Tahqiq Ahl Al-hadith

8/4/2019 Tahqiq Ahl Al-hadith

1/35


2/35

www.peoplefsunnah.comTahqj,q

Ahl ul Hadi,thInvestigating the Credentials of the

n Ahl ul Hadith n

byMaulana Habib ur' Rahman Azamj

IIThis learning, is your religionTake care from whomyoulearn it ItZAM ZAM PUBLISHERS2, Shah Zeb Cen~re,Near !MuCiiadasMasjid.,Urdu Bazar, Karachi. Pakistan. Post Code: 742.00

Phone (02'~) 7713037'4, Tel/Fax: (0.21)7725673,Email: [email protected]
http://www.peoplefsunnah.com/mailto:[email protected]:[email protected]://www.peoplefsunnah.com/


3/35

www.peoplefTahqiq Ahl ul HadithBv lVlauMna Habib ur Rahrnau Azami

Tr~nslated by: Abd ur Rahman 0 'Beirne

Sole DlstrfbntorseAl Farooq International1a Atkinson SrreetLeicesterLE53QAUnited KingdomTiel: OO~44-0116 253 7640fax: 00-44-0116 262 8655E-Mail: [email protected]

AU Rights reserved. No part of this publicationmay be reproduced, stored in any retrievalsystem, or transmitted in any form or by anymeans, electronic. mechanical! photocopying.recording, or otherwise, without the priorwritten consent of the publishers, except forpassages for preview purposes.

ZAM ZAM PUBLISHERK AR A C HI- P A K.]ST A Noon - 21 - 7725673

h eTahqiq Ahl~eHadUh

The AuthorMauldna Habib lIT Rahman Azarni was a very well knownand reputable scholar of the Indian subcontinent, whosereputation extended well beyond its boundaries into theArab world. He was born in 13] 9 A.H. and passed away in1413 A.H. (1992). He was an acknowledged authority onTafslr, Fiqh. and Hadnh.Maul.ana Habib ur Rahman was born in the tow n of MauNath Bhanjan in the district of Azamgarh (U.P.) india. Hiswhole life was spent in study and teaching. Like the greatscholars of the past, he led a very simple and unpretentiouslife. spending most of his life in his horne town, and teach-ing Hadith literature to students from all over the world.There he founded a number of institutions, among themMadrasah Mirqat ul "Ulfim, Jam! "a11Miftab ul 'Ulilm, andthe Islamic Institute for Higher Studies ...He studied under a number of prominent Ulamaa of thelast century, including Allamah Anwar Slbah Kashrrriri,Mufti Aziz ur Rahman Deobandi, and Maulana 'Abd ulGhaffar, the disciple of Maulana Rashid Ahmad Gangohl.Many students have benefited from his Iearrring, one ofwhom was Maulana Manzilr Nu'manl'. Several prominentscholars of the Arab world have also been given 'ijazah byhim ...They include Shaikh Abdul F


4/35

www.peo IeTahqjq Ahl e Hadith

This BookThis book explains the meaning of the term "AhJ ul Hadith .','This erm is used in many books dating from different pe-riods. At present there are certain parties who claim that it.efers to people who do not follow any of the four schools0. fiqh, and derive legal judgements directly from Hadith.Basically the purpose behind this claim is to establish thatthis view was to be found among scholars of Islam sincethe earliest times.The author, who has spent his whole life teaching Hadith,and is very familiar with the literature referring to it, showsthat this is a complete misrepresentationof the facts. Thisterm has only belen used in this sense within the last twocenturies, since the start of the movement which at presentuses this name ..Prior to that, the term was used in severaldifferent senses, but never in this se~se.This is an important issue. The Muslim. world is not goingto easily accept the views of any group unless they have atleast some claim 10 be able to trace their origins to the'early days of Islam, If it is not able to do so, then this meansthat- their teachings are an innovation, and "every innova-tion is error and every error .... " (al Hadith). In these times,when people are greatly inclined to take their religion fromrurnour among their fel lows, rather than lessons by teach-ers, and whenfellowship has taken the place of study, it isvery easy to circulate confused ideas and misrepresenta-tions. This translation of ,3 booklet by a very reputableteacher should be useful for dispelling one misrepresenta-tion that has now become quite widespread.

hTuh q i q AhJ e HadithIll' has \'\'1"1ten several works 011 Hadith. One of them is ,8-ri t ique of the works of Shaikh Ahmad Muhammad Shakir.u well-known recent scho lar or H8IdHh. He has also editedand brouuht ut several manuscripts of 1 adith from pri-vate coll;ctions. Among them are A I /V!u8annq! of ImamAbd til' Razzaq (11 vols): . 'v!usnod a! Humaidi (2 vcls); 11 eSunan of Sa "id ibn Mansur; ln1/qa' 01 Tarhib by ibn Hajar:AI }\![ctl6lib a! 'Aliyah hi Zenl'a 'i d at Mas d n id at hThamdniyah by Ibn, Hajar (4 vo ls): the Kashfal Astdr 'onZawuci ' ld Musnad al Bazzdr of Haitharni; AllvfH$:annc~f'byibn Abi Shaibah; Kltab ath Thiqdt by ibn Shahin, and Fat '/ 1al Nfughflh by Imam Sakhawt.His own writings include: Al Hdwi Ii Rij61 at Tahdwi which traces the rija.I (per-

sonalitie ) mentioned in Imam Tahawis Ma'iin; of'Athor and Mushki! al Arhtil:AI lthatoh as Saiy ah hi Dhikri Muhaddit hf atHanafiyahhese two works have sti 11to be pu hlished ,Published works include:

Nusrat al Hadith 011 theindispensibi lity of the Hadith,and refuting the arguments of those who try to rejectthe Hadith

A 'ydn a! HU)}Gl j listing the famous Ularnaa who haveperformed Hajj and Ziyarah

Rak 'at (1/ Tardwih Shari' Haqiqi Dastkdr Ahl e ShctrfestablishJng that ~hereal criteriafor nobil ity .is lawful earning in accordance with the

Shariab, and not the standards of nobility prescribedby the colonial powers or the traditional Muslim ar-istocracy.
http://www.peo/http://www.peo/


5/35

Tahqiq Ahl e Hadith www.people,~ \.GI,~I ~..ull C~~ ~ r~ J~ J.lr~1

Tahqiq Ahl ulHadithbismillah ir rebraen if raaim

1 ANovel Definition of HadithAt the, beglinning of his leoture, the speaker statedthat the word "Hadith" means "the word of AIHlh andthe word of his RasCH."Comment on this:Mawlana Hablb ur Rahman points out that this. is anentirely nove_IIdefinition of Hadith ..Up to this time, theaccepted dennition among the scholars of Islam, bothmuoettid and ghair muqetttd, has always been: "Theword, action, or teqrtr, of the Messenger of Allahsetettehu a/aihi wa sal/am .'" (Here the' word teqrlrmeans selecrlon, confirmation, or approval! of someaction.") He quotes awell-known ghairmuqaJlidwriterNawab Hasan Khan:"Heatth dar istiten m,ash'hOr qawl 00 ti'l 0 tearir e rasalest - ala/his sa/at 0 salam. ""The accepted meaning of hadlth lis the word actionor taqrrr of the Messenger - eleihte sa/at 0 setem,"Then" after referring to a Iless common definition whichincludes the word of a sahabf or tabi'1; he says, "0sawab awwaJ est.'

1 Tahqiq AhJ e Hadith 2'''And the correct one is tile first" (Mask u t Khitem p.2'1)A very well-known qheir muqallid writer of that time,Maulana Thana'ultah Arnritsrarl. after distinguishingbetween Hadlth and Our'an, has also written:"In accordance with accepted principles, the Ahl ulHadtth understand HadTthto be secondary to Qur"an,and, to resolve any question, after looking in the HolyOur'an, look first in the Hadtth." (Ah'J uJ Hedttb kMadhhab p, 79)2 Ciit,inga Counterfeit Hadith as,EVlidtence,The speaker then put forward a claim that the nameAhl ut HadUh derives from the time of the Messengerof Allah sala'lft!Jhu aJaihi wa settsm himself, and thatthis name was accepted by the Sahabah kirem. 1r1support of the first statement he quotes this hadlth:

On the Day of Qiiyamah the A.hl u! Hadlth willcome with their inkwells. Allah Almighty will say tothem, "Youare the Ahl ul Hadith. Now enter Paradise."Comment:In point of fact this l1adith is counterfeit. Certainly thespeaker would not be knowingly quoting a countertelthadith, 500 clearly he is not aware of its status. At thesame time, this raises a question. If those ularnaa oftoday who. do not accept the principle of tsottd arenot in fact able to distinguish between genuine and
http://www.people/http://www.people/


6/35

Tahqiq AId e Hadltbcounterfeit hadfth, then how much right can they haveto derive masa'u directly from hadlth?It is not only muqallld Ulamaa (Dhahlabf, Khatib, andSuyutl) who claasify this hadith as counterfeit. Gheirtnuqettid ularnaa have also included iit under thisheading. (See AI Fewe'k: ul Majmu'ah by AllarnahShawkanl, p.30)The verdict of muqaf/id ularnaa on this hadith is to befound in MawzO'ah on p. 112 -.~I~I ~ ~.bJ! IJAr fP J ~~~I J Ju (JI) t~ y~\ J,l!Khatib has said that this hadlth is counterfeit. ..... , ......jnAI M:i'za,n(Raqql) has said that this hadith was. falselyattributed to Tlbranl."3. The Actua.l Meani'ng of "'Ahl ul Hadith"Even if for the sake IO f arqurnerrt.this hadlth was, notcounterfeit, stilll it. would not support the speaker'sclaim. The term es'tiet: ul hadith that is used heredoes not refer to people who abandon teqtid and claimto be practising direct on Hadith. W'hat it refers to. isthose scholars who specialise in the writing down andteachfng of Hadith. This is dearly proved by the words

(.f.~" ~..l.:!4)"bi aydrhim uJmehebtr. 'J Coming forward with inkwellsin their hands can only refer to people whoseoccupation is writing. This is also proved by the factthat this counterfeit hadlrn is also found with thesewords:

3h

4~\jAIJ ~~I ,--:-,~,,~,~

"1\11h Almighty will gather together the people ofI, idtth and 'ilrn. '"( La'all ,MasnO'ah p.13)When the "es'heb u! hedtib" are here referred totogether wilth the ahl ul'Hm, then clearly "es'beb ul/1adfth refers to, the scholars of hadith and to thosewho record them and teach them.The third proof is in the remaining' words of this hadlthwhiich for some reason the speaker leaves out in hisquotation.

