بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

21 Safar, 1444 AH (Friday, 8 September 2023)

‘Allāmah Ibn aṣ-Ṣalāḥ says:

‌وأما ‌ما ‌روينا ‌عن ‌الشافعي رضي الله عنه من أنه قال: “ما أعلم في الأرض كتابا في العلم أكثر صوابا من كتاب مالك”، ومنهم من رواه بغير هذا اللفظ، فإنما قال ذلك قبل وجود كتابي البخاري ومسلم.

After making the incorrect claim that Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī and Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim are the most authentic books after the Qur‘ān, ‘Allāmah Ibn aṣ-Ṣalāḥ now faces a challenge, because his Imām; Imām Shāfi’ī clearly spoke about the authenticity of the Muwaṭṭā. If we accept the apparent meaning of what Imām Shāfi’ī said, then that will contradict both of the claims that ‘Allāmah Ibn as-Ṣalāḥ made, that:

1. 1. Imām Bukhārī was the very first to write on authentic narrations
   2. Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī and Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim are the most authentic books.

Therefore, ‘Allāmah Ibn aṣ-Ṣalāḥ attempts to interpret this statement of Imām Shāfi’ī. He writes:

وأما ‌ما ‌روينا ‌عن ‌الشافعي رضي الله عنه من أنه قال

We explained in detail about whether “Ruwwīnā” should be pronounced as Majhūl, since it is obvious that ‘Allāmah Ibn aṣ-Ṣalāḥ did not hear this directly from Imām ash-Shāfi’ī, or can it be pronounced as Ma’rūf?

The conclusion was that although it is better to pronounce it as Majhūl, it is not compulsory. If we wanted to pronounce it as Rawaynā, then that too would be fine.

ما أعلم في الأرض كتابا في العلم أكثر صوابا من كتاب مالك

‘Allāmah Ibn aṣ-Ṣalāḥ quotes these words from Imām Shāfi’ī. But it seems to be out of context. The discussion is about which book is more authentic, whereas ‘Allāmah Ibn aṣ-Ṣalāḥ is quoting words about more precision. The word “Akthar Ṣawāb” will refer to a book that is more correct in knowledge, but that is not what we are speaking about. In an-Nukat al-Wafiyyah it is mentioned:

وسوق المصنف – فيما يصلح أن يكون دليلا للمعترض – بكون كتاب مالك صحيح الرواية التي عبر الشافعي فيها بأصح، أولى من سوق ابن الصلاح الرواية التي فيها أكثر صوابا ، لأن ‌أكثرية ‌الصواب يمكن أن تحمل على استنباط الفقه، أو غير ذلك مما لا يرجع إلى صحة جميع ما ساقه من الحديث، وإلى الرواية التي ساقها المصنف أشار ابن الصلاح بقوله: ((ومنهم من رواه بغير هذا اللفظ)). (النكت الوفية – 1 / 111)

Any Mālikī will claim that most definitely, after the Qur‘ān, the Muwaṭṭā is the most precise book, and that is why they practise upon it. Thus, we need to see if Imām Shāfi’ī mentioned about the authenticity.

It will be essential for us to first determine whether Imām Shāfi’ī was speaking about the authenticity of the Muwaṭṭa or not.

‘Allāmah Ibn aṣ-Ṣalāḥ acknowledged:

ومنهم من رواه بغير هذا اللفظ

This statement makes it seem as if there is one statement of Imām Shāfi’ī, and everyone quoted it differently. Some paraphrased it, whilst some quoted the precise ruling. But this is not the case. There is not only one statement from Imām Shāfi’ī. Rather, there are numerous statements with different wording that have been quoted from Imām Shāfi’ī. Some statements highlight how beneficial the Muwaṭṭā is, others– like this statement that ‘Allāmah Ibn aṣ-Ṣalāḥ quoted- explain how correct the book is, but we need to see whether there is a statement of Imām as-Shāfi’ī that speaks about the authenticity of the Muwaṭṭa and claims that the Muwaṭṭa is the most authentic book after the Qurān. For this, we need to take a look at all of these different statements.

