Is there any strong reference about imam amash being shia or if not the what then prove it with refrence with writing arabic text for refrence book

I am trying to verify the authenticity of a hadith that has been transmitted through the following chain of narrators:- ***Khalid bin Yazeed Ansari <= Ibn Abi Zi’b <= Nafee <= Ibn Omar <= Prophet Muhammad (Sallallahu'alaihiwassalam)*** What is the status of Khalid bin Yazid Ansari in this chain and is this chain acceptable?

I know there are many Sahih narrations that say that Prophet Muhammad (Sallallahu'alaihiwassalam) used to visit his wives equally. However, my question in here is about this particular Hadith with **these particular wordings**. My question is about the following narration:- > Allah's Prophet (Sallallahu'alaihiwassalam) used to divide visits to > his wives equally and say, "O Allah, this is my division concerning > what I possess, so do not blame me concerning what You possess and I > do not." This narration is found in the following Hadith collections:- Bulugh Al-Maram, Book 8, Hadith 104 Mishkat Al-Masabih, 3235 Sunan Abu Dawud, 2134 Jami' At-Tirmidhi, 1140 According to some sources, Hakim and Ibn Hibban graded the version in Bulugh Al-Maram as authentic. However, Imam Tirmidhi has stated that it is Mursal narration due to a missing link in the transmitters of the narration. As far as the version in Mishkat Al-Masabih is concerned, Albani has declared it as *Jayid*. However, I am not sure if Albani is correct in his gradings because Albani has been criticized a lot by Hadith scholars for his gradings. As far as the version in Jami' At-Tirmidhi is concerned, it has been narrated by the following chain of transmitters:- Muhammad bin Yahya bin Abi Umar (Found In Sahih Muslim 2003h, 1341c, etc) Bashr bin al-Sari al-Afwah (Found in Sahih Al-Bukhari 7048 and Sahih Muslim 1452e, 635b, 2351b) Hammad bin Salama (Found in Sahih Muslim 2567b, 2379, etc) The link between Ayoub al-Sakhtiyani and Abu Qilabah can be found in Sahih Al-Bukhari 5517, 5463, Sahih Muslim 110c, and in various places in the Sahihyaen) Abdullah bin Yazid bin Zayd (Found In Sahih Bukhari 5516, 4414, 1159, etc) Aisha bint Abi Bakr (May Allah Be Pleased With Her) is obviously a reliable narrator. So is this narration with these particular wording suitable to quote and is it Sahih (authentic)?

As-salamu alaykum wa Rahmatullahi wa barakatoh. I have a issue with Ahadith regarding the narrator khalid ibn yazid ibn abi malik concerning whether he is reliable or not. I saw some ahadith with him being in the chain narration and the hadith was weak. I couldn't find anything about him. The hadith is sunan ibn majah 4337. JazakAllahu Khayran 🌹

The author Muhammad Salih Al-Munajjid at Islamqa.info in Fatwa # 3801 has stated the following:- Al-Bukhaari reported in his Saheeh (no. 250) that ‘Aa’ishah said: “The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him)and I used to bathe from one vessel.” Al-Haafiz said in al-Fath: “Al-Daawoodi interpreted this to mean that it is permissible for a man to look at his wife’s ‘awrah and vice-versa. **This is supported by the report narrated by Ibn Hibbaan via Sulaymaan ibn Moosa, who was asked about a man looking at his wife’s private parts. He said: ‘I asked ‘Aa’ishah, and she referred to this hadeeth.’ This is evidence in this matter.** And Allaah knows best.” [Source:- https://islamqa.info/en/answers/3801/husband-and-wife-taking-a-bath-together-and-looking-at-one-anothers-private-parts] **My main question is: where can I find Sulayman ibn Musa's narration in Sahih Ibn Hibban where he stated that Aisha (Radhi'allahu'anha) referred to the hadith in Bukhari when she was asked about whether a man could look at the private parts of her wife? Can someone please point out the narration in Sahih Ibn Hibban?**

