Kawthari on Hadith: Abu Hanifah lamp of the Ummah

[Abualqamah]

Salam aleykum

Zahid Kawthari

‘Allamah ‘AbdurRahman ibn Yahya Al-Mu’alimi wrote in his Tankil v 1 p 446 :

“Muhammad ibn Sa’id Al-Boriqi, in “Tarikh Baghdad” v 13/335 from his way: “Sulayman ibn Jabir ibn Sulayman ibn Yasir ibn Jabir narrated to us: Bishr ibn Yahya narrated to us, he said: Fadl ibn Musa As-Sinani informed us from Muhammad ibn ‘Amr from Abi Salamah from Abu Hurayrah from the Messenger of Allah (saw):

“Verily there will be a person in my Ummah, is name will be An-Nu’man and his Kuniyah will be Abu Hanifah and he is the lamp of my community, he is the lamp of my community”

Al-Khatib said: “This is a fabricated Hadith, Al-Boriqi is alone is narrating it, and we have detailed his condition in what has preceded” meaning his mention that is in “Tarikh” v 5 p 308-309 and there is there from Hamzah As-Shuhaymi: “Muhammad ibn Sa’id Al-Boriqi is a liar…” and from Hakim: “This al-Boriqi had indeed fabricated so many Manakir from trustworthy narrators that we cannot count and he propagated his narrations…: There will be a man in my community that will be called Abu Hanifah and he is the lamp of my community” and this is how he narrated it in land of Khurasan and then he narrated it in ‘Iraq with his Isnad and he added: “And there will be a man in my community called Muhammad ibn Idris and his Fitnah will be more harmful than that of Iblis” and Al-Khatib mentioned other from his Manakir.

The Ustaz (Al-Kawthari) said p 30 (of his “Tanib Al-Khatib”): “Al-Badr Al-‘Ayni gathered its ways in his “Tarikh Al-Kabir” and it is difficult to judge it to be fabricated with the presence of these so many ways and he said: “And this Hadith as you can see has been narrated from many ways and with close Matn and many narrators from the Prophet (saw) and this shows that it has a basis, even if some Muhadith rather their majority reject this and some declare it to be fabricated, and sometimes this is due to the effect of Ta’assub, and the narrators of this Hadith are in majority scholars, and they are from the best of all communities, and it is not suitable to their condition to invent a lie on the Prophet (saw) on purpose”

And Al-Kawthari added the words: “A scholar who struggled all his life until he died in prison and then his knowledge propagates in countries of all corners in the east and west, and half of the Muhamadiyah community follow him in his Fiqh rather the third in successive centuries, despite facing dispute from jurists, Muhadiths and authors showing animosity towards him, his greatness grew so it is not far that the Prophet (saw) would inform of him…”

I say: …I followed the narrations of this Hadith in “Manaqib Abi Hanifah” and others and I saw that it is based on a group:

The first is Al-Boriqi, and you have known his condition, and he narrated from a Majhul from a similar one from As-Sinani with this Sanad…

Secondly: Abu ‘Ali Ahmad ibn ‘Abdillah ibn Khalid Al-Juwaybari Al-Harawi and he is famous for fabricating and his matter is known and he has four ways:

First from As-Sinani with this Isnad
Second from Ibn Yahya Al-Mu’alim from Humayd from Anas
Third from ibn Yahya from Aban from Anas
Fourth from Abdullah ibn Ma’dan from Anas

And the narrator from him (Al-Juwaybari) in some of these narrations is Mamun ibn Ahmad As-Sulami and he is similar to him in being famous for clearly lying.

Thirdly: Abul Ma’ali ibn Muhajir…he is Majhul. And it has been narrated from Muhammad ibn Yazid Al-Mustamli and he is accused (of lying) from a Majhul from his similar from Abul Ma’ali from Aban from Anas.

And An-Nadhari narrated with three Isnads all containing Majhul narrators up to Abul Ma’ali from Aban from Anas.

Fourth: Abu ‘Ali Al-Hasan ibn Muhammad Ar-Razi, and he is accused (of lying) and sayings related to him have preceded in the mention of Ahmad ibn Muhammad ibn Salt n° 34, and An-Nadhari narrated from his way with a Sanad whose narrators are all Majhul up to ‘Abdullah ibn Mughafal from ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib, his saying.

Fifth: An-Nadhari, ibn Sam’ani said about him: “Al-Khiuwi with the name Abul Qasim Yunus ibn Tahir ibn Muhammad ibn Yunus ibn Khiuw An-Nadhari Al-Khiuwi from the people of Balkh, named as Shaykh Al-Islam” and he did not mention any Tawthiq nor Jarh, Allah knows best about him.

And some of the precedent narrations are from him, and he added with a Sanad whose narrators are all Majhul from Aban from Anas;

And a Sanad whose narrators are all Majhul from Abu Hudbah from Anas

And a Sanad whose narrators are all Majhul from Musa At-Tawil from Thabit from Anas

And a Sanad whose narrators are all Majhul from Hammad from a man from Nafi’ from ibn ‘Umar

And a Sanad whose narrators are all Majhul from Abu Qatadah Al-Harani from Ja’far ibn Muhammad from Juwaybir from Ad-Dahak from ibn ‘Abbas

And this is all I came to know, and the first four narrators, you came to know (their conditions), as for the fifth and he is An-Nadhari and Allah knows best about him, and anyway there are between people non Arab Majhul Muta’asib people, and there is no novelty that they get close to Allah (‘Azza wa Jalla) with many narrations containing all Majhul, and Aban, abu Hudbah and Musa At-Tawil are all destroyed (in Jarh wa Ta’dil) and despite this I see them innocent from this Hadith, else it would have become famous in their times.

What is the matter that there is no mention of this before its fabrication by Al-Juwaybari in the third century?

And Abu Qatadah Al-Harani became Fasid at the end and despite this I consider him free of this and Hammad who narrates from him from a man from Nafi’ from ibn ‘Umar, I do not known who he is, and it is possible that he is Hammad ibn Abi Hanifah, because it has been said that he narrated from Malik from Nafi’ from ibn ‘Umar, and some Majhul heard this and invented a Sanad up to him with this Sanad, and An-Nadhari had shame to say from Malik from Nafi’ from ibn ‘Umar, as it would have been the worst of mistakes, so he names a person instead of Malik!

And this is the status of Dajjal people, one of them invents many Isnad for one Hadith in order to deceive ignorant people, and one of them invents it and another steals it and invents an Isnad from himself, and this is the status of ignorant Muta’asib to get close (to Allah) with fabrication and stealing and invention of Isnads.

Abul ‘Abbas Al-Qurtubi said: “Some jurists (Fuqaha) of Ahlur-Ray have given themselves permission to attribute the ruling that is shown by Qiyas to the Messenger of Allah (saw)…that is why you will see their books full of Ahadith whose Matn witness that they are fabricated because of their resemblance to the Fatawa of Fuqaha…and because they do not give any Isnad for it.”

And ibn As-Salah hinted at this: “And likewise the people of Fiqh who gave themselves permission to attribute what the Qiyas shows to the Prophet (saw).”

Reflect on what we explained and what Al-‘Ayni said. And then compare the many ways with authentic Isnads about the story of Abu Hanifah forced twice to repent from Kufr else he would be killed, and the majority of these ways have successive men famous between being a Thiqah Muhadith and a Thiqah Hafiz or famous Imam.

Look at what Al-‘Ayni and Al-Kawthari said (about this authentic story of Abu Hanifah forced to repentance twice) as if the Imams of Hadith and its men, Fuqaha of other Madhab can invent any kind of lie for Al-‘Ayni and Al-Kawthari, even if they are famous with being Imam, Thiqah, Sidq, Taqwa contrary to their companions of Ahlur-Ray as if there was not among them and their donkeys and dogs but Sidq.

And despite this he accuses people who oppose him of Ta’assub and following their desire until the Ustaz (Al-Kawthari) repeats his saying: “May Allah protect us from the followers of desire, we ask Allah the protection, we ask Allah safety” and he is more resembling this (description)…” End of Mu’allmi’s words

Now the story of Abu Hanifah being forced to repent twice is Mutawatir and from so many Thiqah, and they were also from the best of communities…

But ‘Ayni and Al-Kawthari authenticate this lie of Abu Hanifah being the lamp, saying that they were scholars from the best of communities and they would not lie…while when thiqah Imams of this same community say Abu Hanifah was forced to repent twice, then this is a lie…all these scholars, Hufaz, Imams would lie…

Known liars and Majhul cannot lie on the Prophet (saw) but Hufaz and known Imams can gather on lie upon Abu Hanifah…what nonsense from Al-Kawthari and ‘Al-‘Ayni.

So one can see the state of Al-‘Ayni whose Ta’assub has been refuted by Hafiz Ibn Hajar in his “Fath Al-Bari”,

And the state of the great Dajjal Al-Kawthari who has no shame to attack great Imams of Salaf, accusing them of having a bad creed, being Muta’asib, lying in attacking them as he lied on Abu Ash-Shaykh and on many others, is known.

Just to mention one narration about the story of Abu Hanifah forced to repent from Kufr, is the narration mentioned by Al-Mu’allimi in his “At-Tankil”v 1 p 373 quoting from “Tarikh Baghdad” v 13 p 386 from the way of Ibrahim ibn Sa’id Al-Johari then from the way of ‘Amr ibn ‘Ali (ibn Bahr Abu Hafs Al-Falas) both of them saying: I heard Mu’az ibn Mu’az saying: I heard Sufyan Ath-Thawri saying: “Abu Hanifah was forced to repent (Istitabah) twice from Kufr (else being killed).”

Al-Kawthari tried to weaken this authentic narration saying that ‘Amr ibn ‘Ali ibn Bahr Abu Hafs Al-Falas “had strong Ta’assub and strong opposition to the people of Kufah”

Al-Mu’allimi replied: “I do not know him to be Muta’assib, and if this was known then this would not be a defect (in accepting) his narration with what is established from his being Thiqqah and Amanah, and this story (of Abu Hanifah being forced to repent from Kufr) is famous rather Mutawatir and true.”

Shaykh Albani wrote in notes about Hafiz Al-Falas: “He is from Thiqah and Thabat Hufaz, Az-Zahabi put him in his “Tazkirah” and described him by his saying: “…Al-Hafiz Al-Imam Ath-Thabat one of the great personalities…” and Al-Hafiz said in “At-Taqrib”: “Thiqah Hafiz”.

So this is the state of Al-Kawthari, instead of accepting the truth, that his Imam is a human that can make mistakes and commit Kufr, he started attacking great Imams and Hufaz accusing them of being Muta’asib, being Mujassim…

Dajjal Al-Kawthari attacked Imam Al-Bukhari and after quoting from Imam Bukhari’s Tarikh about Abu Hanifah “Sakatu ‘anhu” (and the word Sakatu ‘Anhu is among strongest jarh, meaning they (Ahlul Hadith) abandoned him) and Imam Bukhari said the same for Abu Hanifah’s Ray, meaning they abandoned it.

