PDA

View Full Version : The Sahihayn. A Sign of Ahl al-Bid'ah?!


Abu_Abdallah
18th December 2007, 11:03 PM
Bismillah,

The Sahihayn are without a doubt the most sound collections of Prophetic Hadith. It is a manifest sign of the Ahl al-Sunnah, being two most authoritative works for knowledge of the religion. Yet, surprisingly it as been considered once by a scholar a possible sign for the Ahl al-Bid'ah!

Yes, can you imagine that? When I've first read what this scholar, not just anyone but a major Hafidh and Imam, opinioned concerning one of these books amazed me. I asked myself: how can he say something like that, a bit farfetched..?

When I saw a thread elsewhere here, particularly the posts of one, it struck me that the impact of this story is reflected in the acts of another! Here you have it:

Abu 'Uthman al-Bardhâ'i, the student of the Huffadh Abu Zur'ah and Abu Hatim, said:

I saw Abu Zur'ah mention the Sahih book written by Muslim b. al-Hajjâj, then that of al-Fadl b, al-Sa'igh based upon it. Abu Zur'a said to me, "These are people who wanted prominence before their time, so they did something for which they show off; they wrote books the likes of which none had written before to gain for themselves precedence before their time."

One day when I was present, a man came to [Abu Zur'ah] with the Sahih transmitted from Muslim, and Abu Zur'ah started to look through it. When he came across hadiths from Asbât b. Nasr he said to me, "How far this is from sahih! He includes Asbât b. Nasr in his book!" Then he saw in the book Qatan b. Nusayr, so he said to me, "This is even more overwhelming that the first one! Qatan b. Nusayr [incorrectly] attributed hadiths from Thabit [al-Bunani] to Anas [b. Malik]." Then he looked and said, "[Muslim] narrates from Ahmad b. 'Isa al-Misri in his Sahih book; did you not see the people of Egypt complaining that Ahmad b. 'Isa." and he pointed to his tongue as if to say, 'lies,' then he said to me, "[Muslim] narrates from the likes of them and leaves out [hadiths] from Muhammad b. 'Ajlan and those like him. He is making a path for the people of heresy (bida') against us, for they see that they can respond to a hadith that we use as proof against them by saying 'That is not in the Sahih!'"

I saw him denigrating the book and censuring it, so when I returned to Naysabur on the second occasion I mentioned to Muslim b. al-Hajjaj Abu Zur'ah's rejection of his narrations in the book from Asbâr b. Nasr, Qatan b. Nusayr and Ahmad b. 'Isa. Muslim said to me, "Indeed I did deem [the book] Sahih, and what hadiths I included from Asbat, Qatan and Ahmad have been narrated by [other] trustworthy narrators (thiqât) from their [Asbat, Qatan and Ahmad's] shaykhs, except that these [that I included] came from [Asbat and them] through shorter isnads. But I also have these [hadiths] from those who are more reliable that them [Asbat et al.] via longer isnads (bi-nuzul)... and the core report of the hadith is well known through the transmission of trustworthy transmitters."

Muslim came to Rayy and it reached me that he went out to Abu Abdallah Muhammad b. Muslim b. Wâra, and he received him coldly and chastised him for the book, saying essentially what Abu Zur'ah said: this opens us up to the people of bida'. So Muslim apologized to him and said, "Indeed I produced this book and declared it authentic (sihâh), but I did not say that that hadiths I did not include in this book are weak. Rather, I produced this from sahih hadiths to be a collection for me and those who transmit from me without its authenticity being doubted. I did not say that everything else is weak..." and Ibn Wâra accepted Muslim's apology and transmitted [the book].

I've underlined the parts that contain strong criticism, in fact an open refutation, of what others expose.

Abu Maryam PK
19th December 2007, 10:09 AM
Bismillah
Assalamoalaikum
That is why some students of knowledge say Muslim was the first to practically implement sahih li-ghairihi and hasan li-ghairihi. i.e. the undisputed rule that the core text is reported authentically in a hasan lidhathi or sahih lidhatihi text, then the weaker chain becomes sahih/hasan lighirihi. And seeking 'uloo of the sanad is no way 'show off'. it just adds beauty to the collection, though it maybe disputed by someone as strict as Al-Raazi.

Abu_Abdallah
19th December 2007, 10:32 AM
Bismillah
Assalamoalaikum
That is why some students of knowledge say Muslim was the first to practically implement sahih li-ghairihi and hasan li-ghairihi. i.e. the undisputed rule that the core text is reported authentically in a hasan lidhathi or sahih lidhatihi text, then the weaker chain becomes sahih/hasan lighirihi. And seeking 'uloo of the sanad is no way 'show off'. it just adds beauty to the collection, though it maybe disputed by someone as strict as Al-Raazi.

JazakAllah for that.

I posted it because some people seem to rely only on "al-Bukhari & Muslim, and the rest is garbage", when this is surprisingly - in my estimation - something I could not imagine people would say. Apparently, Abu Zur'ah's insight was right:

There are people of innovation who misuse matters.

wa-Allahu Musta'an

Abu Maryam PK
19th December 2007, 01:02 PM
Bismillah
JK. U r right. Ignorance is not a bliss, not at least in Islam. It's a major misconception among some sufiis tat ahlulhadith rely only upon saheehayn, because scholars generally say the hadith is in bukhari/muslim to save themself the trouble of saying 'the hadith is in tirmidhi and it is sahih', beacue merely the 'azw of the hadith to saheehayn is proof of authenticiy, as is known by all sunnis. Infact some sufiis due to the supriority of ahlulhadith on this score became do jealous that they started imams bukhair and muslim of partisanship, some even claimimng their books were distorted, and the 'real' books are elsewhere. Some barelvi scholar was over heard "the hadith is mawzoo'aat shareef of mulla ali qari", to 'prove' his point. The hype is so much that i heard a deobandi scholar taunt the ahluhadith 'you have the bukhaar (urdu for fever) of bukhari and u have the islaam of (imam) muslim'. Alhamdolillah 'ala dhaalik

justabro
19th December 2007, 01:27 PM
JazakAllah for that.

I posted it because some people seem to rely only on "al-Bukhari & Muslim, and the rest is garbage", when this is surprisingly - in my estimation - something I could not imagine people would say. Apparently, Abu Zur'ah's insight was right:

There are people of innovation who misuse matters.

wa-Allahu Musta'an

This is not surprising. Abu Zur'ah's insight was 100% correct. As essential and useful as the Sahihayn are, his fears came true. When Imam al-Hakim wrote his Mustadrak, it was with the stated intent of refuting this erroneous notion being spread by Ahl al-Bida of his times.

Sadly, today, there have even begun calls to "reexamine" the Sahihayn. Some even coming from prominent heads of large Islamic organizations in North America, Wallahul Musta'an. There is much work to be done in this area.

nobody
20th December 2007, 07:20 AM
jazakAllahu khairan. we face this misconception frequently spread by the pillars of deviance as AM said. to know that Abu zurah, muslim and hakim refuting this is very useful for counter attack.