Showing posts with label Imam Malik. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Imam Malik. Show all posts

Thursday, February 18, 2010

Judge not lest ye be Judged - Code of Judicial Ethics.

The NRO judgment has struck down the law also for being violative of Article 62(f), which requires a member of parliament to be, ‘Sagacious, righteous and non-profligate and honest and ameen’. Hence, the bench will now judge the moral standing of parliamentarians on these stringent standards set by the notorious Zia regime. This article of the constitution has always been considered undemocratic and a tool to keep members of parliament insecure. If parliamentarians, who also go through the rigorous test of contesting elections in the public domain, are to be subjected to such exacting moral standards then the scrutiny of judges should be higher still. After all, judges are selected purely on the value of their integrity and skills. Judges who erred in the past seek understanding on the plea that they subsequently suffered and have made amends. Should others also not be given the same opportunity to turn over a new leaf? How will sagacity and non-profligate behaviour be judged? Another aspect of the judgment By Asma Jahangir Saturday, 19 Dec, 2009 http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/dawn-content-library/dawn/the-newspaper/editorial/another-aspect-of-the-judgment-929


عدلیہ دائرہ کار سے تجاوز کر گئی ہے‘
علی سلمان
بی بی سی اردو ڈاٹ کام، لاہور
http://www.bbc.co.uk/urdu/pakistan/2009/12/091219_hrcp_asma_as.shtml
آخری وقت اشاعت: ہفتہ, 19 دسمبر, 2009, 05:25 GMT 10:25 PST
عدلیہ کا کام ارکانِ پارلیمان کی اخلاقیات کی جانچ پڑتال نہیں
پاکستان انسانی حقوق کمشن کی چیئرپرسن عاصمہ جہانگیر نے این آر او کے بارے میں سپریم کورٹ کے فیصلے پر تبصرہ کرتے ہوئے کہا ہے ’عدلیہ اپنے دائرہ کار سے تجاوز کرگئی ہے اوریہ بہت ہی خطرناک بات ہوگی کہ سپریم کورٹ اراکین پارلیمان کی اخلاقیات پر فیصلے دے۔‘

“quote”


Second, the short order found the NRO to be against Quran and Sunnah as it held the ordinance violative of Article 227, which says that all existing laws shall be brought in conformity with the injunctions of Islam as laid down in the Holy Quran and Sunnah and no law shall be enacted which is repugnant to such injunctions. Dubious MPs to face the axe Thursday, December 17, 2009 http://www.thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDetail.aspx?ID=26131&Cat=13&dt=12/16/2009

“unquote”

"QUOTE"

113. Besides above, the principle of equality (Musawat), as enshrined in Article 25 of the Constitution, has its origin in the Islamic teachings. Reference in this behalf may be made to Muhammad (PBUH) Encyclopedia of Seerah (Sunnah, Da’wah and Islam), 1st Edn. 1986. Vol.IV (p:147-148). Relevant portion therefrom, on the subject of “Equality” is reproduced hereinbelow for convenience:-

“Equality Equality is an essential requisite of justice, because when there is discrimination and partiality between people, there is no justice. The Code of Allah demands absolute equality of rights between all people without any discrimination or favouritism between man and man and between man and woman on any count.

The Qur’an declares. “O mankind! Behold, we have created you all out of a male and a female, and have made you into nations and tribes, so that you may know each other. Surely, the noblest of you in the Sight of Allah is the one who is most pious.”
(49:13)

This verse clearly establishes equality of all men and women on the basis of common parentage, and as such discounts all claims of superiority or discrimination for any person or group of persons. There is no rational or logical ground for such claims, and therefore, it is unreal and unnatural to demand discrimination between man and man or between man and woman on any count.

Const.P.76/2007, etc. 182

Besides’ all human beings are servants (ibid) of Allah and therefore equal. They are all created by Allah and all are His servants alone. As such they are all equal and enjoy equal rights in all areas of life. In His service and obedience, all humans are equal and stand on the same level without any discrimination all as one race and one people before Him, no one claiming any special privileges and honours.

In Surah al-A’raf we have these words: “When your Lord drew forth from the children of Adam from their loins their descendants, and made them testify concerning themselves, saying: ‘Am I not your Lord?’ They said: Yes we do testify.’” (7:172). And then we find these words; “Surely, this Brotherhood of yours is single Brotherhood, and I am your Lord: therefore serve and obey Me (and no other).” (21:92 and 23:52))

This concept of equality bestows equal rights upon all members of the human race and leaves no room for any discrimination of any kind, whether by colour, creed, race or sex. If there is any discrimination anywhere, it is man made, not divinely ordained, and therefore, must be denounced, condemned and discarded. Any such discrimination is unnatural and artificial and goes against the basic Doctrine of Tawhid. As such it will endanger the right balance and stability of human social life.