(~j.ul ~ ~ , J s - uj..a.i ~ W I.k)That is to say, Allah A.lmighty will send the es'tieb ulnedtth to Paradise saying to them, "you read an greatamount of durud on my Messenger."This again points clearly to those who write and madhadtth because every time they read the name of theMessenger of Allah they will write or say "salJallahueteit)! wa sal/am." From this it is clear tha-t the reas-onfor their being given a place in Paradise is notabandoning teqita, but reciting a great amount ofdurud. The speaker would also be aware of whetherreciting durud in grs'at amounts was a practice ofmuqeitkitn or ghair muqellidin.The sense in which M..Habib ur Rahman takes theterm ss'neb ut hadlthis also evident from what lrnamDhahhabl says, because he has classified this hadithunder the headlnq


7/35

Tahqiq Ahl e Hadith www. eopl(J"!~l! >-~I~. r . J ~J..-)

"Summoning of the Ulam.aa with their Inkwells."(See Ohetmebi: At MTzan.)4 The,_Mea.ning of the S.ahflbah lI3e1ing A.hll ul'HadithTo support hi:scontention that the Sahabah raziyalh3hu'enbum regarded themselves as "ebl u! nedttn", thespeaker presents several quotations. However, in allthese quotations the term as'hab u! hadrth in factrneans those people who reported hadith, ormemorised them Olr taught them, or wrote them down.In none of them can it be understood to mean thosepeople who do not follow any imam, or claim to actdir,ectly on the basis of hadtth ..h1 1 one place he quotes AbO Huralrah raziyaJlanu 'enhuas saying N18 . t he was "eht ul hadrth. f' Unfortunately,he does not quote the full background to this,otherwise it would be quite clear that Abu Hurairahraziyalliihu 'enbu meant by this ..The reference! thatthe speaker quotes is f-rom Tarlkh Kh etlb and!adhkirah. Here a dream seen by Abu Bak-r bin AblDawOd is described:

During the time when AbO Bak-r bin AbT DawOdwas engaged in writing down the hadtth of AbaHurairah raziyallahu 'enhu, he saw Aba Hurairahraziy:a!1.ahu 'ennu in a dream. He had a thickbeard, a wheaten complexion, and was wearingcoarse cloth. Abu Bak-r says. "When I'saw him, I

5h

Taht)iq Ahl e Hadith 6said to him; I lik.9 you very much.'; HE!replied. "Iam the first sahib ul hecittn in the world."

If the definition of Sahib ul Hedttr: that the speakerputs forward is vatid, then we would have to acceptthat there was no SahabJ before Abu Hurairah whopractised on HadHh. Clearly the speaker would notbe so bold as [0say this, so it must mean somethingother than what: he has taken it to mean. Here it clearlymeans a person who is engaged in reporting andrnemorising nadlth ..There can be no doubt that amongthe Sahabah, AbO Huralrab raziya1Uihu 'enhu W8.Sforemost both in his dedlcation to memorising hadlth,and in the number of hadtth that he transmitted. Tnlspoint is 3.'150 clearly confirmed by the fact that thisdream is reported at a rime when the person who sawit was engaged in writing down hadlth, and not inrelation to some person turning rejecting teqttd, ortrying to practise directly on a Hadlth.5 Citinl First a Qount'erfeit Hadlt:hand then a

DreamThen the point remains that this quotation from AbuHurairah raziyallahu 'enbu was not something that tiesaid during his lifetime. It was something that was saidin a dream seen by someone several hundred yearsafter he died. Now if a scholar has. to resort to acounterfeit hadlth, andl then to words said in a dream,to make his case, then clearly the evidence at hisdisposal cannot be very strong,6 Further Citations


8/35

Ta hq iq Ahl e H.adith www. eoplThe speaker then refers to a number of Tabi'In andquotes the phrase:

~.W'~~I~~applied to them.Comment:Here again he is clalmlnq that they were "Ahl ul Heditrr"in the sense that he uses. Again this is not valid. Thephrase

~...\..'loJly~\J~refers to their hav,ing an honoured and leading positionas mutieaaithtn and as transrnittters of hadlth, andthe term "es'heb ul hedttt:" or "ahJ ul hedttn" meanssimply muhadfJithln or transmitters of hadtth. Thespeaker of the book from which he is quoting himselfwrites:(~J~.~ ...~lwIJ~..wI~.yIM~.us" Jli.:f~,Jj)"ln this book we have spoken of the tez! of the hadith,and of the ent ut hedttt, who have specialised inrnernortstnc and recordtng them." (p 134)In this book there are also hundreds of other instancesthat prove this point. Among them is a section on "theas'hab ul bedttt: as the khalffahs of the Messenger ofAlLah setiettehu oteih! w .a seliem." Under this headingthe speaker quotes this hadlth:

HuzOr s.aflalli i'hu slaihi wa settem was asked,j'Who are your successors?" He said,"Those

7h

Tah qlq AIM e Hadith Bpeople who will come after me and will reportmy hadTth and my sunneh, and teach it to thepeople."(p.31 )

Here it is perfectly dear that es'ruib utneattt: refers tothe people who report and teach hadith. Anothersection is called "Huser sallal/aha a/aihJ wa settemleaving instructions that the as'hab ul bedttr: are tobe received with honour." Under this heading,. thishadUh is quoted:

Some young people will come from differentparts of the world to learn hadlth. Treat themwell. (p. 211 )

From this it is dear that students of hadlth are "es'nebul heattt." Here also Abu Sa'ld Khudr1 raziyalJahu'enbu is quoted, and The spe aker uees that quotationon p.3 of his lecture However, he has not presentedthe full quotation.

;'When he saw them he said. "Welcome!" andsaid, "Huzur aallallahu alaihi wa aallam told usto make a place for you in our gatherings, andto teach and explain his hadtth to you. You arehis success ors and the ahl uJ bedttn (i.e.muhaddithTn) after us"

Another section isentiUed, "Dreams of the Sa.lihinabout the as'hab uJ h'adith. Under this he,adilng onedream is as follows:

A certain person was studying hadlth, and died
http://www.people/http://www.people/


9/35

www.peopleTal:1qiq Ahl,c HadHh 9

---- ---------while still studying. Abu 8"'k-rah bin 8*k-rawlsaw him in a dream. He asked him, "Whathappened?'; He" said, "I was, forgiven." Heasked, "What was the reason?" He said,"Because I was studying hadtth. II (p. 111)

Here again the person studying hadtth is cateportsedunder the heading "'as'hab ul bedtth." Other simil,ardreams are recounted. These examples are only ,9handful out of a sack.On top of this, M...Muhammad Sahib ,JOn8l!gHad'ht, whois ghak muq ttki, in translati,lf1Ig this book himse,fftranslatea "es'neb ut hadrth" as "students of haotth"or as "people withe knowledge of hadith", In one placehe translates -

(~, .~.h ~~! ~~ J)as "a student: of hadith", and in another place "asJhabul hadllh" is translated as "scholars of Ihadith J(p.33)oras "munedaitntn", On p.38 "ent ut tiedttti" istranslated as "muneaaithtn", and on p 24 es'net: uihadith is also translated as "muneddithtn."This is part of a general tend-ency in Ahl-e-/iadlthwriters. When the phrase "as':htlb ut beattt:" ~susedas, a term of honour, they translate it as "the Ahl ulHadlth," but, whenever some evil is referred to, theytrallsl'at, tt as "students of hadTth", or else use someroundabout expression like "such people."Thus M. Muhammad JOnagad'hJ translates,

(~ , . .L%!I y~ I r : . . r o . r . ? " r) to)

h e'r'ah,qJq AM e Hadith 10as "There are no people better than the Ahl-e-hedttn. "However, on p.33 he translates

IJ".!_.j1 .j..$' IJ_ .r .i U ~ ~J .. > ~ h jA I ..>.}\..o Ias "see how these students of hacttn have becomecorrupted."In the same way, in Sharfu As'habj'j HadTth, wheneverthe iman of the "ashab ul hadtth, ortheir ibe.ingabdalsis mentioned, he translates it as "the AhJ'ee~had7th" or"the .Jarna'ah of the Ah1-e-Hadith." (see p 18,32,34,etc) However, the statement of Imam A'mash

C~.J.?JI y~~ ~ ~ r _ J J ~J.l1...}v. J})is translated as, "there ana no people in the worldworse than these people," Aocordiing to his rule heshould translate it as " " there are no people in theworld worse than the Ahl-e-HadUh."Similarly, another statement of Imam A'rnash:

(~WI y~1 ~'~j,1 " . ; . . , . ; S ' ~I J ~IS' ) JJJ)is translated as ! l 1 ' f I had dogs, I would set them onthese people .." (p. 104) By his rule it should read, "'If Ihad dogs I would set them on the Ahl ut Hadith."Sim,illarly,~II'I-"~l J l A h ~'bo- jJ ~~I ~~I JI P,)! j,1 ~ ):.1)(~~ ~ J.~1~J.6p:JIII~ ~ ~,-!IJ 'L S )~I Y cJ_p' ~~'J

is translated as, ..Ubaidullah bin Umar. on seeing thepusnling and jostling of people like these, said, "Youhave torn learniing to pieces "" (p..94) .By his rule it should read, "Ubaidullah bin 'Urnar; on
http://www.people/http://www.people/http://www.people/http://www.people/


10/35

www.peopleTahqiq AhI e Hadit.h 11seeing the pushing and jostling of the Ahl-e-Heditt),said, "You have tor n .Iearning to pieces(1) anddestroyed the light of knowledge. If Sayyldina 'Urnarwas here he would have punished us severely (2).""(Note: Here only the translation of As'hab ul Hedttt:has been corrected. Apart from this, to translate"shenittum" (1)a8 "you have torn to pieces," and'(awja'na zerben" (2) as "he would have punished usseverely" is a somewhat original translation. A correcttranslation would be "you have disfig,lllred," and "hewould have hit us hard."SimBarlly,~I)..I.>JI y~'i Js -J!I.,Aj J J~ ~ ~ ~!,~)

(~I.:JA ~ JI~~yl y~':JI-:r ~JI ~ll.u u,.JLai~~is translated as "IIheard Laith bin Sa'd, on seeingl thebehaviour of people like this, say "You are mol-sinneed of a little bit of manners and actual practice thanof a great amount of knowledge. "" (p. 94), whereashe should have translated i t as,11.11eard laith bin Said"emseeing the behaviour of the Ah.l~e-had1th; say "Youare more in need of a little bit of manners and actualpractice than of a great amoent 'O f knowledge,""Abu Bak-r bin Uthman says

(iJ~ 1 ~ ,J1~.hr :. ~ ~.l :!oJ l io. :- '~l)M. Muhammad Sb. translates this as, "The As'hab ulHadtth are very bad people, indeed they are insane."(p.110) whereas he should have said,' "The Ah/ ...e..

hTahqtq AhJ e Hadith 12Nadrth are the 'Worstof people, "In the same way

(~..wl ~~'I ,-:? ~_.~ ~ .y ~ .~ )is translated! as "his dog used to used to attack us",(p.107) but should have been translated, "TrnamA'masb's dog used to used to attack the Ahl-e-HadUh",011p. SS M. Muhammad translates wa enlutiu as "theAh/~e~HadJth," but then translates

( ' < \ . . ; . , Q ~ ~ \ . . Q . . J IA.II.~~WII~I~.;I,.,o.l)J"-_.;;i< OJ ~ .J -,'"-~-... .. r.J,Jrlas "Shu' bah is referring to those people who hear ahadlth but do not practise on it." (p. 84) This is acompletely wrong translation. He should have written."What Shu' bah means is that the ahlHlhadft:h do putinto practice what they hear. "(In these passages where the "en! ui tiedttti" ar;esever~y critic/sed presumebty refer to the people ofthat time who used to come regularly to attend publictessons on bedttn without actually bringing religioninfo their lives. This needs to be checked.)In trying to establish that the Sahabah were A.hl~e-hedttt, the speaker also refers to Ttl.rrkh Baghd'ad andwrites that here Abdullah bin Abbas ra.ziyallahu'anhuwas described as being Ant-e-neattti .. (p. 5)Unfortunately, he has not quoted the actual passage,otherwise it would be quite clear in what senseAbdullah bin Abbas is described as beingeh! ul bedttt:This is the passage in question:(~i.o)..) . 5 )_ , .; ;l "J ' ,ijl.oj") ~'J oi.i~) J . . . , . . \ . , P . r J ! ..f,1~ ~ ~ .J.:o .J1 ~~ I,


