Bukhari

Hadith Commentary:
➊
While explaining the aforementioned ahadith, Allamah Sindhi writes that Imam Bukhari rahimahullah, by mentioning both narrations, has indicated towards a detailed explanation: if raising the voice is done without necessity, it is not permissible, but if it is due to some need, then it is permissible.
It is also possible that Imam Bukhari rahimahullah’s inclination is towards absolute prohibition, because in the narration where it is understood that the Messenger of Allah sallallahu alayhi wa sallam did not object to the raising of voices, it is mentioned that the Messenger of Allah sallallahu alayhi wa sallam immediately took the matter into his own hands to end the dispute, and thus ended the quarrel due to which voices were being raised in the mosque.
From this conduct, it can be understood that he, through his action—by immediately intervening to resolve the issue—clearly indicated the prohibition of raising voices in the mosque (Hashiyah Sindhi 1/93).
However, in our view, Allamah Sindhi’s first possibility is more likely, because Imam Bukhari rahimahullah’s approach shows that he wants to provide a detailed explanation in this matter, and this also aligns with Imam Bukhari rahimahullah’s scholarly temperament: by bringing together both narrations, he wants to clarify that if there is a need to raise the voice in the mosque and moderation is maintained, then it is permitted; but if there is no need, or the voice exceeds the bounds of moderation and causes commotion, then it is not permitted.
He has mentioned two narrations under this heading, and both seem to convey opposite points: the first narration indicates prohibition, as Umar radi Allahu anhu strongly admonished those who raised their voices, and in fact, quickly resolved the matter and ended the discussion.
This also shows that Imam Bukhari rahimahullah is inclined towards a detailed explanation in this matter, as we have stated.
Shah Waliullah Muhaddith Dehlawi, while clarifying Imam Bukhari rahimahullah’s heading, writes that he wants to express the dislike (karahah) of raising voices in the mosque, as this act is not befitting for people of piety.

➋
From the first narration, it is understood that Umar radi Allahu anhu pardoned them from punishment because they were unaware of the ruling in this matter. In some narrations, it is mentioned that he said:
“I would have punished you with lashes, for you are making unnecessary noise and commotion in the mosque of the Messenger of Allah sallallahu alayhi wa sallam with great boldness.”
From these words, it is understood that this narration attains the status of a marfu’ hadith, because Umar radi Allahu anhu was prepared to administer the punishment of lashes.
Such a threat of punishment can only be given for opposing a matter that is tawfiqi (i.e., established by divine guidance).
(Fath al-Bari: 1/726)

➌
From the second hadith, it is also understood that a creditor should not withhold any leniency that he is able to grant to the debtor. The command of Allah, the Exalted, is:

“And if the debtor is in hardship, then grant him respite until ease; and if you remit it as charity, that is better for you, if you only knew.”
(al-Baqarah: 2/280)
However, it is also the debtor’s duty to repay the full debt as much as possible and free himself from this burden, because the Messenger of Allah sallallahu alayhi wa sallam has declared deliberate delay in repayment as injustice (zulm). Due to this, he may be disgraced and even punished.