Bukhari

Hadith Commentary:
1.
The purpose of Imam Bukhari rahimahullah is that, at the time of teaching and preaching, wisdom demands that full consideration be given to the intellectual level of the listeners. Not every matter is suitable to be stated in a public gathering. Some matters are such that certain individuals can understand them, while those same matters are above the intellectual level of others. Doing so results in two harms:
➊ The loss of knowledge.
➋ The risk of denial and rejection.
It is the habit of the ignorant that whatever they do not understand, they reject, and consider the speaker to be a liar. To reject the speaker is, in effect, to reject Allah and His Messenger sallallahu alayhi wa sallam. In this way, a person’s faith is also put at risk. This is the meaning of the statement of Ali radi Allahu anhu. Similarly, Abdullah ibn Mas’ud radi Allahu anhu said that whenever you say something to a people that is beyond their understanding, it will become a cause of tribulation for some of them. (Sahih Muslim, Introduction (14))

2.
Imam Bukhari rahimahullah, contrary to his usual method of compilation, first presented the statement of Ali radi Allahu anhu and then provided the chain of narration. The commentators of Bukhari have mentioned several explanations for this:
➊ It is a stylistic variation by Imam Bukhari rahimahullah.
➋ The chain became available later.
➌ He did so to distinguish between the hadith of the Messenger of Allah sallallahu alayhi wa sallam and the reports of the Companions, i.e., for the hadith of the Messenger of Allah sallallahu alayhi wa sallam, he brings the chain first and the text after, and for the reports of the Companions, he brings the chains after. However, this rule is not observed everywhere; rather, he does so in some places. (Umdat al-Qari: 2/290)
The first and second answers are more likely. And Allah knows best.

3.
In the hadith, it is stated that whoever bears witness to the Oneness of Allah and the Messengership in such a way that the heart sincerely acknowledges it along with the tongue, Allah will make the Fire forbidden for him. There is an objection to this, as numerous narrations indicate that sinful believers will enter the Fire, so what is the meaning of this hadith? The following are the answers to this objection:
➊ This glad tidings is for those who, along with the testimony of faith, also performed righteous deeds. Thus, in Tirmidhi, along with the testimony of faith, prayer, fasting, and pilgrimage are also mentioned.
➋ This glad tidings is for those who, at the last moment, declared the testimony of faith and then death came to them. In such a case, their bad deeds are forgiven through repentance, and they did not get the opportunity to sin again before death overtook them.
➌ What is meant here is a specific Fire, i.e., the Fire prepared for the punishment of the disbelievers, from which there is no opportunity to come out after entering. For such a person, entry into Paradise is impossible. As for the Fire that is for purifying the believers from sins so that they become worthy of entering Paradise, that is a different Fire. The Fire mentioned in the hadith refers to the Fire prepared for the disbelievers.
➍ What is meant by this prohibition is permanent prohibition, i.e., such a person will not remain in the Fire forever; he may enter it for some days.
➎ The hadith mentions an effect of the testimony of faith, but there are certain conditions and impediments for this effect. If the conditions are met and there are no impediments, then the testimony of faith will certainly show its effect. On the contrary, if the conditions are not observed or impediments arise, then the effect of the testimony of faith may be weakened or nullified.

4.
From the conduct of Mu’adh ibn Jabal radi Allahu anhu, it is understood that the prohibitive commands of the Messenger of Allah sallallahu alayhi wa sallam are of two types:
➊ Prohibition of forbiddance (nahi tahrim)
➋ Prohibition of disapproval (nahi tanzih)
Mu’adh ibn Jabal radi Allahu anhu interpreted this prohibition as one of disapproval (nahi tanzih). If it had been a prohibition of forbiddance (nahi tahrim), Mu’adh would not have conveyed it at all. Jabir ibn Abdullah al-Ansari radi Allahu anhu narrates that he was informed of Mu’adh ibn Jabal’s radi Allahu anhu impression by a person who was present at the time of his death. (Fath al-Bari: 1/300)
In passing, let us also listen to the opinion of the “Tadabbur” (Reflection) people, who say: As for the point that Mu’adh ibn Jabal radi Allahu anhu disclosed this matter near his death to avoid the sin of concealing knowledge, this is the narrator’s own impression. Mu’adh radi Allahu anhu, in accordance with the command of the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam, did not make it public, but he would have conveyed it among the people of knowledge. How could Mu’adh ibn Jabal radi Allahu anhu keep such a great matter secret? (Tadabbur Hadith: 1/229)
That is, Islahi Sahib always considers it necessary to insert his own opinion and impression everywhere:
﴿إِنَّ هَٰذَا لَشَيْءٌ عُجَابٌ﴾ (Indeed, this is a strange thing!)