Al-Kawthari attacked the Emir Al-Muminin in Hadith: “The one who turns away from him (Abu Hanifah) is either a Khariji praising similar to ‘Imran ibn Hatan and Hurayz ibn ‘Uthman or Mu’tazili believing in the state between two states”

Al-Mu’alimi answered this that Ahlul Hadith agreed that these two people are among most truthful people in narrating. Al-Bukhari in his “Tarikh” mention that Hurayz abandoned his belief of Khawarij, and Al-Bukhari did not do Ihtijaj with ‘Imran, he only came in Mutaba’ah in one Hadith only.

Yet Dajjal Al-Kawthari inferred that Imam Bukhari was a Khariji praising other Khariji…Al-Mu’alimi quoted from the Hafiz Al-Khafaf that whoever said anything against Imam Al-Bukhari then there are thousands and thousands of curses from me on him.

And Al-Kawthari said that the reason of abandoning Abu Hanifah is not mentioned by Al-Bukhari, so one cannot accept this Jarh, while many Hufaz have mentioned clearly reasons, bad memory, mixing and committing to many errors.

And what is funny is that Al-Kawthari weakened Muhammad ibn Isma’il Abu Isma’il At-Tirmidhi (not the author of the Sunnan) because of the saying of ibn Abi Hatim: “They spoke against him” and Al-Mu’alimi said that ibn Abi Hatim did not mention who where these people and what was the reason for speaking against him, while An-Nassai, Maslamah, Ad-Daraqutni and others declared him to be Thiqah. Shaykh Albani said that Az-Zahabi said in “Tazkirah”: Hafiz Kabir Thiqah, Khatib said he is Mutqin…And Hafiz ibn Hajar said in “At-Taqrib”: Thiqah Hafiz and the words of ibn Abi Hatim are not detailed.”

And Abu Isma’il At-Tirmidhi is among narrators in “Tarikh Baghdad” narrating from Sufyan and Al-Awza’i that there has not been born in Islam more harmful than Abu Hanifah and he is also narrator of the narration of Abdullah ibn Al-Mubarak saying that whoever look at the book of Hyal of Abu Hanifah will make Halal what Allah made Haram.

So to defend his Imam, Al-Kawthari had no shame in attacking great Hufaz. For Abu Hanifah saying “they abandoned him” is not detailed and for Abu Isma’il At-Tirmidhi “they spoke against him” is enough to reject his narration against Abu Hanifah.

One can see the only aim of Al-Kawthari is to defend his Imam, whether it leads to attack Al-Bukhari and others, and play with the religion.

The same for Ahmad ibn Al-Hassan ibn Jundub Abul Hasan At-Tirmidhi (other than the author of the Sunnan) who is a companion of Imam Ahmad, and he quoted a narration from Ahmad against Abu Hanifah and Al-Kawthari rejected it saying that “his ta’assub for ‘Abdullah ibn Ahmad was not little…”

So Al-Kawthari did not find anything in these Hufaz, so he invented from himself that they were Muta’asib, and even a Muta’asib would not invent a lie from his teacher.

Same for Ahmad ibn Muhammad ibn Al-Hajjaj Abu Bakr Al-Marwazi who narrated in Tarikh Baghdad from Imam Ahmad that he said: “Abu Hanifah is worse for Muslims than ‘Amr ibn Ubayd (A Mu’tazili) because he (Abu Hanifah) had companions”

And Al-Kawthari could not find any defect so he attacked Al-Marwazi saying Al-Marwazi’s creed is that the Prophet (saw) will sit next to Allah in Maqam Al-Mahmud and he accused Al-Marwazi of being a Mujassim.

Al-Kawthari criticized ibn Al-Madini for him under compulsion saying words of ibn Abi Duwad during Fitnah of Khalq Al-Quran. And this is also because this great Hafiz declared Abu Hanifah to commit many mistakes.

Al-Kawthari attacked Ad-Daraqutni saying he had a bad creed, he accused Abu Ash-Shaykh of leaning towards Tajsim, the same for Nu’aym ibn Hammad and Sa’id ibn ‘Uthman Ad-Darimi, Ibn Khuzaymah and many others. He accused Hafiz Al-‘Uqayli of being “Al-Muta’assib Al-Khasir (the loser)”

Al-Kawthari criticized the creed of ibn Abi Hatim, accused ibn Battah Al-Akbari of being among Hashawiyah. He quoted the insult of the misguided Asbagh ibn Khalil insulting the great book of Hadith of “Al-Musannaf”.

About Da’laj ibn Ahmad As-Sijzi who has been declared to be Thiqah by Al-Khatib, Ad-Daraqutni, Az-Zahabi inscribed him in his “Tazkirah” and Dajjal Kawthari accused him of having creed of Tashbih and being a Muta’assib.

Abul Qasim Al-Baghawi is agreed upon to be thiqah and Al-Kawthari alone accused him of lying because this agreed upon Imam narrated a narration saying Abu Hanifah was saying that the Qur’an is created.

Al-Kawthari attacked the great Imam Al-Humaydi of being Muta’assib and Mudhtarib.

The same for Zakariya ibn Yahya As-Saji, while he is not Muta’asib.

He attacked Hafiz ibn ‘Adi of being far from Fiqh and Arabic language and having a long tongue on Abu Hanifah and his students.

He attacked the student of ibn ‘Adi, ‘Abdullah ibn Muhammad ibn Sayar Al-Farhiani also called “Farhazani”. There is a narration with him in Tarikh Baghdad that Imams were cursing Abu Fulan on the Minbar of Damascus and Al-Harhyani said it is Abu Hanifah (meaning the cursed one).

Al-Kawthari could not find a defect so he attacked the creed of Al-Farhyani and called him to be a “Khabith” while Az-Zahabi said about him in “Tazkirah”: Al-Hafiz Al-Imam Ath-Thiqah”


He accused Muhammad ibn ‘Abdillah ibn Ibrahim Abu Bakr Ash-Shafi’i of being Mut’asib, and that he narrated from liars and Majhul to attack Abu Hanifah, while Mu’alimi answered to this that there is only one narrator that some told to be liars, other Thiqah and two Majhul, all others narrations in “Tarikh” of Khatib from him are from famous Thiqah, and this Imam is not known with Ta’assub.

Al-Kawthari rejected a narration of the Hafiz Abdul Mumin Khalf Abu Ya’la At-Tamimi An-Nasafi criticizing Hassan ibn Zyad Al-Lului Al-Hanafi saying “he is not trusted in it because he was a Zahiri having a long tongue against the people of Qiyas”

And Al-Mu’alimi refuted this saying that is someone is thiqah then his narration is accepted, and opposition of Madhab does not lead to reject one’s narration, and this is against rules.

Al-Kawthari is someone playing with the religion of Allah, in the same book “Tanib” he declared Muhammad ibn Abi Shaybah to be a liar, and in the same book he dcriticised the Hafiz Muhammad ibn ‘Abdillah ibn Sulayman Al-Hadhrami saying that Muhammad ibn Abi Shaybah spoke against him.

While Al-Mu’alimi has proven that Muhammad ibn Abi Shaybah is not a liar, and he is Thiqah. But yet for Kawthari to declare him to be a liar, then take his saying to weaken another Thiqah is his treachery.

Also Kawthari is known for doing Tahrif of the saying of people of Jarh and Ta’dil

In his “Tali’ah At-Tankil”, Al-Mu’alimi mentioned some examples, and I will quote some:

About Ahmad ibn Kamil, Kawthari said p 43: “Ad-Daraqutni said about him: “sometimes he narrates what he does not have” as mentioned by Al-Khatib”

While the saying of Ad-Daraqutni in “Tarikh Baghdad” is “sometimes he narrates what he does not have in his book”

And this addition removes any kind of blame, because not having a Hadith in his book does not prevent having it in his memory.

About Muhammad ibn Ahmad Al-Hukaymi, Al-Kawthari said p 114: “Al-Barqani said: there are Manakir in his Hadith”

While the words of Al-Barqani as in “Tarikh Baghdad” and “Lisan” are: “Thiqah except that he narrates Manakir” and the difference is clear because what Al-Kawthari quoted showed to be a Jarh and that the author was responsible of these Manakir, so he altered the saying to deceive people. While saying someone is Thiqah but narrates Manakir does not mean he is responsible of these Manakir but he was lax in quoting them.

So the lies, treacheries and misguidance of Al-Kawthari are clear, this man is a Jahmi accusing Salaf of Tajsim, he is a Muta’asib Hanafi accusing Imams of Hadith of being Muta’asib in their weakening and criticizing Abu Hanifah.

Al-Mua’alimi was shocked of what Al-Kawthari did in weakening Hafiz Ibrahim ibn Muhammad ibn Al-Harith ibn Asma ibn Kharijah ibn Hsin ibn Huzafah ibn Badr Abu Ishaq Al-Fazari

Al-Fazari is among narrators in Tarkh Baghdad of words of Awza’i and Thawri about them attacking violently Abu Hanifah.

Kawthari said he was an enemy of Abu Hanifah because his brother died in fighting rulers because of the Fatwa of Abu Hanifah, and ibn Sa’d and ibn Qutaybah and ibn Nadeem weakened him saying he committed many mistakes.

First the animosity if established does not cause the rejection of narration because a thiqah narrator does not lie.

Al-Mu’alimi said that ibn Qutaybah and ibn Nadeem they are not people specialists of narrators, ibn Qutaybah is scholar of language, literature, as for ibn Nadeem he is a Rafidi knowing names of books and he took his words from ibn Sa’d.

And ibn Sa’d is Muhammad ibn Sa’d ibn Mani’ the writer of Al-Waqidi, and he is not such a specialist in narrators to accept his criticism of agreed upon Thiqah, and he was in most of his sayings following his weak and unreliable teacher Al-Waqidi.

Hafiz ibn Hajar said in introduction of Fath Al-Bari about AbudrRahman ibn Shurayh: “Ibn Sa’d did Shuzuz in saying Munkar Al-Hadith, and none looks at Ibn Sa’d in this because he relies mainly on Al-Waqidi and he is unreliable”

About Muharib ibn Dathar, Ibn Hajar said: “Ibn Sa’d said: “they do not do Ihtijaj with him” rather they all did Ihtijaj with him…but Ibn Sa’d does Taqlid of Al-Waqidi”

And same for other narrators

What is funny is that when ibn Madini said Abu Hanifah narrated 50 Hadith and erred in them, Al-Kawthari objected to that saying he did not give examples of mistakes so we would need to answer him, and this is a Jarh ghayr Mufassar.

When Abu Dawud said Abu Hanifah erred in half of Hadith he narrated, and Al-Kawthari said that it is not worth being answered as he did not mention in which Hadith he erred and what kind of mistake it is.

Yet for Al-Fazari, Al-Kawthari takes from ibn Sa’d and ibn Qutaybah whose sayings are not taken into account when opposing Imams of Jarh and Ta’dil, and they did not quote any example of mistakes.