If there is any discrimination for any man or woman in Islam, it is on merit and on merit alone. Those who develop their personal relationship with Allah fear Const.P.76/2007, etc. 183 Allah, attain degrees of piety and taqwa of Allah, and reach higher stations of excellence in the Sight of Allah. However, even they stand equal with others in the enjoyment of rights in society, and can claim no superiority or favouritism over others so far as social rights are concerned. This basic doctrine also demands equality of all men and women before the law and negates any kind of discrimination between them. This is the essential requirement of the Rule of Law in Islam: that all men and women are equal in the eyes of the Law and must be treated as such. Respect for human dignity, upon which the Prophet of Islam laid so much emphasis, also demands equality for all men and women in all fields of human activity. (For details see under “Basic Human Rights” in Volume III of this work)

Equality of Rights

It is implicit in the Doctrine of Tawhid and is also an essential ingredient of justice and equality that all people must enjoy equal rights without discrimination on any count in all fields and departments of life. In the enjoyment of social, political and religious rights, there must not be any discrimination between ruler and ruled, employer and employee, rich and poor and man and woman: all should enjoy these rights freely, equally and without any check or restriction. Denial of any of these rights to any member would, in fact, be a denial of the Doctrine of Tawhid.

Equal Treatment

The logical consequences of the above principle in practice demands absolutely equal treatment of all citizens, without any reservation, in all areas of life. It Const.P.76/2007, etc. 184 also requires: (a) equality of opportunity of education, training, employment and promotion in all services for all citizens, irrespective of their social or political status and influence; (b) equal treatment in all departments, without discrimination of any kind between rich and poor, big and small or workers and employers; (c) the right to a livelihood of every member of the Muslim state. It is the birthright of every person to have a guaranteed decent living and decent wage from the state. This calls indirectly for equitable distribution of wealth between all the members of the state on the principle of maximum circulation of the total wealth of the nation, discouraging, as far as possible, the concentration of wealth among a few people (59:7); and (d) it is also implicit in the above principle that for the political and social stability of society and state, matters of national interest must be decided through a process of consultation with the people, and all state affairs on all levels must be decided on the basis of the concept of consultation in its true sense, as envisaged by the Qura’n (42:38) and practiced by the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH).”

114. Corruption and corrupt practices, being a crime, if proved, against a ‘holder of public office’ takes away his qualification to contest the election because, prima facie, he has breached the trust of his electorate. Therefore, by inserting Section 33F in the NAO, 1999 by means of Section 7 of the NRO, 2007, possibility of raising objection on the qualification of a person to be elected or chosen as a member of the Parliament has been negated for limited purpose, in Const.P.76/2007, etc. 185 view of Article 62(f) of the Constitution, a person having been convicted/sentenced by the Court under the NAO, 1999 shall stand absolved as the case has been withdrawn against him or the proceedings have been terminated, pending in any Court including the High Court and Supreme Court, in appeal or whatever the case may be. Therefore, instead of following the command of Article 5 of the Constitution, Section 7 of the NAO has contravened Article 62(f) of the Constitution. It is true that Section 62(f) of the Constitution cannot be considered self-executory but if a person involved in corruption and corrupt practices has been finally adjudged to be so, then on the basis of such final judgment, his candidature on the touchstone of Article 62(f) of the Constitution can be adjudged to the effect whether he is sagacious, righteous, non-profligate, honest or Ameen.

115. It is true that on an objection against a candidate, without any support of evidence, the provisions of Article 62 of the Constitution cannot be pressed into service, because it is a provision of Constitution which is not self executory. Reference in this behalf may be made to Muhammad Afzal v. Muhammad Altaf Hussain (1986 SCMR 1736).

