Monday, 30 April 2012

Sea Of Muslims At AIMPLB's Convention

Mumbai: The 22nd convention of All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) which began in Mumbai Friday, ended late in the evening on Sunday with a mammoth gathering at Azad Maidan pledging to sacrifice everything in order to save the constitutional rights of Muslims.
Speakers, first for two days in different sessions at Haj House and later at the public meeting at Azad Maidan on Sunday, asserted that the board will force the government to amend the Right to Education Act (RTE), scrap the direct taxes code bill and bring changes in the wakf amendment bill 2010.
The speakers also urged the government to allow prayers at hundreds of the mosques which are under the of custody of the ASI. "Fresh dangers are looming large as the government of the day seems to usurp the Sharia laws. But the government should note that we will sacrifice our lives but will not tolerate any interference in the Sharia", All India Muslim Personal Law Board (AIMPLB) president Mohammad Rabey Hasani Nadvi said.
"India is a democratic country where people from all religions are given constitutional rights to practice as per their faith and belief. But attempts are on to deny Muslim their constitutional rights. It will not be tolerated", he said.
Recalling the rights given by the Muslim rulers to everyone in India, Prof Shakil Samdani, Professor of Law at Aligarh Muslim University (AMU) said, "You are reciprocating with what the Muslims had given to this country hundreds of years back. This is not a favor to the community."
Raising the issue of the mosques under the ASI custody, Syed Salman Husaini Nadvi said, "Drinking wine is permitted here but faithful cannot offer their prayers. What can be more shameful than this?"
Demanding amendments in RTE Act, Abdur Rahim Qureishi, assistant general secretary of AIMPLB, said, "There are provisions in the RTE Act that deny our right to establish and run religious and educational institutions. We will make it a mass movement unless this Act is amended."
Attacking the tax bill, Qureishi said that taxing places of worship was tantamount to interference in the religious affairs of all communities. "The Bill will affect not only the mosques, but places of worship of all religions," he added. The AIMPLB also rubbished reports that one of the organizers of the board's meeting, Khair-e-Ummat Trust, was a front for the banned Students Islamic Movement of India (SIMI). Denying that the Khair-e-Ummat Trust, a Dongri-based registered NGO, had any links with SIMI, the trust's secretary, Ibrahim Khalil Abedi, said that the news was "baseless and defamatory."
Stating that AIMPLB's office in Mumbai is located at the Khair-e-Ummat Trust building, Qureishi alleged, "This is part of the conspiracy to defame and denigrate a Muslim organization which provides scholarships and medical help to the poor."
UP CM Akhilesh Yadav won praise from the board members as he has assured the AIMPLB president Mulana Rabe Hasan Nadvi that the proposed law in his state which deprives married women of their rights in fathers' agricultural property will exclude Muslims. Copies of Akhilesh's letter to Maulana Nadvi were also distributed among the 400-odd members from across the country.
aaThe 3-day convention was inaugurated on Friday with the opening session held at the Haj House. People from various parts of Maharashtra and the neighboring states converged at Mumbai to attend the AIMPLB historic convention.

Saturday, 28 April 2012

Tere Aazaad Bande

Maqaam-e-be_baha hai dard soz-e-aarzumandi
Maqaam-e-bandagi dekar na loon shaan-e-Khudawandi
Yeh faizan-e-nazar tha ya ki maktab ki karaamat thi
Sikhayi kisne Isma'eel ko aadaab-e-farzandi
Tere azaad bandon ki na ya dunya na wo dunya
Yahan marne ki paabandi, wahan jeene ki paabandi

Friday, 27 April 2012

Allah's Throne Shook At His Death!

Al Salamu 'Alaykum.

Narrated Jabir: I heard the Prophet (saw) saying, “The Throne (of Allah) shook at the death of Sa'ad ibn Mu'adh.” Through another group of narrators, Jabir added, “I heard the Prophet (saw) saying, ‘The Throne of the Most Beneficent shook because of the death of Sa'ad ibn Mu'adh.” 
Sahih Al-Bukhari.

Narrated Ibn 'Umar that the Messenger of Allah (saw) said: “This (i.e. Sa'ad ibn Mu'adh) is the one at whose death the Throne shook, the gates of heaven were opened for him and seventy thousand angels attended his funeral. It (his grave) squeezed him once then released him.”
Sunan Al-Nas'aai.

Wednesday, 25 April 2012

Fiqh & Fatawa Of Women Scholars.