11/35

www.peopleTahqi1q Able Hadith 13:--~---"There are three es'bet: ul heattn :Abdullah bin Abbasin his time, Sha'bi in his time and Thawri in his time."If we were to take' the term ent u! nedttr: to mean whatthe speaker says Itmeans, then this means that fromthe time 'of AbduUah bin Abbas right up to the time ofSufyan Thawrl, there were only three Ahj-e~Hadrth.In this case his statement on page 5 that all theSahabah and Tabi'In were Ahl-e-Hadith has to bewrong.In this connection he also says that "ImamSha'bt saysthat all the Sahabah were Ahl-e-Had1.th. (p.S) Herehe giivesTadhkirat ul Huffadh v.1 p. 72as a reference.However, there is no such pasaaqe either on this page,or in the next 20' paqes.He also says that all the 11andsthat the SahabahraziyaHahu 'entium conquered, the people there, aftercoming into Islam, followed the madhhab of the Ahl-e-Hedttti. (p. 5) One question that immediately arises,is how does this prove that the Sahabah were AhJ-e-Hadith? Why then has this, been put under the headingof !ISahabah Kiram"'? Are the new Muslims of theplaces conquered by the Sahabah' also to be regardedas SahtJbah?Secondly" this statement is nowhere to be found inthe book that has been quoted in support of thiscontention. A passaqe has been quoted, but it hasbeen distorted, and he has also not had the courageto translate it. If he did, it would become clear that,even after careful tailoring, the' most that can bederived from this passage is . that, at the time the book

hI'" htl,ill AilE e Hadit.h 14was written, all the Muslims of Rum, Jazlrah Syria!and the borders of Azerbaijan were Ahl ul Hadith.Nowhere- is there any mention of whattime is referredto, whether it was from the time of accepting Islamand the conquests of the Sah'aba,h, or whether it wasat some later period. (1;)(1) There . 1 8 no mention whatever in In UsOIud Din ofelther the word Sahabah or of their conquering anycountry. However regardles,s of this, quoting the nameof this book, he repeatedly states that f;f)m the timethe sahabah conquered these countries, their peoplehave been Ahl-e-Hadtth ..Thus on page 10 he says,"On the authoritv of Usul ud Din you 'lave alreadybeen informed that right frrom the time the Khilafat ofUthman, when Ifriqlyaih was conquered by Sahbahand Tabi'tn, the peoplle of that re~gjon have beenfoll'owing the madhab of the Ahl-e-Hadtth." 111act inUsul ud Din there is no mention of the Khilafat ofUthman, nor of 'tine conquest of lfriqlyah, nor of thepeople there being Ahl !- Hadlthfrorn that time.J ~ ' " I*L!JI)..,';';j 3,;:t~iJ ~J)I;y" ;.~~ , ~Ij L . l A ~t..f)(l_hJ.o tI ~ ~ . . . . w , \ J A ! ~.1.e,J.$,# ~I.J!~I, yl.u u~ JjT"Bring your proofs i f what you say is true."Secondly, the pass,s.ge in Usall ud Din is not 8S hequote's. He has made amendments to it. The originalpassage is as fonows:

(~~L.. , .?~. ~1~ltb!. ,;eI-,A1LA)

the text as quoted is:


12/35

www.peopleTahqiq Ahl e Hndltl~

(Y~!~I~..k~)In quotinq these words the speaker has added theword "kern)" after "kulluhum" and the phrase "min ehlissunneb" after"ala medtmebt ahl ut hadft:h" has disappeared. If theseadjustments had not been made to the text, then itwould simply establish that the people of these placesat the time of writing were "aM ut beattb", but not thatthey had been "eht ul hadTth"prior to that. The 'Originalpassage was written in the 5th century Hijri. So whatis established from this is that in the 5th centu ry, thepeople of these frontier areas were "ahl ut heattti",Secondly, it becomes clear that by "ah) ul had1th" whatis meant is that they were ahl us sunnah, not thatthey were ghair muqetlki.Also, if before quoting this passaqe the speaker hadlooked more carefully to see under what heading thlspaSS2tgl occurs, he would have seRn that the point atissue was to establish that the people of Thawr wereSunnt, not Rtdizi, Khari./f, Mu''!azilah, and so on, Thechapter headi'ngis :

( J _ ; A \ ! ' , J A " ' 1 L-JI,~l ~~)"Establishing that the people of Thawr are from theAhl us SunnahH7 The, Tibi'in and Ati:bbi"ut TabPinIn maintaining that the Tabi'in and Atibba"lUt Tabl'tnwere Ahll ul Hadtth, he has written:"Sufyan bin AymTnah has legally been counted among

15h

'I'~lhqiq Ahl e I:!adith 16theAhl ul Hadith." (p. 6;), and in support of this quotesTarTkh Baghdadi v.9 p 79. Unfortunately, on this pagethis passage is not to be found. However, on his pagethere is a story of the "ahl ul hadlth" stea.ling shoes.The passage is a's fotlows:

" " - ! " " ' ~ ~ ~~I> I ..;~ . . .l : '. 1 . . t. 1 ~ ~ ,.. J .. :l oJ1 . ..- :/ 1 . . , , = - , . . : : 1 \ J _ , . . . . . . )1A.1ii.il;1J ,,-:!.~ r . . s " ) )~~IJ 4..rJlj o: . l~1

( "' - !~ . .J . t -! ~ J~ .~JpJI ~~I' s:-~I~ljThe eb! ut had1th stale the shoes of Abu Zaid, so afterthat, whenever the es'neb us shu'ere or the' as 'habut erebtyen 01 " theas'hab ut akhbar came, he wouldthrow his clothes down without checlking on them, andwhen the as'hab ul hadTth came, he would gather themand keep them in front of him. Tarlkh Baghdad v.9 .p.79)What is actually referred to here are the students ofdifferent classes -Arab poets, arabic language,akhbar, and heant:The point then tisthat when Ibn 'Ayrninah, or anyoneelse Is,referred to as ani ul hadtth, it means that hewas a person who had studied HadTth and was worklnqin that field, as I have explained earlier.Z The Four ImamsAfter this the speaker tries to maintain that the fourImams were "ahl-e-hadlth" like hims,e.lf. Fiirst of all herefers to Imam AbO Hantfah (ahimafwllah', and quotesthe following passage from usa l LIdDIn:
http://www.people/http://www.people/http://www.peo/http://www.peo/


13/35

www.peoTahqiq Ahl e Hadith 17(~ ..~.h y~1 Jy~f")ISJ1 ~ ~ .$.1 J..'I)

The passage quoted is correct, but the translation hehas made is shows a considerable lack of integrity.The translation he presents is

"The principles of AbO. Hanlfah in respect ofAq{i'id and the prohibition of teqtto (fotlowinoanother scholar) are the same as those of theAhl ul HadTth."'(UsQI ud Dln p.B)

Scholars may take note how in translating "keltun" hehas simply added "and the prohibition of ieqno' Hedoes not seem to have understood that the subject ofthe book "Usul ud 0111" is Aqa'id .Kalam'iyah . At thebeg.inninQ ot the book the author has counted andlisted 15 principles of Aqa'id' Kafamlyah., and in thisJist there is 110. mention whatsoever of "prohibitingteqttd. > , Therefore in adding "and the prohibition ofteqtta." what is the speaker doing other than ascribinghis own views to the author he is quoting? At thebeginning of the book he author has set out theprinciples of the as'hab u! hadith on Aqa'id in outline,and then in detail in the rest of the book. If the speakerhere was asked to search the book and find somethingto say that prohibition of taqlid was one of theseprinciples, he would not be able to do so. Indeed whyshould there be any mention of this here? The thingthat he is talking about is teqttd in questions relatinpto particulars of religiion, and the subject of the bookis basic tenets.As well as this it should be understood that when theauthor of UsOI ud DJn refers to as'hab ul hadlth or aMul hedttn. he is not referring to people who do not

I hTahqiq Ahl e Haditb 1a ,accept taqlid. In several places he quotes the followers(muqaflidin) of lmam Shafii' as examples of as'hab u!hadfth or ahl ut hadfth. For example on paqe 204 herefers to Abdullah bin Sa'ld and KarabTsl asmutekettimin of the ahl ut neditn, and they are bothmuaettiatn of lmarn Shfi'l. (see Teoeqsr uebShafj'fyah.)I In Usen ut Mfz.fW Hafiz [ Ibn Hajr hasreferred to both as beinq "Shafi'I tuqeneo. "In this context the speaker has also quoted thisstatement of Ibn AymYnah, "In the first place it wasAbu HanTfah himself who made me Ahl u:1Hadith."This again means "The first person who made me arnuhaddith was AbOIHanifah himself.."The quotation is taken from Tarlkh Khalqan (v. 1 p.211) The actual Arabic text uses the word "muhaddith"',and the speaker has translated it into UrdQ as "Ahl-e-Hadlth." So, instead of rewriting this statement andgiving it his own meaning, he should have explainedthat it mean that Aba Hanifah was a muihaddith, andused to train other people (even people like Sufy.s:lInbin Ayrninah) to become mubaddithln ..After this, in a similar manner, passages are presentedrelating to the rernaininq Imams. There is,then no needto 'go into discussing each one separately. However,there is one question that needs to be asked. WhenaUthetour tmarns were rnuhaddlthln, and based alltheir judgements and decisions on Hadith, - in otherwords were doing what the speaker says should bedone - then what is the need for establi.shing anothergroup to come along and do the same thinq? Are those
http://www.peo/http://www.peo/http://www.peo/http://www.peo/


14/35

www.peo ITahqiq Ahl e Hadith 19people who came after them, and accepted andfollowed their system, not Aht-e-Hadlth alreadv? So,if they are, and most certainly they are, then whatdoes establishing another group achieve other thantetrio beyne't mustimtn (creatlnq division between theMulims) ?Another question that needs to be asked lis this. Whenthe term ahl ul hadTth is used about the four imams,the speaker quotes it and puts 'great stress on itHowever when the same term is used about thefuqahaa, ahl-e-fiqh, or imams of fiq'h, no mention ismade of il For example in UslOllud Din on p.312., afew lines before the passage he has quoted is thisstatement:

1oS)..P!) ~\.4 J ,,1')J')1\ ~ ~I...j ~':JIWI ~~ V"J)(~~. ~ ~~Ijj_; o . t lJ ~I..!JIJ

"and after them the imams of the Urnmah, such asAw.za'y and Mal ik and Thawri and Shaf iF' and ibn Thawrand Ahmad bin Hanbal .."He also refers to the hadlth:

(J!.J~ ~i cr aA:\;t:, JIj3"l)"One section from my folllawers will always have thehelp of Allah with them." When Imam Ahmad binHanbal being asked who this group was, he said, HThe Ah!-ul~Had1th."'(p. 7) Here the speaker has failedto take note of what is written in the most sahlh Kltabafter the Kitabulla!1., (that is to say Bukhari Sharif)otherwise he would have seen that the heading under

h eTahqiq Ahl ,e Hadith 20which this hadlth is placed is

(~'I J...bl,'rJ' L , . l ? J 1 .?jt...1. b ~I ..:_....liak JI..9~)"One section of my Ummah will always stand up IO nthe buth, and those are the eh t uJ 'U rn " (See Bukharlv.2 p. 108)7 Muhammad bin Abd ul W'ahhalbAfter this the speaker quotes the words of ShaikhMuhammad bin Abd ul Wahhab Najdl "The sign ofthe Ahl ul Bid'ah its that they speak illl of tbe Ahl ulHeditt:" The point that needs to be noted here is thatat the same time as. saying this, he was himself aHanbali. As noted by the ghair muqettio writer andleader, Nawab Siddiq Hasan Sahib, in "Misk ulMakhum. "(p, 14) "mssb'ntir or muqarar an est kehIshan henbelt medh'heb and 0 dhik-r der hanabilahwaqj',asl. II"It iswell known and clearly established thathe followed the Hanball rnadh'hab, and he is alsoreferred to as such by the Hanbalta."Furthermore, by Aill ul Hadith he means all the Ahlus Sunnah. Thus Maularna Yusuf Jalpurt "(in Haqiqafut Fiqh p, 11) quotes a passage from the same bookthat is quoted here (i.e. Ghunyat ut Tallbln)(WI JAI) (~..wl ~lx..pl ~J J.:o.1J""""I;H~ ~I 'ij WI jAl)"....the ahl us sunnah, and they have only one name,.that is ahl ul hadith."From this it is clear that the speakers own mentor usesthe term eh! ul hedttt: 1 1 0 mean ahl us sunneh. Thespeaker has. even quoted this statement However,h e has left out the words "ehl us sunneti" from the
http://www.peo/http://www.peo/http://www.pe/


15/35

www.pe n hbeginning of the sentence.