The following scholars quoted a statement from Imām Shāfi’ī regarding the Muwaṭṭa:

1. 1. Ibn ‘Abdil Barr quotes different chains. The first reaches to Ḥārūn ibn Sa’īd al-Aylī, who said:

ما كتاب بعد كتاب الله أنفع من كتاب مالك بن أنس (الاستذكار – 1 / 12)

“There is no book, after the Book of Allāh, more beneficial than the Book of Mālik ibn Anas.” (Al-Istidhkār – 1 / 12)

The second reaches up to Yūnus ibn ‘Abdil ‘A’lā, who quotes Imām Shāfi’ī as saying:

ما في الأرض بعد كتاب الله أكثر صوابا من موطإ مالك بن أنس

“After the book of Allāh, there is no book more accurate than that of Mālik ibn Anas.”

The third narration also goes via Yūnus ibn ‘Abdil ‘A’lā :

ما رأيت كتابا ألف في العلم أكثر صوابا من موطإ مالك (الاستذكار – 1 / 12)

“I have not seen any book authored regarding ʿIlm that is more accurate than the Muwaṭṭa of Mālik.” (Al-Istidhkār – 1 / 12)

These are the wordings of Imām Shāfi’ī that Ibn ‘Abdil Barr quoted with his chains. None of these statements clearly show that the Muwaṭṭa is the most authentic.

2. Abūl Qāsim ad-Dimashqī narrates with his chain to Imām Shāfi’ī that he said:

ما أعلم كتابا بعد كتاب الله أولى من كتاب الموطأ (كشف المغطا في فضل الموطا – ص: 39)

“I do not know of any book, after the Book of Allāh which is more favourable than the Muwaṭṭa.” (Kashf al-Mughaṭṭa – 39)

Again, this does not necessarily pertain to authenticity. This could be based on his personal preference. And his preference could be due to various reasons: It could mean that there is no book that is ‘Awlā’ for using to derive rulings, or is ‘Awlā’ for getting to know the verdicts of the Māliki Madhab, or the scholars of Madīnah. There are so many possibilities.

3. Allāmah Ṣalāḥ ad-Dīn al-‘Alā-ī narrated with his Sanad in Bughyah al-Multamis that Imām Shāfi’ī said:

ما وضع على الأرض كتاب هو أقرب إلى القرآن من كتاب مالك بن أنس. (بغية الملتمس – ص: 88)

“No book has been placed on the earth that is closer to the Qur’ān than the Book of Mālik ibn Anas.” (Bughyah al-Multamis – 88)

This still does not denote upon authenticity. Imām Shāfi’ī is claiming that it is closest to the Qur’ān. This does not certainly mean that it is authentic. It could be closest in conformity. There can be Ḍa’īf Aḥādīth (weak narrations) that are close to the meaning of the Qur’ān. Any person can mention a statement that can conforms with the Qurān. Take any verse of the Qur’ān and paraphrase it in different wording, and it will still be close to the meaning of the Qur’ān.

4. Ḥāfiḍ Ibn Ḥajar quoted:

وروينا في ((جزء أبي بكر محمد بن إبراهيم الصفار)) من طريق هارون بن سعيد الأيلي قال: سمعت الشافعي يقول: “ما بعد كتاب الله تعالى أنفع من موطأ مالك”. (النكت لابن حجر – 1 / 133)

This is the exact statement that ‘Allāmah Ibn ‘Abdil Barr quoted. It does not have to be authentic in order to be beneficial.