Fiqh & Verdicts of Women Scholars
Many female scholars were also jurists and givers of edicts. They excelled in this and the Muslims relied on them completely. Ibn Qayyim says that twenty two Companions were well-known in the subjects of Law and Ifta’. Seven of them were mothers of the believers. Sayyida ‘Ayesha had the title of Faqiha al-Ummah. Zaynab bint Abu Salama was also a leading jurist. 
Shaykh ‘Alauddin Samarqandi was a well known Hanafi jurist and scholar and writer of Tuhfa al-Fuqaha. His daughter Fatima was a great Faqiha and her husband, Shaykh ‘Alauddin Kasani wrote al-Bada’i al-Sana’i, an exposition of Tuhfa al-Fuqaha. Whenever he hesitated she corrected him and she also issued edicts with her father and husband. The verdicts bore the signatures of all three. 

The daughter of Qadi Abu ‘Abdullah Husayn ibn Isma’il Mahamili, ‘Amat al-Wahid Satayta heard hadith from her father and from Isma’il ibn ‘Abbbas Warraq ‘Abdul Ghafir ibn Salama Hamza, Abu’l Hasan Misri, Hamza Hashmi and others. She was very learned and righteous and had acquired proficiency in the laws of inheritance, accounts, grammar, other sciences and arts. But most of all, she had had memorized the Qur’an and fiqh. She was perfect in the fiqh of the Shafi’ school and used to issue verdicts with Shaykh Abu ‘Ali ibn Abu Hurayra. Ibn Jawzi has written about Bint Mahamili that she was a talented scholar and the greatest of those who had memorized the Shafi’ school of law. Thus, she had no equal in Shafi’ fiqh. 

The Faqiha and Muftiha Umm Uyusiya, her sister Fatima and the grandmother of Shaykh Zawraq, Faqiha Umm al-Baneen were three prominent women of West Asqa’ in Fiqh and Fatwa. 

Umm ‘Isa bint Ibrahim ibn Ishaq Baghdadiya was a scholar in Baghdad. Khatib says that she was an accomplished scholar and issued edicts on juristic questions. Ibn Jawzi confirms this. 
The daughter of Shaykh Taqiuddin Ibrahim ibn ‘Ali Wasiti, ‘Amat al-Rahman was distinguished in fiqh and fatawa. She was known as Sitt al-Fuqaha’. The same can be said of Sharifa, sister of Amir Sayyid Sharif ‘Alauddin ‘Ali ibn Khatib Sharfuddin Ahmad. Umm Zaynab Fatima bint ‘Abbas Baghdadiya was a highly talented scholar, an ascetic, a content woman and the leader of the women of her times.

The sister of Faqih Yusuf ibn Yahya Andalusi, Fatima bint Yahya Andalusiyya Qurtubiyya was an accomplished scholar, very Allah-fearing and simple woman who was also a jurist. Her popularity can be guaged by the unprecedented number of people who attended her funeral.

Taken with corrections from ‘Achievements of Muslim Women in the Religious and Scholarly Fields’ by Qadi Athar Mubarakpuri.

Monday, 23 April 2012

Kitab al-Maraseel.

Kitab al-Maraseel of Imam Abu Dawood

According to the later scholars (muta’akhireen), mursal is that hadith in whose chain a Companion (Sahabi) is not mentioned i.e. a Follower (Tabi’i) says that the Messenger of Allah (saw) said…..)
The rest of the chain from the compiler (Musannif) till the Sub-companion (Tabi’i) is continuous (Muttasil) with no one left out. If on the other hand any narrator between the compiler and the Follower is left out, then that tradition is called munqati’. However according to the earlier scholars (Mutaqaddimeen) both the above ahadith are called Mursal.
Imam Abu Dawood is from the Mutaqaddimeen. Hence he has included both kinds of ahadith in his Kitab al-Maraseel. Some jurists (fuqaha’) accept both Mursal and Munqati’ narrations as evidence. Some only accept mursal while others reject both. Since the Imam’s intention in compiling his Sunan was to gather all the proofs of the jurists he only accept Marfu’ narrations therein since these are accepted as evidence unanimously. (Marfu’ narrations are those whose chain from the author to the Prophet(saw) is intact)
He then gathered all the Mursal and Munqati’ traditions in a separate book as an addendum to Kitab al-Sunan. Imam Abu Dawood then wrote to the scholars of Makkah, “In the past, all our scholars unanimously accepted Maraseel as conclusive evidence. Great Imams like Maalik, Sufyan al-Thawri and Awza’i were of this opinion. The first person to voice an opinion in this regard was Shafi’i. After him, Ahmad and others followed suit. However, it is my opinion that if in any mas’ala there is no Musnad or Marfu’ narration, then a Mursal or Munqati’ hadith may be accepted as proof even though they are not equal to the former. He further elaborated, “all these ahadith are mursal according to my findings. It is possible that others may have the same narrations with a continuous chain.”
The Imam gathered 600 Maraseel as a part of his Sunan. Later on some people published it separately without the chains of narrators for brevity. This came to be known as Mukhtasar Kitab al-Maraseel. Its contents are the same, only the chains have been removed.
Adapted from “The Biography of Imam Abu Dawood Sijistani”, edited by Mufti A.H.Elias.

