بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

11 Muharram, 1444 AH (Sunday, July 30 , 2023)

Amount of Narrations With Repetitions

As for the number of narrations in Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim with the repetitions, ‘Allāmah ‘Irāqī said:

ولم يذكر عدته بالمكرر وهو يزيد على عدة كتاب البخاري لكثرة طرقه وقد رأيت عن أبى الفضل أحمد بن سلمة أنه اثنا عشر ألف حديث. (التقييد والإيضاح – ص: 27)

‘Allāmah ‘Irāqī is claiming that he ‘saw’ a statement attributed to Aḥmad ibn Salamah that apparently he claimed that there are 12 000 narration.

‘Allāmah Ibn ‘Abdil Hādī attached that figure to the statement quoted earlier

وقال أحمدُ بن سَلمة: كنتُ مع ‌مسلم في تأليف صحيحه خمسَ عشرةَ سنة، وهو ‌اثنا ‌عشر ‌ألف ‌حديث. (طبقات علماء الحديث – 2 / 288)

Allāmah Dhahabī also attributed this to Aḥmad ibn Salamah when quoting that statement from him. He wrote:

قال: وهو اثنا عشر ألف حديث (سير أعلام النبلاء – 12 / 566)

If this statement of his is true, then it will hold a lot of weight, since Aḥmad ibn Salamah was the closest student and companion of Imām Muslim who was with him throughout the entire period when he was writing the book. Thus, if he claims that there are 12 000 narrations, no one can debate the amount. In fact, if this statement is proven from Aḥmad ibn Salamah and if a lesser number is found by any other scholar, then it will probably have to be said that Imām Muslim cancelled out a few narrations, or that maybe a few narrations did not reach us. A person who was with Imām Muslim during the entire writing of the Ṣaḥīḥ is claiming that that there were 12000 narrations, how can he be wrong! He is telling us that together with Imām Muslim they gathered 12 000 narrations. If a later scholar claims that there are even 11 500, he will be incorrect, or it will mean that the entire Ṣaḥīḥ was not passed on.

Unfortunately, we find no chain or source for this statement. Likewise, there is no print in the world with even close to 12 000 narrations.

We need to determine the authenticity of this statement.

I mentioned above the names of the three scholars who quoted it from Aḥmad ibn Salamah. These scholars lived four centuries after Aḥmad ibn Salamah. ʿAllāmah Ibn ʿAbd al-Hādī passed away in the year 744 AH and ʿAllāmah Dhahabī passed away in the year 748. ‘Allāmah ‘Irāqī passed away around six decades later.

As for ʿAllāmah Aḥmad ibn Salamah, ʿAllāmah Zarkalī mentioned in Al-Aʿlām on pp.132 that he passed away around 286 AH. That means that there are around 450 years in between these scholars and ʿAllāmah Aḥmad ibn Salamah. That is a huge gap and there are many missing links.

In short, there are many missing links between those who quoted this from Aḥmad ibn Salamah and Aḥmad ibn Salamah himself.

Probably, this is why scholars who worked with Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim; like ʿAllāmah Ibn aṣ-Ṣalāh and Imām Nawawī, they did not even indicate to this statement of Aḥmad ibn Salamah, leave alone quoting it. They sufficed by simply mentioning that there are 4000 narrations without repetitions, and they left it there. They did not discuss the total amount with repetitions.

Interestingly, on page 145 of his Nukat, ʿAllāmah Ibn Ḥajar referenced this statement of Aḥmad ibn Salamah to ʿAllāmah ʿIrāqī. He says:

وذكر الشيخ في شرح الألفية عن أحمد بن سلمة أن عدة كتاب مسلم بالمكرر اثنا عشر ألف حديث.

Likewise, in the Muassassah Risālah print, Shaykh Shu‘ayb Arnāwūṭ referenced the statement to Tadhkirah al-Ḥuffāḍ, another book of ‘Allāmah Dhahabī:

والخبر في ” تذكرة الحفاظ ” 2 / 589. (تعليقة سير أعلام النبلاء – 12 / 566)

That really does not help. It is a footnote, just for the sake of adding a footnote, otherwise, it has not benefit at all.