5. The scholars who quoted from Imām Shāfi’ī that the Muwaṭṭa is the most authentic are:

1. 1. 1. Īmām al-Bayhaqī in Manāqib ash-Shāfi’ī. In the Maktabah Dār at-Turāth print, Vol. 1, pp.507, Imām al-Bayhaqī quotes with his chain that goes via Abū Ṭāhir who quotes Imām Shāfi’ī as saying:

ما أعلم شيئا بعد كتاب الله أصح من موطأ مالك. (مناقب الشافعي للبيهقي – 1 / 507)

“I do not know of any book, after the Book of Allāh, which is more authentic than the Muwaṭṭa of Mālik.” (Manāqib ash-Shāfiʾī lil-Bayhaqī – 1 / 507)

This is a clear and emphatic statement of Imām Shāfi’ī which claims that the Muwaṭṭa is the most authentic book.

B. Ibn Fahr also quotes in Faḍāil Mālik with his chains that link to Imām Shāfi’ī that he said:

ما على ظهر الأرض كتاب بعد كتاب الله أصح من كتاب مالك (رواه عنه عبدالبر في التمهيد – ص: 77)

“After the Book of Allāh, there is no book on the face of this earth that is more authentic than that of Mālik.” (At-Tamhīd – 77)

Ibn ‘Asākir transmitted with his chain that goes via Yūnus ibn ‘Abdil A’alā that he said:

قال محمد بن إدريس: يا أبا موسى، ما على الأرض بعد كتاب الله تعالى أصح من كتاب مالك بن أنس. (كشف المغطا في فضل الموطا – ص: 11)

Muḥammad ibn Idrīs said, “O Abū Mūsā! On the surface of this earth, after the book of Allāh there is no other book that is more authentic than the Book of Mālik ibn Anas.” (Kashf al-Mughṭṭa – 11)

‘Allāmah ibn ‘Asākir quoted Imām Shāfi’ī as saying:

ما علمنا أن أحدا من المتقدمين ألف كتابا أحسن من موطإ مالك وما ذكر فيه من الأخبار عن أهل المدينة وغيرهم من العلماء المشهورين ولم يذكر فيه مرغوبا عنه في الرواية كما ذكر غيره في كتبه وما علمت ذكر حديثا فيه ذكر أحد من أصحاب رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم إلا ما في حديث العلاء بن عبد الرحمن {ليذادن رجال عن حوضي} ولقد أخبرني من سمع مالكا ذكر هذا الحديث وأنه قال ود أنه لم يخرجه في الموطإ. (كشف المغطا في فضل الموطأ – ص: 12)

“We don’t know of anyone of the predecessors who documented a book more excellent than the Muwaṭṭa of Mālik, and the narrations which he has mentioned from the scholars of Madīnah and other reputable scholars, and he did not mention any narration which scholars disinclined from, like how others did in their books. And I do not know of him mentioning a narration which consists of any of the companions except the Ḥadīth of al-ʿAlā bin ʿAbd ar-Raḥmān {Certain men will be driven away from my pond}. A person who has heard from Mālik informed me that he would prefer if he did not mention it in the Muwaṭṭa.” (Kashf al-Mughaṭṭā – 12)

(But even this narration is authentic. Imām Muslim quoted it in his Ṣaḥīḥ.)

Hence, Qāḍi ‘Iyādh quoted the wording as follows:

وقال ما على الأرض كتاب أصح من كتاب مالك (ترتيب المدارك وتقريب المسالك – 1 / 100)

He said, “There is no book on this earth which is more accurate than the Book of Mālik.” (Tartīb al-Madārik- 1 / 100)

These wordings are very clear and emphatic to show that the Muwaṭṭa is the most authentic book after the Noble Qur’ān.

