Bukhari

Chapter of Sahih Bukhari Hadith No. 7330: «بَابُ مَا ذَكَرَ النَّبِيُّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ وَحَضَّ عَلَى اتِّفَاقِ أَهْلِ الْعِلْمِ:»
Relevance between the Chapter and the Hadith:
Imam Bukhari rahimahullah established the chapter heading to prove several issues, which consist of multiple parts. For example: the statement of consensus among the scholars of Makkah and Madinah, the mention of the blessed places of the Muhajirun and Ansar, the place where the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam prayed and its being blessed, likewise the mention of the blessed grave of the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam, the mention of his pulpit, and so on.

Through this single chapter, Imam Bukhari rahimahullah intends to resolve several issues, to which he alluded through the ahadith presented under the chapter. He presented about twenty-four ahadith under the chapter, each of which is related to the chapter in part or in several parts, but no single hadith is completely relevant to the chapter in its entirety. In reality, what Imam Bukhari rahimahullah wants to establish is that the report of the people of Madinah is reliable because they witnessed the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam, such as the Muhajirun and Ansar, and those who witnessed the pulpit and grave of the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam, whom Imam Bukhari rahimahullah mentioned in the chapter; all these things are intended. The relevance of the hadith of Sayyiduna Jabir bin Abdullah radi Allahu anhu to the chapter is from the aspect that the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam mentioned the virtue of Madinah, that Madinah is superior to all cities, where evil people cannot remain; even the people there, including the scholars, will be good. However, this virtue was specific to the lifetime of the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam.

Hafiz Ibn Hajar rahimahullah writes:
«قال ابن بطال عن المهلب: فيه تفضيل المدينة على غيرها بما خصها الله به من أنها تنفي الخبث، و رتب على ذالك القول بحجية إجماع أهل المدينة، و تعقب بقول ابن عبدالبر أن الحديث دال على فضل المدينة، و لكن ليس الوصف المذكور لها فى جميع الأزمنه، بل هو خاص بزمن النبى صلى الله عليه وسلم لأنه لم يكن يخرج منها رغبة من الإقامة معه إلا من لا خير فيه.» [فتح الباري لابن حجر : 261/14]
“Ibn Battal rahimahullah narrates from Muhallab rahimahullah that this hadith shows the superiority of Madinah over other regions, along with the special distinction Allah has given it, that Madinah repels filth. Upon this, the statement of the authority of the people of Madinah is based. The answer to this is given by Ibn Abd al-Barr rahimahullah, who says that the hadith does indicate the virtue of Madinah, but this described quality is not general for all times; rather, it is specific to the era of the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam, because only a person devoid of goodness would turn away from residing there during his presence.”
From these excerpts of Allamah Muhallab rahimahullah, the relevance between the chapter and the hadith is also understood, as well as the clarification of an issue. The connection of the hadith to the chapter is that the aforementioned hadith gives virtue to Madinah Munawwarah, which corresponds to one part of the chapter.

As for the practice of the people of Madinah, we will, inshaAllah, discuss this in detail in the benefit section at the end of this chapter. The second hadith, which is narrated from Sa’ib bin Yazid, is relevant to the chapter in the following way, as mentioned in Fath al-Bari:
«ومناسة هذا الحديث للترجمة أن قدر الصاع مما اجتمع عليه أهل الحرمين بعد العهد النبوي و استمر، فلما ذار بنو أمية فى الصاع لم يتركوا اعتبار الصاع النبوي.» [فتح الباري لابن حجر : 263/14]
“The relevance of the hadith to the chapter heading is that the measure of the sa’ remained as it was upon which the people of the two Harams agreed during the Prophetic era. So when Banu Umayyah increased the measure of the sa’, even then, the original sa’ of the Prophetic era was not abandoned (rather, it remained in effect).”
Therefore, in light of these details, the aspect of relevance between the chapter and the hadith is that during the era of Umar bin Abd al-Aziz rahimahullah, the measure of the sa’ may have increased, but in the legal rulings, such as zakat al-fitr, etc., the same sa’ will be considered as was during the time of the people of Madinah and the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam.

