Tuesday, February 10, 2009


War within the Sunni Islam [Courtesy - Abu Alqamah]

Shaykh Irshadul Haqq Al Atharee in His Maqalat answered claims of many Deobandi like Dr Khalid Mahmood that Ahlul Hadeeth are gustakh of Aimah. And shaykh Irshadul Haqq answered showing examples from many Hanafi scholars, their gustakhi of AImah and results of

Blind Following and Prejudice.

Many of quotes are taken from books of Irshadul Haqq like his Maqalat, and also other books of shaykh Irshadul Haqq, as well as other scholars.

Revilement of Sahabah by some Ahnaaf [Deobandis and Barelvis in Indo-Pak]

Prophet saw made du’a for Barakkah for Wail ibn Hujr and his Awlad, but some Ahnaaf could not stand that he narrated ahadeeth of Raful yadayn in last years of Prophet’s life.

In Jami’ul Masaneed of Khawarzimi v 1 p 358 it is said about this Sahabi : “ A’rabi (Bedouin) he did not know laws of Islam”

Muhammad ‘Abid Sindhi in his ”Mawahib Lateefah” and Abdel Hay Luknawee in his “Taleequl Mumajad” both regretted these kinds of sayings.

Judging with a witness and a Yameen is the madhab of majority of scholars Malik, Shafii and Ahmad and majority of Ahle Islam as said by Nawawi in his sharh Muslim, and there are Saheeh Hadeeth about that.

In Sharh Wiqayah, Kitab Da’wa p 205 it is said about this topic :

“ And for us it is an innovation and first who judged with that is Mu’awiyah”

In Nurul Anwar, Mabhathul Ahliyah p 300 it is written after quoting types of ignorance, that would not be forgiven on judgment day :

“ As the ignorance of Shafii in permitting judgment with a witness and a Yameen…and first who judged with that is Mu’awiyah”

Mulla Jioun after saying this, added : “ We said as said by our ancestors ( Ahnaaf), because we would not dare to say that”

In Tawdeeh ma’a Tawsheeh p 477 there is about same topic :

“ It is mentioned in Mabsoot that Qadhau with a witness and a Yameen is a bid’ah and first who judged by that was Mu’awiyah”

Abu Hurayrah and Anas ibn Malik are among most narrating Ahadeeth, and some of their ahadeeth did not suit some muqalidoon, so they invented a rule and went to the extremity of saying these two Sahabi were ghayr Faqeeh.

It is written in Usul Shashi “ The second category of narrators is those who are well known for their hifz and adalah and not for their ijtihad and fatawas like Abu Hurayrah and Anas ibn Malik. If a narration is reported from persons like these two and it is sahih according to you and the narration is according to qias, there is no fear to act upon, but if it opposes qias, then acting upon qias is better… Basing upon this, our companions ( Ahnafs) rejected the hadith of Abu Hurayrah on Musarah against qias.

As for the ikhtilaf in number of narrators, we affirm that the shart to act upon khabar ahad is that it does not opposes Quran and the Sunnah mashurah, the Prophet saw claimed that there will be a lot of hadith after me, check them with the Book of Allah, if they are according accept them, if they are against reject them”

Note : The fabricated hadeeth of confronting Ahadeeth to the Quran is found in many books of Hanafi Usul. And some even attributed it to Saheeh Bukhari.

Ali ibn Muhammad Bazdawi d 682 said : The Prophet saw said :

“ There would be a lot of hadith after me attributed to me, check them to the Book of Allah, if they are according to it accept it, if they are against reject them” ( Usul Bazdawi, Bab Bayan qismul Inqita’)

This narration is also found in “Tawdeeh” by Ubaydullah ibn Mass’ud d 747, author also of Sharh Wiqayah.

In the Sharh of this book “Sharh Tawdeeh” by Mas’ud Taftazani d 792, this hadith is attributed to Sahih Bukhari, and he also affirmed that Yahya ibn Main said this hadith is fabricated by the zanadiqah.

Abdel Aziz Bukhari d 730 said in Sharh of Usul Bazdawi that Imam Bukhari quoted this hadith and he is the specialist of this field, and this is enough for it being sahih, and that is why the critic of others is not taken into account ( Kashf Asrar vol 3 p 10 )

The same is said in Fusul Hawashi Sharh Usul Shashi p 288

In Hashiyah Tawdeeh it is said that Marjani Hanafi got astonished to see hanafi people of Usul (Taftazani, Bukhari, Fusul Hawashi) attributing this to sahih Bukhari while it is not inside ( and Bazdawi, Tawdeeh and Usul Shashi quoted it without attributing it to sahih Bukhari).