Tahqiq Ahl,e I-Iadith 22the famous Ahl ul Hadlth scholar. Gaffa,1Ma'Oni, hadabandoned the Hanafi madhhab,"(p.8}

Tnhqiq Ahl e Hadjth 21

7 A.fghanistan There are a number of points to be noted here.The speaker then takes great pleasure In quotinq apassage from "Feriehteh" to the effect that one of thescholars in the circle of Imam Ghazzaf Abu TayylbSuhall (this should actually be Satu) bin MuhammadSulaiman Sa'tukl, was Ahl ul Hadith. However if welook at:Sa mants "insab' or Sabki's "Tabaqat" (v,3 p.169) we will see that Abu Tayyib was a muqallid ofthe Shafj'j school. He is referred to here as Ahl ulHadlth in the sense that the Malik!s and Shafts arereferred to as Ahil ul Hadith. (See the Muqaddamahof Ibn KhaldOn p. 374,375) In the region of Khurasan,when people use' the term AM ul Hedltn, they meanspeciftcally the ShaJi'i school, and nothing else, asibn lslah and Sabki have pointed out:(~L!J\.J.f-A!. ~J.?J \ I..:"'~ II ..~! 1 1 . ~ ' ~ \ . .. . II _ ;? ~ I c.~' ,.!.lJ;~)"This is in the terminology of the people of Khurasan.When they refer to the Ahl u! Hadith they mean theShafl'Is." (Tabaqat of Sabki V .. 3 p. 258)

(l_;. jl .. 'J~ ~ !l1..r. '.~~WI ~, Jll='1 '~I)"When they refer to the Ahl ul Hadlth they do notmean ,anything other than Shafl'ls." (Tabaqat of Sabkl

v. 3 p. 259)

1 Qaffal IMaOnl has been described as Ahf u!Heattn. In point of fact he was a very strict Shafi'I,(see tabaqat Shafi' iyah v..3 p.1'9a.)2

After this, the following assertion is put forward :"The appointment of an Ahi ul Hadlth '~Him asambassador may date from the time when SultanMahmoud Ghaznawl, as a result of the company of

This relates to ' a story about Gaffal MarOni!which is known to be fictitioLis. He repeats iteven though both in terms of reason andd,ocumentaryevidence, lit is clearly false. Fordetail IO n this is to be found in booklets by Mull,a,Ali Qari and Mulla Abd un Nabl Gangohi.Mawlana Habib ur Rahman also refers to hisown booklet on the' subject, "Makhs'i! at ifti'af'ala sa/awa'i .i J qaffal".

3 He says that Sultan Mahmoud Ghaz.naw1became disaffected! with Hanafi flqh, This iscontradicted by the fact that 'Mas'Od binShaibah and Abd ul Qadi:r Quraishi have'included Sul,tan MahmOd among the HanafYFuqahaa, and also for a long time a book bythe Sultan entitled "Tafrld" was well known andwidely circulated. As well as this, riQlht to tileend of the Sulltan's 'rule, his Qazi ul Qaz,a (C'hiefJusuce) AbO Muhammad Nasihi was HanaflThis is reported in "Jewenir Mazlyah."

4 If appoint.ing an 'LAhl ul HadlHh" as a.mbassadoris all indication of dissatisfaction with Hanafi
http://www.pe/http://www.pe/http://www.peopl/http://www.peopl/


16/35

www.peoplTahqiq Abl c H:ndith 23

fiqh, then what about the fact that 23 years afterthis, in 412 A.H. he appointed .AbC~MuhammadNas ihT, who was his Oazl ul.Oaza. as Arnir afHla~j,and that it was through the agency of thisHanafi elder, that he re-established the Hajj?(Because of the violence and depredations ofthe Oararnatah - a sect of the Sht'ah - the Hajjhad been stopped for many years.) Is this thennot a public announcement of the superiorityof the Hanafi madhhab? The surpris.ing thingis that this is reported in the very same history(Perishtetr; v.1, p.46) from which the speakerhas quoted,

7 Hindustan

The same thing also applies to the speaker'scontention that at the time of Bashart, the majority ofthepopulation of Mansurahtn Sindh was Ahl ul Hadith.What Ibn Khaldun says makes it clear that the Shafi',were referred to as Ahl ul Hadith. So he still has toproduce evidence to show that they were ghatrmuoettid, and not SIhMi'l.I The Dt.s,tri butiol1 of the School~sThe natural spread of the four schools of Flqh intodifferent parts of the world is dismissedcontemptuously by the speaker as "mulkl ba.(warah J(sharing out countries). One answer to that would beto quote the ayat

"Go die of your own raqe."

h eTahqiq Ahl e l-Jadith :2 4A point to note here 'is that Qaffal, Kablr Shashl,'A1bdan ManJnl, and Abu 'Awanah Isfra'lnl are peoplehie quotes as leading figures of the Ahl ul Hadlth. Sohow can we explain the e'fforts that they made toestablish teqtid of the Shafi"l medhbeb?7 Government ForceThe speaker follows certain of his predecessors. inalJ.egi.ngthat teottd was established at sword-polnt.However, simply repeating what a person's teachershave said is not proof of anything. Neither the speakernor his predecessors have yet put forward anyevidence that any government anywhere forcedanyone or even told anyone that they had to . becomeHanan or MaHki.The. only madhhab that bas been spread:. at sword-point is the speaker's own medntieb of the Ahl ulHadtth. He himself'states.

"Yusuf bin 'Abdl ul M:u'min, then after him, hisson Ya'qub , full.y supported the Ah,1 ul Hladtt.hmadhhab The Khalifah (Ya'qub) gave orders toabandon fiqh and not follow any imam." (p. 11)According to the speaker, '(tQsuf and hils son Ya'qObwere "Ahl ul Hadlth."So these North African kings used their royal powerto ban ta'qJld. Indeed, on p.age11 he also states th~~YOsuf placed his sword in front of people and said
http://www.peopl/http://www.peopl/


17/35

www. eahqtq Ahl e Hadtrhthat everything other than the Hol ly Qura'n and theSunan of AbO Oilwud was invalid. In other words, hethreatened people with a sword to :gel them to acceptthis. On this same pag,e he also refers to ' gi'vingpresents;_ in other word's using financial inducements"to spread the Ahl ul Hadltn madhhab. He then statesthat this is the reason for the, Ulamaa of that regionbeing strict AIII ul HadTth, and as an example quotesthe name of Imam Ibn Jazm.In this, matter M. .HabIb ur Rahman fully aqrees withthe, speaker. Similarly, every person in Iindia who hasseen the way in which peap,le chang'~d their madhabas a result of the inducements and intimidation ofNawab Siddiq Hasan Khan, and then seen therepetition of those events in Meo and Sana,ras, ~malso have to agree.7 "Madhhabi 'Asa.biyat,'Under this heading the speaker says,

"If a fojlower of one madhhab leaves hismadhhab and jojns another, then he became'liable to punishlment. IIThen, under the heading of "Persecution of the Ahl ulHadith"', he says that one person left the Hananmadhhab and started to do rafa' yad,ain and .qlra~atkhalfa'J imam. He was then lashed publicly. .Here' the speaker claims that this is the Hanan ru.l l ing

2SI h

Tllhqiq Ahl, e Hadith 26on this matter. At the same time" one of his own party,Mawlana Muhammad JOnagad'h~ in "Aqlcier:M~ihammadt', quoting the Sharh of Durr-e-Mukhtarwhich lis generally known as Sham" says that theHanan ru!lilng lis as follows:

"If a person today makes his s al at inaccordance with one madhhab (say HanafT -that is without sayin,g amin audibly. or raisinqhis hands before, ruki:', or reciting SDrah Fafihahbehind the imam) and then" the following day,makes it in accordance with another rnadhhab(say Shafi'i - saying amin audlbly, raising hishands before rukts', and reciting Sarah Fatiha.hbehind the imam), it is not prohibited for 'him todo so."

Bo, the Question then arises which one o - f the two iscorrect, rnmself or Mawlana Muhammad.In point of fact, here the speaker is misquoting andmisrepresenting his source. In the first place, thepassage on

(,~wJl~~JI,~})which he quotes i~from the commentary on the sherhof Sha,mi. What Allama Sharnl hlrnself wrote,: he hassiimply ignored. For the bene'filt of the reader! whatSharnl himself says is that a person who leaves, say;th! Hanan madhh-ab and takes up the ShaWimednneb, willi not: be punished for doing so 'if he isnot doing it for some reason that is prohibited or notacceptable in Shari'ah, such as, carnal appetite or


18/35

l (

Tahqil'qAhle Hadith www peosome worldly motive. but is doing it because he hasthe capacity for ijNhad; and as. a result of his ijtihadhe has come to the conclusion that a certain view iscorrect; and has therefore adopted it Such a personis in no way punishable.

The conclusion of this is that the Hanafi fuqahaa havenot defined leaving one rnadhhab for another as apunishable offence out of 'asablyat. This applies onlyto a person who is doing this out of carnal desire orfar sorne corrupt motive, and is therefore making' amockery of the madhhabs . .A1Ihis is made quite olearin the place. from which he is quoting. The same willapplly to a person who changes from ShafT'Y to Hanaffor these motives, and this is also made clear in thesame place.11would be Interestinq to know from which ayat of theHoly Oura'n or which hadith the speaker derivespermission for misrepresentation like this.

Under this heading the speaker says:"AbO Hafs Hanan prohibited the compliler ofthe Hadtth of the Messenger, Imam Bukharlfrom g,ivingfatwa in Bukh81"8,and then had himexpelled him from the city." (p.12)

In the ~ncident in question, accusing Abu Hafs ofhaving him expelled from the city is blatant false

e27

h'I'ahqtq Ahl e Haditb 2,8ccusation, and to quote Jawahir Mazfyah in supportof this is blatant false attribution. Alii it says in thisbook is . that Abu Hafs said to Imam Bukharl that heshould not give fatwa because that was not his field.(This was said by way of advice, and he had the rig,htto say this because in terms of age lrnarn Buknariwas like his son, and in terms of leamlnq, they werecompanions in the same class.) Further on what isstated in Jewsnir Maziyah is that Imam Bukhari didnot acccept this advice; and' continued giving fatwas,until someone asked a fa.twa and the answer he gavewas wrong. The error was extremely clear. As a resultthe people there forced him to leave. It had nothing todo with AbO Hafs ..