The hadith narrated from Sayyiduna Ibn Umar radi Allahu anhuma is relevant to the chapter in that the place near the mosque where he was stoned is historically blessed, because the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam would often perform funeral prayers at that place. Therefore, from here, the blessedness of that place is established, and thus its relevance to a part of the chapter is also established. [ارشاد الساري : 89/12], [عمدة القاري للعيني : 88/25]
Benefit:
Is every practice of the people of Madinah authoritative (hujjah)?
Some people claim that the practice of the people of Madinah is absolutely authoritative, whereas this is questionable. In fact, even according to Imam Malik rahimahullah, this was not a relied-upon position. For Imam Malik rahimahullah, the real importance was always given to the Qur’an and Hadith. An incident clearly proves this: When Harun al-Rashid offered Imam Malik rahimahullah to make his Muwatta the law of the land, it is written:
«انه شاور مالكا فى أن يعلق الموطأ فى الكعبة، و يحمل الناس على ما فيه، فقال: لا تفعل، فان أصحاب رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم اختلفوا فى الفروع، و تفرقوا فى البلدان، و كل سنة مضت، قال: وفقك الله يا أبا عبدالله.» [حجة الله البالغه : 116/1], [مفتاح السعادة 87/2]
“The caliph Harun al-Rashid consulted Imam Malik rahimahullah about making the Muwatta the law of the land and hanging it in the Ka’bah so that people would be compelled to follow it. Imam Malik rahimahullah replied: The Companions radi Allahu anhum differed in subsidiary matters and spread to different lands; whatever is transmitted from them is all Sunnah. Harun understood the matter and said: May Allah grant you success in goodness.”
From this, it is clear that Imam Malik rahimahullah did not consider the practice of Madinah absolutely authoritative, but rather considered the hadith of every Companion as part of the religion.

Imam Ibn Hazm rahimahullah, in his book «الأحكام فى أصول الأحكام», has also discussed this issue in detail, the summary of which is that it is impermissible to consider only the people of Madinah as those possessing knowledge of the Sunnah. Allamah Ibn Hazm rahimahullah writes:
«و أما قولهم: إن أهل المدينة أعلم بأحكام رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم ممن سواهم، فهو كزب و باطل، و إنما الحق أن أصحاب رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم و هم العالمون بأحكامه سواء بقي منهم من بقي بالمدينة أو خرج منهم من خرج.» [الاحكام فى اصول الاحكام : 684/4]
“And their statement that the people of Madinah knew the rulings of the Messenger of Allah sallallahu alayhi wa sallam more than others is a lie and falsehood. The correct and true position is that all the Companions radi Allahu anhum knew the rulings of the religion, whether they remained in Madinah or migrated elsewhere.”

Allamah Ibn al-Qayyim rahimahullah, discussing the official status of the Muwatta, writes:
«وهذا يدل على أن عمل أهل المدينة ليس عنده حجة لازمة لجميع الأمة . . . . .» [اعلام الموقعين : 297/2]
“This indicates that the practice of the people of Madinah is not authoritative, nor is it necessary for the entire Ummah to accept it. And the claim that (the practice of the people of Madinah is authoritative) was not made by Imam Malik rahimahullah in the Muwatta or anywhere else; rather, it is merely the expression of an incident.”
Therefore, to say that the practice of the people of Madinah is absolutely authoritative for the entire Ummah is completely wrong and false; in fact, the majority are opposed to this. The author of Fiqh al-Islam has said very well, he writes:
“The majority believe that Madinah has no special status over other cities in terms of practice. In times of disagreement, following the Sunnah is the real thing. The statement of one scholar is not authoritative over another. The Companions radi Allahu anhum spread to different lands; all were people of knowledge. The real thing is the Sunnah. The knowledge of any city cannot be made the basis of legislation.” [فقه الاسلام از شيخ احمد : ص 170]
In fact, if one reflects, even according to Imam Malik rahimahullah, the practice of the people of Madinah was not authoritative, because he presented in his Muwatta such narrations that are contrary to the practice of the people of Madinah. Another strong proof is that he was asked:
«عمن أخذ بحديث حدثه ثقة عن أصحاب رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم أتراه من ذالك فى سعة؟ فقال: لا والله يصيب الحق، و ما الحق الا واحد، قولان مختلفان يكونان صوابًا جميعًا؟ و ما الحق و الصواب الا واحد.» [جامع بيان العلم وفضله عن اشهب : 102/2]
“From whom should hadith be taken? He rahimahullah replied: From one who is trustworthy and narrates from the Companions of the Messenger of Allah sallallahu alayhi wa sallam. Then he was asked: Is there any leeway in this matter according to you? He rahimahullah, denying, replied: No! By Allah, there is not, until the truth is reached, and the truth is only one. Can two differing statements both be correct? No, the truth and correctness is only one.”

Allamah Ibn al-Qayyim rahimahullah, shedding light on this issue regarding the affairs of the people of Madinah after the Companions radi Allahu anhum and the Rightly Guided Caliphs, comments:
“The practice of the people of Madinah was according to the ruling of the muftis, rulers, and markets under «محتسبين»; the subjects could not oppose these people. So if a mufti gave a fatwa, the governor would enforce it, and the market inspector would act accordingly, and thus the fatwa would become the norm. But this is not worthy of consideration; rather, the actions of the Messenger of Allah sallallahu alayhi wa sallam, his caliphs, and the Companions radi Allahu anhum are the Sunnah. Therefore, one should not confuse one of these two things with the other. In our view, giving judgment based on this practice is even more severe, and if the other thing (the practice of the later people of Madinah) is contrary to the Sunnah, it is most deserving of being abandoned.”

