Bukhari

Hadith Commentary:
In the narration, three lies are mentioned regarding Ibrahim (alayhis salam), which in reality were not lies.
Because the word "lie" is very far removed from the dignity of the Prophets (alayhimus salam).
Such lies are, in other words, called "tawriyah" (equivocation).
One tawriyah is that which is mentioned in the Noble Qur’an, when he refused to go with his people and said: “Indeed, I am sick” (inni saqeem) — I am compelled not to go due to my pain.
That pain was an allusion to the grief in his heart upon witnessing the evil actions and misdeeds of his people.
Prophets and reformers are always inwardly distressed by the corruption of their people.
This is the meaning of the verse.
By way of tawriyah, this has been described with the word “lie.”
The second apparent lie mentioned in this hadith is declaring Sarah (alayhas salam) to be his sister in order to save her from the oppression of that tyrant king.
This was in the religious sense.
From a religious perspective, all believing men and women are brothers and sisters.
This is what Ibrahim (alayhis salam) intended.
The third lie is related to the idols, as mentioned in the Noble Qur’an: he destroyed his people’s idol-house and placed the axe in the hand of the largest idol, and when questioned, he said that this big idol must have done it. He said this as a form of sarcasm to expose the foolishness of the idol-worshippers.
By way of tawriyah, this too has been described with the word “lie.”
In any case, the objection of the deniers of hadith to this narration is sheer foolishness.
May Allah grant them sound understanding.
Amin.
In the narration, the Arabs are described as a people who drink water from the sky, because the livelihood of the Arabs mostly depends on rainfall.
Although nowadays wells and canals are being constructed there, and these are achievements of the Saudi government.
May Allah strengthen it with His mighty help. Amin.
Hajarah (alayhas salam) was the daughter of that king, whom he, seeking blessing, had placed in the household of Ibrahim (alayhis salam).

Hadith Commentary:
1.
She was the daughter of Hajarah (radi Allahu anha), whom she (Hajarah) had given to the sanctuary of Ibrahim (alayhis salam) for the attainment of blessings. She is the mother of the Arabs, and she has been called "the one who drank the water of the sky," because the livelihood of the Arabs mostly depended on rainwater. Although nowadays wells and canals have been constructed, and all these are achievements of the Saudi government.
﴿أيَّدَهُ اللهُ بِنَصْرِهِ العَزِيز﴾

2.
Regarding Ibrahim (alayhis salam), Allah the Exalted has said:
“He was indeed a man of truth and a Prophet.” (Maryam: 19/41)
Some people, in view of this noble verse, object to the aforementioned hadith in Sahih Bukhari and, speaking disrespectfully about its authenticity, have written:
A group, in their excess of adherence to narration, goes so far that the truthfulness of a few narrators of Bukhari and Muslim is dearer to them, and they do not care that this results in an accusation of lying against a Prophet, even though two of these three (incidents) are mentioned in the Noble Qur’an.
You broke the idols, but when asked, you said:
“It was the biggest one among them who did it.” (Al-Anbiya: 21/63)
Similarly, when your people went out to celebrate, and you were asked to accompany them, you said:
“I am sick.” (As-Saffat: 37/89)
Then you went and broke their idols, so how could you have been sick at that time? Are these not things contrary to reality? In fact, the real focus of the objectors should be towards the Noble Qur’an, not towards the rejection of hadith. Then, at the beginning of the hadith, the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) said these words: that Sayyiduna Ibrahim (alayhis salam) never lied. This is a great testimony to his being truly truthful (siddiq), that in his 175-year life, he did not utter a statement contrary to reality more than three times, whereas we, not in our whole lives but in a single day and night, lie many times.
Let the objectors themselves decide: if a person, in his long life, does not utter a statement contrary to reality more than three times, can he not be called siddiq (utterly truthful)? Then, as for these three occasions, as is established from the above hadith:
The incident of Sarah, although it too was for the sake of Allah, yet there was also some personal benefit in it. This statement was also made to save his own life. The custom of that king was that he would forcibly seize a beautiful woman. If her husband was with her, he would have him killed; but if her brother or another relative was with her, he would only seize the woman and spare the man’s life.
If Ibrahim (alayhis salam) uttered a statement contrary to reality to save his own life, what calamity is there in that? In fact, even that does not really constitute a lie, as the words of the hadith indicate that she was his religious sister.
If, for the sake of saving one’s life, eating carrion is permissible, then why should uttering a statement contrary to reality not be allowed? For saving one’s life, Allah the Exalted has even permitted uttering a word of disbelief, provided that there is no such thing in the heart. (An-Nahl: 16/106)
Always speaking the truth, and avoiding lies and statements contrary to reality, is a legal (shar‘i) command. However, at times, the Shari‘ah has permitted statements contrary to reality, for example:
To reconcile between husband and wife, it is permitted to make up things and say statements contrary to reality, because in this there is an aspect of goodness and reform. Similarly, in jihad, to frighten the enemy, such statements are permitted, even though, linguistically, these statements can also be called lies.
In any case, to make such statements as a form of allusion or necessary implication for a religious purpose, which outwardly appear contrary to reality, is not the kind of lie for which there is a warning (wa‘id). Doing so is not only permissible, but sometimes necessary.
Such statements, from an apparent perspective, can be called lies, but in reality, they are not lies; rather, this is called tawriyah (equivocation).
In any case, this hadith is a proof of the greatness of Ibrahim (alayhis salam), and for this reason, Imam Bukhari (rahimahullah) has narrated it.
To criticize it or to deny its authenticity has nothing to do with reality; rather, all these are baseless things which the deniers of hadith have popularized in order to create aversion to hadith.

