إلى أن جاء:
7- الحافظ الفقيه تقي الدين أبو عمرو عثمان بن الصلاح بن عبدالرحمن الشهرزوري نزيل دمشق فجمع -لما ولي تدريس الحديث بالمدرسة الأشرفية- كتابه المشهور، فهذب فنونه، وأملاه شيئا بعد شيء؛ فلهذا لم يحصل ترتيبه على الوضع المتناسب، واعتنى بتصانيف الخطيب المفرقة، فجمع شتات مقاصدها، وضم إليها من غيرها نخب فوائدها، فاجتمع في كتابه ما تفرق في غيره؛ فلهذا عكف الناس عليه، وساروا بسيره، فلا يحصى كم ناظم له ومختصر، ومستدرك عليه ومقتصر، ومعارض له ومنتصر.
“(These were the books) until al-Ḥāfiẓ al-Faqīḥ Taqī al-Dīn Abū ‘Amr ‘Uthmān bin aṣ-Ṣalāḥ ibn ‘Abd ar-Raḥmān al-Shahrazūrī came, (who was) a resident of Damascus. He gathered – when he was appointed to teach Ḥadīth in al-Madrasah al-Ashrafiyya – his famous book, then refined the various branches, and dictated it gradually; it is due to this reason that the order (of the book) is not appropriate. He focused on the various books of al-Khatīb, gathering the points that were scattered, and adding selected points of benefit. Hence, that which was scattered in other books was all grouped together in his book. It is for this reason that people then clung to this book, and followed its pathways. It cannot be enumerated how many poems, abridgments, additions, commencements, rebuttals, and responses there are (in response to his book).”
7. ‘Allāmah Ibn aṣ-Ṣalāḥ (may Allāh Ta’ālā be pleased with him)
Ibn Ḥajar (may Allāh Ta’ālā have mercy on him) has given a very brief overview of books until the end of the sixth century. He concludes this discussion with the book of ‘Allāmah Ibn aṣ-Ṣalāḥ (may Allāh Ta’ālā have mercy on him), whose full name is Abū ‘Amr Taqī ad-Dīn, ‘Uthmān ibn ‘Abd ar-Rahmān ibn ‘Uthmān al-Kurdi.
In the Maktaba ar-Rushd print of al-Yawāqit wad-Durar, his birth year is cited as 504 AH, but this is incorrect as he was born in the year 577 AH, and he passed away in 643 AH.
Ibn Ḥajar (may Allāh Ta’ālā have mercy on him) says:
إلى أن جاء الحافظ الفقيه تقي الدين أبو عمرو عثمان بن الصلاح بن عبدالرحمن الشهرزوري نزيل دمشق
“(These were the books) until al-Ḥāfiẓ al-Faqīh Taqi ad-Dīn ‘Uthmān ibn ‘Abd ar-Rahmān ash-Shahrazūri, a resident of Damascus, came.”
Ibn Ḥajar (may Allāh Ta’ālā have mercy on him) first explains by saying:
لما ولي تدريس الحديث بالمدرسة الأشرفية-
When he was appointed to teach Ḥadīth in al-Madrasah al-Ashrafiyya.
‘Allāmah Ibn aṣ-Ṣalāḥ (may Allāh Ta’ālā have mercy on him) was given the position to teach Ḥadīth and related sciences at al-Madrassah al-Ashrafiyyah; a school that was founded by Ashraf (whom the Madrassah was named after), the ruler of Damascus at that time. This Madrassah officially opened on 15th Sha’bān 628 AH. When we visited Damascus twelve years ago, classes still used to be conducted in this school. Allāh Ta’ālā knows best whether the school is still standing now, or whether it has been demolished.
The primary objective of this Madrassah was to cater for those who wanted to specialize in Ḥadīth. ‘Allāmah Ibn aṣ-Ṣalāḥ (may Allāh Ta’ālā have mercy on him) was given the most senior post.
Ibn Ḥajar (may Allāh Ta’ālā have mercy on him) explains that during his career as a teacher:
فجمع -كتابه المشهور، فهذب فنونه، وأملاه شيئا بعد شيء
“He gathered his famous book, then refined the various branches, and dictated it gradually.”