Now, coming to ‘Allāmah Ibn aṣ-Ṣalāḥ, he quoted these wording here in his book, but the words are out of context. When he was teaching, then he quoted the correct wording that is applicable here. Ḥāfiḍ Ibn Ḥajar wrote:

أملى المصنف حاشية على الأصل: أنه روي عن الشافعي أنه قال: “ما بعد كتاب الله تعالى ‌أصح ‌من ‌موطأ مالك”. (النكت لابن حجر – 1 / 132)

Shaykh ‘Awwāmah said:

ذكر اللفظ الأول فقط، وأشار إلى اللفظ اخر، ثم أملاه على طلبته (تعليقة التدريب – 1 / 287)

Since the wording that ‘Allāmah Ibn aṣ-Ṣalāḥ wrote in his book does not correspond with what Imām Shāfi’ī is mentioning, the commenters rather preferred to use this statement that he verbally quoted. Shaykh ‘Awwāmah wrote:

وجاء به الشارح (النووي)، واقتصر عليه العراقي في شرح ألفيته والسخاوي في فتح المغيث ، فلم يذكرا اللفظ الذي ذكره ابن الصلاح أولا (تعليقة التدريب – 2 / 288)

Now we are convinced that Imām Shāfi’ī did indeed assert that the Muwaṭṭa is the most authentic, and, at other times, he also praised the Muwaṭṭā in other ways with different words. It is not as ‘Allāmah Ibn aṣ-Ṣalāḥ is making it seem, that there is one sentence from Imām Shāfi’ī, and others quoted that one statement with different wording. Rather, Imām Shāfi’ī praised the Muwaṭṭa on numerous occasions with different wording. He expressed himself differently when praising the Muwaṭṭa. Shaykh ‘Abdul Fattāḥ Abū Ghudda explained:

وتنوع هذه العبارات يفيد تكرار ثناء الإمام الشافعي رضي الله عنه على كتاب الموطأ، أكثر من مرة في أوقات متعددة. (تقدمة التعليق الممجد على موطأ محمد – 1 / 25)

“The diversity of these phrases denote on the repeated praises of Imām Shafīʾī for the Muwaṭṭa; more than once on numerous occasions.” (Taqdimah at-Taʾlīq al-Mumajjad – 1 / 25)

But the statement that stands out for us is that he regarded the Muwaṭṭa as the most authentic book and the greatest book after the Qurān.

Besides this, in another statement, Imām Shāfi’ī said:

وإذا جاء الأثر من كتاب مالك فهو الثريا. (ترتيب المدارك وتقريب المسالك – 1 / 101)

“If a narration reaches you from the Book of Mālik then it is like the Thurayyā star (of the finest).” (Tartīb al-Madārik- 1 / 101)

And we know that beyond just the Muwaṭṭa, Imām Shāfi’ī would trust Imām Mālik the most for Aḥādīth. Imām al-Bayhaqī transmits with another chain that links to another student of Imām ash-Shāfi’ī, Ḥarmalah Ibn Yaḥya mentioning how he had the greatest regard for the narrations of Imām Mālik:

لم يكن الشافعي يقدِّم على «مالك» في الحديث أحداً. (مناقب الشافعي للبيهقي – 1 / 507)

“Imām ash-Shāfiʾī would not give preference to anyone over the narrations of Mālik.” (Manāqib ash-Shāfiʾī lil Bahyaqī – 1 / 507)

He says:

فإنما قال ذلك قبل وجود كتابي البخاري ومسلم.

He is claiming that since Imām Shāfi’ī mentioned this before Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī was written, it does not contradict the claims that he made.

‘Allāmah Ibn aṣ-Ṣalāḥ mentioned this, and the Shāfi’ī scholars who came thereafter used this same explanation of his. Hence, when you open books on Uṣūl and ‘Ulūm al-Ḥadīth, you will generally find this answer. From there, this answer spread to other books too. For example, ‘Allāmah adh-Dhahabī said:

وقال الشافعي: ما في الارض كتاب في العلم أكثر صوابا من “موطأ مالك”. قلت: هذا قاله قبل أن يؤلف الصحيحان.”.(سير أعلام النبلاء – 8 / 111)

“Shāfiʿī said, ‘There is no book of knowledge on this earth more correct than the Muwaṭṭa of Mālik.’ I say, “This statement was made before the Ṣaḥīḥayn were documented.” (Siyar A’lām an-Nubalā – 8 / 111)

