Imam al-Dhahabī, as mentioned above. It is therefore like the other features by which Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī is distinguished from Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim, as is acknowledged by the majority of scholars: in their view, it is a condition of completeness, not a condition of authenticity.

6—Imam al-Ṣanʿānī discussed the evidence that the hadith master Ibn Ḥajar advanced for al-Bukhārī’s condition in three discussions mentioned in his book Tawḍīḥ al-Afkār. He compelled him to concede the soundness of Muslim’s position, even though al-Bukhārī’s condition is stronger. I had likewise compelled him to this conclusion in a brief annotation I wrote on his Nuzhah, which al-Akh al-Ḥalabī quoted from me in al-Nukat ʿalayh (p. 88); whoever wishes may consult it. Because of the force of the aforementioned argument, the hadith master—may Allah have mercy on him—accepted this conclusion, as was related from him above. All praise is due to Allah.

Al-Ṣanʿānī, may Allah Most High have mercy on him, then said (1/234): “Once you understand this, Muslim’s position is not without strength, for one who is fair-minded. Abū Muḥammad Ibn Ḥazm said in his book al-Iḥkām: (1)

7—Know that when an upright narrator reports from upright narrators whom he could have met, it is assumed that he met and heard from them, whether he says, ‘He informed us,’ ‘He narrated to us,’ ‘from so-and-so,’ or ‘so-and-so said.’ All of this is understood as having been heard directly from him.” End quote.

I say: It should not be overlooked that we have previously cited the opposite of this from him in connection with the hadith of musical instruments, so recall it.