Are Sahih Bukhari & Muslim 100% Sahih or not?

[Yahya]

i'v been told by a very reputable local scholar that the great master of hadith ibn Hajar Askalani took out 5 daeef hadith from sahih bukhari nevertheless it is the belief of the ahlul sunnah wal jamaah that these books are the most authentic books after the quran.

While this statement is commonly believed among the masses, there actually ARE collections of Hadith where every Hadith is Sahih and the scholars do not dispute it. However, these books are lesser known works, and may have come MUCH later than Sahih al-Bukhari or Sahih Muslim.

I was once given an example of such a book, but I don't remember it.

[Salafi]

Not necessarily. If a Sahabi, for example, said that Rasoolullah said something (but he didn't not witness it, nor did he mention who he heard it from) the Hadith is marfoo3, but not muttasil. And it is not considered to be defective either because the Sahabah are all Adl. So the lack of ittisaal at this early point in the chain is not a defect (unless there is reason to believe that this sahabi heard it from a taabi'i).

for that case, it is a rule that if a 'sahabi' says something and it is not a matter where qiyas or ijtihaad is valid then it comes in the category of marfu' and auhentic. like the hadeeth of 'Ali ibn abi talib in musannaf ibn abi shayba according to which 'ali said that the qirat of fateha in the first 2 rak'at is enough for the remaing ones. hanafiyyah has done the istidlal from this hadeeth that a mufred or imam if recites fateha in only in the first 2 rak'at then its sufficient for him. however the hadeeth is weak.

i was talking about the illat that a rawi would not have met a rawi from whom he is narrating and the muhaddetheen have pointed out this defect.

what did u find about ANY marfu' hadeeth to be muttasil?

[JayshAllah]

I've read that some of the Hadith in the Sahihayn may have Shadh (anomalies) in them.

[Salafi]

shududh (anomalies) would make a hadeeth weak.