Do Shias consider Sahih Bukhari and Muslim as authentic

[Pingu]

I've heard that Sahih Bukhari and Muslim are more authentic than the Shia hadith books. Also why don't we take hadiths from them, I doubt all of them are inauthentic.

[Propaganda_of_the_Deed]

Of course there are some shared or similar narrations, not to mention rawafid narrators in those books.

However we do not classify a hadith collection in its entiriety as Sahih. Not even our own, as these were compiled by fallibles.

 

[Simon the Canaanite]

Also, ʿal-Buḵḫāri narrates from nāwaṣib, such as: ʿImrān bin Ḥiṭṭān and Ḥāriz bin Uthmān.

[hasanhh]

34 minutes ago, Simon the Canaanite said:

Also, ʿal-Buḵḫāri narrates from nāwaṣib, such as: ʿImrān bin Ḥiṭṭān and Ḥāriz bin Uthmān.

There is a "Abu Uthman", but not "bin Uthman". Somebody double check this.

[Simon the Canaanite]

24 minutes ago, hasanhh said:

There is a "Abu Uthman", but not "bin Uthman". Somebody double check this.

It’s most likely the same person.

Tāhḏhib ʿal-Tāhḏhib, volume 1, page(s) 375-376.

Ḥāriz bin Uthmān bin Jābr bin Aḥmār bin Asʾād, ʿal-Rāḥbi ʿal-Mishrāqi, Aʾbu Uthmān, (and it’s said): Aʾbu Aʾwn ʿal-Ḥimṣi, and Rāḥba is in Ḥimyār, he came to Baghdad at the time of ʿal-Mahdi [the Abbasid tyrant].

Ibn ʿAdi said: and Ḥāriz is from the athbāt from the Levantines, and he narrates from their thuqāt, and ʿal-Qāṭṭan said that he was thiqā, and he used to narrate from him because he used to despise Ali.

Ḡhunjār said: It was said to Yaḥyā bin Ṣāliḥ: Why didn’t you narrate from Ḥāriz? He said: How can I narrate from a man, that I prayed fajr with, for seven years, and he didn’t exit the masjid, except that he cursed Ali seventy times?

Edited August 3, 2019 by Simon the Canaanite

[aaaz1618]

I can't speak for Shi'a hadith collections, but Imam Bukhari's collection (or rather his student's collection) has plenty of inauthentic hadiths with some of them so outlandish or offensive that if those hadiths never existed and someone expressed the same ideas as personal opinion today, they would be metaphorically hung out to dry. The takfiris would call them dogs and probably issue some fatwa against them. If one were to publish such ideas in the form of a satirical comic strip, some terrorist idiot would decide to take matters into their own hands.

Edited August 3, 2019 by aaaz1618

[The Green Knight]

8 hours ago, Pingu said:

I've heard that Sahih Bukhari and Muslim are more authentic than the Shia hadith books. Also why don't we take hadiths from them, I doubt all of them are inauthentic.

You heard this and you found it believable so you asked. But why? How are they "more authentic"?

As a matter of fact, a person today will have to look for the complete and old versions of these books, Bukhari especially. Mostly there are "summarized versions" available as a result of effort by some Saudis. The purpose behind making summary of Bukhari is to tailor it so some clues are not given away and for the summarized book to conform to and legitimize Sunnism as it exists today.

As another poster wrote, there are also some common hadiths in these books and ours, especially the ones narrated by multiple sources.

[Diaz]

39 minutes ago, aaaz1618 said:

I can't speak for Shi'a hadith collections, but Imam Bukhari's collection (or rather his student's collection) has plenty of inauthentic hadiths with some of them so outlandish or offensive 

True, specially about the last chapter “Oneness of God”, they mentioned Prophet Solomon ((صلى الله عليه وآله وسلم)) having a relations with 60 of his wives in one night. (I didn’t read the book, someone mentioned this sentence). 

 

@Pingu Read why sahih Bukhari and Muslim is criticized in Shia’s 

https://www.al-Islam.org/critical-assessment-sahih-bukhari-and-sahih-Muslim-Sayyid-Ali-al-husayni-al-milani

[3wliya_maryam]

9 hours ago, Pingu said:

I've heard that Sahih Bukhari and Muslim are more authentic than the Shia hadith books. Also why don't we take hadiths from them, I doubt all of them are inauthentic.

That’s not true

yes there are some narrations derived from not only Bukhari and Muslim but other Sunni books that are similar to other Shia narrations. 

But majority of them are inauthentic and mention how rasullulah (sawas) was a lustful man astaghfirullah, how Allah(سُبْحَانَهُ وَ تَعَالَى) is of human form, how Allah would have chosen Umar to be the next Prophet if Allah willed for another messenger and many more. Their belief that the Holy Prophet (sawas) would marry a 9 year old child is also infuriating because our messenger would never marry someone of such a young age. Then you have these anti islamists calling the Prophet (sawas) a pedophile

 

[Propaganda_of_the_Deed]

9 minutes ago, 3wliya_maryam said:

Their belief that the Holy Prophet (sawas) would marry a 9 year old child is also infuriating because our messenger would never marry someone of such a young age. Then you have these anti islamists calling the Prophet (sawas) a pedophile

 

This is debatable even in our sources. As previously highlighted in another thread, according to fiqh, Islamically one could be married at that age. Muslim societies to this present day have child brides.

Edited August 3, 2019 by Propaganda_of_the_Deed

[aaaz1618]

People who are against Islam or Muslims, when they bring these points mentioned in Sahih Al-Bukhari to the mainstream Muslim, the Muslim has no answer or they get on the defensive trying to justify ugly actions which are not reflective of any Prophet of God... It's very depressing to see such a thing happening on a day to day basis.

 

[Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab]

I recently found that it says both in Bukhari and Muslim it says hold on to Qur'an and Ahlul Bayt. Seeking truth should be placed above conflict.

[aaaz1618]

2 hours ago, Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab said:

I recently found that it says both in Bukhari and Muslim it says hold on to Qur'an and Ahlul Bayt. Seeking truth should be placed above conflict.

I wasn't aware it was in Sahih Al-Bukhari, but I know of it being in Ahmad ibn Hanbal, Muslim and Tirmidhi. Tirmidhi classed it as weak. Where did you come to learn of it in Sahih Al-Bukhari?

[Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab]

5 minutes ago, aaaz1618 said:

I wasn't aware it was in Sahih Al-Bukhari, but I know of it being in Ahmad ibn Hanbal, Muslim and Tirmidhi. Tirmidhi classed it as weak. Where did you come to learn of it in Sahih Bukhari?

interestingly enough in a halaka recently (less than a week ago) , though now that I look I don’t see that either! I should double check that it is Qur'an and Sunnah in Imam Maliks work too then

[aaaz1618]

2 hours ago, Muhammad ibn Abdul Wahhab said:

interestingly enough in a halaka recently (less than a week ago) , though now that I look I don’t see that either! I should double check that it is Qur'an and Sunnah in Imam Maliks work too then

Yes, as far as I am aware it is the Qur'an and Sunnah in Al-Muwatta.