Sunday, 15 April 2012

Imam Bukhari's Criticism Of Imam Abu Hanifa.

Imam Bukhari Criticizes Imam Abu Hanifah: An Analysis
By Pir Syed Mushtaq 'Ali Shah
Translated by Ebrahim Saifuddin

This claim is a matter of much bravery and courage because no such saying of Imam Bukhari رحمة اللہ علیه can be presented to back up this claim. This claim is but the result of jealousy, malice and enmity where whatever the heart desires is said. What can one call this if not a result of malice?

Hafidh Ibn ‘Abdul ‘Aziz Ibn Abi Rawwaad رحمة اللہ علیه spoke the truth with sagacity which was noted down by Ibn Hajar Makki رحمة اللہ علیه in Khayraatul Hisaan pg.35:
“Hafidh Ibn ‘Abdul ‘Aziz Ibn Abi Rawwaad said that whosoever loves Imam Abu Hanifah is a Sunni and whoever has malice in his heart for him does Bid’ah. It is stated in a narration that Imam Abu Hanifah is between us and the people of the past. Thus whosoever loves him is from the People of Sunnah and whosoever has malice against him is from the People of Innovation.”
Some Ghair Muqallideen (people who refuse to follow one of the 4 established schools of Law) lead the common man astray by saying that Imam Bukhari رحمة اللہ علیه has written in his book Kitab al-Du’afaa: “(Imam Abu Hanifah) was a Murjee' and the people adopted silence from narrating from him.”

In reply to this I say that firstly the book 'al-Du’afaa' by Imam Bukhari رحمة اللہ علیه, published in Agra Allahabad, does not contain any such sentence. The same is not found in Adab al-Mufrad, Juzul Qira’ah and Khalqul ‘Ibad either. Even if it is taken to be true, the reply is that Imam Bukhari رحمة اللہ علیه had enmity of mathhab towards Imam Abu Hanifah رحمة اللہ علیه which is apparent in the writings of Imam Bukhari رحمة اللہ علیه. Thus this jarh cannot be accepted on the basis of enmity of mathhab. That is why Thahabi, Ibn Hajar, Wasiuddin Khizaji and others رحمة اللہ علیھم did not give any importance to this Jarh and did not even mention it by considering it “لا یعبا به”.

Secondly, regarding the saying that Imam Abu Hanifah رحمة اللہ علیه was a Murjee', the meaning has to be established. If by Murjee' those were referred on whom be Allah’s Curse, then this is absolutely wrong because it is stated in Fiqh al-Akbar:

“We do not say like the Murjee'ah that it is for certain that our good deeds are accepted and sins are forgiven. We say that whosoever does good deeds with all the right conditions, provided he does not make them void and dies in the state of Iman, then Allah will not let go his good deeds to waste and will reward him accordingly by accepting his deeds.”

It is stated in Khayrat al-Hisaan, pg 73, it is stated:

“The Commentator of al-Mawaqif mentions that Ghisaan Murjee' used to say things so that it would seem that Imam Abu Hanifah was a Murjee' and he used to include Imam Abu Hanifah in the Murjee'ah sect. Ghisaan deliberately accused Imam Abu Hanifah to legitimize his mathhab.

Shehristani, in al-Milal wal Nihal, has said that it is astonishing how Ghisaan used to attribute the teachings of his Murjeea'h sect to Imam Abu Hanifah and would call him a Murjee'ah. He has lied.”