Salam Guys, I would request my readers to not to mark this question as duplicate. This question is a bit different from the [previous question](https://islam.stackexchange.com/questions/61209/what-is-the-status-of-narrator-minhal-ibn-amr-did-scholars-really-rejected-his) I asked about narrator Minhal Ibn Amr. My question is about particular narrations that come from Al-A'mash through Minhal Ibn Amr. According to [THIS](https://islam.stackexchange.com/questions/46316/did-prophet-isa-go-to-the-cross/46325#46325) source it has been stated that both Yahya ibn Ma'īn and Adh-Dhahabi had reasons to weaken narrations that came from Al-A'mash through Al-Minhāl ibn 'Amr. **The problem here is that the user III-AK-III who posted his answer did not cite any reference in order to prove that Yahya bin Ma'in and Ad-Dhahabi actually weakened the narrations that come from Al-A'mash through Minhal Ibn Amr.** Al-A'mash and Minhal were Kufi and met each other. Both of them have also narrated narrations in Bukhari. **The main question is: where is the evidence that suggests that Yahyah bin Ma'in and Ad-Dhahabi weakened the narration that come from Al-A'mash through Minhal Ibn Amr?**

**The excerpt says that this was supposedly authenticated hy Imam Ibn Qayyim in his work called Madarijus Salikin. Is this true?**

I have found a really strange narration that says that the Nutfah of men travel in the veins and muscles of women. This is the original text of the hadith:- فقد ثبت عن مالك بن الحويرث أنه قال: قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم: إذا أراد الله جل اسمه أن يخلق النسمة فجامع الرجل المرأة طار ماؤه في كل عرق وعصب منها فإذا كان اليوم السابع أحضر الله له كل عرق بينه وبين آدم ثم قرأ في أي صورة ما شاء ركبك This is found in [Mu'ajam Al-Kabeer At-Tabrani](https://hadith.islam-db.com/single-book/477/%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%85%D8%B9%D8%AC%D9%85-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%83%D8%A8%D9%8A%D8%B1-%D9%84%D9%84%D8%B7%D8%A8%D8%B1%D8%A7%D9%86%D9%8A/287705/16021) , [Mu'ajam A-Sagheer At- Tabarani](https://hadith.islam-db.com/single-book/476/%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%85%D8%B9%D8%AC%D9%85-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B5%D8%BA%D9%8A%D8%B1-%D9%84%D9%84%D8%B7%D8%A8%D8%B1%D8%A7%D9%86%D9%8A/280763/106) , and in [Mu'ajam Al-Awsat At-Tabarani](https://hadith.islam-db.com/single-book/475/%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%85%D8%B9%D8%AC%D9%85-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%A3%D9%88%D8%B3%D8%B7-%D9%84%D9%84%D8%B7%D8%A8%D8%B1%D8%A7%D9%86%D9%8A/280459/1642) . According to [THIS SOURCE](https://www.islamweb.net/ar/fatwa/72781/%D8%AF%D8%B1%D8%AC%D8%A9-%D8%AD%D8%AF%D9%8A%D8%AB-%D8%A5%D8%B0%D8%A7-%D8%A3%D8%B1%D8%A7%D8%AF-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%84%D9%87-%D8%A3%D9%86-%D9%8A%D8%AE%D9%84%D9%82-%D8%A7%D9%84%D9%86%D8%B3%D9%85%D8%A9) , the narration in question is authentically reported through a sound chain of narrators, according to Ibn Manda and it is also recorded in Silsila As-Sahiha by Albani! However, there is a Hadith in [Sahih Muslim](https://sunnah.com/muslim:2645c) that says that semen "stays" in the womb of women. It doesn't say that semen reaches other parts of a woman. According to [THIS SOURCE](https://ghayb.com/the-decree/) , Ibn Masud (RA) is reported to have said that the Nutfah of men travel to hair and nails of a woman. Moreover, it also descends back to the womb! It says, It has been narrated from Ibn Mas’ud in other ways. As for his words “The creation of any one of you is gathered in the belly of his mother for forty days as a drop,” their explanation is narrated from Ibn Mas’ud. Al-A’mash narrated from Khaythamah that Ibn Mas’ud said, “***When the drop falls into the womb she conceives in every hair and nail. Then it remains for forty days and then it descends into the womb and becomes a clot”*** He said, “That is its ‘gathering’.” Ibn Abi Hatim and others narrated it. ***So, how can we reconcile these two hadith with modern science?***