Notice that Ibn Ḥajar (may Allāh Ta’ālā have mercy on him) says that ‘Allāmah Ibn aṣ-Ṣalāḥ (may Allāh Ta’ālā have mercy on him) ‘gathered’ his book. He does not say that he ‘wrote’ his book. The reason for the use of this word is because ‘Allāmah Ibn aṣ-Ṣalāḥ (may Allāh Ta’ālā have mercy on him) needed to establish a syllabus but he found that no book seemed compatible for teaching the terminology and principles of Ḥadīth. Most of the books before him contained all the chains of transmission and verbatim quotations from earlier scholars. Such books would confuse beginners and even intermediate students. Furthermore, a lot of information was scattered between these books. Thus, when he could find no book to fit his exact needs, ‘Allāmah Ibn aṣ-Ṣalāḥ (may Allāh Ta’ālā be pleased with him) finally decided that he would dictate and write his own book. He conducted research and dictated his lessons, and these lessons were in turn documented and reproduced in a print (book) format. ‘Allāmah Baqā’ī mentioned this in his an-Nukat al-Wafiyyah:
قيل: إن ابن الصلاح أملى كتابه إملاء، فكتبه في حال الإملاء جمع جم (النكت الوفية –2/ 436)
“Ibn aṣ-Ṣalāḥ dictated his book over intervals. A great number of people wrote down what he said.”
‘Allāmah Ibn aṣ-Ṣalāḥ’s (may Allāh Ta’ālā have mercy on him) lessons commenced on the 7th of Ramaḍān, 630 AH and concluded on the last day of Muḥarram, 634 AH. It took just over 40 months to complete all of the lessons. This duration (of 40 months) is proven from the manuscript of Ḥāfiẓ Aḥmad ibn al-‘Irāqī (may Allāh Ta’ālā have mercy on him). What dedicated students ‘Allāmah Ibn aṣ-Ṣalāḥ (may Allāh Ta’ālā have mercy on him) was blessed with! Imagine studying a book for over three years! Of course, there were intervals in between, but those intervals were very few and very brief. As Mullā ‘Ali al-Qārī (may Allāh Ta’ālā have mercy on him) says:
فإن الفتور يؤدي إلى القصور، والتعطيل ينسي التحصيل (شرح علي القاري – ص: 145)
“Being lax causes a person to become deficient, and being idle makes a person forget what he learnt.”
From this, we understand that ‘Allāmah Ibn aṣ-Ṣalāḥ (may Allāh Ta’ālā have mercy on him) wrote this book in the latter part of his life after he had travelled far and wide to obtain knowledge, gain great insight, and much experience. All of this adds greatly to the value of his book.
As for the book itself, although his book is commonly known as Muqaddimah Ibn aṣ-Ṣalāḥ, the actual name of his book is Ma’rifah ‘Ulūm al-Ḥadīth. He uses this name often in another book of his that he was occupied with before he passed away: Ṣiyāna Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim (a commentary of Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim). Ibn aṣ-Ṣalāḥ (may Allāh Ta’ālā have mercy on him) began to write this commentary of Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim, but unfortunately, he wrote very little before he passed away. To give three (random) examples, he says:
وقد أجبت عليهما بجوابين أحدهما ما ذكرته في كتاب معرفة علوم الحديث (صيانة صحيح مسلم – ص: 75)
“And I answered them both with two answers, one of which is what I mentioned in the book, Ma’rifah Ulūm al-Ḥadīth.”
A few pages later, he says:
وقد قررنا في كتاب معرفة علوم الحديث أنه إذا تحقق اللقاء والسماع مع السلامة من التدليس…الخ (صيانة صحيح مسلم – ص: 83)
“And we have established in the book, Ma’rifah Ulūm al-Ḥadīth, that if the meeting and hearing is ascertained with soundness from Tadlīs (where a narrator did not hear from the link above him, but he tries to give the impression that he heard from the link above using ambiguous words)… etc.”
At another place, he mentions:
وقد جليت في كتاب معرفة علوم الحديث حمل الخطيب أبي بكر الحافظ على ذلك احتجاج صاحبي الصحيحين وأبي داود وغيرهم (صيانة صحيح مسلم – ص: 96)
“And I made clear in the book, Ma’rifah Ulūm al-Ḥadīth, that Al-Khaṭīb Abī Bakar al-Ḥāfiẓ considered that to be a basis for Imām al-Bukhāri, Imām Muslim, and Abū Dawūd, and others quoting narrations from those upon whom there were objections.”