116. However, with reference to examining the vires of Section 7 of the NRO, 2007, in pursuance of which Section Const.P.76/2007, etc. 186 33F has been inserted in the NAO, 1999, with an approach that a ‘holder of public office’, as per the mandate of law, has been absolved without following the legal course from the allegations of corruption or corrupt practices, which also keeps the element of trust in its fold, and washed him from all such like sins, then how he can be considered qualified to contest the election because conviction and sentence under Section 9 of the NAO, 1999 has not been set aside legally, and whether such ‘holder of public office’, with a stigma upon him to be corrupt and involved in corrupt practices, can become a member of the Parliament, which is a sovereign body, representing the people of Pakistan. Article 62 (f) has been incorporated in the Constitution by means of President’s Order No.14 of 1985 (The Revival of Constitution Order, 1985) and it being a part of the Constitution has to be taken into consideration by the Courts, while examining the case of a convict, involved in corruption and corrupt practices, who has attained the status of innocent person by means of a law which has washed away his conviction/sentence by withdrawal or termination of cases or proceedings, however, subject to furnishing strong evidence for establishing the allegation mentioned in Article 62(f) of the Constitution. As it has been noted hereinabove that this provision was inserted by a dictator but it is still continuing Const.P.76/2007, etc. 187 although five National Assemblies and Senate had been elected and completed their terms, but no effective steps, so far have been taken in this behalf.

16. The word “Ameen” difined in the following books which is to the following effect:

1 The Concise Encyclopedia of Islam at page 41: “al-Amin. A name of the Prophet, given to him by the Quraysh before the revelation of Islam, meaning the ‘Trustworthy One’. The word is used as a title for an organization official in a position of trust, such as the treasurer of a charitable organization, a guild, and so forth”. 2. Urdu Daera-e-Maharafil Islamia at page 279-80 Const.P.76/2007, etc. 267

3. The Encyclopaedia of Islam (New Edition) Vol.1 at 436-37 “Amin, ‘safe’, ‘secure’; in this and the more frequent from amin (rarely ammin, rejected by grammarians) it is used like amen and (Syriac) amin with Jews and Christians as a confirmation or corroboration of prayers, in the meaning ‘answer Thou’ or ‘so be it’ see examples in al-Mubarrad, al Kamil, 577 note 6; Ibn al-Diazari, al- Nashr, ii, Cairo 1345, 442 f., 447. Its efficacy is enhanced at especially pious prayers, e.g. those said at the Ka’ba or those said for the welfare of other Muslims, when also the angels are said to say amin. Especially it is said after sura i, without being part of the sura. According to a hadith the prophet learned it from Gabriel when he ended that sura, and Bilal asked the prophet not to forestall him with it. At the salat the imam says it loudly or, according to others, faintly after the fatiha, and the congregation repeats it. It is called God’s seal (taba or khatam) on the believers, because it prevents, evil. “Amin” (Ar. Pl. umana), ‘trustworthy, in whom one can place ones’s trust’, whence al-Amin, with the article, as an epithet of Muhammad in his youth. As a noun, it means ‘he to whom something is entrusted, oversear, administrator’: e.g. Amin al Wahy, ‘he who is entrusted with the revelation’, i.e. the angle Gabriel. The word also frequently occurs in titles, e.g. amin al-Dawla (e.g. Ibn al-Tilmidh others), Amin al Din (e.g. Yakut), Amin al-Mulk, Amin al-Saltana”.

“MORALITY”.

Words and Phrases, Permanent Edition Volume 27A: “Morality” The words “morality” and “character” may have the same meaning when standing alone, but when used together the word “moral” defines the kind of character required by the rule, that attorney mus t be of good moral character. When so sued, the word “moral” Const.P.76/2007, etc. 269 is in contradistinction, to the word “immoral”. Warkentin v. Klein-watcher, 27 P.2nd 160, 166 Okl. 218.” “Morality” The word “morality” is not used in any narrow sense, but in a general sense, such as the law of conscience, the aggregate of those rules and principles of ethics which relate to upright behavior and right conduct of elected representatives and prescribe the standards to which their action and in particular those who are Muslims, who are guided by the Holy Qur’an and Sunnah should conform, in their dealings with each other or with institutions or the State”. M. Saifullah Khan Vs. M. Afzal. :PLD1982 Lah.77. REFERENCE: No law could be made which perpetuated corruption: SC By Nasir Iqbal Wednesday, 20 Jan, 2010 Read full text of detailed judgement on NRO http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/dawn-content-library/dawn/news/pakistan/18-sc-issues-detailed-verdict-on-nro-case-am-08 http://www.supremecourt.gov.pk/web/user_files/File/NRO_Judgment.pdf


"UNQUOTE"


What would be the criteria of Piety, Morality and Character if it is defined by Judiciary? For Example, growing Beard is part of Sunnah and most of the MNA/SENATORS/JUDGES dont have beard so who will decide about the Criteria of Piety since Quran and Sunnah is exploited by the Judiciary to condemn NRO. Moral Brigade in Judiciary should start following this in the light of Sunnah which they have exploited to condemn the NRO. As per Islamic Law "Growing Beard" is compulsory and SEVERAL MEMBERS OF THAT NRO BENCH and other Islamic Type Members of CIVIL SOCIETY are clean shave rather they have Moustaches and that too of a kind which is Unlawful in Islam [I mean moustaches beyond your upper lips]. Moral Brigade should define the “Absence of Beard” in the light of Quran and Sunnah from the faces of the Members of Judiciary in view of their own set standards in the decision against NRO.