And if by Murjee'ah it is meant Murjee'ah Marhoomah then all of Ahl al-Sunnah wal Jama’ah is included in it. It is mentioned in al-Tamheed of Abu Shakoor Salimi:

“There are two types of Murjee'ah. One is Murjee'ah Marhoomah and it is the Companions of Rasulullah. The second is Murjee'ah Mal’oonah and these are those who say that sins do not matter and there is no punishment for them. ‘Uthman bin Abi Laila once wrote a letter to Imam Abu Hanifah asking if he is from the Murjee'ah. Imam Abu Hanifah replied that there are two types of Murjee'ah. One is Murjeeah Mal’oonah and I am not from them. The other is Murjee'ah Marhoomah and I am from them. In fact, the Anbiya علیھم السلام were also the same. Do you not know the saying of ‘Isa علیه السلام, ‘If You (Allah) punish them, they are Your slaves after all, but if You forgive them, You are the Mighty, the Wise.’

Thus it is learnt that Imam Bukhari’s رحمة اللہ علیه saying regarding people not accepting the Hadith and opinion of Imam Abu Hanifah رحمة اللہ علیه is absolutely false and baseless.

Thirdly, in ‘Uqud al-Jawahir al-Manifa, the book of Hafidh Mosuli, al-Du’afaa is quoted to state:

“Yahya bin Ma’een has said, ‘I have not found anyone superior to Waki’ and he used to give fatwa on the qawl of Abu Hanifah and would memorize all his Ahadith. He heard a lot of Ahadith from Abu Hanifah.’”

And it is stated in Manaqib Kurdi, pg 100: “Sa’eed bin Yahya bin Humayri Wasti was an Imam and Hafidh of Hadith from Wasta. He has narrated from Imam Abu Hanifah and has acquired knowledge from him. He used to say that Imam Abu Hanifah is an ocean of knowledge.”

And in the same Manaqib on pg 19 it is stated:

“’Abdullah bin Yazeed al-Muqri Makki heard 900 Hadith from Imam Abu Hanifah.”

In Khayrat al-Hisaan, pg 23, it is stated:

“Ibn al-Mubarak said, ‘He (Abu Hanifah) used to be the one with most knowledge in Fiqh, and I have not seen anyone more knowledgeable than him in Fiqh. . . .And he is the most knowledgeable amongst them (Imam Malik and Sufyan) and a better Muhaqqiq and Mudaqqiq.’”

“Abu Yusuf al-Thawri says, ‘I follow Imam Abu Hanifah in majority of issues.’”

“Yahya bin Sa’eed Qattan says, ‘We have not heard an opinion better than that of Imam Abu Hanifah and thus we give fatwa on his qawl.’”

“Ibn al-Mubarak says, ‘I have seen Mis'ar ask questions and benefit from the study circles of Imam Abu Hanifah.’”

In Khayrat al-Hisaan, pg 26, it is stated by Ibn Jarir رحمة اللہ علیه:

“The second chapter is regarding those who acquired Hadith and Fiqh from Abu Hanifah and to assess their number is impossible.”

“This is the reason why some ‘Ulema state that amongst the A’immah of Islam, no one has as many students as Imam Abu Hanifah.”

Look at this with justice and without any bias. Waki’, Ibn Yahya al-Wasti, Ibn al-Mubarak, Sufyan al-Thawri, Mis'ar bin Kudam, Yahya bin Sa’eed al-Qattan and others have spoken so highly about the Fiqh and Opinion of Imam Abu Hanifah رحمة اللہ علیه. Thousands have acquired Hadith and Fiqh from Abu Hanifah رحمة اللہ علیه and have become famous by his blessing in the world.

As is seen in Manaqib al-Kurdari and Manqib Mawafiq of Ibn Ahmad al-Makki.

Despite of this, Imam Bukhari رحمة اللہ علیه says,
“سکتوا عن رأيه و حدیثا”
If this is not out of malice due to Mathhab then what is it?
Fourthly, If, according to Imam Bukhari رحمة اللہ علیه, a narrator should be left and nothing should be taken from him if he is a Murjee', then due to what reason did Imam Bukhari رحمة اللہ علیه include in his Sahih, Ahadith from deviant sects like Murjee'ah, Nasibiyah, Kharijiyah, Shi’a, Jahmiyah, Qadariyah and others? Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, in Muqaddamah Fath al-Bari, has written this in detail name by name. Over here we will mention the total number of people from four of these deviant sects.

