There is a famous hadith about embroy in womb mentioning alaqa,mudgah and nutfa stage.Ref:bukhari 3208.Here in this hadith it states"إِنَّ أَحَدَكُمْ يُجْمَعُ خَلْقُهُ فِي بَطْنِ أُمِّهِ أَرْبَعِينَ يَوْمًا، " and translation is "Creation of each of you is put together in the womb for 40 days".I know some scholars say that alaqa,Mudgah and nutfa all happen in the 40 days it is not 120 days. Interpretation of 40 days is acurate according to modern science.But my question is how can we explain the Gathering of Creation in Womb for 40 days?what is actually gathered in the womb if we interpret the hadith in a way that all stages take place in the same 40 days not individually 40 days?

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?

Which Ahadith and references from the scholars could be provided to answer this question? ------------ Continuation of "the authentic supplications (A'dyiah) during the Tashahhud ."

It was mentioned in a previous post clarifying a report by anas ibn malik ra in sunan al kubra al beyhaqi 2/320 that the slave girls of umar ra were serving with their hair uncovered and hitting their breasts and the confusion arose from the word تَضْرِبُ which was used to denote "strikes or hits" however this narration was reworded to تَضْطَرِبُ which denotes "shakes" changing the meaning to "serving with their hair uncovered and breasts shaking" in Book of Knowledge of Sunnah and Athar 3/146 (4071) authored by beyhaqi as well. What accounts for the difference in wording and which is the correct narration? https://shamela.ws/book/2863/1247 https://shamela.ws/book/7861/3655

There is a report from Saeed bin ibn al-Musayyub in Malik's Muwatta that states the following:- > Yahya related to me from Malik from Yahya ibn Said that Said ibn > al-Musayyub said, **"Ibrahim, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, > was the first to give hospitality to the guest and the first person to > be circumcised and the first person to trim the moustache and the > first person to see grey hair.** He said, 'O Lord! What is this?' > Allah the Blessed, the Exalted, said, 'It is dignity, Ibrahim.' He > said, 'Lord, increase me in dignity!' " > > Yahya said that he had heard Malik say, "One takes from the moustache > until the edge of the lip appears, that is the rim. One does not cut > if off completely so that one mutilates oneself." - [Muwatta Malik, Book > 49, Hadith 1677](https://sunnah.com/urn/516560) **Can someone please explain me the highlighted part of this narration?**

Is al Hakims hadith collection Al Mustadrak reliable? I have read on Wikipedia that al dhahabi said it was better if he never complied it and ibn hajar was also dubious about it. al Hakim said about his book, that the sahih hadiths narrations are on par with bukhari and muslim? If al hakim grades a hadith sahih can it be trusted without verification from al dahabi abridgement of the al Mustadrak?

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)?

So the two hadiths may be totally different yet they are both forbidding something in particular, would that render the prohibition "hasan li ghayrihi" even though the hadiths would still be weak? Jazakhallah

For example if a certain prohibition was found in only one hadith and it is graded hasan li ghayrihi, would that one hadith be sufficient to validate the prohibition? Jazakhallah

I've heard that imam Bukhaari did not consider the hadith in sahih Muslim on fasting on the day of Arafat expiating 2 years worth of sins to be authentic. https://www.abuaminaelias.com/fasting-on-day-of-arafat-or-not/ > ...He was asked about fasting on the day of 'Arafa (9th of Dhu'I-Hijja), whereupon he said: It expiates the sins of the preceding year and the coming year. ... (Sahih Muslim ) Why was that?

On Maktaba Shamela there is a book titled' > مسند أبي حنيفة رواية الحصكفي
Musnad Abi Hanifa, the transmission of Haskafi but inside the book I didn't find any chains from Imam Abu Hanifa to us. So I came here to ask is this book authentically attributed to the hand of Imam Abu Hanifa رحمه الله

Many Christian missionaries quote many "Narrations" from the Salaf and claim that the early Salaf actually believed that Paul was mentioned in the Quran and he was actually a Prophet of Allah! Narrated Ibn S'âd and Ibn Asakir by the authority of Abi Saleh and Ibn Abbas who said: There was a one thousand and nine hundred years gap between the time of Moses the son of Imran and Jesus. During which time one thousand prophets were sent to the people of Israel. And there was five hundred and sixty nine years gap between the birth of Jesus and the time of Muhammad. During the first part of this gap, **three prophets were sent. The third one of these prophets WAS SIMON.** **Narrated Ibn al-Monthere from Saed bin Jubayr who said: The name of the third messenger was Paul.** **Narrated Ibn Abi Hatim by the authority of Shuwaib Al Jabâ'ayee who said: The names of the first two MESSENGERS were Simon and John. And the name of the third one was PAUL.** Among the apostles, and the followers who came after them were the Apostle Peter and Paul who was a follower and not an apostle; they went to Rome. (Tabari, History, Volume IV, p. 123) **Ibn Jurayj narrated from Wahb bin Sulayman, from Shu’ayb Al-Jaba’i, "The names of the first two Messengers were Sham’un and Yuhanna, and the name of the third was Bulus, and the city was Antioch (Tafsir Ibn Kathir)** **The Question Is: what is the reality of such reports?** I have read some articles that address this issue and they state that these are merely views of some early Muslims. **However, does not this prove that at least some early Muslims believed that Paul was someone who was sent by Jesus Christ (Alayhisalam) or God?**