Further (p.15) on the same accusation is repeated.Together with this he says that thefatw8 that ImamBlJkhari gave was notwronq, and that Abu Hafs Kablrhas falsely ascribed it to him. In support of this hequotes Fawa'jd Buhaiyah" However, this book doesnot say what he says. On the contrary it says exactlywhat is said iln Jewehir Maz.iya.h. This is what each ofthese books say, together with translation:

~I ~ ~I.:r j,_} I.S}A.~II\,.g_.;1 ~ ~ ~Jj)~ -~ p J A , -4 l ; ~\.!...:-J JIjJ~ Y o , 1 o L t : A ~ ~ J

~ _pJ1 ~ jA I~\i i s ~ ' )1 i \. .. 1) ~ 4 . JI i ~ _ ,. .: ., ~ ' cf ~ ?(LSJ~' ~ oF- /'J' ~ ,-""WI ~Ij

Muha.mmad bin Isma'il Bukharl came to


19/35

www. eoTahqiq AM e fladithBukhara during the time ofAbOHafs Kablr, andbegan to give tatawa. Abu Hafs then told himnot to do so, saying to him that he was not hisfield. He did not stop doing so, until he wasasked about two children who had drunk themilk. of the same sheep or cow, and he gave afatwa of harmet beteween them. (l.e. he saidthat they cannot marry each other.) The resultof this was that the people united against himand expelled him from Bukhara .. (Jawal1ir v.1p.?, quoted in Fawa 'id p..18)

There is also more to this issue. In NishapOr therewas an alirn named Muhammad bin Yahya Dhahll,who was what the speaker would term a great andfamous scholar of the .Ahl ul Hadttn. A dispute arosebetween him and Imam Bukhari over some question.As a result h-e became extremely hostile to ImamBukharl, and even started calling him a bld'atl, andannounced that whoever went to him should not comeinto his company', and that as long as he was there,Imam Bukharl could not stay in Nsh,a.pur. ImamBukharl became afraid of what might happen! so heleft there and went ItoBukbara. (The full details of thisare to be found in the Preface to Fet'ti uJ Barf - thevery famous commentary on Sahfh BukhiJri by ibnHajr, who is regarded by the ghair muqa/Jidtn ascompletely reliable' - see Muqaddamah to Fat'h ut Barip.579) However, even there Muhammad bin Yahyadid not leave him In peace. Tine details of this are!recorded by historians like Shams ud Din Dhahabl,who was also a hafiz of haditlh. In Siyar A'/am unNu,ba/aa he writes that Dhahll wrote complaints

e29 Tahqiq Ah. e Hadith 30

against Imam Bukharl to the governor and to the'scholars of Bukhara. Theqovemor became enragedandlmade up his mind to take very harsh action aqairrstImam Bukhari. However, the son of Abu Hafs KablrHanan, Muhammad bin Hats was told about this, andhe secretly took Imam Bukh.ari to a hospice .lnBukhara. (See .Fawa'id Yahiyah p.19.)The person who asked Imam Bukharl the fatw8 andthen stirred up the people against him was himselfone of the Ahl ul Hadlth of Nishapur (Muqaddamahp.5te'). On the other hand, it was the son of AbO HafsKablr (whom the speaker accuses of forclng lrnarnBukharl to leave Bukhara) who risked his own life to,save Imam Bukharl and bring him to the safety of ahospice in Bukhara. It would seem fairly clear thatthe motive behind misrepresenting this whole incidentis to shift the blame for it from someone who is takenby the Ahl ul Hadith as one of their predecessors andonto a Hanaf1.I A ContradictionOn page 9 the speaker says: "It was in the 4th centurythat taq/fd was, born." However, on page 1.2he refersto a person who attacked Imam Shafi'I as being afoUower of the Ma,liki school, and he also refers. to theperson he accuses of expelling Imam Bukharl fromthe city as a Hahafi. Then 'Onp.13 he says, "This is asmalll example of the treatment of the As'hab ul Hadlthby the' propagators of Taqlid."Since Imam Shafi'I died in 204 A.H. this would mean


20/35

www.peoTahqiq Ahl e Hadlththat teqttd was already present In the second century.Clearly one or Ditherof his statements lis not quite riqht.Z JlbnTaymiyahUnder the heading' of "Persecution of the Ahl ulHadlth", Ibn Taymllyah Is described as "Imam of the.Ahl ul HadTth," whereas Nawab Siddiq Hasan Khanhas referred to him. as ,afollower (m.uqalJid) of ImamAhmad bin Hanbal, (See Misk ul MakhtOm p..4.)Simill,arlyhe has described Imam M (1) as a leaderof the Ah.l ul Hadtth, whereas he was in fact Sh,afi'T.This is made clear by Imam Dhahabi in Tadhkirat ulHuff,adlh on p. 280 of vo1.1. Hie refers to Hafidh Abd ulGhani MuqaddasT as "openlly Ahl ul Hadlth" when lnfact Imam Dhaha'bl has clearly stated on p.160 of v. 4of Tedbkireb that he was Hanbali. Similarly he countsSultan ul Awliyaa, Shaykh Nizam LJdDin DehlawT asbelonging to the Ash'hab ill I Hadlth (in his sense),whereas in the W!3ry place in Tarlkh Farlshtah that hehas quoted as a reference, it is . stated that anopponent of the Shaykh said to him that he was a"muqalllid", and the Shaykh did not deny this. Also inTarlkh Farishtah on p.597 of v. 2 It says that he "hadfull recall and full expertise in the Fiqh ofAbu Hanifah,Tedstr, Hedttir, UsOf, and Kalam,"Similarly it is not right for him to quote the name ofMawhlna lsma'tl Shahid, because he dld not approveof leavinlg taqlld, In Sirat ut Mustaqim hewrites, "emmeittiba'madhfthib 'erbe'eh kih' ri!J'y aertemem eh! e islamest blhtar 0' kh(1b ast - anyway, following the four

I31 Tahqiq Ahl e Hadith 32madh..hab,s, ~s is the universal practice of the people

of Islam, IS right and proper."Neither is it right to quote Mirza Madhhar Jan e .Jananas beilng Ahl ul HadHh. He was a strict Hanaft, Witnregard to the one or two points, where his practicewas contrary to that of Hanafi Fiqh, his Khallfah ShahGhulam IAII said, "az fnfiqal dar tnes'eteh iuz't khilafmadhhab iezim nerni ayad - dis8!glreement iin a.particular rnas'alah does not amount to opposttlon tothe madhhab." Mirza Sahib has himself written thesarne thing (see Maktub 12 p. 102), MiirzaSahib wasof _~heview that it was good' (but not in any wayobligatory) for the muqtad1i in silent salat (dhunr, asr)to read SOrah Fatihah behind the Imam. However, hewas so concerned about the necessity for followingthe Hanafi madhhab that he would himself act asimam, thus avoiding, where possible any occasion foracting contrary to the Hanafi madhhab." (M.aqamatp.119)1 "'Sectarian Conflict"Then, under the heading of "sectarian conflict," thespeaker talks about fights between the followers ofthe four different madhhabs.In this matter the speaker is not paying the sameattention to the state of affairs in his own house. Itshould 110t be forgotten how many sects and sectariandisputes have arisen out of the Ahl-e-Hadithmovement in century and a half during which it hasbeen in existence.


21/35

Tah qiq AId e Hadith www.peoDuring the time this speech was made, the Ahl-e-HadTthin India were divided into two parties, one underthe leadership of Maulwi Abd ul Wahab SadryDehlawl, and the other under Maulwi Thana ullah, towhich the speaker belonged, The first partyannounced publicly that anyone followiing the otherparty would die the death of iahilfyah. Referring tothis first party the speaker, on p.2.Bsays:

"After making a claim to khilldat, and thusmaking himself a stateless monarch, he hasgiven a tatwa that whoever does nat declarehis allegiance to him and send his zakat to himin full will die the death of iahil1yah .."

The first party also regards the second party asmeran(under a curse). The spe-aker himself say that: iifanyone claims irnamat, but is not in a position toestablish the Shart'an or to maintain lit, then he iscursed ..(p ..28)Z False AccusationsIn this matter the speaker has also resorted to takingthis mistakes of writers and presenting them asaccusations. For example the writer of Hidayahmistakenly says that Imam Mallilk regarded muta" asperrniasib!e. He has presented this as the writermakilllg a false accusatlon against Imam Ma~ik..AIiyadhu biNah. If this klnd of error is inexcusable thenwhy is .it that in his translation of Ibn Shaybah's bookKifljb ur Radd a' ia Abi Hentiet, in those places where

34the writer has rnlsrepresented the view of Imam AbCiHanifah, he has not written that in this place Ibn AbiShaybah has falsely accused Imam Abu Hanttah.For example, Ibn AbTShaybah says that according toImam AbCiHanlfah the time for lsha' extends only uptomidnight (Kitab ur Radd p.30 and in his translatlon.p. 29.) linthe speaker's terminology, this is a "patentlyfal!se accusation." The actual view of the Imam is thatthe time for Isha' extends up to subh us sadiq (seeSharah ut Ma' ani ul Athar v.1 p.'94,95.) Similarly, hesays that according to IAH it is permiasible for thernawall of the BanOHashim to eat from sadaqah (Kitabur Radd p.38 and in his translation, p. 35.) This is infact n.otSQ. (see Tahawl v. 1, p. 301.) There are manyother examples, but for the sake of keeping thingsshort, they can be passed over.The speaker has also presented many validstatements as false accusations. For example thewriter of Hldayah says that according to lrnarn Shalfi'i,playing chess is not prohibited. This is quite true.However, the speaker does not seem to know theShafi'j view, and presents this as a false accusation.Allam., Ibn Hajr Makki Shafi'j in zawajir writes:(~'plS" ~.I"1I~J~~L.....;oJI)~IJs~I~1.f ~)

"So, as Iiongas the objective is to develop the abilityto think and calculate, then there is no reason for notpermitting them, as for example chess," (v.Z, p.168)In the same w.ay, he makes a great d isp lay ofindlqnation at a footnote to Sunan Nisa', when there


22/35

www.peo IeTahqiq Ahl e Hadh his no cause for this. According ito his translation. thefootnote in question describes those Wahhabis "whoconsider it permissible to killl our men and take ourwomen prisoner" as Khilfijis. Now, if the party hehimself follows are not like this, then why should hetake offence at this comment?Alsop if there are no ghair muqalJids today who takethis attitude, this does not lin itself prove that at thetime this footnote, was written there were noWa.hhabiswho did take this attitude. So, until it is proved thatthere were no such people, this footnote' cannot becalled a false accusation" Is the speaker not aware ofMuh.ammad bin Abd ul Wahhilb Najdf going to wara'g'ainstMuslims, and creating widespread bloodshedand misery? Is it then not possible that at that timethere may also have, been some Wahhabis like this inHindustan?Z The Ahll-e-Hadith MaslakAfter all these anecdotes, the speaker starts to expllainthe rnaslak of the Ahl ul Hadlth. He starts fromthe hadith

(1.ft~')1 ~ L . Q .L . :J ' ~ j~~)Which he translates as" Follow my practice and thatof the Khulafaa-e-Rashjdln." (p.16) Further on heexplains that the meaning of "the practice of theKhulafaa.-e-RashidinH is that when they dis.aglreed onSome point, they acted according to th,eHadlth of theMessenger seteusnu alaihi wa sal/am. What he meansto say is that the term Sunnnah applies only to . theMessenger of Allah salallahu a/aihi we sal/am" and