Ibn Ma’in said about him: Thiaqh Thiaqh

Abu Hatim said: Thiqah Mamun Al-Imam

An-Nasa’i said: Thiqah mamun one of the Imams

Al-Bukhari and Muslim doth did Ihtijaj with him in their Sahih

Ibn Al-Mubarak said: I did not see a man more Faqih than Abu Ishaq Al-Fazari

Abdullah ibn Dawud Al-Khuraybi said: The saying of Abu Ishaq is more beloved to me than the saying of Ibrahim An-Nakh’i.

And likewise Ibn ‘Uyaynah, Ash-Shafi’i and other praised him.

So declaring such a Thiaqh Imam to be weak because of the Shaz saying of ibn Sa’d, then it is the Ta’assub of Al-Kawthari, specially when ibn Sa’d also declared Abu Hanifah to be weak in Hadith, and yet Al-Kawthari does not accept this.

May Allah protect us from Mut’assib people of Ray who attack the Imams of Ahlul Hadith, call them to be Muta’asib, as if these great Imams would lie because of their animosity with Abu Hanifah.

Rather their sayings are proven and established, and the story of Abu Hnaifah forced to repent twice from Kufr is Mutawatir as told by Mu’alimi, and Mu’alimi said even Al-Kawthari agreed that Abu Hanifah used to say the Qur’an is created, then changed his view. So when this matter is agreed even by Ahlur Ray, why attacking Ahlul Hadith for narrating Abu Hanifah was forced to repent twice.

And the great son of Abu Hanifah, who is a liar for Muhadith, said at time of Fitnah of Khalq Al-Quran that Abu Hanifah’s view is that the Auran is created, and if Abu Hnaifah repented without being forced to repent, then one would be sure he did not do Taqiyah, yet he was forced twice, meaning he repented once, then said it again, then repented second time because fear of death. Allah knows best and we hope he indeed repented sincerely from the Kufr of saying the Quran is created and not because of being forced to.

As for Al-Kawthari, he is a Dajjal accusing Salaf of Tajsim and Ta'assub, and many other accusations, showing he is a Muta'asib worshiper of Abu Hanifah

For Al-Kawthari trust is only found in Ahnaf even if people like Hasan ibn Zyad Al-Lului is severly attacked by Hufaz, yet Hanafi are good and all other are Muta'asib and lacking of justice and fairness

And despite all these lies and attacks of Kawthari on the Salaf, one will see that Deobandiyah and Abu Ghuddah praise him and remand his works accusing Salaf of Tajsim and Ta'asub…so they have a share in his crimes…

May Allah protect us from Jahmiyah and AHlur Ray accusing Muhadith of Ta'assub

[zaid_ibn_ali]

brother why are you so keen to diminish the status of Imam Abu Hanifah? Rejecting his methodolgy of ahl al ray is one thing, but being so keen to prove how he was 'forced' (notice how you say forced rather than repented willfuly) to repent from kufr.

Just one question, were those who reported these incidents from ahl al hadith? If so, is it fair to quote the reports of those who were against the ahl al ray & Imam Abu Hanifah i.e. ahl al hadith?

[Abualqamah]

Salam aleykum

A proper translation of Istitabah would be that he was requested to repent, meaning Tawbah was sought from him.

And if he refused he would have been killed for Kufr.

Then there are two possibilities: either when he was requested, he did so based on Taqiyah like many scholars did at time of Mamun and Bishr Al-Marisis, they did Taqiyah, and Imam Ahmad did not do it and was beaten until close to die.

The second possibilty is that he saw his mistakes and repented twice sincerly.

But there are narrations Imam Abu Hanifah saying the Quran is created, and some saying he did not believe in this, so we hope Imam Abu Hanifah repented and the narrations of denying Khalq Quran are last and are not based on the fact he was requested to do this else be killed

And Allah knows best

Next is the fact of doing Tanqees of Abu Hanifah...

First I already said, if Muhadith said the same on Malik, Ash-Shafi'i or Ahmad, they would have been treated similarly, and it is not for a particular individual.

If it came in a Mutawatir way that any Imam repented twice from Kufr, then it wouyld be quoted the same way by Ahlul Hadith.

Now I have already told that there is a lesson in this for people who whorship Abu Hanifah, and take his saying as a Hujjah for them instead of Hadith, and one of their basis is that Abu Hanifah is the greatest...

And they have attributed many stories and narrations without Isnad to show that Abu Hanifah was the most knowlegable, until even the Prophet 'Isa will judge by his Fiqh

False Hadith, narrations from Salaf and they call people to blindly follow him because of their Ghulu. Their excuses we do not have power of Ijtihad, we cannot understand Hadith are all false as they explain meanings of Hadith and do their Taweel, they reject some sayings of their Imam and choose saying of his two companions...

Also the big excuse, the Imam might know Ahadith abrogating this one, but this one is also a big lie, because they do not do this when choosing the saying of his two companions...why on 'Aqiqah and Muzara'ah they take saying of two companions, as Imam Sahib might have a Hadith

So behind these excuses is their ghulu of Imam Abu Hanifah, he understood Islam as nobody could...

So these people need to know the reality, that their Imam was criticised for his Ray and even in creed, from which he might have repented.

But yet he is a man who can commit wrong Ijtihad in Fiqh and even in creed, and his saying is no Hujjah on you.

As for only Ahlul Hadith quoting this story of Istitabah twice, then as said by Mu'alimi it is Mutawatir and from Thiqah.

So it is the truth, and it is possible, and even Kawthari agreed that Imam Abu Hanifah belived it in first place...

And telling the truth is not Tanqis of someone, it just shows his reality that is of a human being...and showing someone is a human being is seometimes necessry when people start to wortship him, turn him into a Prophet

Allah A'lam

[Abualqamah]

Fabricated Ahadith in Hidayah and Hanafi books of Fiqh.

Based and adapted from the book of Shaykh Irshad Ul Haqq Al-Athari “Ahadith Hidayah”

‘Allamah Al-Lukanawi wrote in his “Nafi’ Al-Kabir”:

“What we have mentioned in the order of books, this is according to issues of Fiqh, as for the Prophetic Ahadith narrated in them, then how many books of Fiqh on which Fuqaha base themselves are filled with fabricated Ahadith, specially the Fatawa, and it has been made clear to us after looking a lot that their authors even if they were complete, but in quoting narrations, they were easy (Mutasahil).”

Mulla Ali Qari said in his “Mawdu’at Al-Kabir” and “Masnu’” p 125:

“The quoted of Nihayah and other explanations of Hidayah are not reliable, because they are not Muhadith, and they have not attributed the Ahadith to any reference.”

Abu Ghuddah also approved this saying of Mulla Ali Qari in his Hashiyah of “Masnu’” p 157 and said p 55: “And what is acted upon in this chapter is the saying of Muhadith and not Fuqaha despite their great status”

‘Allamah Luknawi also said in his introduction of “Umdatu Ra’yah” p 12-13 after approving the words of Mulla Ali Qari:

“How many Ahadith in reliable books (of Fiqh) are fabricated and different (from how they appear in books of Hadith)”

He said furthermore in “Rad’ Al-Ikhwan” p 57:

“Do you not see the author of Hidayah, despite being from most noble Hanafiyah, he put in it Gharib and weak narrations on which one does not rely, as it is made evident in the Takhrij of its Ahadith by Az-Zeyla’i and ibn Hajar”

‘Abdul Qadir Al-Qurshi wrote in his “Kitab Al-Jami’” published with “Jawahir Al-Madhiyah” p 440 v 2:

“And there have been a lot of errors in the book “Hidayah” and “Al-Khulasa” and others that I have mentioned, and I have made them clear in my book “Al-‘Inayah bi Ma’rifah Ahadith Al-Hidayah”…”

Some examples are quoted below:

First example: in the chapters of Imamah, Al-Marghinani quoted: “because of his saying (saw): he who prays behind a pious, it is as if he prayed behind a Prophet”

As-Sarkhasi before also quoted this in his “Mabsut”

(As-Sarkhasi is the Hanafi who quoted without Isnad the story of Abu Hafs Al-Kabir and Imam Al-Bukhari in which Abu Hafs forbade Imam Bukhari to give Fatwa, which is a pure lie…and these lies are even quoted by some Deobandi like Ameen Okarvi)

Ibn Hajar said in his “Dirayah” p 168: “I could not find it”

Mulla ‘Ali Qari said in his “Mawdu’at” p 121 and “Masnu’” p 152: “It has no basis”

Ibn Humam wrote in “Fath Al-Qadir” v 1 p 246: “Allah knows best about this Hadith”

‘Ayni wrote in his “Binayah” v 2 p 331: “This Hadith is Gharib, it is not in books of Hadith”

Tahir Al-Patni said in “Majma’ Al-Bihar” v 3 p 511: “I could not find it with these words”

Al-Luknawi said in his “Hashiyah Hidayah”: “As for the words of the mentioned Hadith in books, it is not found rather some Muhadith said it is fabricated”

Al-Luknawi thought: “As for me, it is taken from the Hadith: The scholars of my Ummah are like the Prophets of Bani Israil”

But this one also as said by Al-Luknawi is not found in books, and he quoted As-Sakhawi and Mulla Ali Qari for this.

Second example: Al-Marghinani attributed this to the Prophet (saw): “He who leaves the four (rak’ah) before Zuhr, my intercession will not reach him”

Zeyla’i said: “Very Gharib”

Ibn Hajar said: “I could not find it”

‘Ayni said: “It has no basis”

Third example: About Raf’ ul Yadayn, Al-Marghinani said: “And what is narrated about Raf’ is considered at the beginning, this is said so by ibn Az-Zubayr”

Muhammad ibn Mahmud said in his commentary “’Inayah”:

“He (ibn Zubayr) saw a man praying in Masjid al-Haram and raising his hands in prayer before and after raising his head from ruku’, and when he completed his prayer, he said to him: “Do not do this, because this was something done by the Prophet (saw), then he abandoned it”

‘Ayni said in his Sharh of Bukhari:

“And what the opposite side base upon is considered at the beginning of Islam then it was abrogated by the Dalil that ‘Abdullah ibn Zubayr saw a man…”

Mahmud Hasan Deobandi also pointed at this narration in his “Idah Al-Adillah”

(So it shows that with adding an Ayah to justify Taqlid, he also quotes fabrications without Isnad for his Madhab)

While Az-Zayla’i wrote according to his Istilah: “Gharib”

Ibn Hajar wrote: “I could not find it”

Al-Luknawi in his “Ta’liq Al-Mumajad” said: “If the Sanad of the Athar of ibn ‘Abbas and Ibn Az-Zubayr is not found in reliable books of Hadith, how can we take into account basing only on good opinion on those who quoted it, with the prove of the contrary from them (meaning ibn ‘Abbas and ibn Az-Zubayr) with many Isnads”

Shah Isma’il said in “Tanvir Al-‘Aynayn”: “Its basis is not found for Muhadiths”

Shaykh Irshad Ul Haqq said that basing on these kinds of narrations is not strange for the author of Hidayah and its commentators, but the strangeness is on ‘Ayni that he wrote a Sharh of Bukhari, and rejects its Hadith on the base of a fabricated Hadith without basis.