Assalamu alaikum Why contradict comes between two sahih hadiths? Particularly sahih al bukhari 7517 and 3207 contradict about prophet idris stayed on which heaven? Which one is correct?? How authentic Hadith become contradict with each other?? sahih al bukhari 7517 > Idris on the second Heaven > > > > https://sunnah.com/bukhari/97/142 sahih al bukhari 3207 > Then we ascended to the 4th heaven and again the same questions and answers were exchanged as in the previous heavens. There I met Idris > > https://sunnah.com/bukhari/59/18

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 translation of the hadith is written as: >"Narrated Ibn Umar: The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) forbade qaza'. Qaza' means having part of a boy's head shaved and leaving part unshaven."
**[ [Sunnah Ref: Sunan Abu Dawud 4193](https://sunnah.com/abudawud:4193) ]** I am having trouble deciding if the meaning of Qaza here is what Ibn Umar is reported to have said or if the writer, Abu Dawud is giving his opinion. Who is speaking here? thanks

It says that Tariq b. Shihab had seen the Prophet (ﷺ) but not heard anything from him On Sunnah.Com : > Narrated Tariq ibn Shihab: The Prophet (ﷺ) said: The Friday prayer in congregation is a necessary duty for every Muslim, with four exceptions; a slave, a woman, a boy, and a sick person. > >Abu Dawud said: Tariq b. Shihab had seen the Prophet (ﷺ) but not heard anything from him

Many muslims are read the Book of Ahaadith in the List of "Sihah Sittah" (The authentic six books of Ahaadith). I want to mention the names of Sihah Sittah which are as following: 1. Sahih Bukhari 2. Sahih Muslim 3. Sunan Nisaai 4. Sunan Abu Dawood 5. Sunan Ibne Majah 6. Jamia Tirmizi There is not mention the book name Musnad Ahmed which was written by Imam Ahmed bin Hanbal. Most Muslims also read and concern the Ahaadith from Masnad Ahmed. How we can prove that the Musnad Ahmed is a book of Sahih Ahaadith, if it is not a book of Sahih Ahaadith then why Muslims read and concern the Ahaadith from this book?

عن حذيفة بن أسِيد: سمعت رسول الله - صلى الله عليه وسلم - يقول: «إنّ النُّطفة التي تُخلَقُ منها النَّسَمَةُ تطير في المرأة أربعين يومًا وأربعين ليلة، فلا يبقى منها شعرٌ ولا بشرٌ ولا عِرقٌ ولا عظمٌ إلا دخله، حتى إنها لَتَدخُلُ بين الظُّفُر واللحم، فإذا مضى لها أربعون ليلة وأربعون يومًا أهبطه الله إلى الرحم. This is long hadith: I am just quoting the top part. Translate: Hudhayfah ibn Asid reported that he heard the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) say: "Indeed, the sperm-drop from which a human being is created flies within the woman for forty days and forty nights. Nothing of it remains from hair, skin, vein, or bone except that it enters into it, even entering between the nail and the flesh. After forty nights and forty days have passed, Allah sends it down to the womb This is reported by Imam suyuti: link to his book: https://shamela.ws/book/12884/4020 Ibn hajar called one of the narrator liar from the chain mentioned by al-wahidi in his tafsir, and it was graded very weak This narration from imam suyuti I didn't find anyone else reporting or commenting on it. Does anyone know if this sahih or what's scholarly opinion on it?

In Sahih Bukhari,in the 3rd Book (كتاب العلم) in Chapter 39. (The writing of knowledge (باب كِتَابَةِ الْعِلْمِ), 111th Hadith states the following: > Abu Juhaifa said, "I asked Ali, 'Have you got any book (which has been revealed to the Prophet (ﷺ) apart from the Qur'an)?' Ali replied, 'No, except Allah's Book or the power of understanding which has been bestowed (by Allah) upon a Muslim or what is (written) in this sheet of paper (with me).' Abu Juhaifa said, "I asked, 'What is (written) in this sheet of paper?' `Ali replied, it deals with The Diyya (compensation (blood money) paid by the killer to the relatives of the victim), the ransom for the releasing of the captives from the hands of the enemies, and the law that no Muslim should be killed in Qisas (equality in punishment) for the killing of (a disbeliever). > > حَدَّثَنَا مُحَمَّدُ بْنُ سَلاَمٍ، قَالَ أَخْبَرَنَا وَكِيعٌ، عَنْ سُفْيَانَ، عَنْ مُطَرِّفٍ، عَنِ الشَّعْبِيِّ، عَنْ أَبِي جُحَيْفَةَ، قَالَ قُلْتُ لِعَلِيٍّ هَلْ عِنْدَكُمْ كِتَابٌ قَالَ لاَ، إِلاَّ كِتَابُ اللَّهِ، أَوْ فَهْمٌ أُعْطِيَهُ رَجُلٌ مُسْلِمٌ، أَوْ مَا فِي هَذِهِ الصَّحِيفَةِ‏.‏ قَالَ قُلْتُ فَمَا فِي هَذِهِ الصَّحِيفَةِ قَالَ الْعَقْلُ، وَفَكَاكُ الأَسِيرِ، وَلاَ يُقْتَلُ مُسْلِمٌ بِكَافِرٍ‏.‏ *"No, except Allah's Book"*. Does that mean the only revelation was the Quran and the Sunnah is not a revelation just the practical understanding of the Quran? Would not this information change the concept how we classify which Hadith is Sahih which is not?