Comparing the Approach of Ibn Hajar al-Asqalānī and Badr ad-Din al-Aynī in the Interpretation of Mukhtalaf al-Hadīth: An Applied Study Through Fath al-Bārī and Umda al-Qārī

Abstract

This article deals with a brief study of the history of the emergence of mukhtalifu’l-hadīth science and its literature, as it is one of the most important types of hadīth science that fuqahā‘a and muhadithūn need it in the deducing of the primary and secondary provisions and the explaining of the Prophetic hadīths. It includes a detailed comparative study between the approach of Hāfiz bn. Hajar al-Asqalānī al-Shāfi‘ī (d. 852/1449), and Badru’d-Din al-‘Aynī al-Hanafī (d. 855/1451) in the interpretation of mukhtalifu’l-hadīth through Fathu’l-Bārī and ‘Umdatu’l-Qārī. it was clarified that each of them was exposed to the study of seemingly contradictory texts in the folds of the explanation of the hadīths of al-Bukhārī and expanded on it and excelled in it. In addi- tion, a glance has been shed in this article on the differences of muhadithūn and fuqahā‘a among the Hanafis scholars in arranging the ways of pairing in the interpretation of mukhtalifu’l-hadīth in general, and Ibn Hajar al-Asqalānī and Badru’d-Din al-‘Aynī in particular. It has been proven from the application of examples from Fathu’l-Bārī and ‘Umdatu’l-Qārī that Ibn Hajar does not expand on abrogation if it is possible to combine it, unlike Badru’d-Din al-‘Aynī. preference to the tarjih on jama . it is concluded by comparing the approach of Ibn Hajar al-Asqalānī and Badru’d-Din al-Aynī in the interpretation of various hadīths , that they sometimes agree and sometimes differ. It has been proven by studying applied examples from Fathu’l-Bāri and ‘ Umdatu’l-Qārī that Ibn Hajar al-Asqalānī went in reconciling the two conflicting hadīths to the combination and Badr al-Din al-‘Aynī to the abrogation on the same subject. In addition, the study found out that both scholars expanded on the subject of tarjih in their studies and interpreted the conflict between narrations through the study of isnad , matan, and other related matters. However, it is noted that Ibn Hajar al-Asqalānī did not expand on abrogation and did not take it if the combination of both contradicted narrations possible, unlike Badru’d-Din al-‘Aynī