Did Imam al Bukhari have the opinion that “wajh” in ayah (28:88) means Mulk – Dominion, thus making ta’wil of it?

Evidence that al Bukhari rahimahu Allah did not have the opinion that “Wajh” in ayah [28:88=Everything will perish save His Wajh (face)] means  “His Mulk \ dominion”

1_ al-Hafidh Ibn Hajar rahimahu Allah says in explanation of this section in sahih al Bukhari:

قَوْله : ( إِلَّا وَجْهه : إِلَّا مُلْكه )
فِي رِوَايَة النَّسَفِيِّ ” وَقَالَ مَعْمَر ” : فَذَكَرَهُ . وَمَعْمَر هَذَا هُوَ أَبُو عُبَيْدَة بْن الْمُثَنَّى ، وَهَذَا كَلَامه فِي كِتَابه ” مَجَاز الْقُرْآن ” لَكِنْ بِلَفْظِ ” إِلَّا هُوَ “

Translation:

His saying: ( illa wajhah: except His mulk)
In the narration of an-Nasfi (check note below in red): “and Mu’mar said“: then he mentioned it (the opinion above).
and Mu’amar is Abu Ubaidah bin al-Muthanna, and this is his saying in his book “majaz al-Quran” but with the lafth (illa huwa).

so it means that in the narration of an-Nasfi the words “and Mu’amar said:” were before the word “illa Mulkah”.
and in this narration, in this book of sahih al-Bukhari, these words were left out.

so this means that the saying “illa mulkahu\except His mulk\dominion” is the saying of Mu’amar not al-Bukhari rahimahu Allah.

2_ Hafidh Ibn Kathir rahimahu Allah said in his tafsir regarding opinion of Bukhari in his sahih in this same ayah:
وقال مجاهد والثوري في قوله: { كُلُّ شَيْءٍ هَالِكٌ إِلا وَجْهَهُ } أي: إلا ما أريد به وجهه،
وحكاه البخاري في صحيحه كالمقرر له.

Rough translation:
Mujahid and ath-Thawri said regarding His (Allah’s) saying: (Everything will perish save His Face [Wajh]=28:88), meaning: except what is done for sake of Allah.
and al Bukhari mentioned it in his sahih like being his opinion regarding its tafsir“
As for evidance that he confirmed the attribute of Wajh (face) and didn’t do ta’wil to it:

1_ He mentioned this same ayah (28:88) in the Chapter of (Tawheed – which includes tawhid of sifat\attributes) :

(1) بَاب قَوْلِ اللَّهِ تَعَالَى
{ كُلُّ شَيْءٍ هَالِكٌ إِلَّا وَجْهَهُ }
حَدَّثَنَا قُتَيْبَةُ بْنُ سَعِيدٍ حَدَّثَنَا حَمَّادُ بْنُ زَيْدٍ عَنْ عَمْرٍو عَنْ جَابِرِ بْنِ عَبْدِ اللَّهِ قَالَ
لَمَّا نَزَلَتْ هَذِهِ الْآيَةُ
{ قُلْ هُوَ الْقَادِرُ عَلَى أَنْ يَبْعَثَ عَلَيْكُمْ عَذَابًا مِنْ فَوْقِكُمْ }
قَالَ النَّبِيُّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ أَعُوذُ بِوَجْهِكَ فَقَالَ
{ أَوْ مِنْ تَحْتِ أَرْجُلِكُمْ }
فَقَالَ النَّبِيُّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ أَعُوذُ بِوَجْهِكَ قَالَ
{ أَوْ يَلْبِسَكُمْ شِيَعًا }
فَقَالَ النَّبِيُّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ هَذَا أَيْسَرُ
chapter: Allah’s saying: (he mentions same ayah above).
narrate Qutaiba … etc. (chain of narration)
when this ayah came down (Say: He is able to send punishment upon you from above you [6:65])
The Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam said: I seek refuge with Your face (bi wajhika)
(or from beneath your feet )
so the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam said: i seek refuge with Your face
(or to bewilder you with dissension and make you taste the tyranny one of another.)
so the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa salam said: this is easier

If he believed that wajh does not mean the attribute of Allah (an attribute of the essence) “al wajh” (face), he would not have narrated this hadith specifically in this section, because he mentions hadiths in which the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam seeks refuge with Allah’s wajh, stressing it means “wajh” and not anything else, and if he believed it meant “mulk” or anything else (doing ta’wil to it) and didn’t believe that face is one of Allah’s attributes, he would have brought a hadith pointing to that (about mulk or whatever one believes  he considers “wajh” to mean),  not hadiths mentioning the word “wajh”.