(This is not surprisiung for someone who authenticates lies of the Hadith of Abu Hanifah being lap of this Ummah)

Fourth example: Al-Marghinani to justify his Fiqh quoted the Hadith: “he (saw) sat on a cushion of silk”

It is said on “Nasb Ar-Rayah”: “Very Gharib”

‘Ayni said: “This is not proven from the Prophet (saw) at all, and none among specialists quoted it neither with an authentic Sanad nor weak”

While there is a Hadith in Bukhari of Huzayfah saying: “He (saw) forbade wearing silk and Dibaj and to sit on it”

Zeyla’i wrote: “The Hadith of Huzayfah is difficult for the Madhab (Hanafi) (to be answered)”

Fifth example: In “Hidayah” there is a Hadith: “Three matters, being serious or joking makes it final, Nikah, Talaq and Yameen (oath)”

In Hanafi Fiqh, if one by joking makes an oath should fulfill it contrary to the Shafi’i. And Al-Marghinani quoted this Hadith to justify his Madhab.

While the words “Yameen” are not in this Hadith as said in “Nasb Ar-Rayah”, “Talkhis”, “Binayah”.

‘Allamah Ash-Shami wrote in “Rad Al-Muhtar”: “This Hadith is famous without words “al-Yameen” and it is also wrong on the Ma’anwi consideration…”

Dawud Arshad mentioned in his “Tuhfah Ahnaf” that this Hadith is in Abu Dawud, ibn Majah and At-Tirmidhi with words “Raj’ah” instead of “Yameen”.

Then Shaykh Irshad Ul Haqq Athari showed that the state of Al-Kasani is the same as al-Marghinani.

Al-Kasani quoted in his “Bada’i As-Sana’i” a Hadith without Isnad from ibn Mas’ud: “The Prophet (saw) raised his hands and we raised them, and then he abandoned and we abandoned”

And this has been quoted by many Ahnaf even Mahmud hasan Deobandi in his “Idah Al-Adillah” and in many books of Hanafi Fiqh like Kifayah, al-Kafi, Nihayah.

Al-Kasani went to the extreme of quoting without Isnad from ibn ‘Abbas saying that the ten Sahabah promised of paradise were only raising hands in the beginning of the prayer.

So this shows the state of these books, how to justify their Madhab they quote Ahadith without Sanad.

Shaykh Dawud Arshad in his book “Tuhfat Ahnaf” mentioned other examples of Hidayah, some of them are quoted below taken and adapted from his words:

Sixth example: Al-Marginani quoted the Hadith: “as the Hadith of Al-Khat’amiyah” as he (saw) said: “Perform Hajj and ‘Umrah”

While this Hadith is in Bukhari and Muslim without the words of performing ‘Umrah

Az-Zayla’i said: “This is an error of the author because the Hadith of Al-Khat’amiyah does not contain the mention of performing ‘Umrah”

Ibn Hajar said: “I could not see in the ways (of the Hadith of Al-Khat’amiyah) the mention of doing ‘Umrah, and what is clear is that it is a mistake of copy from the author”

Seventh: Al-Marghinani quoted a Hadith: “and our prove (Hanafi) is that the Prophet (saw) forbade selling dogs except the dogs of hunt and Mashiyah (for looking after beasts)”

While this Hadith is in At-Tirmidhi without words “Mashiyah”, and none among ibn Humam, Zeyla’i, ibn Hajar could find these words.

Eight: Al-Marghinani in chapter of “Adab Al-Qadhi” quoted the Hadith: “The mosque are only built for the remembrance of Allah (Ta’ala) and for (giving) judgments”

This Hadith is in Muslim but without words “judgments” as said by Zeyla’i.

Muhammad Junaghri accused the author of Hidayah of inventing this Hadith for his Madhab and refuting the Shafi’i Madhab.

Ninth: In the chapter of the prayer, Al-Marghinani quoted the Hadith: “because of his (saw) saying: when one of you prays in the desert, then he should put a Sutrah in front of him”

And none among Ibn Humam, Zeyla’i or Ibn Hajar found words “in the desert”.

And this addition also suits the Hanafi Madhab.

Tenth: About the Kaffarah of doing Jima’ (sexual relation) while fasting in Ramadan, Al-Marghinani quoted the Hadith of the Prophet (saw) telling the person to fast and feed poor people, but the man said there was not more poor than him, and the Prophet (saw) gave him dates, and then Al-Marghinani added words: “And this will not suffice anyone after you”

But Ibn Hajar said this addition is not present in the ways of this Hadith, but Al-Marghinani had the courage then to say: “And this is a proof over Ash-Shafi’i” while this addition does not exist.

So these are ten examples, Shaykh Irshadul Haqq quoted others as well as Shaykh Dawud Arshad, but this will be enough to show that Al-Marghinani quoted many Ahadith no Muhadith could found, also he added words or changed in famous Ahadith, and these additions suit his Madhab. And despite all these fabricated Ahadith Ahnaf have ghulu in Hidayah

Shaykh irshad Ul Haqq Athari wrote that Muhammad Haneef Gangohi wrote in his “Zafar Al-Muhasilin” the poem about Hidayah saying:

“Al-Hidayah is like the Quran
It has abrogated what was written before it in books of religious law (Shar’)”

And Haneef Gangohi said it is not an exaggeration but the manifestation of the truth.

(The Ahnaf did not stop at saying books of Fiqh, but Shar’ showing their extreme Ghulu, also these Sufi also say Mathnawi of Rumi is like the Quran in Farsi, and one can read himself and see Ilhad in this book)

And this poem is written on many published versions of Deobandi in Pakistan.

Then Shaykh Irshad Ul Haqq mentioned that some Ahnaf like Qasim Qutlubagha and Kashmiri even consider Qadhi Khan higher that Hidayah, so one can see Hidayah dit not even abrogate Qadhi Khan, what about abrogating books of Fiqh like Al-Umm of Ash-Shafi’i and others.

Now Shaykh Muhammad Junaghri and Dawud Arshad accused Al-Marghinani of fabricating for his Madhab, although Shaykh Irshad Ul Haqq like Zeyla’i and others considered it as errors, but one has to think that additions that support one’s Madhab, or words changed to support the Madhab, this is doubtful, as their Istidlal is with added words.

This is why Abul ‘Abbas Al-Qurtubi said: “Some jurists (Fuqaha) of Ahlur-Ray have given themselves permission to attribute the ruling that is shown by Qiyas to the Messenger of Allah (saw)…that is why you will see their books full of Ahadith whose Matn witness that they are fabricated because of their resemblance to the Fatawa of Fuqaha…and because they do not give any Isnad for it.”

One can still say Al-Marghinani might have found these narrations in some Hanafi books and their authors invented these lies like they invented Hadith of Abu Hanifah being the lamp of this Ummah, or many Hadith about saying he who prays behind the Imam should have mouth filled with fire or he who raised his hands in prayer there is no prayer.

If he gave the Isnad, people would know who the liars are, all blame would be removed from Al-Marghinani. People could say these additions favouring Hanafi Madhab do not come from Al-Marghinani.

This is why Muhadith who quoted fabricated Ahadith gave Isnad, and by giving the Isnad.

But not giving any Isnad, and quoting Ahadith that suit one’s Madhab, then it would lead to accusations and give strength to the saying of Abul ‘Abbas Al-Qurtubi, that Ahlur Ray fabricate Hadith as words suit their Madhab and there is no Sanad.

Maye Al-Marghinani made so many errors himself without purpose of lying, and it shows he was very weak in Hadith

In recent times, Sarfraz Safdar Khan Deobandi also in his "Khazain Sunnan" p 90 added some words in a Hadith that suit his Madhab.

He quoted a Hadith from Abu Dawud: “When you find water, then put it on your skin and hair (Sha’r)”

And Ahnaf do not see washing mouth and nose as an obligation in Wudhu, but for Ghusl they consider it obligatory, and Sarfraz Khan quoted the narration above to justify that washing nose is obligatory in Ghusl as there are hair in it.

So the added words “Sha’raka” have been added to justify Hanafi Madhab.

When Shaykh Irshad Ul Haqq wrote about this addition in his “Maulana Safdar apni Aine mein”, then the son of Sarfraz Khan agreed that it is a mistake in his “Wa Wela” and it will be corrected.

So now are these additions from Muhadith mistakes or forgery for the Madhab ?

Mahmud Hassan added an Ayah to the Quran to justify Taqlid which was not changed even 30 years later, Habib Ur Rahman A’zami omitted to tell there was a difference in the nuskhah of Zahiriyah that was in his hand and he published the mistaken version of the Indian Nuskhah abour Raful Yadayn, Sarfraz Khan added to a Hadith in Abu Dawud suiting his Madhab.

Are these all mistakes or confirmation of what Abul ‘Abbas Al-Qurtubi said on Ahlur-Ray ?

Allah knows best.

[mosa]

So, Imam Abu Hanifah is not lamp of Ummah. Is that what u wanted to prove?

[zaid_ibn_ali]

brother abualqamah, all you had to do was prove that alleged narration was fabricated. I'm sure any pious Hanafi would of agreed. It just seemed to involve a lot of Imam Abu Hanifa bashing in that lenghty post.

I find it odd that you call yourself a follower of the salaf. How many of the Salaf have you derided like you have Imam Abu Hanifah here? Its almost like you don't accept him from being amongst the Salaf, and also dare I say, you have something in your heart against him?

The extremists Hanafi's & then those who bash the Imam, wanting to expose his alleged faults are just two sides of the same coin.

I now understand why many Arab Salafi's have differences with Indo-Pak Ahle Hadith.

In responding to Hanafi partisanship amongst your Indo-Pak Hanafi brothers, you lot have gone to extremes no doubt. Yes Kawthari was a Hanafi extremist, and you seem to be an anti-Hanafi extremist, which puts you on parr.

[Magoo]

brother abualqamah, all you had to do was prove that alleged narration was fabricated. I'm sure any pious Hanafi would of agreed. It just seemed to involve a lot of Imam Abu Hanifa bashing in that lenghty post.

I find it odd that you call yourself a follower of the salaf. How many of the Salaf have you derided like you have Imam Abu Hanifah here? Its almost like you don't accept him from being amongst the Salaf, and also dare I say, you have something in your heart against him?

The extremists Hanafi's & then those who bash the Imam, wanting to expose his alleged faults are just two sides of the same coin.

I now understand why many Arab Salafi's have differences with Indo-Pak Ahle Hadith.

In responding to Hanafi partisanship amongst your Indo-Pak Hanafi brothers, you lot have gone to extremes no doubt. Yes Kawthari was a Hanafi extremist, and you seem to be an anti-Hanafi extremist, which puts you on parr.

i couldnt agree more, masha'allah excellent post akhi

[qadri]

I think Abualqamah started the thread with the subject: Kawthari on Hadith so the discussion is about al-Kawthari who is considered 'Shaykh al-islam' for Keller, Kabbani, GF Haddad and their likes.

