This excerpt is taken from Sheikh Irshad-ul-Haq Asri's book Islam and the Criticisms of Ishraq on Music.
In the books of Hadith, the Sahihayn, and especially Sahih Bukhari, have been granted by Allah, Glorified and Exalted be He, a lasting reputation that no other book has attained. The noble Muhaddithin agree that all the narrations in Sahih Bukhari are authentic and serve as proof and evidence in all matters of life. Its hadiths enjoy the honor of general acceptance. However, a few narrations are excluded from this acceptance due to objections raised by some Muhaddithin, but this does not at all mean that those hadiths are weak or rejected. Allama Al-Wazir Al-Yamani clearly stated about these very narrations:
[اعلم أن المختلف فيه من حديثهما هو اليسير وليس ذلك اليسير ما هو مردود بطريق قطعية ولا إجماعية بل غاية ما فيه أنه لم ينعقد عليه الإجماع]
Know well that these few differing hadiths in Bukhari and Muslim are neither categorically weak nor collectively so; rather, at most, it is that there is no consensus on their authenticity.
Reference: (Al-Rawd Al-Basim: p.79 vol.1)
(That is) the narrations of the subject matter are also authentic, but there is no consensus on their authenticity, and they have been reduced from the status of general acceptance (universal acceptance).
Especially those narrations from which the two Sheikhs have deduced rulings and which were initially mentioned in the translation of the chapter, in terms of authenticity, their status is superior to those narrations mentioned subsequently and as evidence. Imam Muslim himself pointed to this difference in the introduction of Sahih Muslim, and other scholars of the field have also clarified this.
In the agreed-upon narrations of the Sahihayn, there is a narration from Hazrat Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her) in which, on the occasion of Eid, in the presence of the Prophet Muhammad ﷺ, the playing of جاریتین (two drums) and singing is mentioned. It is also explicitly stated in the Sahihayn that [وليستا بمغنيتين] those two were not professional singers. Readers of Al-I'tisam will know that in the fatwa permitting music and in its endorsement and support, the scholars of Ishraq initially did not mention these words at all. When we pointed out بفضلِ اللہ سبحانہ وتعالیٰ, they then exerted great effort to prove it weak. We tried to alleviate their concerns in this regard, but it did not satisfy them. Consequently, in the September 2006 issue of the monthly
Reference: Ishraq
, they presented their concerns in a new style, which we are now presenting to our esteemed readers along with our observations. This clarification was deemed necessary because this narration is from Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim, and before the scholars of Ishraq, no hadith scholar or learned person had objected to it. The fatwa permitting music was also given by some others besides the scholars of Ishraq, but none of them had the audacity to declare this agreed-upon narration weak.Traditions of Hisham ibn Urwah
It was previously stated that all of Hisham's traditions from his father Urwah, except one, are through Imam Zahri, but as a result of our observations and the attention drawn by Mr. Iftikhar Tabassum, it is now accepted that there is no difference of opinion regarding Hisham's hearing from his father.
Reference: (Ishraq: p.28 September 2006)
والحمد لله على ذلكThe second objection regarding Hisham was that after going to Iraq, Hisham became careless in narrating traditions from his father Urwah. In response to this, the summary of what we presented is as follows:
① Iraq here does not mean the entire region of Iraq, but Kufa, and both Basri students Hammad and Muammar narrate from Hisham.
② This objection about Hisham relates to his second and third visits to Kufa.
③ Regarding the period in which it is said that he became careless, it is also clarified that during this period, Waki', Ibn Numayr, and Muhadhir heard from him.
④ The tracking of the two Sheikhs in Sahihain is well-known, therefore the ruling on the narrations of the meddlers or mixed narrators in them is not the same as in other books. In response to our objections, it was said:
Hisham certainly went to Kufa; the reference to the people of Iraq is not meant to indicate Hisham's place of residence, nor to show that the aspect of carelessness is found only in the narrations transmitted by the people of Kufa. The intention is that during that period, Hisham adopted the method of Tirsal (uninterrupted transmission). Therefore, the narrations of those narrators who narrated from him during that period cannot be considered definitely connected.
Reference: (Ishraq: p.29)
He spoke rightly, but this is after his second and third visits to Kufa. During this period, those who narrated traditions from him apparently allow for the possibility that some of these narrations are mursal (disconnected), but the reality is otherwise. As for the reference to "Iraq," this is actually to dispel the misconception that Hisham's position applies to the entire region of Iraq; rather, it pertains specifically to the city of Kufa. Moreover, those who narrated from Hisham are not only his Kufan students, as was previously implied, but also Basran students. Regarding the point that Hisham's Basran students also heard from him after his arrival in Kufa, not in Madinah, its explanation will follow later.
We had stated that the objection regarding Hisham's narrations concerns his second and third visits to Kufa that
[قدم الكوفة ثلاث مرات قدمة، كان يقول: حدثني أبي قال: سمعت عائشة، وقدم الثانية فكان يقول: أخبرني أبي عن عائشة وقدم الثالثة فكان يقول: أبي عن عائشة]
Hisham came to Kufa three times. The first time he came, he used to say: [حدثنی أبی قال: سمعت عائشة], meaning he did not send (the report) but explicitly stated the hearing (sama'). The second time he came, he used to say [أخبرنی أبی عن عائشة]. This means that even then he explicitly stated the hearing in the narration from his father, but he did not mention the hearing between his father and Sayyida Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her). And the third time he came, he did not mention the hearing from his father nor the hearing of his father from Sayyida Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her).
Reference: (Al-Tahdheeb: p.50 vol.11), (Al-Seer: p.34 vol.6 and others)
Now, what kind of justice is this that all the narrations from the people of Kufa from Hisham are categorically declared disconnected and unreliable? Especially when those who narrated from Hisham are Abu Usama and Hammad bin Usama, and they are considered trustworthy and reliable by the muhaddithin (scholars of hadith) in narrating from Hisham, and they consider his narration authentic, as will be explained later. We have mentioned before that this objection to Hisham is not about all his narrations, but the people of Ishraq did not consider our request worthy of attention.
Similarly, it was also stated that
Reference: (Al-Tahdheeb wa Tarikh Baghdad (p. 40, vol. 14)
clarifies that in the last period, Waki', Ibn Namir, and Muhadhir heard from Hisham, and in the Sahihayn this narration is from Abu Usama instead of these three. Therefore, it is absolutely incorrect to attribute all the narrations of the people of Kufa from Hisham to being musalsal (continuous). But alas! The people of Ishraq did not pay attention to this either and stubbornly keep saying that the narrations narrated in Kufa cannot be certainly considered as connected (muttasil). From this, the knot is also untied that the Basri students heard from Hisham not in Medina but in Kufa. Did all of them hear for the last time or before that as well? If all their hearing is the same, then what is the meaning of identifying those who heard last?