‘Allāmah Dhahabī attributed that to Aḥmad ibn Salamah and commented:

قلت: يعني بالمكرر، بحيث إنه إذا قال: حدثنا قتيبة، وأخبرنا ‌ابن ‌رمح ‌يعدان حديثين، اتفق لفظهما أو اختلف في كلمة. (سير أعلام النبلاء – 12 / 566)

If a person really wants to accept and consider that statement of Aḥmad ibn Salamah, then probably, this is the interpretation that could be made. But it is just an assumption; we would not know whether this is indeed the case or not, unless someone really wants to take the time and scrutinize every difference that Imām Muslim mentioned or indicate to in the chain and he then verifies whether the total will then reach 12 000. But this will be a daunting and lengthy task, and there really will be much benefit.

ولكنه نصب من غير ‌أرب. (مقدمة ابن الصلاح – ص: 11)

Sometimes the differences are on line. Yes, the only benefit that will be there is that if someone memorizes the entire Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim, that it could be said that he knows 12 000 narrations off by heart.

Nevertheless, we need to look at other amounts presented by earlier scholars, and then compare it to the more recent numbering and counts.

Another earlier scholar who presented an amount is ‘Allāsamah Mayyānishī. He wrote:

اشتمل كتابه رحمه الله على ثمانية آلاف حديث (ما لا يسع المحدث جهله – ص: 27)

The amount that he is presenting is 33% less that the amount that ‘Allāmah Dhahabī and ‘Allāmah ‘Irāqī attributed to ‘Allāmah Aḥmad ibn Salamah.

‘Allāmah Zarkashī quotes from this from ‘Allāmah Mayyānishī and said:

ولعل ‌هذا ‌أقرب. (النكت للزركشي – 1 / 191)

Misquoting From Ḥāfiḍ Ibn Ḥajar

Even though ‘Allāmah Zarkashī is saying that this is probably the closest to being accurate, it is alleged that Ḥāfiḍ Ibn Ḥajar differed. in Tadrīb ar-Rāwī, ‘Allāmah Suyūṭī quoted:

وقال الميانجي: ثمانية آلاف، فالله أعلم. قال ابن حجر: ‌وعندي ‌في ‌هذا ‌نظر. (تدريب الراوي – 1 / 111)

However, if we go back to the original source to verify this comments of Ḥāfiḍ Ibn Ḥajar, we find that ‘Allāmah Suyūṭī misquoted Ḥāfiḍ Ibn Ḥajar.

Ḥāfiḍ Ibn Ḥajar mentioned this after that number of 4000, as we quoted pre. The exact wording that appears in the Nukat are:

وعن الشيخ محي الدين النووي أن عدته بغير المكرر نحو أربعة آلاف قلت: ‌وعندي ‌في ‌هذا ‌نظر. النكت لابن حجر – 1 / 296)

Because of not referring back to the source, Shaykh Yūnūs Jawnpūrī quoted this from ‘Allāmah Suyūṭī and accepted it. He quoted that ‘Allāmah Zarkashī said that this is the closest to being accurate, and he followed it up by saying:

لكن حكى السيوطي عن ابن حجر أنه قال: وعندى في هذا نظر (اليواقيت الغالية – 3 / 330)

And with that he concluded the discussion on the number of narrations.

Surprisingly, Shaykh ‘Awwāmah did not comment or indicate that ‘Allāmah Suyūṭī is quoting this out of place.

The student of Ḥāfiḍ Ibn Ḥajar, Shaykh Zakariyyah al-Anṣārī accepted what ‘Allāmah Zarkashī said, and this became the popular amount which scholars thereafter quoted. Majority of the scholars over the next 500 years would claim that there are 8000 narrations if we include the repetitions and Mutāba’āt. Hence, between 800 AH to 1300 AH, you will find many authors that there are 4000 narrations in Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim without repetition, and there are 8000 with repetitions.

Scholars Who Mentioned A Different Amount

The reason for saying ‘majority of the scholars’ and ‘many authors’ is because there is a handful of scholars who mentioned an amount that is almost 10% less.

In Kashf aẓ-Ẓunūn, Ḥājī Khalīfah mentioned that the amount without repetitions is 7,275.

وبالمكررات سبعة آلاف ومائتان وخمسة وسبعون حديثاً. (كشف الظنون عن أسامي الكتب والفنون – 1 / 555)

This might seem to be a very precise amount.

However, Shaykh Ṭawālabah feels that probably Ḥājī Khalīfah (and others) confused the statement of ‘Allāmah Ibn aṣ-Ṣalāḥ. They misunderstood what ‘Allāmah Ibn aṣ-Ṣalāḥ mentioned in Ṣiyānah Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim.