Asharites say that Khateeb al-Baghdadi was one of the Asharites on the way Kullabites. It is a known fact that Khateeb al-Baghdadi transmitted in his Tarikh Baghdad fabricated narrations against Imam Abu Hanifah. Obviously Khateeb al-Baghdadi considered those narrations authentic otherwise why would he put those narrations in his book ?

We also have Bayhaqi who is the author of the book Khilafiyyat which is a refutation of Hanafi Madhhab. Bayhaqi is also considered to be Asharite.

There are some Asharites who included Imam Abu Hanifah within the Zaydi Shia Sect.

May Allah have mercy on this great Imam, Abu Hanifah Numan ibn Thabit.

al-Fudayl b. 'Iyâd (d.187) said:

"Abu Hanifa was a Fâqih, known for Fiqh, famous for Wara', very wealthy and known for graciousness towards all those who visited him. He was steadfast in teaching knowledge, night and day. He was often silent, a man of few words. When a question on the lawful or unlawful would come to him, he was good at pointing out the truth, keeping away from the ruler['s desire]."

Shu'ba b. al-Hajjâj (d.160) said about him when he heard he died:

"With him the Fiqh of Kufah disappeared. Allah raised him over us and himself by His Mercy."

Abu Dawud al-Sijistani (d.275) said:

"May Allah have mercy upon Malik, for he was an Imam. May Allah have mercy upon al-Shafi'i, for he was an Imam. May Allah have mercy upon Abu Hanifah, for he was an Imam."

http://forums.islamicawakening.com/showthread.php?t=5284

Abu Turab al-Hanafi

[zaid_ibn_ali]

are you a sufi? just curious.

[Abu Maryam PK]

Bismillah
No. he is not. His screen-name is misleading.
Imam Abu Hanifa is an accepted imam from the salaf. many salaf made mistakes for which they were reprimanded in their lifetimes. this is because they were not infallible and due to the prevailing situation. Imam 'Ali ibn la-madini, a famous imam of the ahlulhadith was accused of much worse. Does that push him out of the salaf? Similarly, if the sanad of something attributed to imam abu hanifa is correct, with the reporters transmitting something they saw, not their own opinions, scientifically it should be accepted. It is not from the jarah bayna al-aqran [contemporary jealousy]. Otherwise the narrator should be disparaged in hadith too. Neither is the Imam infallible nor is he zayd/'amr/bakr who should be disparaged by the likes of me or you.
Of course many stories about imam abu hanifa are fabricated, as can be seen from dhahavi's commentory in siyar a'laam al-nubala. But not all are.Particularly his memory is weak in hadith, which is what Imam Muslim, Al-Nasai etc said too. But of weak memory too was an Imam of ahlul hadith, namely Shareek bin 'Abdullah Al-Qaadhi. So weak memory and having a strange belief or two or relying too much on analogies [which is much more for hanafiites than anyone else; contrary towhat ibn abdul barr said] is a disparage, but only in the 'ilmi/knowledge-based setting. It is absurd and totally repulsive for some to say "hanifa da abba" etc [read this somewhere, though i think it was only the writer's immagination]

[zaid_ibn_ali]

what does da abba mean dear brother?

[Abu Maryam PK]

Bismillah
what does da abba mean dear brother?

Oh so u know no punjabi? How un-chic!!

In punjabi "haneefaan da abba" means "Hanifah's father". Technically there is nothing wrong with this word-to-word rendering of abu-hanifa, but if u know punjabi, it is a bit rude.

I read in a extreme hanafi book "Hadith aur ahle hadith" by anwar shah that some Ahle Hadith man called Imam Abu Hanifa "heneefaan da abba". It may have been a possibility because almost anything is possible in Punjab [i think it is one of the most expletive laden language in the world...hey my mom is from punjab so i dont mean no harm]. However the book contains many half-truths, going so far as to distort ahadith/tahreef. So i take it as the writer's immagination at work. I have never seen any ahle hadith scholar being that rude about Imam Abu Hanifa, being an ahle hadith myself for several years now.

[zaid_ibn_ali]

i get you. yeah I speak know punjabi, and yeah, makes sense to me now:)

[safdl]

i couldnt agree more, masha'allah excellent post akhi

I agree whole heartedly, Abualqamah has no respect, though its not like its the first time, its as if he is trying to make him out to be untrustworthy and dare I say it not worthy to be on the rank of the 4 imams this nation follows.

Respect Abualqamah will get you places.

[safdl]

Salam aleykum

A proper translation of Istitabah would be that he was requested to repent, meaning Tawbah was sought from him.

And if he refused he would have been killed for Kufr.

Then there are two possibilities: either when he was requested, he did so based on Taqiyah like many scholars did at time of Mamun and Bishr Al-Marisis, they did Taqiyah, and Imam Ahmad did not do it and was beaten until close to die.

The second possibilty is that he saw his mistakes and repented twice sincerly.

But there are narrations Imam Abu Hanifah saying the Quran is created, and some saying he did not believe in this, so we hope Imam Abu Hanifah repented and the narrations of denying Khalq Quran are last and are not based on the fact he was requested to do this else be killed

And Allah knows best

Next is the fact of doing Tanqees of Abu Hanifah...

First I already said, if Muhadith said the same on Malik, Ash-Shafi'i or Ahmad, they would have been treated similarly, and it is not for a particular individual.

If it came in a Mutawatir way that any Imam repented twice from Kufr, then it wouyld be quoted the same way by Ahlul Hadith.

Now I have already told that there is a lesson in this for people who whorship Abu Hanifah, and take his saying as a Hujjah for them instead of Hadith, and one of their basis is that Abu Hanifah is the greatest...



Nobody worships Imam Abu Hanifah, yet they guard his sanctity against people like you who show disrespect. If there is two sides to a coin then you show both sides, not only comment on the one that suits you!!

Do you call your dad or mum OH FULLAH FULLAH?? like you quote 'abu hanifah'? your ranking is not as high, one may think by reading your post that you feel uv surpassed him and have earned the right to criticise him.

[Abu Maryam PK]

Bismillah
Nobody worships Imam Abu Hanifah, yet they guard his sanctity against people like you who show disrespect.
Kawthari does. That evil liar.
Do you call your dad or mum OH FULLAH FULLAH?? like you quote 'abu hanifah'?

My dear safdl, removing the title of Imam or rahmatullahi 'alaihi is a common practice in arabic books. It does not mean disrespect. U can even find qaala abi hanifa [Abu Hanifa said], 'inda abi hanifa [in abu hanifa's view] in hanafi books as well.
We may not agree with Sheikh Abu 'Alqamah's choice of words, but it is part of a larger larger project to translate whole of tankil

[abu imaan an-nepalee]

i remember the sufis reprimanded me for saying 'keller' instead of "shaykh" nuh......maybe they wanted the "shaykh" to go with the "rattle and roll" of their dancing! lol!


as brother abu maryam said it isn't a sign of disrespect, everyone even haddad and co do this

[Abu Maryam PK]

Bismillah
everyone even haddad and co do this
Well this makes me remember another incident of barelvis [i never run out of them, do i?]. In a debate an ahle hadith 'aalim said:
"Qaala Qaala Rasulullahi sallallahu'alaihiwasallam"
[The companion said that the Prophet sallallahu'alaihiwasallam said...]
Immediately the barelvi opponent said:
"Dekho Aaqa ko kaala keh raha hai hallan kay woh to goray thay"

[Look he is calling the Master black, while he was white!]

PS:
Kaala with kaaf in urdu means black. pakis cannot genereally differentiate between kaaf and qaaf

[Um Abdullah M.]

May Allah have mercy on the soul of the Imam Abu Hanifah rahimahu Allah and grant him al firdaws.

when we learn ilm shari'ah we also learn akhlaq, and learn to respect the scholars of ahl assunnah, even with their mistakes, for no human is infallible except the Prophets alayhem assalam in delivering the message.

[Abualqamah]

Salam aleykum

First these narrations of Tanqees do not come from India or Pakistan

They have been quoted in SUnnah of Abdillah ibn Ahmad and Tarikh Baghdad of Al-Khateeb. And these two are great Imams of Ahlul Hadith

And many of these Asaneed are authentic, and one can see Mu'alimi's answer to Kawthari who tried to weaken them.

Secondly, as for Imam Abu Hanifah's acceptance, then majority of Ahlul hadith criticised him, one can see authentic narrations in these books from Awza'i, Thawri, Malik, Ibn 'Uyanah, Ali ibn Madini, Humaydi, Al-Bukhari and many others...

So the criticsim of ABu Hanifah is not something new, or something I invented, it is based on facts and authentic narrations...

Now many of the Manaqib of Abu Hanifah are invented or come without Isnad, as Deobandi author of Anwar Bari or Sarfraz Khan in his Maqam Abu Hanifah quoted from many fabricators praising Abu Hanifah...fabrictors agreed upon to be liars...

And these fatcs will come in right time Insha Allah

As for worshipers of ABu hanifah, even worshipers of grave do not call their worship as worship...they will say it is Tawassul...

I will quote even words of Sarfraz Khan Safdar agreeing that some kinds of Taqlid can be Kufr...quoting from Shah Waliullah, Shah ABdul Aziz and Shah Isma'il...

[safdl]

Bismillah

Kawthari does. That evil liar.


My dear safdl, removing the title of Imam or rahmatullahi 'alaihi is a common practice in arabic books. It does not mean disrespect. U can even find qaala abi hanifa [Abu Hanifa said], 'inda abi hanifa [in abu hanifa's view] in hanafi books as well.
We may not agree with Sheikh Abu 'Alqamah's choice of words, but it is part of a larger larger project to translate whole of tankil

Point taken, but we have two scenarios here......

Its clear this guy isnt the biggest fan of Iman Abu Hanifah.... When scholars are talking amongst themselves and they are of a higher degree then i agree they may use Abu Hanifah, Malik etc. This guy isnt of that degree....

Secondly its blatently obvious he is having a swipe so in this case your conditions dont apply to him. You can choose to ignore it but im not the only person seeing it.


p.s funny story about the barelwi's.

[Um Abdullah M.]

wa alaykum assalam

I have only seen this hate for Imam Abu Hanifah rahimahu Allah from people of subcontinent.
I haven't heard this from shaikhs of Arab countries, they always speak with respect for the imam , and I mean Salafi scholars, and many of them know about those narrations in book of Abdullah ibn Imam Ahmad, and other narrations attacking the imam rahimahu Allah.

I believe it is because of your extremism.

May Allah save us from ghuloo in deen.

halka al mutanati'oon, sadakta ya Rasulallah.

[Abualqamah]

And what do people say about what Al-Bukhari said in his chapter about Hyal (tricks) clearly attacking Abu Hanifah, saing some people have made treachery among Muslims legal...

What about Ibn Taymiyah in his "Bayan Ad-Daleel fi Ibtal Al-Hyal"

In which he clearly said the Ahlur Ray are responsable of Hyal, and this is because of their Ray

He clearly authenticated the narration of Nu'aym ibn Hammad saying that worst group of this Ummah would be the one who would judge with Ray, and make Haram Halal...Ibn Taymiyah said its Isnad is Jayid and answered to the objections...