Also, Imam al-Bukhari rahimahu Allah would narrate hadiths that are relevant to chapter heading, in which this chapter’s heading was the ayah (28:88) showing what it means.
He would bring hadiths that have tafsir of the ayah in chapter of tafsir, but in chapter of tawhid he puts ayat and hadith related to it, and this is included in tawhid of sifat, because it is evidence for the attribute of face.
so, in addition to his opinion about tafsir of the ayah (everything perishes except what is done for His sake), he also believed it is evidence that wajh (face) is one of Allah’s attributes of the essence.

2_ also, Ibn Battal (A.H. 400s ) said, in his sharh of sahih al-Bukhari of the chapter in kitab at-tawhid in sahih al-Bukhari:

[فيه: جَابِر، لَمَّا نَزَلَتْ على النَّبِىّ - صلى الله عليه وسلم - : {قُلْ هُوَ الْقَادِرُ عَلَى أَنْ يَبْعَثَ عَلَيْكُمْ عَذَابًا مِنْ فَوْقِكُمْ} [الأنعام: 65]، قَالَ – صلى الله عليه وسلم – : « أَعُوذُ بِوَجْهِكَ » ، فَقَالَ: {أَوْ مِنْ تَحْتِ أَرْجُلِكُمْ}، قَالَ عليه السّلام: « أَعُوذُ بِوَجْهِكَ » ، قَالَ: {أَوْ يَلْبِسَكُمْ شِيَعًا}، قَالَ النَّبِىُّ – صلى الله عليه وسلم – : « هَذَا أَيْسَرُ » .
استدلاله من هذه الآية والحديث على أن لله تعالى وجهًا هو صفة ذاته

Translation of the part in blue:
“His using of this ayah and hadith as evidence that Allah has a wajh (face), that is an attribute of the essence”.
Then he explains about the attribute of face and that it is confirmed without likening it to creation saying “so it is confirmed that he has a face that is not like faces“

also, the ayah used in title of the chapter after this one, mentions “bi-a’yonina” and ” ala ‘ayni” he mentions under it hadiths about dajjal, and Allah’s not being “a’war”
which shows that he confirms ‘ayn (eye) as being an attribute, and Ibn Battal rahimahu Allah explains that.
and in chapter after that in kitab at-Tawhid, Imam al-BUkhari has the ayah which mentions “bi-yaday” (with my 2 hands) and he puts under it hadiths that talk about Allah’s hands.

so all those chapters have ayat the mentions attributes of dhat, and it is in the book of tawhid of sahih al-Bukhari rahimahu Allah.
now if he didn’t believe these were attributes of dhat he wouldn’t have put these specific ayat with those hadiths in book of tawhid and put them right after each other, choosing those ayat specifically.
and if he made ta’wil to them he would have mentioned so in those places, or he would have put hadiths indicating that he believed that it meant other than the dhahir meaning or if he believed they weren’t attributes of Allah, and something else, he wouldn’t have mentioned them in book of Tawhid.

Note:

The book “sahih al Bukhari” was narrated by a number of narrators,  including al Nasfi (Ibrahim bin Ma’qal an Nasfi), so their is more than one narration of the book of sahih al Bukhari.

Ibn Hajar mentions in different places in his sharh (explanation) if their is an addition in a narration (of sahih al Bukhari) that is not in the narration he used for his sharh and so on.
In the narration used in the book that is found with us, of sahih al Bukhari, the part “and ma’mar said” before “illa Mulkahu” is not mentioned, but it is mentioned in the narration of an Nasfi, so the narration of sahih al Bukhari by an Nasfi clearifies for us who said “illa Mulkahu“, which is Ma’mar and not al Bukhari
and al Bukhari was mentioning Ma’mar’s tafsir of this ayah.