Ibrahim ibn Ma’qil narrated that he once heard Imam al-Bukhari mention,

“I was with Ishaq ibn Rahuyah when someone suggested, ‘Why don’t you compile a concise collection of the prophetic traditions?’ This idea stayed with me, which led to my compilation of the Sahih.” Al-Dhahabi noted that it was reported through two reliable chains of transmission that Imam al-Bukhari said, “I selected this book from around 600,000 authentic hadiths. I compiled it over sixteen years, and it serves as a plea between me and Allah.”

Al-Firabri added that Imam al-Bukhari mentioned,

“I did not include a single hadith in the Sahih without performing ablution (ghusl) and praying two rak’ahs beforehand.”

In his work Kitab al-Tatabbu’, Al-Daraqutni critiqued the authenticity of 78 hadiths in Sahih al-Bukhari, 100 in Sahih Muslim, and 32 found in both collections, focusing on issues in the chains of transmission (isnad) and content (matn).

Ibn al-Salah remarked,

“Any hadith narrated exclusively by either al-Bukhari or Muslim is considered sahih without the need for investigation, although a few minor issues have been raised by hadith experts such as Al-Daraqutni, which are well known to specialists.” He added that “when both Sahihs agree on a hadith, it is definitively authentic for the Ummah.”

However, Al-Nawawi objected to the use of the term “definitively sahih” while maintaining that the hadiths in the Sahihayn are “strongly presumed authentic unless they reach the level of mutawatir.” In contrast, Ibn Kathir aligned with Ibn al-Salah, affirming, “I agree with Ibn al-Salah’s conclusion, and Allah knows best.”

Al-Suyuti in Tadrib al-Rawi echoed Ibn Kathir’s view and stated, “This is also my choice and none other’s.” This reflects the standing of the Sahihayn in the Muslim community, as no other early Islamic scholars made the claim that their collections were entirely authentic except for al-Bukhari and Muslim. Furthermore, the verifying scholars upheld their assertion.

In Muqaddimat Sharh Muslim, Ibn as-Salaah mentions that some hadiths narrated by al-Bukhari and Muslim were not unanimously accepted by scholars. Al-Haafiz called this a cautious approach. Shaykh Muhyi’d-Deen remarked similarly, noting that some scholars had reservations about certain narrations in both collections. ad-Daaraqutni, Abu Mas‘ood ad-Dimashqi, and others expressed reservations about some hadiths, though most of these concerns have been addressed by other scholars.

In Muqaddimat Sharh al-Bukhaari, it is mentioned that ad-Daaraqutni’s doubts were based on principles not widely accepted by scholars of fiqh and usool. Therefore, these critiques should not be given undue weight.

When carefully analyzing the context of these hadiths, it becomes clear that most of the critiques are not valid. As stated by Shaykh Muhyi’d-Deen, the majority of these reservations have been satisfactorily addressed by other scholars (Muqaddimat al-Fath, p. 344).

It is also noted that a few hadiths in Saheeh al-Bukhari faced scrutiny, though these are very rare. Upon closer examination, many of these narrations proved to be sound. Saheeh Muslim contains some phrases narrated solely by Muslim, which al-Bukhari refrained from including, and some scholars deemed these narrations weak. In certain cases, these scholars may have been correct, as in the case of the eclipse prayer, or Muslim’s version may be more accurate, as is often the case (Majmoo‘ al-Fataawa, 18/17-20).

Shaykh al-Islam, referring to the prominent scholar Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani, supported this view in his work al-Nukat ‘ala Ibn al-Salah. Al-Suyuti quoted in detail Ibn Hajar’s refutation of Al-Daraqutni’s criticisms, demonstrating that Al-Daraqutni’s objections did not disprove the authenticity of the Sahihayn.

Shaykh al-Islam further stated that when al-Bukhari was criticized, his assessments of the hadiths were more often accurate than those of his critics. In contrast, critiques of some of Muslim’s narrations were more justified (Majmoo‘ al-Fataawa, 1/256).

While all hadiths in these collections are authentic, not all reach the same level of authenticity. This aligns with Al-Dhahabi’s conclusion regarding a few narrators in the Sahihayn whose reliability was questioned: “Their narrations do not fall below the rank of hasan, which we can consider the lowest level of sahih.“

Shaykh Abu Ghudda also emphasized, “This explicitly shows that al-Bukhari and Muslim did not limit themselves to narrating only the highest degree of sahih hadith.” He also stated in his appendix, “Our Shaykh, the great scholar Ahmad Shakir – may Allah have mercy on him – affirmed that the hadiths in the two Sahihs are all authentic, with no valid cause for criticism or weakness. What Al-Daraqutni and others critiqued was merely that these hadiths did not meet their stringent criteria, but in terms of overall soundness, both al-Bukhari and Muslim upheld their standard.“

Dr. Badi’ al-Sayyid al-Lahham, in his edition of Ibn Kathir’s al-Ba’ith al-Hathith, concluded that most of the hadiths in Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim are of the highest degree of authenticity, though a few may not reach this level. Supporting this, Dr. Nur al-Din ‘Itr explained in his manual Manhaj al-Naqd fi ‘Ulum al-Hadith that the ruling concerning the hadiths of the Sahihayn is that they are all sahih. Scholars like Ibn al-Salah, Al-Nawawi, Al-Dhahabi, Ibn Kathir, Ibn Hajar, Al-Suyuti, Ahmad Shakir, Abu Ghudda, and Dr. ‘Itr all agreed that the hadiths in Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim are authentic, with Ibn al-Salah, Ibn Kathir, and Ibn Hajar specifically asserting that their narrations are as reliable as mutawatir hadiths. Additional research on the positions of major hadith masters might reveal more scholars in agreement with this stance.

Common questions arise about whether all hadith scholars agree that every hadith in the Sahihayn is sahih, whether any scholars consider these collections to contain weak hadiths, and if believing that “the Sahihayn are not 100% sahih” constitutes innovation. As discussed, leading hadith scholars like Ibn al-Salah, Ibn Kathir, and Al-Suyuti answered affirmatively to the first question. Imam al-Haramayn (Ibn al-Juwayni) even remarked that if someone swore that everything in al-Bukhari and Muslim was authentic, their marriage would be safe. However, Al-Daraqutni did critique a small number of hadiths, answering “yes” to the second question. Yet, these critiques were addressed and refuted by scholars like Ibn Hajar and Al-Nawawi in their respective works.

It is essential to note that this discussion excludes narrations without chains of transmission or incomplete reports. For example, the “suicide hadith,” attributed to al-Zuhri, is considered a broken-chain narration and thus weak. Al-Bukhari mentioned it only to illustrate the discrepancy between different chains that omit the attempted suicide account, underscoring the rigorous criteria used for authentic hadiths.

For more details, see: Fath al-Baari (11/341), Jaami‘ al-‘Uloom wa’l-Hikam (358), and as-Silsilah as-Saheehah (2/384), Kitaab al-Ilzaamaat wa’t-Tatabbu‘ by Abu’l-Hasan ad-Daaraqutni; Meezaan al-I‘tidaal (4/39-40); Muqaddimat al-Fath (344); Sharh Muslim by an-Nawawi (1/27); Silsilat al-Ahaadeeth as-Da‘eefah (1/142; 2/471-475; 5/218).