Now it is Fatawa Alamgiriyah who itself attributes a Hilah to Abu Yusuf about avoiding Zakah and giving its wealth to his child and then taking it back to avoid Zakah...

So criticism of Ahlur Ray, their saying narrations oppose Qias or general rules, then it does not come from India or Pakistan

Ibn Taymiyah has also a Risalah in his Majmu about the meaning of Qias, and he answered the claim of Ahlur Ray that some Hadith oppose Qias...

Insha Allah all of this will come in right time, but people for Tahqiq should have an open heart and accept facts based on proves, and not merely follow their desire

Why cannot Imam Abu Hanifah be criticised ?

Is he a Prophet ?

Now one can say Ahlul Hadith might be wrong in criticising Imam Abu Hanifah, or Abu Hanifah made wrong Ijtihadat, or any other reason...

As for denying such criticisim of Abu Hanifah by Ahlul Hadith...it is not reasonable...

[Abu Maryam PK]

Bismillah
Brother Abu Alqamah, i think what is being percieved here is:
"Do you accept Imam Abu Hanifah to be a righteous salaf"?
Criticism of Imam Abu Hanifa rahimahullah is fair in an 'ilmi setting. But i think one gains hardly anything by criticising him infront of jaahil deobandis/barelvis. It just hardens their animosity and that is why majority of ahlehadith 'ulema donot criticise his rai directly naming him. The hyal i agree are a very major issue, but they can be warned from without naming their Imams. I mean Imam Bukhari didnot name anyone in his sahih/kitab al-hiyal.
Secondly what is the opinion that ibn taymiyyah has of the imam, in raf'ul malaam [have not managed to read it yet]?

Umm Abdullah...
Have u read sh muqbil's book on imam abu hanifah? AZ attached it someone on this site. BTW i believe brother ab alqamah is not particularly strong in english and is not always able to express himself clearly.

[mhasan]

I have only seen this hate for Imam Abu Hanifah rahimahu Allah from people of subcontinent.


Were Imam Malik and Sufyan Thauri from the subcontinent?

[Abu Maryam PK]

Bismillah
Were Imam Malik and Sufyan Thauri from the subcontinent?

Was Malik and Sufyan on the same 'ilmi level as you and me?

[mhasan]

Bismillah


Was Malik and Sufyan on the same 'ilmi level as you and me?

Bismillah. How is that relevant? I am all for hikmah in dawah and winning people hearts by not immediately mentioning things that might turn them away. However, to consider the Ahlul Hadith of the subcontinent as solitary in their criticism of Abu Hanifah and to accuse them of extremism is just not fair.

[abu hafs]

What did latter scholars like Ibn taymiyya, Ibn Hajr , Ibn Kathir , Ibn Rajab say about Imam Abu Hanifa ?
How did they view the jarh on him ?

[Abu Maryam PK]

Bismillah
What did latter scholars like Ibn taymiyya, Ibn Hajr , Ibn Kathir , Ibn Rajab say about Imam Abu Hanifa ?
How did they view the jarh on him ?

i knew it had the possibility of blowing out of propotion and that is why i said it has to be in a propper setting
Abu Hafs, jarah [criticism] is one thing and a reporter reporting what he saw is something totally different. Go to all my posts in this thread. Even if everything against him is proven he should be thrown out of the pious salaf only if half a dozen other aimma are also pushed out. There is a difference about making a mistake, having a weak memory, relying too much on analogies and not ahadith and being a fraud. I m sure Abu Alqama and mhasan believe the same, because i know one of them personally and talked to the other on fone a few months back. I just want them to say it clearly to remove confusion

[Abu Maryam PK]

Bismillah
Bismillah. How is that relevant?
That is relevant because:
"And speech concering people and their criticism calls for certain points with respect to being just or rejecting them, from it:

- that the speaker is knowledgeable about the ranks of people (marâtib al-rijâl) and their condition, in deviation and straightness;

- and their ranks with respect to their sayings and acts;

- and that he is from the people of piety and fear, away from fanaticism (mujâniban lil-'asabiyyah) and innovated opinions, free of negligence, deprived from biasedness to the self (or self-inclination) through prejudice, with justice in his self, precision and cognizant of the reasons which emanate by its like from man,

or else his word is not accepted from him about who he speaks, and he would be of those who slander and violate a forbidden thing!"

Source: Ibn Nasir al-Din al-Dimashqi, in the Radd al-Wafir p.37

However, to consider the Ahlul Hadith of the subcontinent as solitary in their criticism of Abu Hanifah and to accuse them of extremism is just not fair.

She is not from the subcontinent. All she knows about us is from the net. And we are not always represented correctly. Many arabs maynot know that shaikh ehsan elahi zaheer, shah badiuddin sindhee, al-mubarakpooris, azeemabadi were all ahle hadith. They are our true representatives, not me and u.

[mhasan]

That is relevant because:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Abu_Abdallah
"And speech concering people and their criticism calls for certain points with respect to being just or rejecting them, from it:

- that the speaker is knowledgeable about the ranks of people (marâtib al-rijâl) and their condition, in deviation and straightness;

- and their ranks with respect to their sayings and acts;

- and that he is from the people of piety and fear, away from fanaticism (mujâniban lil-'asabiyyah) and innovated opinions, free of negligence, deprived from biasedness to the self (or self-inclination) through prejudice, with justice in his self, precision and cognizant of the reasons which emanate by its like from man,

or else his word is not accepted from him about who he speaks, and he would be of those who slander and violate a forbidden thing!"

Source: Ibn Nasir al-Din al-Dimashqi, in the Radd al-Wafir p.37 .

Not relevant because I did not criticize anyone. Not that I remember atleast.



She is not from the subcontinent. All she knows about us is from the net.

Hence I said what I said.

[Abu Dharr Al Kashmiri]

Bismillah

Well this makes me remember another incident of barelvis [i never run out of them, do i?]. In a debate an ahle hadith 'aalim said:
"Qaala Qaala Rasulullahi sallallahu'alaihiwasallam"
[The companion said that the Prophet sallallahu'alaihiwasallam said...]
Immediately the barelvi opponent said:
"Dekho Aaqa ko kaala keh raha hai hallan kay woh to goray thay"

[Look he is calling the Master black, while he was white!]

PS:
Kaala with kaaf in urdu means black. pakis cannot genereally differentiate between kaaf and qaaf

Classic! Ya Aba Maryam, did they not make takfeer of you guys?

[Abu Maryam PK]

Bismillah
Classic! Ya Aba Maryam, did they not make takfeer of you guys?

my barelvi maternal uncle has declared me a khariji years ago. these guys say that if u dont believe we are kuffar, u r kaafir urself....chain reaction, man. So what do u think of urself now?

[safdl]

Bismillah


my barelvi maternal uncle has declared me a khariji years ago. these guys say that if u dont believe we are kuffar, u r kaafir urself....chain reaction, man. So what do u think of urself now?

do you mean if you do believe we are kuffar, u r kaafir yourself? I dont quite understand your comment.

[Abu Maryam PK]

Bismillah
do you mean if you do believe we are kuffar, u r kaafir yourself? I dont quite understand your comment.
well english is not my first language. i will rephrase it anyway:
If u think that ahlehadith are not kafir, u r urself a kafir [according to barelvis]

[Um Abdullah M.]

to bro mhasan
I was speaking about this centuries scholars, not ones 1000 yrs ago.

[Abu Maryam PK]

Bismillah
to bro mhasan
I was speaking about this centuries scholars, not ones 1000 yrs ago.
how many of this centuries' ahle hadith scholars do u know or have listened to? I quoted a few recent ones wiithin this century and the last. Tuhfatul Ahwazi and 'Awn alma'bood are by ahle hadith scholars and sh ibn baz recommended it.

[Um Abdullah M.]

brother, did I accuse all of ahl hadeeth scholars?
I only said that I've only heard it from people from subcontinent, I didn't say all of them.

[mhasan]

to bro mhasan
I was speaking about this centuries scholars, not ones 1000 yrs ago.

My sister in Islam Um Abdullah,

Regarding the above please refer to what Abu Maryam said a couple of posts back. Also, it was pointed out to me that I did not come across as was intended. I really did not mean to be obnoxious in anyway. If such was the case then I do apologize. Your efforts for the salafi dawah are immense and I do appreciate that. It's just that when people accuse of the salafis of the subcontinent of extremism they only have one side of the picture.

Let me give you an example. On this site there is an article by Shaykh Saalih Al Shaykh hafidhahullah wherein he says:

"Hence, for example, when As Shaikh Abdullah Ibn Hasan (may Allah have mercy upon him) and those mashaayikh (plural of shaikh) from Makkah who were with, decided to print "Kitaab As Sunnah" by Abdullah, son of imam Ahmad (may Allah have mercy upon him), they did not see any problem in eliminating a complete chapter related to Abu Hanifah and his followers. This was done to bring about a shariah benefit that agrees with the methodology of ahlu'sunnah wal jamaah, hence they took out a complete chapter containing criticisms about Abu Hanifah and his followers. Is this removal considered failing to fulfill the trust, as some claim? Absolutely not, to the contrary, this is actually fulfilling the trust."

The Shaykh then goes onto describe the hikmah behind this. Now Shaykh Saalih Al Shaykh is one of my favourite scholars and I love him dearly. However, when I read this for the first time I was really shocked and despite having read his reasons and his description of hikmah I just didn't get it. But before coming to any conclusion on the topic I would like to discuss this with other arab and hindi ulema and see the contextual situation in which these things were done and said and how we can understand them.

I just hope that we can afford the people of the subcontinent a similar consideration before accusing them of extremism.

Please do read the advice that Abu Maryam gave (which was directed towards me) a couple of posts back. Once again I appreciate what you are doing and ask Allah to reward you with all that is good.

[Abu Maryam PK]

Bismillah
brother, did I accuse all of ahl hadeeth scholars?
I only said that I've only heard it from people from subcontinent, I didn't say all of them.

ok. but what did u find in abu alqamah's post that made u think he is an extremist and hates imam abu hanifa. i am saying this because u r more knowledgeable than our other inflammable friends. Read his first 2 posts thoroughly. To me he looks more angry at 'ainee and kawthari than imam abu hanifa rahimahullah. He is saying that they r inconsistent, accepting reports if they suit them and rejecting them if they dont using the same criteria for acceptance and rejection. And he seems angry at kawthari's attacks on bukhari, al-daraqutni, al-humaidi and others. He also clearly stated that he does not wish to do tanqees of imam abu hanifa but to show that he is not infallaible and there is no need to do ghulu about him. As i said his choice of words is not good, but that is partially due to his weakness in english. Where did u see his hatred for imam abu hanifa in this thread?