The Marfu hadith of confronting Ahadeeth to the Quran is fabricated, see madkhal de Bayhaqi, Suyuti in Miftah Al Jannah p 39, Muwafiqat Shatibi vol 2 p 18, ibn Qayem in Sawaiq Mursalah vol 2 p 437.

Hafiz Qassim ibn Qutlubaghah said in his takhrij of Usul Bazdawi that all the Asaneed of ahadeeth in this meaning are weak. In Fawatih Rahmoot it is said that Abdel Haqq said this hadeeth is fabricated.

So this hadeeth and others in this meaning is the work of Zanadiqah as told by Ibn Ma’een.

As for ghayr faqih, ibn Hummam said that Abu Hurayarh and Anas ibn Malik are Mujtahid and Sahabas came to them for fatawa see Fath Qadir vol 2 p 141

And Abdel Aziz Bukhari also claimed that Abu Hurayra is Mujtahid : “ We do not accept that Abu Hurayrah was not faqih, rather he was faqih and among the conditions of Ijtihad, there was none he did not possess. And he was giving fatawas among sahabas”. Kashf Asrar p 703

And this is also said by author of Fawatih Rahmoot Sharh Muthalam Thuboot.

Note : In Nurul Anwar it is said that Ahadeeth of ghayr Faqeeh Sahabi like Abu Hurayrah and Anas ibn Malik being rejected if it opposes Qias is the madhab of Issa ibn Abban and majority of Mutakhiroon chose it, while Karkhi rejected it, a group followed him. Yet majority of Mutakhiroon have accepted this Batil rule.

Note : Neylwi Mamati also to reject a hadeeth also quoted this rule in his Nidae Haqq, and when Sarfraz Khan Hayati in his “Taskeen Sudoor” rejected this rule, then Neylwi showed and quoted Hanafi books to show that it is rule of majority of Ahnaaf, and it does not come from Neylwi.

Note : Anwar Shah Kashmiri also rejected this false rule, and even said that such words should be taken out of Hanafi books.

Note : Jameel Sakrodwi, teacher at Darul Ulum Deoband, in his “ Ajmalul Hawashi ‘ala Usul Shashee” did not mention the weakness of hadeeth confronting Ahadeeth to the Quran, while it is fabricated, an invention of Zanadiqah, rather he used it as a prove to reject khabar Ahad told to be against Quran.

Revilement of Aimah by some Ahnnaf

“ Yussuf ibn Moosa Al Multi AL Hanafi said : “ One who reads in book of Bukhari, he will become Zindeeq” ( man Nathara fi Kitabi Bukhari Tazandaqa) ( Shazratu Zahab v 7 p 40 and Abnau uL Ghumar bi Abnail Umar of ibn Hajar v 4 p 348)

Also see what Muhammad ibn Mussa Al Bulasaghooni said : “ If I had power, I would take Jiziyah from Shaf’iyah” ( Meezanul I’tidal of Dhahabi v 4 p 52)

And Issa ibn Abi Bakr ibn Ayoob Al Hanafi was asked why he was Hanafi while all his family was Shafii, and he answered : “ Don’t you want there is a Muslim in the family ?” ( Fawaid Bahiyah p 152-153)

Muhibudeen Muhammad ibn Muhammad d 789 was a Hanafi scholar. It is said about him in “ Shazratu Zahab” p 310 that he was doing tanqees and Tawheen of Sahfii and was considering that as worship.

Imam Safkudri of Ahnaaf is famous for his fatwa of Ahnaaf daughters not marrying Shawafi, but Ahnaaf can marry Shafi girls, see Bazaziyah, Fath Qadeer, Bahr ur Raiq.

One can even see in chapter prayer behind other madhaib that is after behind innovators, that how many Hanafi scholars said it was makrooh to pray behing Shawafi and some even said Makrooh tahrimi, meaning prayer behing Shawafi is batil. What is worse is in these books, they even quote some Hanafi scholars doing takfeer of Shawafi because of their saying : “ I am believer Insha Allah”.