35h e

Tahqiq Ahl e Hadith 36only his sunnah can be followed, and that the sunnahof the Khulata-e-Rasnidrn is not sunnen, and that thishadith does not contain an instruction to follow theirsunneh, Alii it contains is an instruction to act 0 . 1 1 1 hadith,as was the practice of the Khulata-e-Rasbldtn.This gives. rlse to a question. Are we to . understandthat of the thousands and thousands of Sahabah oftheMessenger ofAllah seiettehu aJaihi wesellem, onlyfour used act on the basis of Hadtth, and that none ofthe rest used to do s07 Are we also to understand" ,a liyadh'u biUah, that the Messenger of Allah S ' sJa l Jahueteihi wa s8'llam, saw them in this light, and for thisreason selected these four as people to be followed?If this is not what he means, then wlhat does heconsider to be the reason for selectinq particularlythese four Sahabis?Then another question arises. On what basis doesthe speaker select "acting on hadith" as being themeaning of "the practice of the Khulafa-e-Rashldlrr"?If he says that this is established from their lives, thenthe point still remains that there were a great manymore things to be found in their lives. For exampleS,ayyidina Albu Bak-r Siddfq raziyallahu 'ennu said inrelation to keletet:

( JJ _ ,J '.J ,.J.h) I~~)"In my opinion it means the person who has neitherfather or son living." This he said simply on the basisof his opinion, not any hadith. Sayyidina 'UmarraziyaHahu 'enhu instructed Sharih: "where you do notfind an ayat of the Our'an or a hadith about a question,

www.peo Ie h.c


23/35

Tahqiq Ah1 e Hadjth 37then see what decrsion the pious make, and give yourdectston on that basis." He said that to resolve aquestion, analogy (qiyas) with some other similarquestion Gould be used. (see Hafiz Ibn ul Qayyim -A 'lam ul MOqi'in - v.t, p. 29,30.) Again, Hazrrat lJmarF'ai 'ulq did not take it on himself to contradict anythingthat Sayyidina AbO Bak-r Siddiq decided. Thus in thequestion of kalalah he simplly followed Sayyidina AbOBak-r SjddIq, (A'Jam ul MDqj'fn - v. 1',p. 73.) Indeed ~twas his practice that if he did not find a mas'alah linthe Kitab and Sunnah, and Sayyidina AbO Bakr hadmade a decision about it, then he considered thatdecision as binding' on Ihimself. (A'Jam ul MOqi'in - vt ,p. 22.). Similarly Sayyidina Uthrnan Gl1anTruled simplyon the basis of his own opinion tbat a woman wino isdivorced by her husband when he lis on his deathbedremains his heir. (A 'Jam ul Muqi'in- vt , p. 76.)Sayyidina All ruled, simply on the basis of his ownopinion that a woman slave who was umm ut waladcould nat be sold. (AI/am u! MQqi'ln - v.f , p. 73.)These examples demonstrate that it was the practiceof the Khulataa ur RashidTn in rnasa'H for which theydid not find any ayat or hadith, to give fatwas and[udgernents on the basis of their own opinion. It wasalso their practice to decide on one issue on the basisof analogy with another issue. For further detail onthis" see A'lBm ul Muqi'in - v.1, pp. 21-80.Then it was also the practice of the iKhulafaa urRashidin that together with followin'9 the practice ofthe Mes.senger of Allah, they also rega.rded thepractice of their predecessors as scrnethtnp to be

Tahqiq AM e Hadith 38accepted and followed even where it was not the sameas the practice of the Messenger sallallahu a/aihi w.asal/am. Thus Sayyidina 'Urnar razialJa.hu enbu said,"CC:J'~ ~IJ . s : : . , u , \ . . _ ; . ! u . _:.,o .....7 ~ ..... ~I a ~I ,)1~- J J f' u- -~u. , , + ' " oJ' r,.J

(~J' 0j;1~) _ . i , r J~,)..,r'.r? y r . . . ; r ~.;..w"'If I appoint someone as my successor, r am doingwhat someone better than myself did, that is to sayAbu Bak-r, and i f I leave you to decide for yourselves.then Iam doing what someone better than myself did,that is to say the Messenger of Allah sal/al/ahu ala/hiwa sal/am." Imam Nawwawl say the outcome of thisis that to appoint a khaflfah (in the manner of AbuBak-r ) and to not appoint a kha/7 , fah (in the manner ofthe Messenger of AIHlh sallallahu ala/hi wa settem.;are both legitimate. (Nawwawi - Sharh Muslim v.1,p.129)Now" according to' the speaker the practice IQ f the Ahlu r i Hadith is:"Compared to the haditb 'O f the Messen:ger, we do notregard the word of even the grea.test of the great a.shaving the weig'ht of even the wing of a :9nat"(Khutbah~e-sadarat p. 20)However Sayyidina Umar who despite beilng one ofthe Khulafaa ur Rashidin and following in the footstepsof tile Messenger of Allah, still regarded the decisionsof Sayyidlna AbO Bak-r SiddTq as something that wasto be followed Therefore, by leaving this practice ofSayyldina Umar, the Ahl e Hadlth are leaving thehadlth:

www. e h


24/35

(.ft,~I)f ~J.i1,;J, l . : . . . . . tJ~ ~~)",My sunnah and the sunnah of the khui.afaa urrBshidinare binding on you."Furthermore according to the speaker's ownstatements, the Khulafa'8 ur Rashldin regarded thepractice of thei r predecesso rs as Sunnah, Ttl us in oneplace he writes that Sayyidina An raziyaflatw enhudescribed the penalty for drinking wine that was setby Sayyidina Umar raz;yallahu enhu (i.e. 80 strokes)as sunnah, even though this. was. different to thepractice during the time of the Messenger of Allah ..Similarly" by remaining silent: on the matter, the thirdKhallfah, Sayyidina Uthman ra'ziyallahu enhu indicatedhis own approval ofthis. (s,eeKhutbah e Sadarat p.118)However It appears that the Ahl e Hadith, far fromregarding this as sunnah, do.not consider itto be worthas much as the wing of a gnat. AI iyadhu bllls'h.After this, a point we need to consider is that whenthe practice ofthe Khulafaa e Rasidin was that in everymatter theygi8ve precedence' to the words and actionsof the Messenger of Allah sallallahu alaini wa sallamthen it necessarily follows that there was nocontradlctron between their practice and the sunnahof the Messenger of Allah. In this case, on the issueof istikhlaf (appointing a successor), what reason isthere to regard the sunnah of the M.essenger and the~unnah ~f the Khulataa e IRashiidln as beingmcompatlbl,e or contradictory? (See Khutb eh eSads'ral p. 18)

Tahqiq Ahl e Hadith 40Also, in the question of three teteqs, and the questionof temetiu' in l'laJ). the Ahl e Hadith do not say that inthe fatwB that Sayyidina 'Urnar r8'ziyallahu entiu gave,he gave prlority to the word and action of theMessenger of Ailiah sallalMhu a/aih'i wa seiiem. If theyare to say that this was not always their practice, thenthis amounts to saying that in some matters they gavepreference to their own statements and actions overthe statements and acti o ns of the Me s se nqe rsal.lallahu .alaihi wa sal/am. Now to say such a thinglabout the Khul.afaa e Reettkitn is a very serious attackon them.Furthermore, by saying this, it necessarily follows thatthe Messenger of Allah has given two contradictoryorders. Together making with his own sunnahoblligatory, he has made the sunnah of the Khulaf'aa eRashidin obligatory and, accordinq to them, the Ilatterin certain places contradicts the- former. Whateveranyone may wish to say, we regard the person of theMessenger of Atlah as being above any such thing.Then another point arises. In the statement

(~~I)I ~ I . A J . . ,: J , J . . . : . . . . . ,j~ ~)"My sunnah and the sunnah of the Khulataa urRashidin are bind,ilng on you", there are no provisos.W,e then do not have the rigtJtto place our ownprovisos and Ilimitations on it T o do. this would amountto g~ving priority to one's own word over the word ofthe Messenger of Allah.However, on page 19 of his Khutbah e Sadarat the


25/35

www.peo h


26/35

Tahqiq Abl e Hadtthis acceptable is that which is based on the Oura'nand Sunnah.

~IJ~'~!lo~LJ"" h..'d - ~Il w""'~IJA(Nlir ul Anwar pA)After this there remains the issue of hem! un nadhfr'alan nedhlr. ( ) This does not contradict the principleof making the hadith the basis 'O f analogy, nor is itsomething whose validity can be denied. Imam(Mzny), the pupil of Imam Shafi'T, has stated:~ J 1 . ; . 0 ~ J I ( ~ J ~ _ j ,, . ~ ) . . . i l lJ1 ' " ' "J _ rI 2S - ~ . , , l f i A l l~ ~ _ ; - A I ~ ~ tS : , . . " S 1 ~ , . } 4 .U li ~ ~ \. i . . J 1 1 : J . 1 ~ "'~ ift

~I.! J!'IJI ~J J o ' " ,~,i~ ,~II~IJ (Jli)"From the time of the Messeng,er of Allah right up totoday thefuqahaa have made use of qiyas in all theahkam of religion and they agree unanimouslythat the nadhtr (equivalent) of haqq is haqq and thenadhlr of btWI is befit." (A'I.am ul MOqinin v .t p. 74)Consider this point. In the light of the hadlth, in anexchange of barley for barley, no difference in amountis permitted. Now if someone applles the same thingto millet. will this not be haml un nedbtr 'alan nadhit?If it is, and it most certainly is, then where is thecontradiction between nemt un nedntr 'alan nedntr andrnakinq the hadith the basis of analogy?On this topic the speaker has quoted Shah Waliyull!ahDen lawl.. However it is clear from the way that they

44are quoted that the speaker had not in fact taken thetrouble to understand what Shah WaliYl.Jllah wasactually saying.Shortly before quoting the examples of haml un n.adhJj'alan nadhrrthat the speaker quotes, Shah WaliyuUahexplains that Hanafi Fiqh is not based on the academicproofs thatare presented in Hidayah and other similarbooks. These arqurnents are given simply for thepurpose of intellectual stimulation. (Hujiatullah iJBaJigha,h p. 128)Thus, without taking any account of the context, thespeaker has treated these arguments as being theirbasis in Fiqh of the masa'iJ in question, and then setabout raising objections to them. Even then, carriedaway by the heat of his arguments he does not eventake care to stick to the truth. On the contrary, heconstructs. a mas'alah of his own and then attributesit to the Hanafiyah.A) On page 12 he says:"A person hires a woman for the purpose offornication. After this the woman takes the sumaglr,sed. In effect; this is al l invalid hire a.greement,and the basis of the hire agreement is a prohibitedaction. However a rule has been made: "A fair wagelis fair," .... therefore it is legitimate for that woman totake the wage."

www.peo


27/35

Tahqiq Ahl e Hadilth 45Readers should know that this is blatant falseaccusation and false attribution ...AII of our fuqahaahave written that i f a wom-an is hired for fornication,then the wage she takes for this is herem. AllarnahAinTHanafl writes in Sharh Bukharl:

~ I~'j W)I ill r.r JjJ~~Y- ~~" 'J~: l. .r--L-JI ~ J~ '1 ~~,js

"Any wages for fornication is not leqitimate, becausei~ is given in return for an action that is prohibited.Allah Alrniqhty has prohibited fornication. There isijma' on this, and no one at all among Muslims hasdisputed thls." ("1.5p.611)Similarly Allarnah Anwar Shah Kashrntrt writes in hiscommentary on Tirmidhl concerning the wage of aharlot that it is ~I~~~r"hararn accordinq to' all."(p.402)1 1 1 1 short" for the speaker to say:"The Hanafis, on the basis of "ejr ul mithJ ieyyib" havesaid that the wages of a harlot are halal, even thoughli t is clear from the hadith