Others have proven that the name is actually, Ma’rifah Anwa’ ‘Ilm al-Ḥadīth.
Nonetheless, his book was commonly known as ‘Ulūm al-Ḥadīth, and after it was printed, it became known as Muqaddimah Ibn aṣ-Ṣalāḥ.
Evaluation of ‘Allāmah Ibn aṣ-Ṣalāḥ (may Allāh Ta’ālā have mercy on him)
As the book was essentially a compilation of written notes from the lessons of ‘Allāmah Ibn aṣ-Ṣalāḥ (may Allāh Ta’ālā have mercy on him), Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar (may Allāh Ta’ālā have mercy on him) uses this fact as an excuse against the objection that the book is not in the best of orders:
فلهذا لم يحصل ترتيبه على الوضع المتناسب
“It is due to this reason that the order is not appropriate.”
Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar (may Allāh Ta’ālā have mercy on him) offers an excuse for ‘Allāmah Ibn aṣ-Ṣalāḥ (may Allāh Ta’ālā have mercy on him), but he did not provide any excuses for those whom he commented on earlier. He could have said that ‘Allāmah ar-Rāmahurmuzi (may Allāh Ta’ālā have mercy on him) did not complete all the chapters (of his book) because he was writing on one aspect, or Imām al-Ḥākim’s book was not in perfect order (according to his opinion) because he was the first to officially write on that specific topic (i.e. the topic of ‘Ulūm al-Ḥadīth). Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar (may Allāh Ta’ālā have mercy on him) only offers an excuse for Ibn aṣ-Ṣalāḥ (may Allāh Ta’ālā have mercy on him).
Nevertheless, the order of the book of Ibn aṣ-Ṣalāḥ (may Allāh Ta’ālā have mercy on him) is generally not bad. Considering the fact that the book contains lectures that were transcribed, and that too, over a long period of time, it is understandable if there are a few minor things out of place. Indeed, ‘Allāmah Ibn aṣ-Ṣalāḥ’s (may Allāh Ta’ālā have mercy on him) greatest accomplishment was that he produced such a magnificent piece of work after looking into so many writings of his predecessors, and he successfully knew what to quote under which chapter. This remarkable feat dwarfs and overshadows the minor defect of the book not being ordered as well as it could have been.
وأمر الترتيب بعد ذلك أمر سهل، يقدر عليه من أدنى منه بمراتب
“Putting things together thereafter is rather simple. Any person who is much inferior to him can accomplish that.”
As ‘Allāmah Ibn aṣ-Ṣalāḥ (may Allāh Ta’ālā have mercy on him) completed the mighty task of gathering information from so many different places, putting this information into a specific order is much simpler. To understand this, take the following example:
A person travels throughout the world to search for pearls. He goes through mountainous regions, forests, deserts, rural areas, and even dives into the ocean to obtain saltwater pearls. He bears the severe heat of some places, the extreme cold of other sites; the pollution in some regions, and the poor living conditions in other regions. After all of this effort, he returns with a bag of diamonds, rubies, tanzanite, and some of the rarest pearls. He sorts out 98% of his possessions, and only a few of these stones are not set in the correct place. One would argue that this person has a valid excuse for not putting the remaining 2% in the proper place. It is bewildering to comment on this person’s lack of order of the 2% without focusing on the 98% that he has accomplished.
It is precisely for this reason that Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar (may Allāh Ta’ālā be pleased with him) first praised Ibn aṣ-Ṣalāḥ (may Allāh Ta’ālā have mercy on him) and then pointed out the issue concerning the order of the book. He then explained how Ibn aṣ-Ṣalāḥ (may Allāh Ta’ālā have mercy on him) wrote his book:
واعتنى بتصانيف الخطيب المفرقة، فجمع شتات مقاصدها، وضم إليها من غيرها نخب فوائدها، فاجتمع في كتابه ما تفرق في غيره؛
“He focused on the various books of al-Khatīb, gathering the points that were scattered, and adding selected points of benefit. Hence, that which was scattered in other books was all grouped together in his book.”