Abu Layth Samarqandi said : “ Following Shafii in prayer is only permissible when he is not Muta’sib, about Emaan he does not say “ I am Moumin insha Allah”, …whatever comes out of his body more than Sabilayn ( like blood) then he makes Wudhu, if Najasah fell in water greater than Qultain, he does not wudhu with this water, he does not do Raful Yadayn after and before Ruku’..” ( Fatawa Nawazil p 48-49)

Except last conditions, all others are mentioned in Qadee Khan v 1 p 91, Radul Mukhtar v 1 p 563, Alamagiri v 1 p 84, Tatar Khaniyah v 1 p 652, look at fathul Qadeer for this mention v 1 p 313.

Luknawi also mentioned in his Ta’liaqat Sunniyat ‘al Fawaid Al Bahiyah that Amir Itqani also thinks that if a Hanafi prays behind a Shafii, then salah of the Hanafi is batil behind the Shafii because of Raful Yadayn of the Shafii Imam, and Luknawee answered him in the best way.

In Bada’I Sana’I, it is also said that Raf Yadayn is Mawjibu Fasad and Makrooh Tahrimi, v 1 p 548 and also in Sharh Munyah as quoted in Faydul Baree v 2 p 257.

Shah Waliullah mentioned that Salaf had ikhtilaf in Najasah, conditions of Salah, yet they all prayed behind each other.

Imam Ahmad whose position is that the man who received Hijamah or whose blood comes out, his wudhu is broken, was asked about someone whose nose ran and blood came out and he prayed without doing wudhu and Imam Ahmad answered : Would I not pray behind Sayd ibn Musayab ? As quoted in Hujjatullah Balighah v 1 p 159 about Ikhtilaf of this Ummah.

So Sayd ibn Musayab, for him blood coming out of the body does not break the wudhu, and Imam Ahmad did not see any Kirahah in praying behind the like of him.

While for the same reason, all these Hanafi fuqahas tell that Salah behind them is makrooh Tanzeehi and some even said Tahrimi.

So this is the result : dividing the Ummah in different groups, fighting each other, weakening the Ummah, making it an easy prey for Kuffar.

These differences reach point of having four Musalah in Haram Shareef of Makkah, and it is forbidden in Hanafi fiqh that there be two Jama’ah in same mosque, but yet these people because of their Ta’asub in Taqleed left their Madhab and Tqleed of it on this point.

Some even like Shamee went on to compare Masjidul Haram as a Mosque of streets, enabling by this way repetitions of second Jama’ah, third and four, but it is not hidden to anybody that Masjidul Haram does have regular Imam, so it is neverin hukm of Masjid of streets.

And what about many mosques in Shaam and Misr.

Sha’rani quoted from his shaykh Ali Khawas that he heard stories from Shafiyah and Ahnaaf doing Iftar before time in day to strengthen themselves for debate with opponents. ( Mizan Kubra v 1 p 42)

And Anwar Shah Kashmiri also quoted that in some Hanafi books there is a chapter called : “ If a Hanafi does Munazarah with a Shafii in Ramadan, and he thinks that Sawm will weaken him, then Iftar is permissible for him” and Kashmiri criticized such fatawa from some Ahnaaf. ( Fayd ul Bari v 2 p 196, Bab Fadlu Salatil Fajr fi Jama’ah)

So the matter did not stop from changing Allah’s rules on Iftar and others, it went to the extremity of killing each other, burning others houses.

Allamah Yaqoot Al Hamawi narrated some events of Ray : “ There were fights between Ahnaaf and Shawafi’, and Shawafi even being less always became ghalib, and Hanafi of Rustaq were coming in help of their fellows but it did not change anything. And this went to the extremity that only those who hided their madhab or those who transferred their homes. If they did not do that, no one would survive” ( Mu’jam Buldan v 3 p 117)

About Asbahan Al Hamawi writes : “ At this time and before that in Asbahan and cities close to it, Kharab extended between Shafiyah and Hanafiyah because of lot of Fitan and Ta’asub. They fought continuously and when one party was ghalib on others, it was destroying and burning other’s homes, and they did not feel any shame doing that” ( Mu’jam Buldan v 1 p 209)

Nowadays, in Afghanistan and paksitan’s border to it, a lot of Ahlul Hadeeth Madaris and Masajeed were burned by Deobandi Muta’asib.