In my answer on https://islam.stackexchange.com/questions/7864/what-are-the-terms-of-that-which-has-reached-tawatur I've tried to address the topic of the conditions of al.-Bukhari and Muslim. I've also posted a related question: https://islam.stackexchange.com/questions/45275/what-exactly-are-the-conditions-of-al-bukhari-and-muslim I'm certainly not a scholar nor do I have deep knowledge in 'ulum al-Hadith. But I suppose that the conditions of al-Bukhari and Muslim must either have been quoted by both in some of their books (not necessary in the books known as the sahihs ... the correct full title of what is known as sahih al-Bukhai is quoted in my answer here https://islam.stackexchange.com/questions/2419/is-sahih-al-bukhari-considered-as-100-authentic-by-sunni-scholars) . Or later scholars have deduced them I strongly believe they were quoted by al-Bukhari and Muslim themselves. But as I know that both of them have quoted ahadith of da'if narrators I'd like to know whether they always followed their own condition in their major works (I suppose all consider the both sahihs as such, as I'm at least aware of many other works of al-Bukhari) or did it occur that they added or quoted a hadith which doesn't follow their own conditions? (Is it possible to explain why?) If so are these ahadith known, and what is their amount?

Asalam-o-alekum, Is there any Shia book which analyses individual hadees in Sunni's 6 books and has some comments like whether this hadees is acceptable by Shia scholars or not? And similarly is there a Shia book which lists all Sunni raavis which are rejected by Shia's with some reasoning? If such book is available in Arabic, Urdu and English then please let me know. Thanks Lateef

Salam Brothers, I would like to know what is the status of narrator Minhal Ibn Amr. I have read somewhere that he was a Shia, but still many Sunni scholars accepted his narrations. However, is it true that some scholars like Imam Razi, Yaha bin Ma'in, Shu'bah, etc have rejected his narrations? However here is a Hadith Website that cites narrations from Minhal Ibn Amr:- https://hadithanswers.com/how-many-days-did-ibrahim-alayhis-salam-spend-in-the-fire/ **The Main Question Is: is Minhal Ibn Amr reliable narrator, according to Yahya bin Ma'in, Imam Razi, Shu'bah, etc?** Thanks.

Usually if you check a narrator chain -as a layman- you will find something like: > Abu Yusuf has narrated from 'Abdullah ibn Sa'id who heard Muhammad ibn al-Qassim who heard abu Hurrairah ...This is just an example from my own imagination if you found a similar narrator chain by coincidence it was unintended I guess that in the first hijri century there were much more than one single person named Muhammad ibn al-Qassim (note this is just an example) and we could go on this way with any other narrator in the chain unless the muhaddith adds some extra information that may help better identifying a narrator. I wonder how and to what extent the scholars of al-Jarh wa a-Ta'adil actually are certain that Abu Yusuf (for example refers to the student of Abu Hanifa) or 'Abdullah ibn Sa'id (for example refers to "the muhaddith from Yemen" not the one from "Khorassan"). I'd guess usually a Muhaddith referring to Abu Yusuf the student of abu Hanifa would have added the attribute "the qadi" to be more precise. My question is how can scholars of al-Jarh wa a-Ta'adil identify a narrator and what would they do if there could be more than one option according the given facts (methodology)?