[safdl]

Bismillah


ok. but what did u find in abu alqamah's post that made u think he is an extremist and hates imam abu hanifa. i am saying this because u r more knowledgeable than our other inflammable friends. Read his first 2 posts thoroughly. To me he looks more angry at 'ainee and kawthari than imam abu hanifa rahimahullah. He is saying that they r inconsistent, accepting reports if they suit them and rejecting them if they dont using the same criteria for acceptance and rejection. And he seems angry at kawthari's attacks on bukhari, al-daraqutni, al-humaidi and others. He also clearly stated that he does not wish to do tanqees of imam abu hanifa but to show that he is not infallaible and there is no need to do ghulu about him. As i said his choice of words is not good, but that is partially due to his weakness in english. Where did u see his hatred for imam abu hanifa in this thread?

Try the bold markings in all the posts bro....I know english isnt your first language but to someone who fully appreciates the language it seems that he is showing disapproval in his writings except that disapproval isnt differentiated between the two people, but it seems like one big rant about the Imam and his followers.

Also the fact that his english isnt good as you have rightly pointed out on a few occassions means again that he shouldnt be writing these accounts of what he perceives to be the truth without it being proof read and checked by another scholar or a learned one. Our elders say there is writing in Joash and there is writing in Hoash. These are urdu words so im sure you cant attach a better meaning to them than i can.

i dont know what part of the world he is from but effective communication is only acheived by the correct use of the language which the matter is being discussed in and the expressions used. He neither has either of those qualities in abundance as you have said. Using spell checker and thesaurus isnt merely enough when discussing sensitive subjects like this.

[Abu Maryam PK]

Bismillah
Still the brother has some very useful contributions to the english speaking Muslims. Some of them are hosted on al-jawzia, the site in my signature. And translating the tankil is no trivial task.

[safdl]

Bismillah
Still the brother has some very useful contributions to the english speaking Muslims. Some of them are hosted on al-jawzia, the site in my signature. And translating the tankil is no trivial task.

trivial ?? well as you say and most of us observe, its more than trivial for him because he clearly isnt getting it right my friend.

There is a signature of a brother on this forum which roughly reads about meanings lost in transalations by one of the imams (i might be wrong but im using my memory here)....forget meanings here this chap swings whole arguments on poor translations. This is like spreading fitnah because he cant speak nor write the lingo properly and he is writing belief articles.

Remember bro we cant tell whats in his heart but we can only judge by his words and works, and so far not only me but others as well have judged that they are fallable and to say the least misleading.

[mosa]

Bismillah


ok. but what did u find in abu alqamah's post that made u think he is an extremist and hates imam abu hanifa. i am saying this because u r more knowledgeable than our other inflammable friends. Read his first 2 posts thoroughly. To me he looks more angry at 'ainee and kawthari than imam abu hanifa rahimahullah. He is saying that they r inconsistent, accepting reports if they suit them and rejecting them if they dont using the same criteria for acceptance and rejection. And he seems angry at kawthari's attacks on bukhari, al-daraqutni, al-humaidi and others. He also clearly stated that he does not wish to do tanqees of imam abu hanifa but to show that he is not infallaible and there is no need to do ghulu about him. As i said his choice of words is not good, but that is partially due to his weakness in english. Where did u see his hatred for imam abu hanifa in this thread?

Who is Kawthari? Is it Mufti Muhammad Ibn Adam Al Kawthari?

[nobody]

the reason of opinions like ahle hadeeth from subcontinent hate or use unsuitable language against Imam Abu Hanifah rahimahullah is due to 2 reasons:

1) the propaganda against ahl alhadeeth from SC by the ahnaf.
2) the difference of opinion between the two school of thoughts of salafis regarding taqleed of an 'ami. it is thought that the rejection of taqleed by ahlul hadeeth caused this extreme behavior. one may disagree with this but it naturally cause confusion especially when it is coupled with the propaganda.

however the ahle hadeeth have one of the following attitude towrds the imam:

1) his praise like Shaikh dawood dehalvi calls him Imame 'Azam although he was an ahle hadeeth scholar.
2) complete silence.
3) jarah when a hadeeth is quoted where he is a rawi. this is exactly the same attitude like ahl alhadeeth from the arab world example Albani rahimahullah.

[safdl]

the reason of opinions like ahle hadeeth from subcontinent hate or use unsuitable language against Imam Abu Hanifah rahimahullah is due to 2 reasons:

1) the propaganda against ahl alhadeeth from SC by the ahnaf.
2) the difference of opinion between the two school of thoughts of salafis regarding taqleed of an 'ami. it is thought that the rejection of taqleed by ahlul hadeeth caused this extreme behavior. one may disagree with this but it naturally cause confusion especially when it is coupled with the propaganda.

however the ahle hadeeth have one of the following attitude towrds the imam:

1) his praise like Shaikh dawood dehalvi calls him Imame 'Azam although he was an ahle hadeeth scholar.
2) complete silence.
3) jarah when a hadeeth is quoted where he is a rawi. this is exactly the same attitude like ahl alhadeeth from the arab world example Albani rahimahullah.

That and the fact that some have poor literary skills as agreed by bro Abu Maryam as discussed earlier. Well in abuaqlamahs case anyway.

[nobody]

Who is Kawthari? Is it Mufti Muhammad Ibn Adam Al Kawthari?

http://forums.islamicawakening.com/showthread.php?t=941

[Abu Maryam PK]

Bismillah

There is a signature of a brother on this forum which roughly reads about meanings lost in transalations by one of the imams (i might be wrong but im using my memory here)....forget meanings here this chap swings whole arguments on poor translations. This is like spreading fitnah because he cant speak nor write the lingo properly and he is writing belief articles.

actually what i meant is that he did not express his own opinion clearly, not that he is misrepresenting Al-mu'allami. Actually the translation is good enough and only needs a review. He is a good and knowledgeable brother masha'Allah. I said he didnot choose his words properly, not that he twisted the words of another. This is only done by Abul Hasan al-muftari al-deobandy and faqir (fil akhirah) of sufiforums. Masha'Allah brother AbuAlqamah has done much to refute these two world-class liars, who are enemies of Islam. Faqir, it can be safely said is a proper mushrik and has no part of Islam. May Allah Destroy him.

As i pointed out nothing he said means he hates imam abu hanifa as he himself said he does not mean to lower his status. But then this underscores what i have been trying to say that jaahil people are not the best people to present this discussion to.

[mosa]

http://forums.islamicawakening.com/showthread.php?t=941
Jazakallah Khair brother

[Um Abdullah M.]

Bismillah


ok. but what did u find in abu alqamah's post that made u think he is an extremist and hates imam abu hanifa. i am saying this because u r more knowledgeable than our other inflammable friends. Read his first 2 posts thoroughly. To me he looks more angry at 'ainee and kawthari than imam abu hanifa rahimahullah. He is saying that they r inconsistent, accepting reports if they suit them and rejecting them if they dont using the same criteria for acceptance and rejection. And he seems angry at kawthari's attacks on bukhari, al-daraqutni, al-humaidi and others. He also clearly stated that he does not wish to do tanqees of imam abu hanifa but to show that he is not infallaible and there is no need to do ghulu about him. As i said his choice of words is not good, but that is partially due to his weakness in english. Where did u see his hatred for imam abu hanifa in this thread?


firstly, I am definitly not more knowledgable than any of the students of knowledge in this forum, I might seem so in some matters of aqeedah because I did quite a bit of research in those matters of aqeedah.

secondly: ok it was my mistake, I misread brother Abu Alqamah's 3rd post, I should have read it again just incase I misread it.
so it is my fault, I apologize, Allah forgive me, and I hope brother Alqamah also forgives me fro my accusation of him hating imam Abu Hanifah rahimahu Allah.

[Abu Maryam PK]

Bismillah
Jazakillahu khair.
That is what is to be expected of a student of knowledge. May Allah Forgive us all.

[nobody]

Remember bro we cant tell whats in his heart but we can only judge by his words and works, and so far not only me but others as well have judged that they are fallable and to say the least misleading.

well if one is starter & duffer then IA is not a good place. but it is not a fault of the contributers specially the likes of Abu alqamah. or you prove that he mislead.

[safdl]

Bismillah


actually what i meant is that he did not express his own opinion clearly, not that he is misrepresenting Al-mu'allami. Actually the translation is good enough and only needs a review. He is a good and knowledgeable brother masha'Allah. I said he didnot choose his words properly, not that he twisted the words of another. This is only done by Abul Hasan al-muftari al-deobandy and faqir (fil akhirah) of sufiforums. Masha'Allah brother AbuAlqamah has done much to refute these two world-class liars, who are enemies of Islam. Faqir, it can be safely said is a proper mushrik and has no part of Islam. May Allah Destroy him.

As i pointed out nothing he said means he hates imam abu hanifa as he himself said he does not mean to lower his status. But then this underscores what i have been trying to say that jaahil people are not the best people to present this discussion to.


Brother this has nothing to do with Abul whoever from sufiiforums and fil whoever of sufiiforums. By Allah I do NOT know them or have ever spoken to them. Nor has this article got anything to do with them. Abuaqlamah wrote it, not the sufiiforum guys. Abuaqlamah is being repromanded by people who have commented on this thread against his biased and sometimes misleading posts by his poor choice of words and grammer.


Your absolutely right bro - If the comment was intended for me and even if it isnt, I put both my hands up and say I am Jahil and im the lowest of the lowest and i have no shame in admitting it and I dont take offense yet am I happy you called me that, i have a smile of my face :) , I.A Allah wake me with the believers and the learned ones on the day of Judgement. I will be a student all my life till my death as there will always be things that I dont know about that I will come across. May Allah guide me in the right path and NEVER make me denounce another muslim as Kafir for iv heard that he himself becomes Kafir by making such comments.

Allah save us all. This Jaahil leaves you today with Salam and duas. You guys are trying to re-live the lives and teachings of the great Salaf generations. I credit you for that.

[mosa]

Bismillah


actually what i meant is that he did not express his own opinion clearly, not that he is misrepresenting Al-mu'allami. Actually the translation is good enough and only needs a review. He is a good and knowledgeable brother masha'Allah. I said he didnot choose his words properly, not that he twisted the words of another. This is only done by Abul Hasan al-muftari al-deobandy and faqir (fil akhirah) of sufiforums. Masha'Allah brother AbuAlqamah has done much to refute these two world-class liars, who are enemies of Islam. Faqir, it can be safely said is a proper mushrik and has no part of Islam. May Allah Destroy him.

Assalamu alaikum,
Strong words that you are using...

O ye who believe! let not some men among you laugh at others: it may be that the (latter) are better than the (former): Nor let some women laugh at others: it may be that the (latter) are better than the (former): nor defame nor be sarcastic to each other nor call each other by (offensive) nicknames: Ill-seeming is a name connoting wickedness (to be used of one) after he has believed: And those who do not desist are (Indeed) doing wrong. (49:11)

You are more knowledgeable than me and you know this. You ask Allah to destroy him. Why dont you ask Allah to guide him if he is in the wrong?

Be fair in your comments. The same leeway you want to give to Abu Alqamah, give to others too. Be fair. You brought some sufiforum people into the picture when they had nothing to do with this article written by brother Abu Alqamah

Wassalam

[nobody]

Assalamu alaikum,
Strong words that you are using...