See some photos brought by Shaykh Zubayr Ali Zay at end of his Risalah “ Bid’ati ke piche Namaz” about a Mosque destroyed in Butgram some years ago by local Deobandis and they even claimed it in newspapers.

So yesterday it was against Shawafi, and in these places, as there is no Shafii, so they attack Ahlul Hadeeth, and it is well known that generally Ahlul Hadeeth of Indo-Pak take many Usul of fiqh from Shafii, and many famous masail like Qiraah Khalful Imam and Rafu yadayn, putting hands on chests, saying Ameen loudly.

It has came to me from mutawatir reports from Afganee students of knowledge that many Taliban rulers were forbidding teachings of books other than Ahnaaf, even beating those doing Raful Yadayn.

I heard shaykh Shafeequ Rahman Madni teacher at Jamiyah Lahore Islamiyah, also known as Jamiyah Rehmaniyah in garden town Lahore, saying he went at Taliban’s time in Afghanistan, and the Taliban delegate told him not to do Raful Yadayn in the Masjid, or to pray in a house not in the Masjid. So these people cannot stand ikhtilaf.

And this Ta’asub was not specific to Afghanistan, but in India there were two books written by Ahnaaf doing takfeer of Ahlul Hadeeth and telling to expel them from Masajeed.

“ Intizamul Masajeed bi Ikhraj Ahle fitan wal Mafaseed” of Muhammad Ludhiyanvi in which he said that Ahlul Hadeeth were apostates, he asked that they should be killed and no tawbah should be accepted from them. And this book is full of lies.

“ Jami’ Shawahid fi Ikhrajil Wahabiyeen minal Masajeed” written by Wasee Ahmad Soorti in 1883 H, and having signatures of many Ahnaaf from Ludhyanah, Deoband, Gangooh, Pani Pat, Rampoor and others.

Rasheed Ahmad Gangohi, Mahmood Hassan, Muhammad Ya’qoob Nanotwi and others signed this part of Jami’ Shawahid as told by Nadheer Ahmad Rehmani in his book " Ahle Hadeeth or Siyasat" :

“ When the Aqaid of this Jama’at are against Jumhoor, then being Bid’ati is clear, and like Tajseem, Tahleel of more than four wives, tajweez of Taqiyah, saying bad words of fisq and Kufr on Salaf, then in matters of Namaz and Nikah, and Zabeehah there must be Ihtiyat from them like Ihtiyat with Rawafeed”

Allah’s help is sought from lies.

Now that last book had many lies against Ahlul Hadeeth, and because of it, Nadheer Hussain Dehlawi was arrested and close to be beaten by the Shareef of Makkah that was opposed at that time to Wahabiyah and Tahreek of Muhammad ibn Abdil Wahab.

Many Ahnaaf could not stand teachings of hadeeth and propagation of masail of Malik, Shafii, Ahmad, Thawree, Layth or Awzaee in the Indian sub-continent. So to protect their fiqh, they could answer in scientific manners to Allamah Nadheer Hussain Dehlawi, but more and more people were coming in Dehli to learn hadeeth from him.

So they thought the best way to stop spread of Ahlul Hadeeth was to arrest one of their main leader, and when Allamah Nadheer Hussain came to Hajj, some Ahnaaf , among them Imdadullah Makki, Rahmatullah Hindi, Abdel Qadir Badayooni son of Fadl Rasool Badayooni, wrote to the Shareef, and Allamah Nadheer Hussain was put in jail and asked about his creed. And he was only freed because of british demand.

And if some people say that Ahlul Hadeeth were created by British, then why was Nadheer Hussain then put in jail for one year by british government ?

See Maulana Nadheer Ahmad Rehmani’s book “ Ahlul Hadeeth or Syasat” where he tells that Imdadullah Makki was also among people plotting against Nadheer Hussain Dehlawi, and how he gathered with Bralwi thinking Abdel Qadir Badayooni for same purpose : Targeting head of Ahlul Hadeeth.

And nowadays people expect flowers from Ahlul Hadeeth, that they will not show people what Imdadullah Makki wrote in his books from Shirkiyat and Khurafat.

And Allah’s help is sought from Thulm of these Ahnaaf.

Many Ahnaaf did not even leave their own Ahnaaf who followed saheeh ahadeeth and left their madhab, like Abul Hassan Kabeer.