In his commentary on his Alfiyyah, ‘Allāmah ‘Irāqī quoted the correct statement from Imām Shāfi’ī that should be quoted here, but then he presented the incorrect explanation:

وأما قول الشافعي: ((ما على وجه الأرض بعد كتاب الله ‌أصح ‌من ‌كتاب مالك)) ، فذاك قبل وجود الكتابين. (شرح التبصرة والتذكرة – 1 / 115)

‘Allāmah Sakhāwī said:

وقول الشافعي رحمه الله: (ما على ظهر الأرض كتاب في العلم بعد كتاب ‌الله ‌أصح ‌من ‌كتاب ‌مالك) – كان قبل وجوده. (فتح المغيث – 1 / 41)

‘Allāmah Suyūṭī said:

وفي لفظ عنه: ما بعد كتاب الله ‌أصح ‌من ‌موطأ مالك، فذلك قبل وجود الكتابين. (تدريب الراوي – 1 / 96)

Shaykh Zakariyyā al-Anṣār wrote:

وأما قول الشافعي: ((ما على وجه الأرض بعد كتاب الله تعالى أصح من كتاب مالك)) فذاك قبل وجودهما. (فتح الباقي – 1 / 107)

‘Allāmah Ibn Ḥajar al-Hathamī said:

وقول الشافعي رضي اللَّه تعالى عنه: (لا أعلم كتابًا بعد كتاب اللَّه تعالى ‌أصح ‌من “‌موطأ مالك” رضي اللَّه تعالى عنه) (2) إنما كان قبل ظهورهما، فلما ظهرا. كانا بذلك أحق وأولى. (الفتح المبين بشرح الأربعين – ص: 136)

Amīr aṣ-Ṣan‘ānī said:

وأما قول الشافعي ما على وجه الأرض بعد كتاب ‌الله ‌أصح ‌من ‌كتاب ‌مالك فذاك” قاله الشافعي “قبل وجود الكتابين” فكلامه صحيح نظرا إلى زمان تكلمه. (توضيح الأفكار – 1 / 51)

Mullā ‘Alī al-Qārī said:

وصح عن الشافعي أنه قال: ما في الأرض كتاب في العلم أكثر صوابا من موطأ مالك. وفي رواية: ما تحت أديم السماء ‌أصح ‌من ‌موطأ مالك. قال العلماء: إنما قال الشافعي هذا قبل وجود الصحيحين، وإلا فهما أصح منه اتفاقا. (مرقاة المفاتيح – 1 / 20)

‘Allāmah Ṭāhir al-Jazāirī said:

وأما قول الإمام الشافعي ما على وجه الأرض بعد كتاب الله ‌أصح ‌من ‌كتاب ‌مالك فإنه كان قبل وجود كتابيهما. (توجيه النظر إلى أصول الأثر – 1 / 214)

And this argument continued until today. For example, Shaykh ‘Abdullāh al-Jadī’ said:

وقال أبو الطاهر أحمد بن عمرو بن السرح: سمعت الشافعي يقول: “ما أعلم شيئاً بعد كتاب الله ‌أصح ‌من ‌موطأ مالك”.

قلت: وهذا حكم قبل أن يوجد ” الصحيحان “، فإن الناس صنفت الكتب في حديث رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم قبل البخاري ومسلم، فكان ” الموطأ ” أصح تلك الكتب حديثاً، فهو مقارن بما زامنه إلى عهد الشافعي، فلما ألف “الصحيحان” لم تبق تلك الدعوى صحيحة، خصوصاً وأن مالكاً رحمه الله ضمن كتابه الأحاديث والآثار ورأي نفسه، كما وقع في أسانيد أحاديثه المتصل والمرسل والمنقطع والبلاغات، فلم يجرد للحديث الصحيح المتصل. (تحرير علوم الحديث – 2 / 836)