Hadith Commentary:

Benefits and Issues:

➊ (Man anfaqa zawjayn) — There can be different meanings:

1. Whoever spends a pair, i.e., two horses, two slaves, two camels, two coins.

2. Whoever spends two types of wealth, i.e., dirham and dinar, dirham and cloth, dinar and animal.

3. Whoever makes spending (in charity) a habit and continues to do this repeatedly, as in the Noble Qur’an: “Then return your vision twice again” (), i.e., look again and again. The first meaning is preferred because in some narrations there is explicit mention of two camels, two goats, two dirhams.

➋ A person who adheres to all commands and prohibitions, and observes all the boundaries and restrictions of the Shari‘ah, but due to his natural inclination and temperament, a particular good deed dominates him and he performs it repeatedly, exceeding the obligatory limit. Someone may love voluntary charity and almsgiving, another may frequently observe voluntary fasts, another may repeatedly set out for jihad, and another may repeatedly perform Hajj. Such a person will not enter through the door of these good deeds in anonymity and silence; rather, he will be called with honor and respect from his specific door: “Come here, for here is goodness and excellence for you.”

➌ Some fortunate individuals are interested in all good deeds and strive to observe all of them as much as possible. For their honor and respect, every door will be calling out to them, and every door will desire that they enter through it. And Hazrat Abu Bakr radi Allahu anhu is among these fortunate individuals. Despite this clear and explicit hadith, those who harbor resentment and hatred towards him should be concerned about their own fate.

Explanation:
1:
The author has cited this hadith in the context of the interpretation of the Divine statement:
﴿قَالَ بَلْ فَعَلَهُ كَبِيرُهُمْ هَذَا﴾ (: al-Anbiya: 64).

Benefits and Issues:
It is in no way permissible to call one’s wife “sister” out of habit or as an expression of love and respect. However, if someone says it as a form of equivocation (tawriyah) due to a genuine legal (shar‘i) necessity, then it is permissible.
As has been mentioned in the well-known story of Ibrahim (alayhis salam).

2.
Some modernists consider this hadith regarding Ibrahim (alayhis salam) to be unacceptable.
In fact, they refer to the entire corpus of hadith as a suspicious non-Arab conspiracy and call it by all sorts of unknown titles. Their style of writing and speech is such that, in comparison to the Qur’an, it is easier and preferable for them to reject and declare weak the narrators of hadith, rather than to criticize the Qur’an itself.
The Qur’an has explicitly stated about Ibrahim (alayhis salam) that (إِنَّه كانَ صدِّيقًا نَبِيًّا) (Maryam: 41) — “Indeed, he was a man of truth and a prophet.” Those who hold this view should reflect that the Qur’an has also reached us through the same narrators through whom the hadith have reached us.
The unparalleled principles of the highest standards of truthfulness and honesty are the same in the transmission and narration of both the Noble Qur’an and the Prophetic hadith.
Wherever there is a difference, it is not hidden from the insight of the scholars, and for this reason, hadith have been divided into various categories and their rulings have been explained separately.
To claim that this hadith is actually contrary to the Qur’an is against scholarly integrity.
It is appropriate to present the following excerpt from Tafsir Ahsan al-Bayan (by Hafiz Salahuddin Yusuf rahimahullah).
The respected Hafiz, under Surah al-Anbiya, verse 63 (قَالَ بَلْ فَعَلَهُ كَبِيرُهُمْ هَذَا فَاسْأَلُوهُمْ إِنْ كَانُوا يَنْطِقُونَ), writes: (These statements of Ibrahim alayhis salam) certainly cannot be called lies in reality.
In other words, “lying” in the sight of Allah is not subject to accountability because they were spoken for the sake of Allah alone.
And in such a case, no sinful act can occur.
And this is only possible if, despite being apparently a lie, it is not actually a lie in reality.
But (since this was done by Ibrahim Khalilullah alayhis salam, such a noble and great person), it has been described as “lying,” just as the words ‘asa’ (disobeyed) and ‘ghawa’ (went astray) have been used for Adam (alayhis salam).
Although, in the Qur’an itself, their act of eating from the tree has also been described as a result of forgetfulness and weakness of resolve.
The clear meaning of this is that an action can have two aspects.
From one perspective, it may be praiseworthy, and from another, it may have an apparent aspect of blame.
The statement of Ibrahim (alayhis salam) is, from this aspect, apparently a lie because it was contrary to the actual event.
He himself broke the idols,
but attributed it to the largest idol.
However, since his purpose was to establish proof and affirm monotheism (tawhid), in reality, we will call it a method of establishing proof and a way of exposing and expressing the foolishness of the polytheists, rather than a lie.
Moreover, the context in which these “lies” are mentioned in the hadith is also worth considering: it is to excuse himself from interceding before Allah on the Day of Gathering (Hashr) because three slips occurred from him in the world.
Whereas, in reality, those are not slips — in terms of reality and purpose, they are not lies.
But due to the immense awe and majesty of Allah, he will be so fearful that these matters, due to their apparent resemblance to lying, will seem blameworthy to him.
Thus, the purpose of the hadith is by no means to prove that Ibrahim (alayhis salam) was a liar, but rather to express the state that will overcome him on the Day of Resurrection due to the fear of Allah.
Furthermore, it is noteworthy that two out of these three matters are themselves mentioned in the Qur’an; the hadith only refers to them.
The third matter is mentioned only in the hadith, but in the circumstances in which it was said, the Qur’an itself has permitted even the outward expression of disbelief (kufr).
Therefore, if these people wish to criticize the hadith, they should first criticize the Qur’an,
and declare their disassociation from it.