As per Islamic Law "Growing Beard" is compulsory and Justice Javed Iqbal or even CJ and other Islamic Type of Judges are clean shave rather they have Moustaches and that too of a kind which is Unlawful in Islam [I mean moustaches beyond your upper lips]. Shaving the beard is haraam because of the saheeh ahaadeeth that clearly state this, and because of the general application of texts that forbid resembling the kuffaar. One of these reports is the hadeeth of Ibn ‘Umar who said that the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Be different from the mushrikeen: let yourbeards grow and trim your moustaches.” According to another report: “Trim your moustaches and let your beards grow.” There are other hadeeth which convey the same meaning, which is to leave the beard as it is and let it grow long, without shaving, plucking or cutting any part of it. Ibn Hazm reported that there was scholarly consensus that it is an obligation (fard) to trim the moustache and let the beard grow. He quoted a number of ahaadeeth as evidence, including the hadeeth of Ibn ‘Umar (may Allaah be pleased with him) quoted above, and the hadeeth of Zayd ibn Arqam in which the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said: “Whoever does not remove any of his moustache is not one of us.” (Classed as saheeh by al-Tirmidhi). Ibn Hazm said in al-Furoo’: “This is the way of our colleagues [i.e., the Hanbalis].”

Is it haraam (to shave it)? Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyah (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: “The Qur’aan, Sunnah and ijmaa’ (scholarly consensus) all indicate that we must differ from the kuffaar in all aspects and not imitate them, because imitating them on the outside will make us imitate them in their bad deeds and habits, and even in beliefs, which will result in befriending them in our hearts, just as loving them in our hearts will lead to imitating them on the outside.Al-Tirmidhi reported that the Messenger of Allaah (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) said, “He is not one of us who imitates people other than us. Do not imitate the Jews and Christians.” According to another version: “Whoever imitates a people is one of them.” (Reported by Imaam Ahmad) ‘Umar ibn al-Khattaab rejected the testimony of the person who plucked his beard. Imaam Ibn ‘Abd al-Barr said in al-Tamheed: “It is forbidden to shave the beard, and no one does this except men who are effeminate” i.e., those who imitate women. The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him) had a thick beard (reported by Muslim from Jaabir). It is not permitted to remove any part of the beard because of the general meaning of the texts which forbid doing so.

Since Judiciary has quoted the reference of Quran and Sunnah against NRO therefore their logic is to be challenged through Quran and Sunnah. They have started this Piety business but could they even justify Tomb/Shrine of Jinnah and others in the light of Quran and Hadith. Makkah to Data Darbar Lahore [Sufi Shrine in Pakian] http://chagataikhan.blogspot.com/2008/10/makkah-to-data-darbar-lahore-sufi.html


Registrar of the Chief justice conveyed to the MILITARY SECRETARY of Nawabzada Liaqat Ali Khan that since there were a number of cases against the government pending before the superior court he could not meet with him. AND NOW IN 2010 - Having accorded a warm welcome to Prime Minister Yousuf Raza Gilani at Tuesday’s dinner, the chief justice has thus disappointed many who have been lauding the brave and revolutionary actions initiated by him to uphold the supremacy of law and relaying the seed of an independent judiciary by swimming against the tide in a country like Pakistan, which has been ruled by military and civil dictators for most part of its history. One, however, wonders if the chief justice’s action is in line with the set procedures governing the role, functions and ethics of judges, a subject which is still being widely debated on the planet. REFERENCE: CJ’s meeting with PM against traditions Thursday, February 18, 2010 By Sabir Shah  http://www.thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDetail.aspx?ID=27324&Cat=13&dt=2/16/2010  Who played what role in the drama By Umar Cheema & Dilshad Azeem Thursday, February 18, 2010 http://www.thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDetail.aspx?ID=27318&Cat=13&dt=2/18/2010


Lawyers and Civil Society think that after March 9, 2007, they have brought in French Revolution but they are wrong whole Movement was started and manipulated to Finger Musharraf and ease out army from the mess the army itself created. History is as under: [Asma Jahangir was part of that Restoration Movement as well]