Look at how ‘Allāmah Ibn aṣ-Ṣalāḥ worded and phrased the statement in Ṣiyānah Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim. Going back to that incident that we quoted last week…. Abū Quraysh al-Ḥāfiḍ mentioned that they were sitting with Abū Zur‘ah and Imām Muslim was also present. The quotation continues as follows:

فلما أن قام قلت له هذا جمع أربعة آلاف حديث في الصحيح فقال أبو زرعة فلمن ترك الباقي؟ أراد ، والله أعلم ، إن كتابه هذا أربعة آلاف حديث أصول دون المكررات. وهكذا كتاب البخاري ذكر أنه أربعة آلاف حديث بإسقاط المكررات وهو بالمكررة سبعة آلاف ومائتين وخمسة وسبعون حديثا (صيانة صحيح مسلم – ص: 101)

It is clear that the antecedent of the pronoun ‘Huwa’ (that is underlined), is ‘Kitāb al-Bukhārī’! It clearly means that in Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhāri, there are 7275 narrations with the repetitions.

It seems that Ḥājī Khalīfah assumed that the word ‘Huwa’ refers back to Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim, and based on that, he is claiming that there are 7275 narrations in Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim. Shaykh Ṭawālabah says:

فلعلهم أخطأوا فهم عبارة ابن الصلاح (الإمام مسلم ومنهجه في الصحيح – ص: 110)

Taking from Shaykh Ṭawālabah , Shaykh Mashūr ibn Ḥasan Āl Salmān demonstrates how so many scholars just accepted this number, and he explains the same point; it was due to an error of understanding the antecedent of the pronoun:

وشاع في كتب المتأخِّرين – كما تراه في “الحطة” (221) و”كشف الظنون” (1/ 556)، و”الإمام البخاري محدثًا وفقيهًا” (1222) و”منهاج الصالحين” (1001) لبليق، و”مصطلح الحديث” (55) لابن عثيمين – أن عدد أحاديث “صحيح مسلم” بالمكرر (7275) حديثًا! ومستندهم في ذلك عبارة ابن الصلاح في “الصيانة” (100) وشهرها عنه النووي في “شرحه على صحيح مسلم” (1/ 21) )تعليقة الكافي– ص: 142)

He quotes the exact text of Siyānah Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim, and then he explained:

والضمير يعود على أقرب مذكور، وهو البخاري، ولذا قال في “علوم الحديث” (399) عقب قولة البخاري المتقدمة عند المصنف: “أحفظ مئة ألف حديث .. ” قال بعدها مباشرة: “”وجملة ما في كتابه “الصحيح” سبعة آلاف ومئتان وخسمة وسبعون حديثًا بالأحاديث المكررة”. إذن (7275) عدد أحاديث “صحيح البخاري” بالمكرر عند ابن الصلاح، فمن الخطأ جعل ذلك لعدد أحاديث “صحيح مسلم”. (تعليقة الكافي– ص: 142)

In light of this, we can ignore this view of Ḥājī Khalīfah.

Numbering According to his Number in the modern Day prints.

Coming to the more recent scholars, Shaykh Ṭawālabah compared the count of Shaykh ʿAbd al-Bāqī and Wensinck. He presented their total counts of the narrations in each chapter and then he added them up. The total according to Shaykh ‘Abdul Bāqī is 5770 narrations whereas the total according to Wensinck is 5781.

Shaykh Ṭawālabah then also counted the narrations himself. He wrote:

وأما بالمكرر فتتبعت عده – أي عبد الباقي – لأحاديث كل كتاب فبلغت 5770 حديثا من غير المقدمة، وفيها سبعة أحاديث أصول – في عده – فيكون العد الكلى 5777 (الإمام مسلم ومنهجه في الصحيح – ص: 109)

Shaykh Ṭawālabah then says that he added the Mutāba‘āt and Shawāhid. He writes:

ولاحظت أن عبد الباقي – رحمه الله – لم يعد المتابعات والشواهد وما إليها وقمت بعدها مفردة، فبلغت 1615 حدثبا يزاد إليها ثلاثة في المقدمة فيكون 1618 حديثا، وبإضافة هذا إلى 5777 يكون العدد النهائي بالمكرر 7388 حديثا (الإمام مسلم ومنهجه في الصحيح – ص: 110)

This number is very close to that number of 7275 that was presented by Ḥājī Khalīfah, but Ḥājī Khalīfah reached his total due to a mistake. The point that we can, nevertheless, learn from this is that the number of narrations of Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī and Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim are very similar.