Shaykh Abul Hassan Kabeer is known for his trials he was put to for his belief in putting hands upon chest. Muhammad Abid Sindhee in his book “ Tarajimu Shuyukh” states that the shaykh performed this action based upon hadeeth and whilst going into, coming out of rukoo and going up for third rak’ah, he would do raful Yadayn and place his hands upon his chest. In his time shaykh Abu Tayyib Sindhee would debate with Abul Hassan, but could provide no answer when the proofs were given to him.

So he went and complained to the Qaadhi of Madeenah who arrested Abul hassan. When the Qadhi heard proofs he realized this man was a specialist in the various branches of religion and it was befitting to release him. It remained like this for many years for the shaykh. Then a time came when a Qadhi was appointed who was a Hanafi Blind follower and it was no long before a complaint was made to him concerning the shaykh’s views. Abul Hassan was summoned and ordered to stop Raful yadayn and to place the hands below Navel. However shaykh Abul Hassan merely answered he would not obey this order. Therefore the shaykh was imprisoned for six days in a drak place which was extremely uncomfortable. Thereafter the people of Madeenah began to come to the noble shaykh and advise him to accept what the Qadhi was saying so he could be freed. The shaykh replied he would not perform any action that was not authentically proven from the Prophet saw and he would not abandon that which was proven. Thereafter, the shaykh took an oath that he would continue to do this. After this, many people went to the Qadhi to request the release of the shaykh. The Qadhi reluctantly allowed this, but vowed that if ever he saw the shaykh putting his hands upon his chest he would putt him back in prison.

The shaykh was eventually released and thereafter he would cover himself with a cloth and put his hands upon his chest whilst in prayer. Later when the news of the death of the Qadhi reached him, the shaykh, who was praying, flung the cloth away and placed his hands upon his chest openly.

This event as been quoted by Badi’udeen Shah Rashidi Sindhee in his risalah called in english “ The position of the hands in the Salah of the Prophet saw”

So The Hanafi Qadhi could not stand Imam Shafii’ view in the Salah.

An example of Ta’asub in last century is Zahid Al Kawthari, this man mocked Shafii, Malik, Ahmad and many Aimah from Salaf, and yet I don’t know any Hanafi scholar who criticized him, rather like his student Abu Ghuddah they are full of praise. And Yussuf Binnori Deobandi also praised him a lot in his introduction to “Maqalat Kawthari” with lot of praise.

Ta'n on Malik as quoted by Ghumari

About Imam Malik, Kawthari said p 116 of Taneeb : “ The big Qudama of Malikiyah have three opinions towards such sayings of Malik” and after mentioning them he said : “ And it is clear from that that these sayings, if they are proven from what is attributed to him ( Malik), then the one who says that is a Mujrim ( criminal) and how is the criminal made Taqleed in his crimes ?”

Ta’n on Shafii

Kawthari made fun of Imam Shafii on p 23 and after for his having two sayings, then he mentioned a lie that a student traveled to take ilm from Shafii and when he came back, and a man asked him : is there a doubt about Allah ?, and the student answered : there are about this two sayings of Shafii.!!!

Kawthari is also famous for his authentification of fabricated hadeeth that Shafii will be more harmful than SHaytan for this Ummah.

Ta’n on Ahmad

Kawthari said p 141 on his Taneeb : “ And there are not few among Fuqahah who did not agree to put sayings of Ahmad among sayings of Fuqahah as he is a muhadith ghayr Faqih for them”

Zahid Kawthari said in his Maqalat ( p 330 Said Company Karachi, p 404 Maktabah Azhariyah) also introduced by Yussuf Binnori, about kitab Tawheed of Ibn Khuzaymah :

“ And its author Ibn Khuzaymah called it “ Kitab Tawheed” and it is for Muhaqiq of Ahle Ilm Kitab Shirk”

Same is said in Taneeb p 29 published in Beyroot 1981. And his Taneeb has been translated in urdu by Sarfraz Khan Safdar.

So this is a collective failure of Ahnaaf not to criticize such statements, rather to introduce these kinds of books, and print them and recommend them.

And it is not hidden from any student of knowledge, that according to Madhab of Jumhoor, a Muhadith calling to innovation is majrooh and his narrations are not accepted.

