<![CDATA[This article examines the historical formation of hadith canon authority by comparing Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī and Ṣaḥīḥ Ibn Khuzaymah, with particular attention to narrations concerning ṭahārah. It asks why hadith collections with broadly comparable standards of transmission came to occupy unequal positions in the hierarchy of Sunni hadith literature. Using a comparative approach, the study analyzes patterns of transmission, the relationships between narrations, and differences in the selection and organization of hadith. The findings indicate that, within the scope of the selected material, the two collections demonstrate broadly comparable standards of hadith transmission, although differences remain at the level of technical methodology and textual arrangement. This finding raises questions about explanations of canon formation that rely exclusively on textual criticism and scholarly consensus. The article argues that hadith canonization should also be investigated as a historical process shaped by the circulation, reception, legitimation, and institutionalization of scholarly works. Rather than treating Ṣaḥīḥ Ibn Khuzaymah as definitive evidence of deliberate political exclusion, the study positions it as a critical case for examining how certain works acquired canonical authority while others remained at the margins. It concludes that the history of the hadith canon involves not only judgments about authenticity but also the historical processes through which particular judgments and collections came to be authoritative.]]>
Copyrights © 2026