Below is the table that Shaykh Ṭawālabah presented with the total:

 

The first column is the number of Mutābaʿāt and Shawāhid that both; Muḥammad Fuād and Wensinck did not count. That totals to 1,615.

Therefore, the total with the Mukarrarāt (repetitions), Shawāhīḍ and Mutābaʿāt (supporting chains) is 7,385. This excludes the Aḥādīth mentioned in the muqaddimah.

Shaykh Mashhūr Ḥasan Āl Salmān uses the same method but he reaches ten extra narrations, either because he did not do his math correctly, or as a typo, because he clearly mentioned that the number excludes the ten narrations of the Muqaddimah. He writes:

وأخيرًا، بقي بعد هذا كلِّه: معرفة عدد ما في “صحيح مسلم” من الأحاديث بالمكرر، وهذا سهل، ويمكن ضبطه، ذلك لما كان الشيخ محمد فؤاد عبد الباقي قد وضع رقمًا للحديث يدل على موقعه في الكتاب الذي فيه – وتَسَلْسَل هذا الرقم في الكتاب الواحد -؛ سهل تجميع عدد أحاديث كل كتابٍ، وبجمْعِ هذه الأعداد يكون عددُ ما في “صحيح مسلم” من الأحاديث المكررة (5770) حديثًا، عدا أحاديث المقدمة، وفيها سبعة أحاديث أصول في عد الشيخ محمد فؤاد رحمه الله تعالى. إلا أن الترقيم الذي وضعه الشيخ محمد فؤاد للأحاديث الأصول في الباب دون المتابعات والشواهد، وبتتّبع عددها مفردة تبلغ (1615) حديثًا، عدا المقدمة، وفيها ثلاثة وعلى ضوء ما سبق يكون عدد أحاديث هذا “الصحيح” بالمكرر ومع الشواهد والمتابعات (7395) حديثًا، عدا أحاديث المقدمة، وهي عشرة، والله تعالى أعلم. ونكون بذلك قد قطعنا الاضطراب والبلبلة في عدد أحاديث هذا الكتاب، والحمد لله الموفق للصواب. (تعليقة الكافي في علوم الحديث ص: 147)

The 7395 ought to be 7385, because he is clearly saying that it excludes the ten narrations cited in the introduction.

Numbering in the Prints

In the Dār at-Ta’ṣīl print, they wrote:

عدد الأحاديث المكررة (الشواهد والمتابعات): 4494 حديثا (مقدمة طبعة دار التأصيل – 1 / 102)

Add this to the 3031 without repetitions (which was explained in the previous lesson), the total according to their system of counting is 7525:

إجمالى عدد الحديث: 7525 حديثا (مقدمة طبعة دار التأصيل – 1 / 102)

According to the numbering system of the Maktabah Bushrā print, the total number narrations reach 7544. They also had a system of numbering all the Aḥādīth in one chapter separately.

In the Muassassah Risālah print, they numbered the narrations, and it reached 7562 narrations.

All these amounts are close to 8,000. This is why ʿAllāmah Zarkashī says when mentioning the statement of ʿAllāmah Mayānishī in his Mā lā Yasaʿ al-Muḥaddith Jahluhū:

لعل هذا هو الأقرب.

The conclusion here is that the Aḥādīth of Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim including the Mutābaʿāt and Mukarrarāt are between 7,300 and 7,600. This clearly shows that either that report that ‘Allāmah Dhahabī, ‘Allāmah Ibn ‘Abdil Hādī and ‘Allāmah ‘Irāqī quoted so many years after Shaykh Aḥmad ibn Salamas demise, is inaccurate or it is a misquote. If it is proven, it will be a rough estimate.

Methodology of Referencing The Number of Shaykh Muḥammad Fu’ād

 

Chapter headings

In the prints of Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim, there are broad chapter headings (that commences with the word ‘Kitāb’), and there are also subheadings (the commences with the word ‘Bāb’).

There is general agreement that Muslim wrote the main chapter titles (kutub) of his Ṣaḥīḥ, e.g., Kitāb al-Īmān (the Book of Faith), Kitāb aṣ-Ṣalāḥ etc.