Ibn Ḥajar (may Allāh Ta’ālā have mercy on him) highlights that ‘Allāmah Ibn aṣ-Ṣalāḥ (may Allāh Ta’ālā have mercy on him) drew from the various works of ‘Allāmah al-Khatīb. Earlier, ‘Allāmah Ibn aṣ-Ṣalāḥ (may Allāh Ta’ālā have mercy on him) mentioned that almost on every subject, chapter and topic, ‘Allāmah al-Khatīb (may Allāh Ta’ālā have mercy on him) wrote a dedicated book.
Hence, ‘Allāmah Ibn aṣ-Ṣalāḥ (may Allāh Ta’ālā have mercy on him) first focused on all that was scattered in those various books of ‘Allāmah al-Khatīb (may Allāh Ta’ālā have mercy on him).
Then, he also drew from the books of others, like ‘Allāmah Ibn’ Abd al-Barr and Imām al-Ḥākim (may Allāh Ta’ālā have mercy on them).
Thus, gathering all these Nuqūl (quotations) in this manner overshadows the slight defect of the disorder and disorganisation of the information.
فلهذا عكف الناس عليه، وساروا بسيره
“It is for this reason that people then clung to this book, and followed its pathways.”
Due to the brilliance of the book that ‘Allāmah Ibn aṣ-Ṣalāḥ (may Allāh Ta’ālā have mercy on him) presented, scholars after him attached great importance to this book of his.
Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar (may Allāh Ta’ālā have mercy on him) uses the word عكف, which means:
العكف والعكوف: إقبال الناس على شيء بحيث لا يصرف وجوههم عنه.
“The people’s immersion upon a thing in such a manner that they do not turn their faces away from it.”
The word عكف is used when one takes on a task with his mind, body, and soul, and devotes himself completely to that task. The word اعتكاف is derived from this, and it is called اعتكاف because a person devotes himself fully. This is the extent of the attachment that scholars had with Muqaddimah Ibn aṣ-Ṣalāḥ.
فلا يحصى كم ناظم له ومختصر، ومستدرك عليه ومقتصر، ومعارض له ومنتصر.
“It cannot be enumerated how many scholars put the text in poetry form, the amount of scholars who abridged the text, what a great number added on to it, the huge number who condensed the text, those who wrote rebuttals, and the amount of responses that there are.”
We will elucidate and give examples of each of the above.
Nāẓim: كم ناظم له
Some scholars such as ‘Allāmah al-‘Irāqī and ‘Allāmah as-Suyūtī (may Allāh Ta’ālā have mercy on them) arranged the text of Muqaddimah Ibn aṣ-Ṣalāḥ in poetic form. Both of their poems are called Alfiyya because they arranged the text into one thousand lines of poetry. One will commonly hear these poems being referred to as Alfiyya of al-‘Irāqī or Alfiyya of as-Suyūtī.
Following, both ‘Allāmah al-Irāqī and ‘Allāmah as-Suyūtī (may Allāh Ta’ālā have mercy on them) then wrote commentaries on their poems. ‘Allāmah al-Irāqī (may Allāh Ta’ālā have mercy on him) wrote Sharḥ at-Tabṣirah wat Taḏkirah, and ‘Allāmah as-Suyūtī wrote al-Bahr Alladhi Zakhar. Others also wrote commentaries on the Alfiyya of ‘Allāmah al-‘Irāqī, such as ‘Allāmah as-Sakhāwi (may Allāh Ta’ālā have mercy on him) who wrote Fatḥ al-Muġīth.
Ikhtiṣār: ومختصر
The meaning of this is:
الإتيان بالمقصود كله بلفظ اقل من الاول
“Bringing all of the intended meaning with a word less than the first”
Ikhtiṣār is an abridgment; a shortened form of the work that retains the general idea of the original reading. Every point of the book is mentioned, but it is just in less words and in a shorter form.
Examples of scholars who abridged the book of Ibn aṣ-Ṣalāḥ are: ‘Allāmah Badr ad-Dīn Ibn Jamā’ah, ‘Allāmah at-Tībī, and Imām an-Nawawi (may Allāh Ta’ālā have mercy on them) in Irshād Ṭullāb al-Haqā’iq and at-Taqrīb, etc.
Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar (may Allāh Ta’ālā have mercy on him) quotes from ‘Allāmah al-Irāqī (may Allāh Ta’ālā have mercy on him) that the best Ikhtiṣār is that of ‘Alā ad-Dīn ibn at-Turkumānī (may Allāh Ta’ālā have mercy on him). Under his entry in Raf’ al-Iṣr, Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar (may Allāh Ta’ālā have mercy on him) praises his abridgement and quotes from ‘Allāmah al-Irāqī:
علي بن عثمان بن إبراهيم بن مصطفى بن سليمان المَارِدِيني، علاء الدين المعروف بابن التُّركماني الحنفي، من المائة الثامنة.
ولد سنة ثلاث وثمانين وستمائة. وولي الحكم بعد أن أسَنَّ فِي شوال سنة ثمان وأربعين فِي سلطنة المظفر حاجي ابن الناصر. أرسل إِلَيْهِ فألبس الخلعة من غير أن يتقدم لذلك إشاعة. فدخل الصالحية عَلَى الزين البسطامي، فلما عرف الزين بأنه قرر موضعه، خرج من مكانه. وباشر أحسن مباشرة.
وكان كثير الإفضال، مع مشاركة فِي علم الحديث. واختصر كتاب ابن الصلاح اختصاراً حسناً. سمعت شيخنا العراقي يقول: إنه أوفى بمقصودة. قال: ولا نعلم أحداً ساواه فِي ذَلِكَ. (رفع الإصر عن قضاة مصر – ص: 278)
(Summary of the last two lines):
“He abridged the book of Ibn aṣ-Ṣalāḥ in a brilliant way. I heard our teacher, al-Irāqī saying: “He did justice to the topics.” He also said: “We do not know of anyone who matched him in that.””
The title of this abridged book is: al-Muntakhab fī ‘Ulūm al-Ḥadīth and it is published by al-‘Ulwān with the Taḥqīq of Dr. Bashār al-Khalf. This is a book that we recommend one tries to invest in, especially if one does not intend to study Muqaddimah Ibn aṣ-Ṣalāḥ after Nuzha.
Istidrāk: ومستدرك
Istidrāk refers to when one takes the original work and adds additional points that he thinks the author perhaps missed but are nonetheless relevant and important. An example of this is ‘Allāmah Bulqīnī (may Allāh Ta’ālā have mercy on him), who added a few things in his book Maḥāsin al-Iṣṭilāḥ.
Iqtiṣār: ومقتصر
The meaning of this is:
هو الإتيان ببعض المقاصد
“It is summarizing in a way that only some aspects are mentioned (meaning).”
Iqtiṣār refers to condensing or shortening a book by omitting some of the points mentioned. Some of the points in the original work are omitted.
Mu’āriḍ: ومعارض
Mu’āriḍ has two meanings:
- Someone tried to compete with the author (in our case, Ibn as-Ṣalāḥ) and produce a similar book. For example, ‘Allāmah Ibn Abī ad-Damm (may Allāh Ta’ālā have mercy on him);
Or:
- Someone who objects to the author’s work. For example, ‘Allāmah al-Muġultāi (may Allāh Ta’ālā have mercy on him) continuously raises objections against ‘Allāmah Ibn as- Ṣalāḥ (may Allāh Ta’ālā have mercy on him).
Muntaṣir: ومنتصر
Muntaṣir refers to those who defend the author. For example, ‘Allāmah al-Irāqī (in his Nukat /At-Taqyīd Wal Iḍāḥ) and Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar (may Allāh Ta’ālā have mercy on them) both defended Ibn as-Ṣalāḥ (may Allāh Ta’ālā have mercy on him) and responded to those objections and refutations.
This great amount of books that centred around the book of ‘Allāmah Ibn aṣ-Ṣalāḥ (may Allāh Ta’ālā have mercy on him) is enough to illustrate how lots scholars began focusing on his book.
Bear in mind that everything Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar (may Allāh Ta’ālā have mercy on him) wrote is less than two hundred years after the passing of Ibn aṣ-Ṣalāḥ (may Allāh Ta’ālā have mercy on him). ‘Allāmah Ibn aṣ-Ṣalāḥ (may Allāh Ta’ālā have mercy on him) completed his book in the year 634 AH, and Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar’s is writing all these praises for his book in the year 818 AH. This clearly shows the acceptance and status that Allāh Ta’āla gave to this book, such that within less than two hundred years it already had such acceptance.