It is written in Faydh Subhani Sharh Urdu Muntakhabul Husami v 1 p 364 ed Meezan, translated and explained by Jameel Ahmad Sakrodwi, teacher at Darul Ulum Deoband :

“ As for Sahib of Hawa, then Madhab Mukhtar is that narrations of those who took his Khawaish Nafs as deen ( Intahala al hawa) and called people to it, are not accepted, because Muhajatu and call to Hawa is a cause calling to Taqawwul ( iftira as translated in urdu) so he is not trusted for hadeeth of Rasoolillahi Saw”

And the Sharih agreed with that, and said that because of trying to prove wrong Aqaid and calling to it, then narrations are not accepted.

So if Ibn Khuzaymah was a caller to shirk or innovations, then his narrations would be mardood, according to Hanafi rules.

And Ibn Khuzaymah is agreed upon to be thiqah, so telling his book was book of shirk is rejecting all what scholars of hadeeth said about him, and also a blame to Salaf for not criticizing it, and remaining silent of so-called imaginary shirk.

And how many others did Kawthari accused in his Maqalat and his Ta’neeb to be Mujasim or leaning to Tajseem like Abu Shaykh, while no Salaf said that about them.

And Allah’s help is sought from Thulm of these Ahnaaf on Muhaditheen…

And Ameen Okarvee, student of Sarfraz Khan, said about Ahmad ibn Sa’eed Darimi in “ Masoodi Firqe ke I’tiradhat ke Jawabat” p 41-42 and “ Tajliyat Safdar” published by Jam’iyat Isha’at Uloomil Hanfiyah v 2 p 348 :

“ The narrator is Ahmad ibn Sa’eed Darimi, who was a Bid’ati from Mujassimah Firqah”

While none of Muhadithoon ever said that, and he is a narrator from Bukhari and Muslim, agreed upon to be thiqah.

So Ameen Okarvee is on same way of Zahid Al Kawthari for calling people Mujasim without quoting this jarh from Salaf.

Shaykh Zubayr Ali Zay in his book Nasrul Baree fi Takhreej Juzz Qiaraat of Imam Bukharee, mentionned in the introduction what Ameen Okarvee Deobandi Hayati said about Imam Bukhari.

This Deobandi wrote in his tahqeeq of Juzz Qiraat in introduction p 12 that : " The Imam and teacher of Imam Bukharee, Abul Hafs Kabeer sent a message to Imam Bukharee to teach Hadeeth and not to give fatwa"

He mentionned the reason for this on the same page quoting from Mabsoot of Sarkhasi Hanafee v 30 p 298 : " That if two baby drink milk from same goat, their Nikah will be forbidden"

Imam Luknawi denied this story told by Sarkhasee to be true, knowing the great fiqh of Imam Bukharee in his Fawaid Al Baheeyah p 188.

And there is no Sanad from Sarkhasi to Abu Hafs Kabeert despite more than a century between them. So is this not a revilement and gustakhi against Emir Al Moumineen fil Hadeeth.

Anwar Shah Kashmiri in his introduction of Fayd Al Bari, and Zakariyah Kandahlwi in his introduction of Lami’ Durari, both said that Imam Bukhari was a Mujtahid and denied him being a muqalid of Imam Shafii.

Know brother that Nadheer Hussain Dehlawi in his book “ Mi’yarul Haqq” praised Imam Abu Haneefah, and Thanaullh Amritsari while studying at Darul Ulum Deoband ( he also studied Bukhari from Mahmoodul Hassan Deobandi) answered some claims of Ahlul Hadeeth being disrespectful towards their Imam, and he quoted them what Nadheer Hussain Dehlawi wrote about Imam Abu Haneefah, so they could not say answer, as quoted in Tarikh Ahlil Hadeeth of Mir Muhamadi Sioalkoti.

One can look at shaykh Ata’ullah Bhujiyani’s Ta’leeqat on urdu translation of “ Hayat Abi Haneefah” of Abu Zur’ah Missri, and when Abu Zur’ah Missri mentioned some criticism of some Muhadithoon on Abi Haneefah and defended Abu Haneefah, shaykh Bhujiyani also defended Abu Haneefah and said he might have some excuses for what Muhadith criticized him with and his conditions on Khabar Ahad and others…

Now if some Ahlul Hadeeth quote words of Bukhari from his Tareekh, or from his kitabul Heel from Saheeh Bukhari, or other scholars like Humaydi, ibn Abi Shaybah, Ali ibn Madeeni on khiyar Majilis as quoted in Nassai, Wakee’ as quoted in Tirmidhi about Halalah and Ish’ar of camels, then they would do the same if it was another Imam, and they do it to rectify some mistakes, so people do not blindly follow their Imam, not because of any hate of Abu Haneefah.