Mutawatir is when a narration gains a huge amount of narrators that it being a lie has basically become impossible, in other words there would basically be no doubt in regards to it's authenticity. But Tawtur has terms, and the terms have been split into Mutaffaq alaih/that which has been agreed upon, and Al Mukhtalaf Feeh/that which there is difference upon. So the question is, what are the terms that fall under Mutaffaq Alaih (متفق عليه) ? and what are those terms which fall under Mukhtalaf feeh (مختلف فيه) ?

Should a Hadith from someone in the chain of narration (Isnad) who practices a Bid'ah be accepted? I have heard that if it supports what he is practicing of Bid'ah then it is not accepted but if it does not support his practice it is OK. What if he didn't create that Bid'ah/innovation, and he is trustworthy and truthful, does the practicing of this Bid'ah affect the transmission of Hadith he has? What have scholars (looking for the views mainly of Bukari and or Muslim) said on this?

There are two main aspects of a hadith that make reliable (sahih): its narrator chain (sanad) and its content (matn). See Hadith studies at Wikipedia. **Question**: What is an example of a hadith that is sahih in chain but not sahih in content? I'm not sure if this is possible. Such a hadith might fall under the classification of *shadh* or *mu’allal*: > ... The statement that “**the hadith should not be shadh” (irregular)**“ excludes from the sahih hadith the shadh report where a trustworthy narrator goes against the narration of narrators who are more reliable than him. Their statement: “**It should not be mu’allal (defective)**“ excludes from the sahih hadith the mu’allal report which has a defect. The ‘illah (defect) consists of a weakness in the hadith, causing its rejection, a matter which appears to the critics when collecting and examining the various transmission routes of the hadith. > khilafah.com The closest I've found is the following (and this may actually be an example, but I'm not clear on this): > If there was to have a Prophet after me, it would have been 'Umar bin Al-Khattab. > Jami` at-Tirmidhi [grade: hasan] This was described as "odd (munkar)" on Islam Q&A ; they present the hadith as: > Imam Ahmad (17405), at-Tirmidhi (3686) and al-Haakim (4495) narrated via Mishrah ibn Haa ‘aan, from ‘Uqbah ibn ‘Aamir (may Allah be pleased with him) who said: I heard the Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) say: “If there were to be a Prophet after me, it would be ‘Umar ibn al-Khattaab.” The scholars differed concerning this hadith. It was classed as saheeh by al-Haakim, and adh-Dhahabi agreed with him. It was classed as hasan by at-Tirmidhi and by al-Albaani in Saheeh at-Tirmidhi.

Dhahak Bin Muzahim is one of the most reliable narrators who has narrated many narrations in many hadith collections. He has been declared a strong narrator by many hadith scholars. He is one of the senior narrators of the hadith and he can be found in Sunan Abu Dawud and Jami' At-Tirmidhi. He has been declared reliable by many scholars like Yahyah bin Ma'in, Abu Zurʽa al-Razi, Ibn Hajr Al-Asqalani, Darqutni, Imam Ahmad Bin Hanbal, etc. It looks like Dhahak Ibn Muzahim has already been declared reliable by Imam Bukhari as well:- ## **However, why did Yahyah bin Sa'eed declare him weak?**