Ibn Taymiyyah explained that this was in relation to the books of that period. He said:

وهذه هي كانت كتب الفقه والعلم والأصول والفروع بعد القرآن فصنف مالك الموطأ على هذه الطريقة. وصنف بعد عبد الله بن المبارك؛ وعبد الله بن وهب؛ ووكيع بن الجراح وعبد الرحمن بن مهدي وعبد الرزاق وسعيد بن منصور وغير هؤلاء فهذه الكتب التي كانوا يعدونها ‌في ‌ذلك ‌الزمان هي التي أشار إليها الشافعي رحمه الله فقال: ليس بعد القرآن كتاب أكثر صوابا من موطأ مالك فإن حديثه أصح من حديث نظرائه. (مجموع الفتاوى – 20 / 322)

Ḥāfiḍ Ibn Hajar mentioned the same in the introduction of his commentary of Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī. He wrote:

وعلم أن الشافعي إنما ‌أطلق ‌على الموطأ أفضلية الصحة بالنسبة إلى الجوامع الموجودة في زمنه؛ كجامع سفيان الثوري، ومصنف حماد بن سلمة، وغير ذلك. (هدي السارى – ص: 10)

And here in his Nukat he said:

والحاصل من هذا أن أول من صنف في الصحيح يصدق على مالك باعتبار انتقائه وانتقاده للرجال، فكتابه أصح من الكتب المصنفة في هذا الفن من أهل عصره وما قاربه كمصنفات سعيد بن أبي عروبة، وحماد بن سلمة، والثوري، وابن إسحاق، ومعمر وابن جريج، وابن المبارك وعبد الرزاق وغيرهم، ولهذا قال الشافعي: “ما بعد كتاب الله أصح من كتاب مالك” (النكت لابن حجر – 1 / 129)

None of these scholars pondered to determine whether this actually makes sense or not. There are so many flaws with this claim:

This clearly contradict his claim a few lines earlier where he said:

أول من صنف الصحيح البخاري. (مقدمة ابن الصلاح – ص: 17)

If Imām Shāfi’ī mentioned before Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī that the Muwaṭṭā is authentic –and actually, the most authentic after the Qurān- then how did ‘Allāmah Ibn aṣ-Ṣalāḥ claim that Imām Bukhārī was the first to write a Ṣaḥīḥ? ‘Allāmah Ibn aṣ-Ṣalāḥ is shooting himself by indirectly acknowledging that the Muwaṭṭā was claimed to be authentic by a scholar who he holds in so much esteem that he practises on all of his rulings.

Imām Shāfi’ī mentioned this with so much confidence. How can we then assume (and that is really what it is; just a mere assumption!) that he would have preferred Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī over the Muwaṭṭa? With this claim, they are just shooting in the dark!

We cannot say something with so much conviction when it is not known. There is a possibility that Imām Shāfi’ī could have still given preference to Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī, but there is also the possibility that he would have still maintained his stance on the Muwaṭṭa. There is a very great possibility that he would have still preferred Muwaṭṭā over Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī.

Especially since there are so many scholars after him who preferred the Muwaṭṭa, we really cannot just assume that Imām ash-Ṣhāfi’ī would have preferred Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī. Therefore, Shaykh ‘Awwāmah says:

فما يدرينا لو أن الشافعي رأى الصحيحين هل يرجحهما على الموطأ أو يبقى على ترجيح الموطأ؟ (تعليقاته على التدريب – 2 / 289)

“So we do not know that if Shāfiʿī would examine the Ṣaḥīḥayn, would he them prefer them two or would his preference still remain for the Muwaṭṭa?” (Taʾlīqāt ʿAlā at-Tadrīb – 2 / 289)

If we open the door of this kind of interpretation, then it will open wider. One may then say that if Imām Shāfi’ī had seen books such as Al-Mukhtār and Ṣaḥīḥ Ibn Khuzaymah and Ṣaḥīḥ Ḥibbān, he would have preferred those. How far down will we then push the Muwaṭṭā?