This is the view of the overwhelming majority of scholars, but there is a rare view of Muḥammad al-Sanūsī (d. 895 AH) claiming that even the main chapter titles were added by later scholars. Shaykh Muḥammad ibn Khalafah al-Ubayy (d. 827 AH) said:

 ثم لتعرف أن الأولى للقارئ أن يصرح بقراءة الترجمة فيقول كتاب كذا (كتاب الإيمان كتاب الطهارة كتاب الصلاة مثلًا)، أما أولًا فلأنها جزء من التصنيف الذي أخذ في قراءته ويتأكد ذلك في مريد الرواية، وأما ثانيًا فلأنها تفتقر إلى البيان كغيرها من مسائل ذلك التصنيف (إكمال إكمال المعلم – 1 / 48)

Commenting on this, Shaykh Muḥammad as-Sanūsī remarked:

(قلت) هذا صحيح في التراجم التي وضعها مؤلف الكتاب كتراجم البخاري وأبي داود أما مثل ‌تراجم ‌كتاب ‌مسلم هذا فقد لا يسلم فيها ما ذكره لأنها ليست من وضع مسلم حتى يصدق عليها أنها جزء من الكتاب ويطالب القارئ بقراءتها وإنما هي من وضع المشايخ ولهذا نجد الاختلاف فيها كثيرًا بحسب اختلاف اختياراتهم فلا ينهض فيها ذِكْرُه والله أعلم. (مكمل إكمال الإكمال 1 / 48)

However, almost all other scholars believe that Imām Muslim added the main headings for every chapter, and they base it on the fact that some very early scholars referred to this main chapter headings.

Number of Broad Chapter Headings

There are 54 broad chapters within the Ṣaḥīḥ. Shaykh Ṭawālabah said:

أما الكتب فهو أربع وخمسون كتابا من غير خلاف في ذلك (الإمام مسلم ومنهجه – ص: 108)

Imām Muslim is the one who placed the names for these 54 chapters.

Subheadings

Before mentioning the views on whether Imām Muslim added these or whether they were added later, it is important to note that the narrations within each broad chapter run in a perfect order and coherent sequence; narrations of one topic are all group together, and then the narrations of the next topic are placed thereafter. The narrations have very consciously been categorised and they are placed in the precise place and the ideal section. Shaykh Ṭawālabah writes:

ومن خلال درسي وسبري للصحيح وجدت أن الأحاديث تاتي متابعة مضمونة في المسألة الواحدة حتى إن القارئ ليشعر أن هذه الأحاديث وحدة جزئية تبحث موضوعا معينا (الإمام مسلم ومنهجه في صحيحه – ص: 106)

The reader will easily be able to determine which narrations on a topic are the Nāsikh, and which are the Mansūkh.

The difference now is only on whether Imām Musim was the one who actually added the titles for those subchapters, or whether it was another scholar who came later who made up the subtitles. Even if Imām Muslim did not add the subheadings, if anyone else wanted to do so, he could simply do so without having to alter the order of the narrations, since the narrations have already been put in the best order.

Importance of Knowing Who Put The Headings

It is famously know: Fiqh al-Bukhārī Fī Tarājim Abwābi. The heading was the area where an author could present his commentary, verdicts or opinions. Scholars would mention the point that they wanted to make in the chapter headings.

If these subchapters are from Imām Muslim, then the claims in those subheadings will be that of Imām Muslim, and through that, we can learn about the Madhab or least the views of Imām Muslim. But if they are from another scholar, then we know that probably that is not really the view of Imām Muslim.

Those Who Felt that Imām Muslim was Indeed the One Who added the Subheadings as well

1) ‘Allāmah Zayla‘ī

In Naṣb ar-Rāyyah, he attributed the Abwāb to Imām Muslim. For example, he wrote:

وبوب له مسلم “باب خروج الإمام بعد الإقامة للغسل”.نصب الراية – 2 / 59)

2) ‘Allāmah Badr ad-Dīn al-‘Aynī

‌بوب ‌مسلم على هذا الحديث حيث قال: باب البعث بالهدي وتقليده من غير أن يحرم. (عمدة القاري شرح صحيح البخاري 10/ 39

3) Shaykh Ḥusayn ibn Muḥammad al-Lā’ī (al-Maghribī) (d. 1119)

He wrote in his commentary of Bulūgh al-Marām:

