کتاب الحج (صحیح بخاری) کے ضمن میں علامہ ابنِ بطال پرعلامہ سعیدی کے استدراکات -ایک مطالعہ

دراسة دلالية

Abstract

The scholarly tradition of Ḥadīth commentary has developed through a continuous process of interpretation, critical evaluation, comparison, and refinement, in which later scholars have examined and reassessed the arguments of earlier authorities. This study focuses on the istidrākāt (critical observations, corrections, and supplementary remarks) made by ʿAllāmah Ghulām Rasūl Saʿīdī concerning the views of ʿAllāmah Ibn Baṭṭāl in the context of Kitāb al-Ḥajj of Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī. The study is significant because Ibn Baṭṭāl’s Sharḥ Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī represents one of the earliest comprehensive commentaries on Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī, while Saʿīdī, through his Niʿmat al-Bārī, critically engages with a wide range of classical interpretations and juristic arguments. The research problem arises from the need to systematically identify, examine, and evaluate the instances in which Saʿīdī differs from, supplements, or corrects Ibn Baṭṭāl’s interpretations within Kitāb al-Ḥajj, particularly where differences emerge in the understanding of textual evidence, juristic reasoning, and the application of analogy. The study specifically examines Saʿīdī’s critical observations concerning the requirement of Wuḍūʾ for Ṭawāf, the ruling regarding entry into Makkah without Iḥrām, the requirement of a Maḥram for women undertaking Ḥajj, and the legal rulings related to menstruation during the performance of Ḥajj. The research adopts a qualitative and critical methodology. Relevant passages from Ibn Baṭṭāl’s Sharḥ and Saʿīdī’s Niʿmat al-Bārī are identified, presented in their appropriate contexts, and compared with one another. The study demonstrates that Saʿīdī’s istidrākāt are not merely isolated disagreements but reflect a systematic effort to reassess classical interpretations through textual, juristic, and analytical reasoning. The research is important in highlighting Saʿīdī’s contribution to contemporary Ḥadīth commentary and in demonstrating the continuing relevance of critical engagement with the classical commentarial heritage. It also provides a clearer understanding of the methodological relationship between Ibn Baṭṭāl and Saʿīdī and contributes to the study of the interaction between Ḥadīth interpretation and Islamic jurisprudence.