Likewise, this same claim could then apply to Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī as well, and a person can say that books that came thereafter are more authentic. I can gather a few very authentic narrations today, and write a book with no Mu’allaqāt and without just saying Qāl and without bringing weak narrations as support. Will that diminish the status of Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī, and will you then say that all those who said Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī is more authentic than my book, they did not see my book? It is clear that this interpretation of ‘Allāmah Ibn aṣ-Ṣalāḥ does not make any sense.

Therefore, if one wants to claim that this statement was confined to Imām Shāfi’ī ’s time, then it loses all its value since it was said specifically for the Muwaṭṭa. It cannot be used to prove any merit of the Muwaṭṭa, since there are more books that came afterwards and were all Ṣaḥīḥ.

Point to Note From The Statement of Imām Shāfi’ī

Imām Shāfi’ī was stringent even with the narrations of Khayr al-Qurūn. He did not accept Marāsīl of Tābi’īn if they did not fulfil additional conditions. Yet, he is mentioning this statement. He knew the better narrations by memory and he was well aware of the narrations with missing links. Yet, he mentioned this.

Shaykh Abūl Ashbāl al-Manṣūrī said:

أن وصل هذه الأحاديث المقطوعة والغريبة والمرسلة لم يخف على الشافعي، فـالشافعي قد عرف مخارج حديث مالك، فإنه كان خبيراً بحديثه وأخص تلاميذه، فقال هذا الحكم بناءً على علمه بوصل تلك الأسانيد، ولذلك الحافظ ابن عبد البر عليه رحمة الله أتى بعد ذلك في القرن الخامس والسادس فوصل -كما فعل غيره مع غير هذا الكتاب- هذه الأحاديث كلها، إلا أربعة أحاديث إلى الآن لم توصل. (شرح كتاب الباعث الحثيث – 1 / 6)

This strengthens the point that since Imām Shāfi’ī was well aware of the narrations with missing links within the Muwaṭṭā, and he also knew well the chains of those narrations for him to make the claim so often and with so much certainty, there are great chances that he would continue with his claim that the Muwaṭṭā is more authentic.

Conclusion

The statement of Imām Shāfi’ī still holds its merit and the Muwaṭṭa of Imām Mālik definitely has great value. The claim of Imām al-Ḥākim and ‘Allāmah Ibn aṣ-Ṣalāḥ, the responses of ‘Allāmah al-Irāqī and ‘Allāmah Ibn Ḥajar and the simple blind following of others all falls away. Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī does not get precedence and over the Muwaṭṭa, since the ‘defects’ that is attributed to Imām Mālik are also present in Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhāri, and to a larger and more intense extent.

The Shāfi’ī scholars ought to follow their Imām when he said:

إذا جاء الحديث عن مالك فاشدد يديك به. (حلية الأولياء وطبقات الأصفياء – 6 / 322)

“If a narration reached you via Mālik, then hold onto it firmly.” (Ḥilyah al-Awliyā – 6 / 322)

Their Imām studied the entire Muwaṭṭa, and he knew why he uttered this statement. He said:

كان مالك إذا شك في الحديث طرحه كله. (حلية الأولياء وطبقات الأصفياء – 6 / 322)

“If Mālik doubted a narration, he discarded it completely.” (Ḥilyah al-Awliyā – 6 / 322)

The same applies to ‘Abdur Raḥmān ibn Mahdī when he also used the words of authenticity:

سمعت الحسن بن عثمان بن زياد بتستر، يقول: سمعت بندار، يقول: س

معت عبد الرحمن بن مهدي، يقول: ما نعرف كتابًا في الإسلام بعد كتاب الله عز وجل ‌أصح ‌من موطأ مالك. (المجروحين لابن حبان – 1 / 42)

May Allāh Taʿālā have mercy on them all.

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