Often when a question about the authenticity or a qualification of a hadith is asked I find scholars quoting that scholar A considered the narrator X as fine, while scholar B considered him as da'if while scholar C say his hadith is munkar (rejected). Here a couple of relevant posts of mine: https://islam.stackexchange.com/questions/35749/is-al-hakims-hadith-collection-al-mustadrak-reliable (here al-Hakim has been described as lenient) And here ahadith where some narrators have been a matter of discussion between scholars of jarh and t'adeel: https://islam.stackexchange.com/questions/33479/prohibition-from-drinking-water-from-a-broken-or-a-cracked-vessel/33514?s=1|34.4236#33514 https://islam.stackexchange.com/questions/37359/is-this-hadith-about-not-killing-a-kafir-under-protection-authentic/37391?s=2|30.1966#37391 https://islam.stackexchange.com/questions/33335/is-it-part-of-the-sunnah-to-fast-for-6-days-in-the-month-next-to-ramadan/33365?s=3|27.4770#33365 https://islam.stackexchange.com/questions/382/is-this-hadith-is-authentic-all-the-sins-of-my-followers-will-be-forgiven-exce/29191?s=7|22.7310#29191 https://islam.stackexchange.com/questions/46280/is-there-a-hadith-he-who-buys-the-stolen-property-with-the-knowledge-that-it-w/46283?s=5|25.7089#46283 I want to ask is there a scale where we can "put" or add some scholars to those who are rather picky when qualifying narrators (one could say hard liners), while others are rather more lenient? Or maybe one could say can we put scholars of jarh wa t'adeel in different categories according their rigor when judging or qualifying a narrator. For example an answer could look like (this is not an answer draft just an example maybe the answer would put these names in different categories): Lenient: al-Hakim, X, Y ... Less lenient and not too picky: a-Dhahabi , Z ... Hard-liner: ibn Ma'yn, ....

I think there are some Hadith in this book are not compatible with Quran. Also I think this is not a logic term to say "Sahih Bukhari is Sahih (authentic) **because its name is Sahih**" Bukhari was an Iranian written this book near 200 years after prophet and indeed any human can have mistakes. Also Jamal Albanna a sunni Scholar argues that > 653 of the hadiths as written in al-Bukhari and Muslim are incorrect > and should not be accepted. His Arabic book is titled "The Cleansing of Bukhari and Muslim from useless Hadiths" (2008). Firstly I want to know considering Sahih Bukhari a 100% authentic Book by sunni scholars is true or not? and if yes is it an Islamic fitwa or it is mostly for policies of Sunni Kings during history and accepted as a rule today? or has other reason? Here is an article but in Persian containing names of many sunni scholars with evidence critiquing Sahih Bukhari and not considering in 100% authentic: http://hawzah.org/FA/articleview.html?ArticleID=79418 translating all of it takes much time. and maybe you can read it using google translator. for example this article says Ibn Hajar Asqalani in his book Tahzib al-Tahzib volume 10 page 461 (تهذیب التهذیب، ج 10، ص 461) says there are some narrators in Sahih Bukhari that Muslim never consider them reliable and even critiqued them and did not narrate any hadith from them. for example one narrator Muslim never considered him reliable is نعیم بن حماد مروزی. some sunni scholars considered him reliable but still many not. I think evidences from sunni books mentioned in this article prove there is no Ijma among sunni scholars that Sahih Bukhari is 100% authentic.

I've noticed that this question has never been asked before even if we have posts such as: https://islam.stackexchange.com/questions/23/what-are-the-requirements-of-a-sahih-hadith https://islam.stackexchange.com/questions/23212/which-criteria-the-rawisarabic-narrators-of-sahih-hadith-had-to-fulfil I've tried to address this topic before in my answer on https://islam.stackexchange.com/questions/7864/what-are-the-terms-of-that-which-has-reached-tawatur , however I didn't mention what exactly these conditions are, even if I have a hint of an answer about it, at least for one of the related partial questions which I want to have answers. And here I quote the partial question which I'd like to have answered: So what exactly is the condition of al-Bukhari (is it solely related -as-sanad- to the narrator chain or also to the content al-matn- of a hadith)? and what is the condition of Muslim? What is the difference between both conditions?

One aspect of authenticating a hadith is to make sure that there is a continuous chain of narrators. So this means looking at biographies of the narrators to find out when they were born and when they died. e.g was narrator A alive at the same time as narrator B. My question is though, how were these dates verified either by the authors of those biographies or Bukhari himself?