Nawab Siddiq Hasan Khan Bhopali rahimahullah, commenting on this issue, writes:
“The practice of the people of Madinah, contrary to any authentic hadith, is not authoritative, just as the practice of Imam Malik rahimahullah and his followers is not, because they too are only a part of the Ummah (i.e., not the whole). Therefore, it is possible that the authentic report did not reach them.” [حصول المامول من علم الاصول : ص 59]
The sum of all this discussion is that the only criterion will be the Prophetic Sunnah. Any practice contrary to it—whether from the people of Madinah, Kufa, Basra, Sham, Yemen, Egypt, Damascus, or any other well-known or unknown scholarly or non-scholarly city—can never be made the criterion.

Imam Shafi’i rahimahullah says:
«كيف أترك الخبر لأقوال أقوام لو عامرتهم لما حجتهم بالحديث .» [الاحكام فى اصول الاحكام للامدی : 165/2]
“How can I abandon the report (i.e., the hadith of the Messenger of Allah sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) for statements? If I had been among those people, I would have debated with them about the authority of the hadith.”
Thus, the only criterion is the Qur’an and Hadith; this is the sum of the discussion.

Hadith Commentary:
The relevance of this hadith to the chapter is as follows: Even if the measure of the mudd increased during the time of Umar ibn Abd al-Aziz, in the rulings of the Shari'ah—such as zakat al-fitr and others—the same sa‘ (measure) continued to be considered as was used by the people of Madinah and by the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam).

Hadith Commentary: However, only the sa‘ (صاع) from the time of the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) shall be taken into consideration.

Hadith Commentary:
(1)
In the blessed era of the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam), the measure of a mudd was less than two ratl. During the time of Hisham, the deficiency was compensated, and the measure of a mudd was made equal to two ratl. Then, in the caliphate of Umar ibn Abd al-Aziz (rahimahullah), it was doubled, making the measure of a mudd four ratl. If one adds a third to this, it becomes equal to the sa‘ (sā‘) of the Prophetic era, meaning that in the time of the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam), the measure of a sa‘ was 3 1/3 ratl. When, in the era of Umar ibn Abd al-Aziz (rahimahullah), the prevailing mudd, i.e., four ratl, is increased by a further third of a mudd, i.e., 1 1/3 ratl, it becomes equal to the measure of the Prophetic sa‘. If, in the time of the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam), the sa‘ had been eight ratl, then Sā’ib ibn Yazīd (radi Allahu anhu) should have said that in the era of the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam), one sa‘ according to your present mudd was equal to two mudd, and then in the era of Umar ibn Abd al-Aziz (rahimahullah) it was increased. But he did not say this; rather, he said that the sa‘ in the Prophetic era, according to your present mudd, was equal to one mudd and a third mudd, i.e., 1 1/3 (one mudd and a third) mudd.
(2)
In any case, in the blessed era of the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam), one sa‘ was 3 1/3 ratl, not eight ratl; otherwise, the statement of Sā’ib ibn Yazīd (radi Allahu anhu) in the aforementioned hadith would not be correct.

English Translation:

Measures and weights are always subject to change; they do not remain the same. The mudd, sa’ (sā‘), dirham, and mithqal have also varied in size over time. It is evident that the measure and weight considered valid in the Shari’ah are only those that existed during the time of the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam). In his era, the sa’ was equivalent to four mudd, and one mudd, in terms of weight, was one and one-third ratl (1 1/3 ratl). Similarly, the sa’ was five and one-third ratl (5 1/3 ratl). And one ratl was equal to ninety mithqal. In this respect, the details of the weight of the sa’ have already been mentioned in hadith 2515, which comes to approximately two and a half kilograms. Later on, the mudd and sa’ were made larger. The mudd, instead of being 1 1/3 ratl, was made 2 1/3 ratl. Likewise, the sa’ became eight ratl. The Hanafis adopted this sa’, even though it is not the Prophetic sa’. This is why, when Imam Abu Yusuf (rahimahullah) went to Madinah Munawwarah and had a discussion with Imam Malik (rahimahullah) on this matter, he retracted from his own school of thought, because Imam Malik (rahimahullah) brought him the sa’ from various houses in Madinah Munawwarah dating back to the time of the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam), and they were all equal to each other. The people of Madinah had inherited these sa’ from their forefathers. And this is the correct sa’. The majority of the scholars hold this view. Imam Abu Yusuf said that if my teacher, Imam Abu Hanifah (rahimahullah), had seen this sa’, he too would have accepted it. Thus, the Hanafi sa’ is not the Shar’i (legally prescribed) sa’, therefore, for ‘ushr (obligatory agricultural charity) and Sadaqat al-Fitr, only the Madinan sa’ will be considered valid, not the Hanafi sa’ which was introduced later.