Shīʿa Narrators in Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī and the Allegation of Shīʿism Against Imām al-Nasāʾī and Imām al-Ḥākim
Reference: Fatāwā Rashidiyyah, Page 549
❖ The Question
Are there Shīʿa narrators in Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī? And were Imām al-Nasāʾī and Imām al-Ḥākim themselves Shīʿa?
❖ The Answer
Al-ḥamdu lillāh, waṣ-ṣalātu wa-s-salāmu ʿalā Rasūlillāh, ammā baʿd!
✔ Shīʿa Narrators in Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī
Yes, there are some narrators described as Shīʿa in Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī. However, it is essential to distinguish between Shīʿa and Rāfiḍa in the terminology of the early scholars (mutaqaddimūn):
- Shīʿa (in early usage):
Those who believed in tafdīl — preferring ʿAlī رضي الله عنه over ʿUthmān رضي الله عنه — while still affirming ʿUthmān رضي الله عنه as a rightful Imām and a great Companion. Some Sunnī scholars also held this view, so it was considered a tolerable difference. - Some other Shīʿa:
Those who regarded ʿAlī رضي الله عنه as superior even to Abū Bakr and ʿUmar رضي الله عنهما, while still acknowledging their legitimacy as caliphs and noble Companions. This was regarded as an innovation (bidʿah), but not kufr. - Rāfiḍa (in early usage):
Those who rejected all Companions except ʿAlī رضي الله عنه and a few others, slandering the rest. Such narrations are absolutely rejected.
✔ Conditions for Accepting a Narration from an Innovator (Mubtadiʿ)
A narration may be accepted if:
➊ The narrator is truthful, reliable, and not accused of lying.
➋ He does not actively call others to his innovation.
➌ His narration does not directly support his innovation.
By these rules, the Shīʿa narrators found in Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī were:
- Trustworthy and honest,
- Not propagators of their views,
- Reported narrations that do not support innovation, and in some cases even go against it.
Therefore, their narrations are acceptable, and no objection can be raised against Imām al-Bukhārī رحمه الله.
✔ Imām al-Nasāʾī رحمه الله
- The claim that he was Shīʿa is baseless.
- He authored Khaṣāʾiṣ ʿAlī, a book defending ʿAlī رضي الله عنه against groups who reviled him.
- That book contains both authentic and weak narrations, as is common in many ḥadīth collections (such as Sunan al-Tirmidhī, Ibn Mājah, Abū Dāwūd).
- His intent was not sectarian bias but protection of the honor of a noble Companion.
✔ Imām al-Ḥākim رحمه الله
- Ḥāfiẓ al-Dhahabī wrote in Tadhkirat al-Ḥuffāẓ that al-Ḥākim leaned towards Shīʿism.
- However, he was not a Rāfiḍī nor extreme; at most, he favored ʿAlī رضي الله عنه in tafdīl.
- He held Abū Bakr and ʿUmar رضي الله عنهما in the highest respect.
- Thus, his “Shīʿism” was no more than a mild inclination, not deviation.
- His status as an authority in ḥadīth is undisputed, and leading scholars praised his contributions.
✔ His Work al-Mustadrak
- It appears Imām al-Ḥākim did not fully review al-Mustadrak before his death.
- Hence, it contains some weak, even fabricated, narrations.
- Still, it also contains a wealth of authentic and good aḥādīth.
✿ Conclusion
- Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī includes some narrators labeled as Shīʿa in the early, limited sense (tafdīl), not in the extreme or Rāfiḍī sense.
- Such narrations are acceptable under the principles of ḥadīth.
- The claim that Imām al-Nasāʾī was Shīʿa is false; he defended ʿAlī رضي الله عنه only out of fairness.
- Imām al-Ḥākim leaned towards tafdīl but was not a Rāfiḍī; he honored all the great Companions and remains a recognized authority.
ھذا ما عندی، واللہ أعلم بالصواب