: . . ' 1 ' 1~~,*'the rnanr of a harlot is hararn'that it is hararn."iis a plain lie. The Hanafis have also said that it ishararn. and have said so on the basis of that same

46-hadlth. In both of the books referred to above, underthe heading ot this hadlth, the wagre of a harlot hasbeen declared hararn, Then. in Bada'l we find

(.ujJI)lF~~I~ ~.}- ' : "1~"i 'lij1l~\.o~1 a)G:--ljr'1j~J ~I *. .:r ~.ul (~J ~ jr~) iJl J _ , . . . . . JY' ~j)

U)I#4Ijl.r.'"The hirin9 of slave girls for fornication is notpermissible, because il t is payment for sin il tis reported that the Messenger ofAllah has prohibitedthe rnahr of a harlot, and the mahr of a harlot is aterm for the wages of forntcation."This should be enough to make clear that what thespeaker has said is less than honest. Even MaulwlAbd ur Rahman MubarakpOri (of the Ahl e Hadith)has also had to admit that~.r-u~~J~"on this question there is ijm,a: of the whole ummeh.There has not been any dis aqreernerrt." (SharhTlrmidhl)On this issue the speaker has also given AllamahShamT as a reference. Aqain, this is patent falseattribution. In ShamT there is no mention whatsoeverof "Paying a woman a wage for fornication".lookil1g to Their Own HouseIt is however interesting to note that Hlafiz AbdullahS,a.hib GhazT, ent e hadith, has written:

www.peo
http://www.peo/http://www.peo/http://www.peo/


28/35

Tahqiq Ahl e Hadith"A prostitute' has earned money through fornication,and then repented of it. In this case her moneybecomes legitimate and -pure. both for hersel-f and foralii Muslims." (Fatawa Hafiz Abdullah Sahiib GazipCtrl,23 RabT' ul Akh,ir 1329. quoted in Oata'ul WaHn)

18) The speaker quotes this mas'alah:"lit an imam who is musetir (on journey) does not makeqasr, but performs the whole sa/at, then the sa/at ofMuqtadfs who are muqim ( I I J I O , t on journey) is not valid,because for the last two rek'ets the safilt of the imamwas nafal."Up to this point what he wntes is correct. Howev,erthe reasoning on which he claims thiis is based ~"thestrong cannot be based on the weak", seems to besomething he has made up for himself. He has notquoted any boolk of HanafT Fiqhas a reference.Even if he did quote some reference, it woulld notmakeany difference, because, as Shah Waliyullah hasstated. Hanan Fiqh is not founded on academic proofsof the kind quoted in Hidayah and so on.In actual fact the basis the reason for the mutaqadtssalat ln the above instance being invalid is that thesalat of a person performing his taraz salat is not validbehind an i lm,am who is makinq natal satat, This i;sestablished from precisely the hadtth that the speakerquotes. However, he has also quoted part of thishadith.

47I ulu1 iq A ill 'e RadlUi _ 4BIh full incident is as follows. Malfz raziyallayu anhu

1 1 ' 1 ' d to join in 'Isha salat behind the Messenger ofI\II~h saflallahu alalhl wa satlarn, and then go to hisf wn quarter and lead the 'Isha salat there. He use_d10 read very longi rak'ats. When complaints about thiswere made in the court of the Messenger satlallahuI " 'ihi wa sallam. he said to him

~ ; . , J . .. . ; s - ~ ~1 l.olJ ~ ~ ioJl L . o ~ ,- -"You should either make your salat with me, or, if youmake it with your people, then shorten your rak'ats."Il~fi'z Ibn TaymTyah, who the speaker has celled the"lrnarn of the Ahl e HadTth", writes that this hadithpl"QVl9S that it is not valid for a person to make his farzalat behind an imam who is making naft,

o l . . : A l . . > 1 ~I i\N~ lSI


29/35

Tahqiql Ahl e Hadith 49then presents it, saying that the HanaH scholars,contrary to this nadith, have derived their ruling froma principle of their own making. 1 1 1 point of fact, thesituation is exactly the' opposite. In precisely the waythat the accepted imam of the Ahl e Hadith hasexpl'ained, the Hanafi scholars have based their rulingon this very hadith.In quoting this hadith, tile speaker has said that Ma'azraziyallahu anhu "used to make his farz 'Isha with theMessenger of Allah sallallahu 'alaihi wa sallarn." Theword farz he has himself added. Hafidh ilbnTaymiyahhas explained at thts point,

,}iJ,~ J~ .;tl~ ~I r:' ~ w lS " ~ . . . u \ wI r - W"Know that the satat that he was making with theMessenger of Allah satlallahu alaihi wa sallam wasnafl"Imam Qutrubl ', whom the speaker also counts as beingof the "Ah! ul Hadith," has also said the same thing.(see Sharnl v.1 p. 407)(A person can join a Jamat and pray with the niyah ofnafl, either after he has already made his faraz, orbefore making his faraz elsewhere. The latter iswhatHarat Maerz raztyaltahu anhu was in fact doing. TheM6'ssenger of Allith told him to either make his f'arzwith him i.e. not act as imam in his local masjid, or, ifhe did act as imam, to shorten his rak'ats, In short, inaccordance with his own priciple of referring directlyto hadith, the speaker quoted this hadtth, but at thesame time completely rnisunderstood its meaning.)

T~,bq~qAM e Hadith 5011) The third example the speaker plves is this:"A person reads his fajr salat so late that after thefirst rak'at the SUI1 rises, and he then reads the secondrak'at. His salat becomes invalid."(p. 22)

This mas'alah iis also in itself correct. However, thereasoning he gives is wrong. The Hanafi jurists hav.9most certainly not arrived at this verdict on the basisof a principle that "the deficient cannot be..added tothe complete." They have said that somethm_glwhosecomptetlon is obligatory cannot be fullfilled bysomething that is deficient. Furthermore, this, point,as Shah Waiiyullla,h has made clear., is simplyinteillectualisatioll. U is not the actual basis of thernasatah. On the contrary, this rnasalah is alisobasedon a hadith.From the hadith that the speaker has quoted itwouldappear that salat performed like this at the time of therising of the sun is still valiid. However there are aIlargenumber of 'Other hadltn in whi:chmaking the salatat the time of sunrise has been prohlblted.Now onlytwo alternatives remain - either to give priority to thefirst nadlth 01 " to give priority to the others. So, imamShafi'I, on the basis of his own understanding! andijtihad, has gilven priority to the Hr~t. Ima~ .A?UHanttah. on the basis of his understandlnq and (Jtlhad,has gliven priority to the second. He has thereforeconcurded that salat madie in this way is not valid.Anyway, both lmam Shafi'i and Imam Abu Haifah havebased their decisions only on hadtth. For further detailsee Sharh Ma 'Emful Athar v.1, p.232-234).

www.peopl h


30/35

!ahqhl Aid e-Hadidl S:17 "No lima' OtherThan the I.jma"of the Sahilbah"After the subject of Qiyas, what the speaker has saidabout ljma' is as follows:"Essentially the ijrne' that is authoritative is the ijma'of the senebet: kirem." (p.2.4)Readers should note this point. What he has said isthat the i jm,a l of the tab/ 'Tn, the tebe' tabi'inl or othermvjtahidln has no authority. Only the ijma' of thesebetxet: kirem is authoritative. In short, he does notaccept any ijma' other than that of the seneber:7 An Answe'lr to ObjectionsFinalily it has occurred to the speaker that thepassages which he has quoted to eetablish theexistence' of "Ahl ul Hadlth," for the most part refer tocom pue rs of hadlth. To strengthen his owninterpretation of the term, he makes the followingstatement"I'n the same way, in the passaqes in the text of UsOI udDin, and those referring to .ImamShafi'land Imam Ahmad,the term 'rnadhhab of the Ahl ul HadTth' is clearly used."What: he means to say is that the term Ahl ul HadTthdoes not only mean a complier of Hadlth, but alsorefers to a. madhhab called Ahl til, Hadith. So clearlyhe does not deny that the term Ahl ul Hadith is usedto . refer to those who compile hactth. What thenremains is tine question of whether there was anyrnadhhab called Ahl u ll HadTth, and then the validity of

52his reference to Usul ud D i n _As far as this reference is concerned, the earlierdlscussion of these passages will have made it quiteclear that they in no way support his interpretation.Then come the passages referring to lrnarn Sh,afi'iand Imam Ahmad. On this point a question ariaas. Ifboth thes,elmams were Ahl ul Hadith, then the peoplewho follow their madhab and accept their mednhebare also Ahl ul HadTth. In this case why does thespeaker exclude them from the Ahl ul Hadtth ?Furthermore, iftheir madhhab is already Ahl ul Hadlth,then what need is there to ,establish anothermecintieb': Establishing a meontteb distinct from thernadhhab of these two personages can only mean oneof two things. Either they were not Ahl ul Had1th, orilse the modnhab of the speaker is not Ahl ul Hadtth.After this he quotes a passage from Qszl Ayyaz.However, rather tha n strength en in 9 h is case itdamages, iit He states that what Imam Ahmad hassaid referring to the firqah najiyah means that thefirqah na ) 1 yah ' is the ahl us sunnah wetjama'ah ~thatis to say, by the phrase "ahl ul hadtth't ImamAhrnadmeans the a.hl us sunneh wel jsme'ett. Therefore whatthe speaker represents on p.7&8 - that the passages.he quotes here refer specificallytc what he regards,as the "Ahl ul Hadlth" - is simply not correct. Theyrefer to the whole ahl us sunnah weljeme'en.Someone may object that after the phrase "the ahl ussunnah wal jarna'ah", Qazi Ayyaz has written

www.peo I h


31/35

Tahqiq Ahl e Hadlth~ ..w l JA ,I ~..i..A ~:r J

"and those follow the way of the aht ul hadfth". Nowthe answer to this lis that if the word "and" here is tobe re~dl as 'att mugha'ir 'elet mug.h'ar, (i.e. joiningtwo thinqs that are different to each other) then thespeaker should announce publicly that the eht ul.h8~i,th and those who follow them are not part of theeb! us sunn~h wel jeme'en. However" if he is not willingto make this announcement, then he will have toaccsp,t that h~re the "and" is 'att tetstri, (l.e. addinqmore mf_?rmatlon about the previous thing) and thatthe ma'tufand the rna 'tut tletb! (the thing that is addedand the thing to which it is . added) both refer to thesame group of people. and that is the group of the ahlus sunnah wa 'I jama 'en.After this he says that"Hafiz Nawwawi Shafii' ...... in his Sharh Muslim lnsev~ral' places refers to five different rnedhhab s,saying that 'in our Shafi;! madhhab this is like this' 'inthe MalikI' madhhab like this', 'in the Hanafi madhhablike this', 'in the Hanbali madhhab like this,' and thenseparately states the madhhab of the Ahl ul Had1th. _see v.1, p73, and v ..2 p.32.'"Then, right next to what he has saiid here, he says:"Those people wh.o practice qira'at behind the imamand rete' yadain before ru.kO' have always been c.a.lledebt u t hadfth." (p.24,25)It is clear that Imam Shafi'i and his followers, and (in