Murjee'ah 31;

Shi’a 2;

Qadariyah 28;

Nasibiyah 5.
Then according to the standards of Ghair Muqallideen, does Sahih Bukhari not become the weakest of all books?
Now that the topic of the narrators of Bukhari has been touched, it is only appropriate to talk about some of these narrators. The world knows that Sahih Bukhari has been accepted as ‘Asahhul Kutub’ unanimously (which means that as a collection it has collectively more sahih ahadith; this does not mean that each and every hadith of Bukhari is most authentic when compared to other ahadith found in different collections). It is without any doubt that Imam Bukhari رحمة اللہ علیه has put in a lot of effort in it which is worthy of much praise. May Allah (swt) accept his effort.
However, it has many narrators on whom different types of Jarh have been done. Examples are given below:
(a) Kathhab: Extreme liar
(b) Yakthibul Hadith: Lies in matters of Hadith
(c) Yasriqul Hadith: Steals Hadith
(d) Yadha’ul Hadith: Invents Hadith
It is seen that the highest form of Jarh is also included. Fathul Bari and Meezanul I’tidaal can be referred for more details. They list more than 100 such narrators.
Despite these Jarh, Imam Bukhari did not consider these narrators among those from whom Hadith should not be taken. Instead, he accepted Ahadith from them. And despite this, other Muhadditheen did not deny Sahih Bukhari to be Asahhul Kutub.
Then what is the reason apart from Mathhabi malice that Imam Bukhari رحمة اللہ علیه did not take from Imam Abu Hanifah رحمة اللہ علیه although no Jarh can be done on him according to the principles of this science?
Thus when this malice is established by clear evidence then what weight can the Jarh of Imam Bukhari رحمة اللہ علیه have in regards to Imam Abu Hanifah رحمة اللہ علیه?
Fifthly, if the Hadith of narrators, on whom Imam Bukhari رحمة اللہ علیه has done Jarh, is to be rejected then there are many such narrators taken by Imams Muslim, Nasa`i, Tirmidhi, Abu Dawood and others رحمة اللہ علیھم who should be rejected according to this rule. But the Muhadditheen did not consider such narrators as rejected. Then why should Imam Abu Hanifah رحمة اللہ علیه be rejected due to the Jarh of Imam Bukhari رحمة اللہ علیه?
In ‘Kitab al-Du’afa’, Imam Bukhari رحمة اللہ علیه has said that 'Uways Qarni’s sanad is doubtful (فی اسنادہ نظر) and this Jarh, according to the rules of Bukhari, is a serious one. However, 'Uways Qarni cannot be considered to be Majruh (disparaged).
Sixthly, if Imam Bukhari رحمة اللہ علیه relied on his own Jarh, then he would not have narrated from narrators on whom he has done Jarh. There are many such narrators in Bukhari whom Imam Bukhari رحمة اللہ علیه has declared Majruh. Such narrators are listed below:
1. Usayd bin Zayd al-Jalal – Imam Dhahabi رحمة اللہ علیه has mentioned in al-Meezan, “It is strange that Imam Bukhari has taken narrations from this narrator in his Sahih and has also mentioned him in al-Du’afaa.”
2. ‘Ayyub bin ‘Aa’id – Imam Bukhari رحمة اللہ علیه has mentioned in his book al-Du’afaa, “He used to prefer the beliefs of Murjee'ah despite being truthful.
3. Thabit bin Muhammad – Imam Dhahabi رحمة اللہ علیه has stated, “Although Imam Bukhari has narrated from this narrator, he has included him in his al-Du’afaa.”
4. Zuhayr bin Muhammad – Imam Bukhari رحمة اللہ علیه has said in his al-Dhu’afa, “People of Shaam have narrated Munkaraat from him.”
5. Ziyad bin Rasigh – Imam Bukhari رحمة اللہ علیه said his sanad is doubtful as is also found in al-Meezan.
6. ‘Ataa Ibn Maimoona – Imam Bukhari رحمة اللہ علیه mentioned in his al-Du’afaa, “He used to like the beliefs of Qadariyyah.” And it is mentioned in the Muqaddama of Fathul Bari that many narrators were inclined towards Qadariyyah e.g. Hams bin Minhala. Imam Dhahabi رحمة اللہ علیه has said that he has been accused of being a Qadariyyah and he has Munkar Hadith and that is why Imam Bukhari رحمة اللہ علیه has included him in al-Du’afaa.
Look at this from an unbiased perspective. If Imam Bukhari رحمة اللہ علیه trusted his own Jarh, then why did he narrate from these people? When Imam Bukhari himself does not trust his own Jarh, then it is strange that the Muqallideen of Bukhari trust his Jarh and call Imam Abu Hanifah رحمة اللہ علیه weak in Hadith.
Seventhly, if near those who object, the Jarh of Imam Bukhari رحمة اللہ علیه, despite being inaccurate and against ‘usuls, is valid in the case of Imam Abu Hanifah رحمة اللہ علیه, then why would Imam Bukhari رحمة اللہ علیه not be Majruh and rejected?