Rather Ahlul Hadeeth love every Imam and do istifadah from them, and take their words if they see according to daleel.

Nadheer Hussain Dehlawi always prayed in Jami’ Masjid of Dehli behind Hanafi, so Ahlul Hadeeth only had to separate when they were expelled by Ahnaaf from their mosques.

People can look in books of Kibar Ahlul Hadeeth like Nawab Sideeq Hassan Khan, Abder Rahman Mubarakpoori, Abdel Haqq ‘Atheemabadee or others if they do find any gustakhi on Abu Haneefah.

And yet many people call them La Madhabi, Zindeeq, Shi’a’s little brothers, and many other names.

This is the same as some’s takfeer of Shawafi’ and mockery of Aimah, yet they did not find any Shafii so they attacked the people they saw against their Madhab…

Al Hamdulilah, some Ahnaaf like Mufti Kifayatullah said in his fatawa that Ahlul Hadeeth were from Ahle Sunnah, eating their Zabeehah, Nikah with them all of that is saheeh, and by leaving Taqleed one is not expelled from Ahle Sunnah wal Jama’ah. See Kifayatul Mufti v 1 p 325. Answer N 370.

Allamah Abdel Hay Luknawi, despite having differences with Allamah Basheer Sahsawani and writings books refuting him on Ziyarah of Qabr Nabawi, then when Allamah Basheer came to Farang Mahali, he was received with honors by Abel Hay Luknawi and remained many days here.

But yet, some minors like Ameen Okarvee, Habeebullah Daerwi and others called in Pakistan Kawthari Mashrab people, are still insulting Ahlul Hadeeth, attacking Imam Bukhari, saying Ahlul Hadeeth are not Sunnis in the same way of Zahid AL Kawthari.

About Muhammad ibn Abdil Wahab, there are two fatawas in “ Fatawah Rasheediyah” published by Makatabah Rehmaniyah in Lahore, and they praise Muhammad ibn Abdil Wahab saying he had ‘umdah ‘Aqeedah, was a pious man, was Hamabli and also ‘Amil bil Hadeeth, he was fighting shirk and bid’ah.

Sarfraz Khan in his “ Taskeen Sudoor” p 266 ed sep 2004 said about Muhammad ibn Abdil Wahab : “ And he was a caller of Tawheed and Sunnah, and he mad some ‘Awami mistakes in Waqti Masalahat, and this is why he was badnam, and Buzurg like Allamah Shamee and Hadhrat Madni were not protected from being Mutaathir ( by his bad reputation), but the right position is that of Allamah Aloosi and Hadhrat Gangohi”

But yet some Ahnaaf, inspired by the late Kawthari still insult scholars of Najd, mock them, call them misguided…

As Salah wa Salam ‘ala Nabi saw

So is same violence of Ahnaaf against anything that opposes their Madhab.

They do tafseeq, revile, do takfeer, beat, put in jail and all that opposes their madhab.

May Allah save us from Blind Taqleed

Habibur Rahman principal of Darul Ulum Deoband said in his Hashiyah of “ Jalalayn” that Shaykhul Islam Ibn Taymiyah was misguided and a misguiding others ( Dhal wa Mudhil).

So like Kawthari calling to ‘Aqeedah of Salaf, leaving Blind Taqleed, fighting shirk and innovations, all of this is misguidance.

Muhammad Hassan Sanbhuli in his sharh of ‘Aqaid Nassafi compared Ibn Taymiyah, ibnul Qayem, Shawkani, ibn Hazm and Dawood Thahiri to dogs.

So one can see how these people stand ikhtilaf in Taqleed, and other matters. For them Fiqh of their Imam is a law that cannot be abandoned.

This is why Mufti Muhammad Shafi’ Deobandi wrote in his ‘Ma’ariful Quran” v 3 p 364 :

“ The different Masalik of Fuqahah of this Ummah have same level as in precedent time different Sharai’ of Prophets before Islam, despite being different, they were all Allah’s hukm”

All different laws before send to Prophets were all Wahee from Allah, and one abrogated the other, but are differences in Ijtihadat of Fuqahah from Allah ?