53 Tahqiq Ahl e. Hadith 54the opinion of those who refer to themselves Ahl eHadlth"), ImamAhmad and his followers, aliipracticedIOn qire'e! knette! imam and rete' yedein 'inde! ruk'a.Therefore they were all Ahl ul Hadlth ..[lSee Molwi Muhammad Ali Sa,h;,b Mi'awi's bookletAI QawJu Muhallan bi KuJJi Zein and Mawl;an.aAbd urRahman Mubarakpuri's booklet Tehotc; ul Ka/am part1]The speaker then needs toexplain why it ts that HaflidhINawwawi has spoken of "the ahl ul hadtth" assomething distinct from both of them.Indeed in the pages of Sharah Muslim referred toabove Hafidh Nlawwawi has himself referred to the"ahl ul hadtth" as distinct from Imam Ahmad, ImamShafi'1, Imam Thawri, and Imam Malik ..From this it isclear that these personages were not ahl ul had1th. littherefore follows inescapably that when the speakerrefers to them on p.6 and 7 as being ahl ul hadith, heis mistaken.7 An Answer to Objections turns into a

Confirmation of .objections.If the speaker thinqs carefully he will see that insteadof answering objections. he has in fact confirmed thembecausefirstly, he cannot deny that the' term Ahl ul Hadith isused to refer to those who. transmit Hadlth.secondly, in quoting the passage from Qadi Ayyaz he

www.peoplTahqiq Ahl e Hadith 55

h e


32/35

has established that the term Ahl ul Hadtth is alsoused in the sense of Ahl us Sunnah wa~ .Jarna'ah.thirdly, havingl said that "the term eh! ut heotth hasalways been used to refer to all those who practiceon qire'et khetts! imem and tete' yetiein 'indaJ ruk'o",he has established, at the very least, that every Shafi'!can be called an} ut neattn.Therefore, to establish the existence of what he callsthe Allilu[ Hadtth, he still has to produce vahd evidenceto show that in each of the passag.es he has quoted,the term ahl ul hadlth does not have one, of theseti l ree mea nings.7 Who is Meant By !lAhl e Ha"dwth"?Basically these days the term Ahl ul Hadtth is used torefer to those people who, in spite of simply beingordinary individuals (i.e. do not have the qualificationsto be a mujtahid), do not accept the need to followone of the Imams. 'Wha.t:Maulana Hablb ur Rahmanis saying is that this use of the term is entirely novel,and that such Ahl ul Hadith have never existed untilvery recent times.The persons of earlier times whom that the speakerhas presented as being Ahl ul Hadith were either ahlut had1th in the sense of tra nsmiUinghadilth orspecialislnq in the study and teaching of hadlth, or8M vi heottt: in the sense of foil_owing the Shafi'T orlMaliki macihhab.cr eh! ul hedtth in the sense of beingahl us sunneh wetjeme'en. The term ahil ul hadlth is

T1thqi.q Abl e Hadith __ 56,used in these three senses. This we have estabUshe,dabove, Indeed it ts also established from the sp~aker,sown explanations, Thus his efforts to establish hispoint have, so far produced no resultIt still remains for him to produce from the books ofthe mutaqaddimfn (the scholars of,th,e early ~erlod)any passage in which an 'ammf ghaJf muq~OJ~ . (a.nunqualified person who does not follow any Imam) ISreferred to as aM ul tieditn.JJ,J-"J>~")L.J~)= 1 } -- .d IJ ~ W I ~ J , . . i I J...d I ~ ; A S : . I !r " \ J . J o J

~J.lI.~y-,JI~~I'J~J~T)~:H~1.Andthat concludes what we had to say,~nd all praiseis for Allah, lord of All the Worlds, and his mercy andpeace remain always 011His M,essel1ger; the Truste'~I'the Teller of Truth. and on his Hous,ehold and hisComp,anilons, and his followers until the Day ofReckoning.( Original book~,etwritten Ohi'l Hijjah 1362 A.H, - Dec1943 G.C.)

Tabqiq Ahl e Hadith www.peop e
http://www.peop/http://www.peop/


33/35

AppendixSummary

of a lecturegiven by

MauHln.a Muhammad Abd us ShukurThe day before Maulana Habib UI '" Rahman's talk, MauldnaMuhammad Abd US Shukur had given a talk on the sameissue. Because of his ill-health this tal] was very short, butat the same time very iluminating. What h~ said wasafterwards misrepresented by his opponents, so M. Habib'~Ir.Rahman iLldu~eda brief s?mmary of what he actuallysaid as a conclusion to the written text of his own talk.j) The .~peaker started by quoting this ayat of the HolyQur 'fln:

{~}ijS'JillylJ a . . . .~1 ,J~t!I,~ J~" ~,~ ,~~"J.!.Jj"j~~14,-,,_1,)~I~\",,~JJJ~41JFlj

those who,if.\Ve esta~lish their position in the land,will establish the Salat, and give tile Zakat,and order what 'isgood,and prohibit what is wrong"and AIh\h Almighty knowsthe outcome of all affairs,or alternativelythe outcome of all affairs rests with A Ilah ..

2) After reciting this ay.at he said that the subjecrof histalk would be the status of the Sahabah and the

57 58importance of the Salat. even though the purpose ofthe gathering was to answer the objections raised byghair muqallidin agui nst Line leading scholars of thHanafi School. Unfortunate! ,as [he organisers of thisHauafl Conference had not given him any informationabout them. he did not know what these objectionsw reo Indeed, he had 110t recei ved even the text of the:Khutbah Sadarat of th hl e Hadith Conference.Therefore he was not ill a position to give any kind ofdetailed talk all that subject.

2) In this ayaL the Iistener can hear for himself how welland how fittingly the merits of the sahabah kiram, andparticularly of the muhajirtn have been described. Inparticular he shed light on a rather fine paint: Why isit that the merits and the achievements of the sahabah,and particularly of the muhajlrin and ansar have beenspoken of with such attention that, from Iocklng atthe pages of the Holy Quran it almost seems as ifone major objective of the revelation of the Ho lyQur'an was to establish 1 1 1 the hearts of muslirns afirmly grounded conviction of the saintliness purity,and elevated standing of the muhajirin and ansar?He then explained this point so well ill the Iight ofseveral ayat of the H ely Que'an, that people's heartsspontaneously began to exclaim

{ ~ . r . - ' ~ j ~J~ _ . i , }Jillilhi darrakum lila 'alalhi ajrakum. ..AIJah is theone who enabled YQU to do this, and he is the onewho win reward you for it.'After that, the way in which he explained the benefitsand the importance of the Salat was again anunexpected delight for all muslims.Explaining the {Gdlla! (merits) of the muhdjirin

www. eo hemah qiq Ahll c Hadith I59


34/35

rh /H"c in I l1 l6h i alwhirn from this ayaH, he said that had 'Amen(slIllessness) 110t been a exclusive characterisric ofnahU1.ITI'U/ (propllethood), then this Uy3t would certainlvhav pro"'i; ied g_o.d grounds for assert ing tbat the IN.IIh6jir i ;1'were nta sum (sinless) - especially with regard to those whosu~c:~ded to [ he . o tJ ic e o f khik7filt . during the time of tharklllhr/af. Alter this. byway of confirmation, he read a fewpas_sages nhe peerles ~book of Shah \VallyuJlah Inuh.addilhJ?ehlawi, "Izdlat II I Khqfa ". among them. being thefollowil1g passage:

2)

Ba o r n u .d h1. Jm " 'aqcfml" t , alfi, H~aamant 1-IIQnahaw " l inus/k~hhar ch,:h az };1l~makkin;n dar ayyam-i-lamkln-e-iyshtinuyn abl1lab tfh.allll"shawad hamah mu tadd bihi khwdhadMId sh a r 'a n .Included in the meaning of "aqtinul, c 1 t u , Wlf amarii H'{{na~a1l"" is (hat, during the period of their tamkin, whateveracuon the mUJ11akk inJn wil! do that come under theseheadings, will all be dependable in terms of shari 'ah, -As well as this. he read out the passage in which ShaikhWaHyull]1 muhaddtth Dehlawi describes the {taft/at o f the/ 1 1 . 1 ( h 4 / ir0 . ' . t~al is b~ing defined by this Qurani ayot aboutthe muhaprm as being "the shade of 'ismat.." (i.e. the shadeof the ismat of the Messenger sallalUihll alaHli wa sallarnrather than ismat itself) ,I.u ~he conl1~ct~onith. of this he referr~d to the twentyrak ats_oft~awlh'l!e ~wd that the clear logical consequenceof abandomng taqlld lEi tba t those who do so will have tod~ny the fad~lat of the muhqjirfn which is established fromthis quranic . 8 1 y a t . TIle ghair muqallidin say tha t the twentyrak.'61 of 'a_ra'wfh is a bid'ah (inno ation), even thoughdunng the time of the khilq{at of'Umar rac1ialltihu 'anhuthe .twenty rak'ats of larliH'ih was organised au a regularbasis, and this was d .one was by his order, or at the veryleast, ~o~k place with, his full knowledge. The ghairmuqallidin a1$0 accept that he knowing about it. So, ifthis

Tahqiq AlII e Ha.dith 60thine "NOS a bid'ah and was undesirable. then it is notpossible that Umar radtyaltutn, 'anhu. who. in the time ofhis tamkin. was the b stof this cr -iamd 'ah of muhajirin.should not stop this undesirable practice. and instead. let itcontinue._hen, in the course of this .. he spoke of taqlid as being asunnah mutawtitirah, pointing out its immens ben~fits.and shed some light on the damage that comes fromabandoning 'a'lifd He also said that nearly twenty yearspreviously, in Darbha~lgah, he ~ave a t a l } < ~n this same ayat ,and in the course of It, the tOPIC of tarawih also carne upalthough here. from beginning to end, the actual talk wasin reply to the ra-w4fltl(rcrw6jiameans Sill ah). However,some ghair muqallidin were present at the talk. They thenattri buted some completely false' and unfounded statementsto me, which they printed in the ahl e hadith nev spapersand I had to answer in "an Najm ". It is quite possible thaton this occasion also they 'will resort to the same kind ofmisrepresentation.What he said about tarawih was in itself a magnificentlecture. That the twenty rak 'ats of tarawth was sunnah,and that the people who say that twenty rak 'ass is a bid'ahdo not actually understand what is sW7. I1'ah, was all m~declear as daylight. Inreference to this, he also gave a quotationfrom "Minhdj us Sunnah' by Shaykh ul islam Allamahibn Tayrniyyah, where he sets out accurately resear-chedanswers to the objection of the leading Imarn by the Shl ahShaikh I -I-y that tardwih. is a bid'ah and that 'Umarradiyalldhu 'anhu was the originator of this bid'ah,That is a summary of Maul a n a ' s talk Thr-oughou t the wh?letalk not a sinzle harsh word was used, There was nothingthat' any pers~!) could take as grounds f~r comp]~int.~r~nsparticular characteristic ofboth his speaking and his W l:Jltmgis something that is acknov ledged today all over India,

www. eo I nnah. om


35/35

THE LEGAL STAT'US OFFOLLOWING A MADHAB

By:Justice Muhammad Taqi UsmaniPakistan

Translated by:Mohammad Amin KholwadiaEdite,d by:

Muhammad Dhakir Shaikh

ZAM Z'A,MPUBLISHERS2, Shah Zeb Centre, Near Muqadas Masjid,

Urdu Bazar, Karachi. Pakistan, Post Code; 74200Phone (021) 7760374, TellFax: (021)07725673,

Email ;[email protected]
mailto:;[email protected]:;[email protected]

Documents

Tahqiq Ahl Al-hadith