Is Jarh on Imam Bukhari رحمة اللہ علیه not established by A’imma of Hadith?

Of course they are.

Some of them are listed below:
1. Imam Dhuhli رحمة اللہ علیه, the teacher of Imam Bukhari رحمة اللہ علیه, has done serious Jarh on him. In Tabqat al-Shafi’iyyah, Vol.12, pg 12, it is stated, “Imam Dhuhli said, ‘He who visits the study circle of Imam Bukhari should not come to us as the people of Baghdad have written to us that Imam Bukhari does kalam in the case of the words of the Qur’an (being created or uncreated) and we told him not to do so. However, he did not listen. Thus do not go to him.’”
Note that not only did Imam Dhuhli رحمة اللہ علیه tell people not to visit Imam Bukhari رحمة اللہ علیه but also said that he is an innovator who thinks that the words of the Qur’an, coming out of his mouth are words of the creation. Neither should anyone sit with him nor talk to him. This warning of Imam Dhuhli رحمة اللہ علیه had such a huge impact on people that many stopped meeting Imam Bukhari.
In Tarikh Ibn Khallikaan, Vol.2 pg 123, it is stated, “When a difference arose between Imam Bukhari and Muhammad bin Yahya regarding the words of the Qur’an, he stopped people from going to Bukhari. So much so that Imam Bukhari was compelled to migrate from Nishapur and, apart from Imam Muslim, many people boycotted him.”

2. Imam Muslim رحمة اللہ علیه, despite his closeness to Imam Bukhari, has not narrated a single Hadith from him in his Sahih Muslim. In fact, in the discussion of “’an’ana” Hadith, he has referred to Imam Bukhari رحمة اللہ علیه with the word “’asawna” (which means he opposes him in this matter) and has severely criticized him. For reference see Muslim Vol. 1, pg 21.

3. Abu Zur’ah and Abu Hatim رحمة اللہ علیھما have not taken from Imam Bukhari رحمة اللہ علیه either. In Tabqaat al-Shafi’iyyah, Vol.1 pg 190, it is mentioned, “Abu Zur’ah and Abu Hatim have left Imam Bukhari because of the difference in the case of the Words of the Qur’an.”

In Meezanul I’tidaal it is stated, “. . . .Abu Zur’ah and Abu Hatim did not narrate from the Imam Bukhari, the student of ‘Ali Ibn al-Madini, because of the dispute regarding the Words of the Qur’an.”
And `Abdur Rahman Ibn Abi Hatim رحمة اللہ علیه says, “Abu Zur’ah left Imam Bukhari due to this reason.”
4. Ibn Mandah رحمة اللہ علیه has categorized Imam Bukhari رحمة اللہ علیه amongst the Mudalliseen (such a narrator who conceals the name of his Shaykh or the Shaykh of his Shaykh) in Shuruutul A’immah. Thus he stated, “Bukhari has narrated in his books in these ways: ‘I said to fulan (an unnamed person)’ which is permitted, and ‘Fulan has said this,’ and this is Tadlees.”
It is obvious that Tadlees is a greater defect when compared to weak memory as it is a voluntary act and there is fraud and deception in it. That is why Shamsi has said, “Tadlees is Haram near the A’immah.” (Muqaddama Usul al-Shaykh al-Muhaddith al-Dehlawi ‘alal Mishkat, pg 2)
Please note, Imam Bukhari رحمة اللہ علیه has narrated about 30 Ahadith from Imam Dhuhli رحمة اللہ علیه but has not mentioned the name with which he was famous because there was strict aggression between Imam Bukhari رحمة اللہ علیه and Imam Dhuhli رحمة اللہ علیه. In Tareekh Ibn Khallikan vol.2 pg 134, it is stated, “Imam Bukhari narrated from Imam Dhuhli in 30 places and has not mentioned his name anywhere. He should have said, ‘Muhammad bin Yahya Dhuhli narrated to me’ but instead said ‘Muhammad narrated to me.’ And in some places he has mentioned him as Muhammad bin ‘Abdullah’ (‘Abdullah was the name of his grandfather) and in some places he attributed it to his great grandfather.”