Shaykh Irshadul Haqq said : This is a great lie, Allah said in the Quran : “ If it was from other than Allah, they would find in it a lot of ikhtilaf”

So all ikhtilaf do not come from Allah, some are right and some are wrong, and Allah will give double recompense to those who were right and one recompense to the one who made erred.

And Ahlul Hadeeth respected these ikhtilaf based on daleel, as in matters of Qiraat Khalful Imam. Ahlul Hadeeth from India favor the position of Imam Shafii and Bukhari that Muqtadi should read Fatihah behind Imam in all cases, whether Imam reads loudly or silently.

Yet, Ahlul Hadeeth do not say that those who based on Ijtihad do not read behind Imam, that there prayers are Batil.

Muhammad Gondahlwi, who was also teacher of Shaykh Rabi’ Al Madkhalee, said in introduction of his book : “ Khayrul Kalam fi Wujub Qira’ah Khalfil Imam” p 33 :

“ Our Maslak is that Fatihah Khalful Imam is because of being a furu’I and ikhtilafi, an Ijtihadi masalah. One who does extreme tahqeeq and thinks that Faihah is not fardh, whether in Jahri or Sirri prayer, and he acts on his tahqeeq, then his prayer is not batil”

While some Hanafi said that one who reads Fatihah behind Imam, his teeth should be broken and mud should be put in his mouth.

Hussain ibn ‘Ali Saghnani d 711 said in “ Nihayah sharh Hidayah” as quoted in “ Imamul Kalam” p 40 of Abdel Hay Luknawi about the one who reads behind Imam :

“And from Abdallah Al Balkhi, he said that his mouth should be filled with mud ( turab), and it has been said that it is Mustahab to break his teeth”

Haskafi said in Durul Mukhtar v 1 p 544-555 :

“ In Durarul Bihar from Mabsoot Khawahir, it is added that it ( prayer) is fasid and he becomes a Fasiq”

For this purpose some Hanafi even invented some ahadeeth.

Like the hadeeth “ One who reads behind the imam, his mouth will be filled with fire” mentioned by ibn Tahir in his “Tazkirah” and he said : “ There is in it Mamoon ibn Ahmad Al Harawi, Dajjal, narrates fabrications”

Abdel Hay Luknawi said in his “Ta’liqul Mumajad ‘ala Muwatta Muhammad” p 99 :

“ And Sahib Nihayah and others mentioned it in marfoo’ way with words : “ There will be Jamrah ( burning stone) in his mouth” and there is no basis for it ( la Asla lahu)”

And this Mamoon ibn Ahmad Al Harawi also narrated the hadeeth : “ one who does raful yadayn in prayer, there is no prayer for him”, as mentioned by Ibn Tahir in his “ Tazkiratul Mawdoo’ah” p 87, as taken from Sisila Da’eefah N 568 and 569.

This is consequence of Ta’asub and Blind Taqleed.

In "Hadeeth" of august, shaykh Zubayr Ali Zay has shown somes lies of Habeebullah Daerwi Hayati Deobandi as well as some of his revilments of Aimah.

Daerwi said about Imam Bukhari in his Nur Sabah p 154: " Hadhrat Imam Bukhari ki be cheni ( lack of calm)"

About Khateeb Baghdadee , Daerwi said in his " Tawdeeuhul Kalam par ek nadhar" p 153 : " Khateeb Baghdadi is a strange man"

About Bayhaqi, he said in his nadhar on Tawdeehul Kalam p 136 : " O dear readers, in this quote Hadhrat Imam Bayhaqi did a zabardast Khiyanat"

About Hafiz Daraqutni, he said in the same book p 306 : " By which Daraqutni's partisanship and biasness is clear"

About Al Hafiz, Al Imam Abu 'Ala Nisapoori, Daerwi dares to say p 304 of the same book : " Abu 'Ala hafiz is a Thalim ( unjust)"

So when will these ghulat Muqalid will stop their violence and revilments of Aimah ?

It is well-known that Muqalid do not rely on Muhadith they sometimes accuse of being Shafii, or tell to be Muta'asib and others, as if these people did not fear Allah, and only Ahnaf were non biased people.

No comments: