Sahih of al-Bukhari questionable?

[Haqq786]

The main narrator of al-Bukhari, al-Firabri, is said to be majhool. If that is the case, then does that not make the collection of al-bukhari questionable?

[Abu Muhammad]

The main narrator of al-Bukhari, al-Firabri, is said to be majhool. If that is the case, then does that not make the collection of al-bukhari questionable?

Was he alone in transmitting Al-Bukhari? I don't think so...

"Firabri is not the only transmitter of Sahih al-Bukhari. There were many others that narrated that book to later generations, such as Ibrahim ibn Ma'qal (d. 907 CE/295 AH), Hammad ibn Shaker (d. 923 CE/311 AH), Mansur Burduzi (d. 931 CE/319 AH) and Husain Mahamili (d. 941 CE/330 AH)."

[Farid]

The main narrator of al-Bukhari, al-Firabri, is said to be majhool. If that is the case, then does that not make the collection of al-bukhari questionable?

He isn't majhool. He was referred to as reliable by Al-Sam'aani. Also, we have access the differences between his copy and the copy of Al-Nasafi, which shows that he was reliable in his transmission of Saheeh Al-Bukhari.

[Abu Muhammad]

He isn't majhool. He was referred to as reliable by Al-Sam'aani. Also, we have access the differences between his copy and the copy of Al-Nasafi, which shows that he was reliable in his transmission of Saheeh Al-Bukhari.

Since there is no more "Like" button, I have to use this: 👍👍