‌وبوب ‌مسلم بذلك وقال باب كراهة قضاء القاضي وهو غضبان. (البدر التمام شرح بلوغ المرام – 10 / 17)

4) Mawlānā Abdul Ḥayy Lacknawī

He wrote:

وإلى هذا أشار مسلم في صحيحه بعوان الباب (سباحة الفكر – ص: 37)

5) Shaykh Yūnus Jawpūrī

He wrote:

ولكن صرح أبو نعيم الأصبهاني في مستخرجه على مسلم والقاضي عياض والجمال الزيلعي وأخرون بنسبة التراجم إلى مسلم وكأنه هو الأقرب (اليواقيت الغالية – 3 / 332)

Note: The view attributed to Abū Nu ‘aym and Qāḍī ‘Iyaḍ is inaccurate. Since Shaykh Yūnus is baising his view on an incorrect assumption, it goes without saying that the conclusion will not be precise.

6) Shaykh Yaḥyā Ismā‘īl

When he was working on al-Ikmāl, he tried to demonstrate some the benefits of the book. Amongst others, he mentioned one benefit as:

أن ” الإكمال ” كشف عما جاء فى بعض النسخ لصحيح ‌مسلم ‌من ‌تبويب وتراجم، غابت عن كثير من الشراح الذين تناولوا النسخ غير المبوبة، حتى ذاع – خطأ – بين طلبة العلم بعامة، والمتخصصين فى الحديث وعلومه بخاصة، أن مسلماً لم يبوب كتابه، وأن البخارى فضل عليه فى ذلك. وذلك فى مثل ما جاء فى كتاب الطهارة، باب التطييب بعد الغسل من الجنابة. (إكمال المعلم بفوائد مسلم – 1 / 24)

Note:

A) After saying this he misquoted a statement of Qāḍī ‘Iyāḍ,

Reasons For These Scholars Holding this View

The above list of scholars felt that Imām Muslim was the one who added the sub-headings due to the following reasons:

a) they found it in some early manuscripts and recensions of Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim with the sub-headings; and,

b) Some earlier scholars, like Imām Dāraquṭnī (d. 385 AH) and Ibn Manjūyah (d. 428 AH) alluded to the subtitles.

Response to these two claims

1) Although the manuscripts were early, they were still after Imām Muslim. It could be that another earlier scholar placed these subtitles. Imām Nawawī does allude to earlier scholars placing what they felt to be the best chapter heading. Thus, even if scholars in the next century are referring and referencing to the chapters, it is due to the chapter headings that was placed by others. Alternatively, since Imām Muslim grouped the narrations together, probably Imām Daraquṭnī is referring to that set of narrations, and he is mentioning his own title to indicate towards it.

2) There are many earlier manuscripts with no chapter headings. In fact, the manuscript that ‘Allāmah Ibn aṣ-Ṣalāḥ had was the handwritten copy of Jalūdī (d. 368), the student of Ibrāhīm ibn Sufyān (d. 308 AH), the main transmitter of Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim. This copy was bereft of any subtitles. Rather than arguing that there are earlier manuscripts with subtitles, we can claim that there are earlier manuscripts with no sub-headings!

3) There are differences in where these headings are placed and also on the wording of the title; which all clearly show that they cannot be from Imām Muslim.

Those Who Felt that Imām Muslim was Indeed the One Who added the Subheadings as well

This is the view of most scholars, but we will just quote from a few:

1) ‘Allāmah Ibn aṣ-Ṣalāḥ

He wrote:

ثم أن مسلما رحمه الله وإيانا رتب كتابه على الأبواب فهو مبوب في الحقيقة ولكنه لم يذكر فيه تراجم الأبواب لئلا يزداد بها حجم الكتاب أو لغير ذلك (صيانة صحيح مسلم – ص: 103)

2) Imām Nawawī

He wrote:

قلت وقد ترجم جماعة أبوابه ‌بتراجم ‌بعضها ‌جيد وبعضها ليس بجيد إما لقصور في عبارة الترجمة واما لركاكة لفظها واما لغير ذلك وانا ان شاء الله أحرص على التعبير عنها بعبارات تلييق بها في مواطنها والله أعلم. (شرح النووي على مسلم 1 / 21)

3) ‘Allāmah Zarkashī

He said:

وأما مسلم فلم يصنع ذلك بل الذي ترجم أبوابه (القاضي عياض). (النكت للزركشي 1 / 167)

4) Shaykh Muḥammad as-Sanūsī (d. 895 AH)

Based on the quotation quoted above.