5. Darqutni and Hakim رحمة اللہ علیھما have said that Imam Bukhari’s رحمة اللہ علیه narrating Hadith from Ishaq bin Muhammad bin Ismail has been considered to be something with defect. In Muqaddama Fathul Bari pg 451 it is stated, “Darqutni and Hakim said that there is an allegation on Bukhari in narration of Hadith.”
Darqutni and Hakim رحمة اللہ علیھما mean that Ishaq bin Muhammad has been considered trustworthy by Bukhari whereas he is weak. He could not differentiate between Thiqah and Da’eef. And Isma’il رحمة اللہ علیه has shown astonishment that Imam Bukhari رحمة اللہ علیه considers the Munqata’ narration of Abu Salih Juhani as Sahih but considers Mutassil as Da’eef. It is written in Muqaddama Fathul Bari pg 483, “Ismail accused Bukhari and was surprised that why does Bukhari consider the Ahadith of Abu Salih Juhani as evidence when it is not Muttassil.”
He added, “It is more astonishing that Bukhari considers Munqata’ Hadith as authority and Mutassil as Da’eef.”

6. Thahabi رحمة اللہ علیه has also shown bewilderment on some of his works. He writes in the biography of Usayd bin Zayd al-Jamal, “It is astonishing that Bukhari considers him to be Da’eef yet narrates from him.” What can one say about the memory of a person who considers a narrator as weak and yet narrates from him in Asahhul Kutub!

Those who object should do some justice. If Imam Abu Hanifah رحمة اللہ علیه is weak due to the Jarh of Imam Bukhari رحمة اللہ علیه then why would Imam Bukhari رحمة اللہ علیه not be Majruh on the basis of the Jarh of Ibn Mandah رحمة اللہ علیه and Dhuhli رحمة اللہ علیه?

7. By the yardstick used by those who object (on Imam Abu Hanifah رحمة اللہ علیه), Imam Bukhari himself is proven to be Majruh. Thus what effect can the Jarh of a Majruh have on Imam Abu Hanifah رحمة اللہ علیه?
It is sad that Ghair Muqallideen attack Imam Abu Hanifah رحمة اللہ علیه due to mere jealousy and do not realize that they live in glass houses. If Imam Abu Hanifah رحمة اللہ علیه will be called Da’eef, then all the Muhaditheen of the world will become Da’eef and rejected in matters of Hadith.

Note: It should be clear that these Jarh have been noted down just to answer the opponents. This is just how Mawlana Shah ‘Abdul ‘Aziz Muhaddith Dehlawi, in his book “Tohfa” has adopted an offensive position (as opposed to defensive) against Shi’a. Otherwise, in truth, our Aqeedah is that Imam Abu Hanifah رحمة اللہ علیه and Imam Bukhari رحمة اللہ علیه are trustworthy, truthful, just, with strong memory and devout worshippers (of Allah). None of them is Majruh. And Hadith narrated by them is accepted. The reasons due to which we do not accept the Jarh on Imam Bukhari رحمة اللہ علیه are the same due to which we do not accept the Jarh on Imam Abu Hanifa.

Wa Salamu 'Alaykum.

Monday, 9 April 2012

Sayyid Ahmad Shahid & The `Ulama-e-Su'u.

The Jihad of Sayyid Ahmad Shahid and the ‘Ulama-e-Su`u. 