O ye who believe! let not some men among you laugh at others: it may be that the (latter) are better than the (former): Nor let some women laugh at others: it may be that the (latter) are better than the (former): nor defame nor be sarcastic to each other nor call each other by (offensive) nicknames: Ill-seeming is a name connoting wickedness (to be used of one) after he has believed: And those who do not desist are (Indeed) doing wrong. (49:11)

think about the highlighted text.and read what faqir's believe.

[mosa]

I.A Allah wake me with the believers and the learned ones on the day of Judgement. I will be a student all my life till my death as there will always be things that I dont know about that I will come across. May Allah guide me in the right path and NEVER make me denounce another muslim as Kafir for iv heard that he himself becomes Kafir by making such comments.
Allah save us all.
ameen to you, me and everyone in this forum too.

[mosa]

Bismillah


aThis is only done by Abul Hasan al-muftari al-deobandy and faqir (fil akhirah) of sufiforums. Masha'Allah brother AbuAlqamah has done much to refute these two world-class liars, who are enemies of Islam. Faqir, it can be safely said is a proper mushrik and has no part of Islam. May Allah Destroy him.


Assalamu alaikum warahmatullahi wabarakatuhu,

Sorry If I sound rude as you are more knowledgeable than me

Is the above quoted text expected from a student of knowledge too?

I ask everyone to make dua for me that I will be amongst the rightly guided and that I enter Jannathul Firdaus and have an illuminated and wide grave.

Jazakallah Khair

Wassalam

[Abu Maryam PK]

Bismillah
Brother i am not knowledgeable at all.

Faqir is a kafir becuase he is a kafir. I know the hadith that if a person is not kafir he should not be called as such. But i swear by Allah that he is. And he is worse than George Bush and Areil Sharon. Beacuse these two dont distort the words of the Prophet sallallaho'alaihiwasallam while faqir does. Rather he is worse than abu jahal because abu jahal only turned to false gods in times of difficulty while he turns to his idols in ease and difficulty. His kufr is surpassed by only his peer GF Haddad.
His tahrifs are ample and have been shown by many. Perhaps ibn imam could post a few links of his misdeeds which are evidence of his kufr.

[Abualqamah]

Salam aleykum

I have no personal enmity with Imam Abu Hanifah.

I have made it clear that if Imam Al-Bukhari and others had used the same words for Ash-Shafi'i, Malik, Sufyan, Ahmad : They (ahlul Hadith) abandonned his Hadith and Ray...

And if a narrations comes in a Mutawatir way in Tarikh baghdad and others telling Musilm, Abu Dawud, Ibn Hazm or any other were requested twice to prent from Kufr, then I would do the same

Now if someone erred, and these errors are mentionned by precise scholars, is it serious to reject them.

Ibn Hazm was a great scholar loving the SUnnah, yet he had great mistakes in Attributes of Allah....

So Imam Abu Hanifah might also have good intention, yet he erred in creed, and he might have repented from this as there are narrations telling he did not hold this view...

So If I did not translated Tankil properly about Mu'alimi saying story of Istitabah is Mutawatir, then let someone translate it properly...

Secondly when people worship Imam Abu Hanifah, and their worship is based on the fact that he is the greatest and the most knowledgable of all Imams, and they have invented many lies to prove this...

It is relevant to show the reality to hgis worshipers, so they leave taking his saying as a Hujjah rather take Quran and Hadith as a Hujjah

Thirdly, almost all Scholars of Indo-Pak respect Imam Abu Hanifah, although they consider him weak in Hadith, from the like of Nawab Sahib, Mian Nazeer Husain Dehlawi, Mubarakpuri, Azimabadi, Ropuri, Amritsari, Ismail Salafi, Ataullah Bhujyani and all others...

Yet Ahlul Hadith do not follow anyone blindly and some scholars like Rais Nadwi criticised Imam Abu Hanifah...

So I tell you, this criticism of Imam Abu Hanifah exists among Salaf...

Now one can say that Imam Sahb was excused not to take so many Khabar Ahad and rely more on Qiyas because many people of Kufah were liars, or any other excuses

Or one can even say that all these scholars of Hijaz, Sham and others were mistaken in their critcism...

Even Al-Kawthari was forced to accuse many scholars and Hufaz of Ta'asub and enmity with Imam Au Hanifah...others Ahnaf even claim that Imam Sahib's rules of Dirayah are better and Muhadith did not have that much Fiqh...they accept Kahabar Ahad easily without looking deeply in rules of the Shari'ah...

Yet to say this criticism does not exist, this is not serious

Note to mention this for Maslahah is one thing, but to deny such criticism is another matter.

And when the Maslahah of showing the truth can also make some people leave worship of Imam Sahib, then it might be relevant

Allah knows best

[Abu Maryam PK]

Bismillah
Jazakallahu khair Abu Alqamah. U have made ur position clear.

[Abualqamah]

Salam Aleykum

Brother Shaykh Rais Nadwi in his vol 5 of "Lamhat fi ma fi Anwar Al-Bari min Zulumat" showed that many narrations in Kitab SUnnah, Tarikh Baghdad were authentic, and he refuted many mistakes of Qahtani.

Also there are also narrations in "Tarikh Kabeer" vol 1 p 240 of Imam Al-Bukhari that are authentic,

One of these narrations come from Al-Bukhari, AburRahman ibn Shaybah who is thiqah and narrator of Al-Bukhari from Muhammad ibn Maslamah, the companion of Malik declaring Imam Abu Hanifah to be a Dajjal.

Now Zahid Al-Kawthari tried to say Muhammad ibn Maslamah is Majhul while he has been declared thiqah by many like Abu Hatim Ar-Razi and others...one can see intiqa of ibn Abdil Barr for details

So this criticism exists, shaykh Rais Nadvi also said the story of Istitabah is Mutawatir...

Now we there are possiblities Imam Abu Hanifah repented from aqidah Khalq Al-Quran as the narrations saying he did Taqiyah or from his great son Isma'il ibn Hammad ibn Abi Hanifah saying the creed of Kahlq Quran is that of his great father...then they are narrated trough Isma'il ibn Hammad who is a liar for Ahlul Hadith, but he is reliable for Ahnaf...and other anrrators that are weak for Ahlul Hadith but accepted by Ahnaf

And there are other narrations showing Imam Sahib did not hold this view...

Secondly, as for Imam Abu Hanifah's ray, then I debated with some of my teachers, and people differ wheter the rules told in Hanafi books of Usul come from Imam Sahib.

Some say like Shah Waliullah and ibn Taymiyah that these rules of Khabar Ahad not doing takhsis of the Quran or Hadith being against Qias do not come from Imam Abu Hanifah...neither saying Hadith is against Qias

And Mian Nazeer Sahib also showed in his Mi'ar ul Haqq that some early Hanafi in Khurasan did not accept Khabar Ahad not doing Takhsis of the Quran quoting from Muthalam Ath-Thubut, but it was accepted by Iraqi and it was chosen by majority of late people...

And the author of Muthalam Ath-Thubut also seemed to reject ths concept that Takhsis of Quran cannot happen with Khabar Ahad, as Sahabah were doing Takhsis with Khabar Ahad and where not waiting this narration to be Mashur...

And also Imam Abu hanifah in his fiqh does even do Takhsis of the Quran with weak Hadith and Qias like doing Wudhu wit Nabidh...and other examples given by Ibn Ul Qayim in his I'lam

But other scholars who looked into Hanafi books of Usul Al-Fiqh say these rules fit Abu Hanifah's Fatawa, so there must come from him...one reading books like Usul Shashi and Nur Al Anwar is scary...

So one can excuse Abu Hanifah for not acting on some Khabar AHad, as Kufis were liars, and Imam Abu Hanifah was Qalil ul Hadith and did not travel like Muhadith, so he looked more to ray than people fo Hijaz and others, and say it is a wrong Ijtihad of Imam Sahib as he was a Mujtahid

Also one can excuse Imam Sahib by saying some people exagerated things upon him, he did not say all of this or not to that extent, and the people of Hijaz could not understand that these rules are not trully reflecting Imam's sahib's ray...

So these matters needs investigation, and Imam Abu Hanifah can be excused...yet denying he ever said the Quran is created or was not blamed for his Ray is not serious, and his hiding is face...

Allah knows best

[mosa]

Assalamu alaikum warahmatullahi wabarakatuhu,

Ibn `Umar (May Allah be pleased with them) said: The Messenger of Allah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said, “When a person calls his brother (in Islam) a disbeliever, one of them will certainly deserve the title. If the addressee is so as he has asserted, the disbelief of the man is confirmed, but if it is untrue, then it will revert to him.”
[Al-Bukhari and Muslim].

Wassalam

[Abu Maryam PK]

Bismillah
faqir is not a muslim and not my brother. He is a kafir. Read his kufr online at dufi-forums.

[Abu Maryam PK]

Bismillah
Brother Abu Alqama,
I think ur reason is not correct.
People worship Imams malik and shafa'i as well. How many shafies continue praying qunoot in fajr just because shafaie said so. rahimahullah. And they dont look to evidence and think he was more knowldegeable than anyone.
How many malikis leave their hands on sides and completely ignore ahadith which make folding hands wajib (bukhari). So is the best way to show their jahil muqallids that their imam was spoken against? in case of malik and shafa'i it is impossible to do that. In case of ahmad b hanbal it is more impossible still. It may have some hikmah, but scholar after scholar throughout the centuries, including ahle hadith scholars, as u mentioned, have avoided criticizing the imam, except in an 'ilmi environment and when required, like in a hadith etc. It is enough to show their muqallids that ur imam was not infallible, he himself required u to leave his opinion if it opposes the sahih haith etc. This will neither create enmity and make the task of bringing them to sunnah easier.
Similarly, Jesus 'alaihisalam is worshipped. We only need to show that he is human and humans cant be god. Anything other than that is uncalled for. and unwise...

[safdl]

Bismillah
Brother Abu Alqama,
I think ur reason is not correct.
People worship Imams malik and shafa'i as well. How many shafies continue praying qunoot in fajr just because shafaie said so. rahimahullah. And they dont look to evidence and think he was more knowldegeable than anyone.
How many malikis leave their hands on sides and completely ignore ahadith which make folding hands wajib (bukhari). So is the best way to show their jahil muqallids that their imam was spoken against? in case of malik and shafa'i it is impossible to do that. In case of ahmad b hanbal it is more impossible still. It may have some hikmah, but scholar after scholar throughout the centuries, including ahle hadith scholars, as u mentioned, have avoided criticizing the imam, except in an 'ilmi environment and when required, like in a hadith etc. It is enough to show their muqallids that ur imam was not infallible, he himself required u to leave his opinion if it opposes the sahih haith etc. This will neither create enmity and make the task of bringing them to sunnah easier.
Similarly, Jesus 'alaihisalam is worshipped. We only need to show that he is human and humans cant be god. Anything other than that is uncalled for. and unwise...

Fantastic comment bro. May Allah reward you abundantly.