5) Ḥājī Khalīfah

ثم إن مسلماً رتب كتابه على الأبواب، ولكنه لم يذكر تراجم الأبواب، وقد ترجم جماعة أبوابه. (كشف الظنون عن أسامي الكتب والفنون – 1 / 555)

6) Mawlāna Anwar Shāh al-Kashmīrī

He wrote:

وما وضع مسلم بنفسه التراجم. )العرف الشذي شرح سنن الترمذي – 1 / 35)

7) Mawlānā Shabbīr Aḥmad ‘Uthmānī

Leave alone claiming that Imām Muslim did not add the sub-headings, he felt that right until today, no one has added accurate subtitles:

ولعل الله يوفق عبدا من عباده لما يؤدي حقه (فتح الملهم – 1 / 100)

8) Shaykh ‘Abdul Fattāḥ Abū Ghuddah

He wrote in the footnotes of Sabāḥah al-Fikr

عناوين أبواب صحيح مسلم ليست من صنع مسلم ولا تأليفه، وإنما عَنْوَنَ مسلم للكتب فقط (تعليقة سباحة الفكر – ص: 37)

9) Shaykh Ṭawālabah

ولم يترجم مسلم عناوين الأبواب وترك ذلك لدرس القارئ وفهمه وتحريك ذهنه وعقليته، وشد انتباهه (الإمام مسلم ومنهجه في صحيحه – ص: 106)

      10) Editors of Dār at-Ta’ṣīl

In the introduction of the Dār at-Ta‘ṣīl print it is written:

اشتهر بين أهل العلم أن الإمام مسلما رحمه الله لم يترجم للأبواب داخل كتابه ، وإنما هذا من عمل رواه النسخ وبعض الشراح (مقدمة طبعة دار التأصيل – 1 / 218)

The vast majority of scholars hold this second view.

Conclusion

The subtitles were actually added either by:

1) Scribes, where they felt to be the most appropriate,

2) Owners of manuscripts in their personal copies (remember, all the narrations are grouped together. Just as we would make notes in our books, they would make notes in theirs)

3) Some commentators, like Imām Nawawī, for example, added a subtitles.

4) Those who abridged the book. For example, Abūl ‘Abbās al-Qurṭubī (d. 656 ah), a contemporary of Imām Nawawī and the teacher of the famous author of the Tafsīr, took the liberty of adding titles.

Another contemporary of theirs, ‘Abdul ‘Aḍīm al-Mundhīrī (d. 656 ah) rearranged the chapters of Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim, and he also added subtitles. Even recently, in the Taba’ al-Āmirah, they took from the titles of Imām Nawawī and the manuscripts that they had access to, and they formulated their own subtitles.

Liberty To Change and Amend

Because Imām Muslim did not put the chapter headings, those who wanted to disagree with the subtitles could disagree, and they could change it as they deemed fit. Below is one random example of how a commentator changes the subtitle:

وترجم له النواوي والقاضي عياض، وكذا أكثر نسخ المتن بقوله (باب بيان تفاضل الإسلام وأي أموره أفضل) أي باب بيان تفاضل أهل الإسلام بعضهم على بعض عند الله تعالى وعند الناس، وبيان أي أموره، أي أمور الإسلام وخصاله أفضل، أي أكثر أجرًا لمن فعله أو قاله، وترجم له الأبي والسنوسي بقولهما (‌باب ‌أي ‌الإسلام ‌خير) ففي هذه الترجمة قصور عن منطوق الحديث، وفي التي قبلها إيهام وغموض، فترجمتنا أوضح وأوفق، وضم القرطبي ترجمة هذا الحديث إلى الترجمة التي قبلها حيث قال: (باب الاستقامة في الإسلام وأي خصاله خير). (الكوكب الوهاج شرح صحيح مسلم بن الحجاج – 2 / 340)

Likewise, Imām Nawawī is accused of making the headings blend with the Shāfi’ī Madhab.

Summary

• Imām Muslim added the main headings of the chapters.

• Imām Muslim grouped Aḥādīth together which all relate to one topic.

• Imām Muslim did not add any of the Tarājim al-Abwāb.

May Allāh Taʿālā have mercy on them all

 

سبحانك اللهم وبحمدك ، أشهد أن لا إله إلا أنت ، أستغفرك وأتوب إليك