Shaykh Muḥammad Muḥy ad-Dīn ‘Abd al-Ḥamīd said in his introduction of Tawḍīḥ al-Aḏkār:
ولو لم يكن من حظوة هذا الكتاب الا ان يتصدى له الإمام النووي وابن كثير وابن جماعة والزركشي والعراقي وابن حجر: حفاظ أزمانهم. ثم لو لم يكن له حظوة إلا أن يتفرغ له الحافظ العراقي الزمن الطويل….. لو لم يكن من الحظوة إلا ذلك لكان كافيا ودليلا مع ذلك على منزلة الكتاب ومنزلة صاحبه.
The Science of Ḥadīth in the light of the Shāfi’ī viewpoint
After listing all of these books, Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar (may Allāh Ta’ālā have mercy on him) then discusses his reasons and motivation for writing this Kitāb (Nuzha).
An important point to note is that most of the scholars who wrote on the topic of Ḥadīth were all Shāfi’ī scholars. There are only a few exceptions, such as Qāḍi ‘Iyyāḍ (may Allāh Ta’ālā have mercy on him) and Ibn’ ‘Abd al-Bar(may Allāh Ta’ālā have mercy on him), who were Mālikīs. The result of this was that the science began to correspond with the Shāfi’ī Madhhab, because all of the Shāfi’ī scholars presented the principles in a way that conforms to their Maḏhhab. Shaykh ‘Awwāmah mentions this in the introduction to Tadrīb ar-Rāwī. He says:
وإن أركان علم مصطلح الحديث رحمهم الله هم: الحاكم، والبيهقي، والخطيب، وابن الصلاح، والنووي، والعراقي، والزركشي، وابن حجر، والسخاوي، والسيوطي، ومؤلفاتهم المتداولة هي أركان هذا العلم، وأقوالهم هي السائدة المرجوع إليها. يضاف إليهم: ابن جماعة، والطيبي، والتبريزي، والعلائي، وابن كثير، والأبناسي، والبلقيني، وابن الملقن، ثم القسطلاني، ثم المناوي – كل هولاء – وغيرهم – هم من حيث المذهب الفقهي فقهاء شافعية ، ومعلوم اشتراك مباحث السنة من علم أصول الفقه مع علم أصول الحديث ، فمزج هولاء الأئمة كتبهم في علم أصول الحديث بأراء أئمتهم الشافعية الأصولية الفقهية لا سيما وأن الإمام الشافعي رحمه الله وسائر علماء المسلمين كتب أبحاثا كثيرة تدخل في العلمين ، فصار علم أصول الحديث أو مصطلح الحديث مصطلحا شافعيا الخ(الدراسة على تدريب الراوي – 1 / 16)
“The pillars of this field of Ḥadīth nomenclature are: al-Ḥākim, al-Bayhaqī, al-Khatīb, Ibn as- Ṣalāḥ, an-Nawawī, al-‘Iraqī, az-Zarkashī, Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar, as-Sakhāwī, and as-Suyūtī. Their opinions are regarded as the most important, and they are referenced (often). The following scholars could be added to this list: Ibn Jamā’ah, at-Tībī, at-Tibrīzi, al-‘Alā’i, Ibn Kathīr, al-Abnāsī, al-Bulqīnī, Ibn al-Mulaqqin, then al-Qasṭalānī, then al-Munāwī: all of them –and so many others, followed the Shāfi’ī methodology from a Fiqhī perspective, and they were masters of it. It is known that there are chapters of ’Uṣūl al-Ḥadīth mixed with ’Uṣūl al-Fiqh. Since these scholars were Shafi’ī, they mixed many Shafi’ī principles in their books of ‘Ulūm al-Ḥadīth. Imām ash-Shafi’ī did this in Ar-Risālah, and many others wrote chapters which involved both sciences. So, the science of Ḥadīth now became according to the Shafi’ī Madhhab.”
Therefore, we will differ much in this book because we will be studying it from the Ḥanafī perspective. Ḥanafī scholars retained their principles and approach to Ḥadīth in the books of Uṣūl al-Fiqh, so we will quote these books (of Uṣūl al-Fiqh) often.