Sayyid Abu’l Hasan ‘Ali al-Nadwi(rah) writes in “Sayyid Ahmad Shahid” about the British intrigues and techniques to defeat the Jihad of Sayyid Ahmad(rah)
He states on pg. 106: “The British, however, were not slow to realize that any attempt to stamp out the reformist movement by persecution alone was bound to fan the zeal of the Muslim populace to flame and array the whole community on their side. The ruling circles held the view that all attempts by the Muslims to return to the first principles of their faith involved a revolt against the ruling power. (Indian Musalmans, p. 76) 
And nothing could suit the purpose better than to defame the Sayyid as a prophet preaching a new religion (Indian Musalmans, pp. 51-54) and his followers as Wahhabis who had, by that time been sufficiently besmirched by the Orientalists (Carsten Nisbuhr’s Description de la Arabia) and hired clerics (‘Ulama) and were looked down upon by the illiterate Muslim masses of India as sacrilegious barbarians. 
A counter propaganda against the followers of the Sayyid was started and fataawa against the Jihad were obtained and circulated (Rajendra Prasad; Indian Divided, p. 94. Also see Calcutta Review and the article “Wahabeeism” by Reilly in the Times, London, dated Feb 27 and Mar 1, 1871), some of which have been quoted by Hunter (Indian Musalmans, p. 147).
Then the Shaykh gives the names of some of the scholars who gave fatawa and ran a smear campaign against the Sayyid. These are:
Nawab Abdul Latif of Calcutta.
Maulwi Karamat ‘Ali Kajgavi of Jaunpur (Rafidi Shi’a). Not to be mistaken for Hadrat Mawlana Karamat 'Ali Jaunpuri who was a follower of Sayyid Ahmad.
Maulwi Chirag ‘Ali (Aligarh Movement).
Maulwi Nazir Ahmad (Urdu Litterateur and Hanafi ‘Alim).
Maulwi Fadl Rasul Badayuni ( Hanafi Mubtadi’ and British agent).
Maulwi Muhammad Husain Batalvi (Ahl Hadith).
Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani (Apostate). (Names mentioned in book end here)
In addition to this, some other scholars who opposed the Jihad were:
Syed Ahmed Khan (Modernist).
Maulwi Nazir Husain Dehlawi (Ahl Hadith).
Nawab Siddiq Hasan Khan (Ahl Hadith). 
‘Alaykum Salam.

Thursday, 5 April 2012

Green Clothing.

Green Clothing in Islam:
The wearing of green clothing was greatly liked by Rasulullah (saws) to such an extent that Anas says, “Green was the colour most liked by Rasulullah.” (Narrated by Tabarani in Al-Awsat)
A number of narrations regarding Nabi wearing green are mentioned in Subulul Huda war Rashad (vol 7 pg 312)
‘Allama ibn Battal, Ibn Hajar and Munawi have all mentioned that the clothing of the inhabitants of Jannah will be green. This can be deduced from the Ayah, “The inhabitants of Paradise will wear green clothing.” (Surah Kahf, v.31)
‘Allama Tabari narrated that the Khalifa al Ma’mun and his entire army wore green attire; to such an extent that even their caps were green.” Tarikh al Tabari
(This part was taken from Mufti Husain Kadodia's, 'Crown of a Believer')

Green color worn by women in the time of Nabi(saws):
Imam Bukhari narrated in his Sahih: Narrated Umm Khalid bint Khalid:
The Prophet (saws) was given some clothes including a black Khamisa. The Prophet (saws) said, "To whom shall we give this to wear?" The people kept silent whereupon the Prophet (saws) said, "Fetch Umm Khalid for me." I was brought carried (as I was small girl at that time). The Prophet took the Khamisa in his hands and made me wear it and said, "May you live so long that your dress will wear out and you will mend it many times." On the Khamisa there were some green or pale designs (The Prophet saw these designs) and said, "O Umm Khalid! This is beautiful." 7:72:713.

He also narrated: Narrated 'Ikrima:
"Rifa'a divorced his wife whereupon 'Abdur Rahman bin Az-Zubair Al-Qurazi married her. 'Aisha said that the lady (came), wearing a green veil (and complained to her (Aisha) of her husband …..till the end." 7:72:715.

The Prophet’s wearing green:
Narrated 'Aisha:
When Allah's Apostle died, he was covered with a Hibra Burd (green square decorated garment). (Sahih al Bukhari)

From Abu Rimtha ‘I went with my father to Rasulullah (saws) and I saw that he had on him two green cloaks”. (Abu Dawood)
Salamu 'alaykum.

Wednesday, 4 April 2012

Funny Conversation: Al Mansur & Abu Dulamah.

Al Salamu 'Alaykum.
It is narrated that Abu Dulamah visited Al Mansur (the 'Abbasid Khalifa) while dressed in the uniform that Mansur had ordered them to wear i.e a tall, black cap, a cloak with the following Qur'anic verse engraved on the back: "Allah is sufficient for you against them. He is the All-Seeing, the All-Knowing.", and with his sword hanging from his waist (the normal practice of the Arabs being to hang the sword around the neck). 
The following conversation ensued:
Al Mansur: How are you, O Abu Dulamah?
Abu Dulamah: Not well at all, O Amir al Mu'minin!
Al Mansur: Why is that?
Abu Dulamah: What do you expect from one whose face is in the middle of his clothes (due to the topi), whose sword is in his posterior and who has thrown the Qur'an behind his back?
Al Mansur was greatly amused by this retort and immediately ordered that the uniform be changed. (Tafsir Qurtubi)
Adapted from Mufti Husain Kadodia's "The Crown of a Believer".