’عدالتی آمریت کی طرف بڑھ رہے ہیں‘
ریاض سہیل
بی بی سی اردو ڈاٹ کام، کراچی
آخری وقت اشاعت: جمعرات, 18 فروری, 2010, 19:39 GMT 00:39 PST
http://www.bbc.co.uk/urdu/pakistan/2010/02/100217_asma_judges_mah.shtml

پاکستان میں انسانی حقوق کمیشن کی سربراہ عاصمہ جہانگیر نے کہا ہے کہ وہ ملک میں عدلیہ کی آمریت آتے دیکھ رہی ہیں جسے کے بعد لوگ سیاسی آمریت بھی بھول جائیں گے۔
انہوں نے اعلان کیا کہ انسانی حقوق کا کمیشن آئین میں اصلاحات کے لیے ایک چارٹر تیار کر رہا ہے جس میں یہ مطالبہ کیا جائے گا کہ اعلیٰ عدالتوں میں جج بننے والوں کے بارے میں عوام کو ان کی پروفیشنل زندگی کے بارے میں آگاہ ہونا چاہیئے اور اس چارٹر پر وہ عوام کی رائے لینے کے لیے مہم چلائیں گے۔
عاصمہ جہانگیر کا کہنا تھا ’میں نے عدالتی آمریت دیکھی ہے ہم اس طرف جا رہے ہیں وہ ایسا سخت وقت ہوگا کہ عوام سیاسی آمریت کو بھول جائیں گے یہ رویہ رکھنا کہ ہمارے منہ سے جو بھی لفظ نکلے اور اسے فوری پورا کیا جائے ورنہ کالے کوٹ والے آپ کو ٹھیک کردیں گے یہ ایک آزاد اور غیر جانبدار عدلیہ کو زیب نہیں دیتا‘۔


The detailed verdict of NRO carried references from Quran and Hadith [to exploit the same for serving political ends], these Judges should have read the life history of Imam Malik [May Allah have mercy on his soul] because they never issued Fatwa in favour of Rulers and preferred to be flogged and imprisonment [Imam Malik was beaten so mercilessly that one of his arm was broken but he never budged] - When he was aged twenty-five, the Caliphate passed into the hands of the Abbasids caliph Mansur who was his colleague. Mansur highly respected him for his deep learning. The Imam however, favoured the Fatimid Nafs Zakriya for the exalted office of the Caliph. When he learned that the people had taken the oath of fealty of Mansur, he said that since Mansur had forced people to do so, the oath was not binding them. He quoted a Tradition of the Prophet (sws) to the effect that a divorce by force is not legal. When Jafar, a cousin of Mansur, was posted as Governor of Medina, he induced the inhabitants of the Holy city to renew their oath of allegiance to Mansur. The Governor forbade him not to publicise his Fatwa in respect of forced divorce. Highly principled and fearless as he was, the defied the Governor’s orders and courageously persisted in his course. This infuriated the Governor, who ordered that the Imam be awarded 70 stripes, as punishment. According, seventy stripes were inflicted on the naked back of the Imam which began to bleed. Mounted on a camel in his bloodstaind clothes, he was paraded through the streets of Medina. This brutality of the Governor failed to cow down or unnerve the noble Imam. Caliph Mansur, when apprised of he matter, punished the Governor and apologised to the Imam. Once, Caliph Mansur sent him three thousand Dinars as his travelling expenses of Baghdad, but he returned the money and refused to leave Medina, the resting place of the Prophet (sws) In 174 A.H Caliph Harun-ar-Rashid, arrived in Medina with his two son Amin and Mamun. He summoned Imam Malik to his durbar for delivering a lecture on Muwatta. The Imam refused to comply with his orders. Arriving in the durbar, the told the Caliph, ‘Rashid! Traditions in a learning cultivated and patronised by your ancestors, if you don’t pay it due respect, no one else would,’ This argument convinced the Caliph, who, along with his two sow, then chose to attend the class taken by the Imam. The Imam was reputed throughout the world of Islam for his self-control and great patience. One a band of Kharijis armed with swords forced their way into a mosque of Kufa, where he was praying, All persons scampered away from the mosque in panic but he sayed there undismayed. It was customary with all those who waited on Caliph Mansur in his durbar to kiss his hands but Imam Malik never stooped to his humiliation. On the other hand, he paid highest regards to the learned people and once, when Imam Abu Hanifa came to see him, he offered him his own seat. [Tareekh Baghdad by Khateeb Baghdadi and Mawta Imam Malik]

I just want to ask that where was the Integrity when Judges were allowing/legalizing Martial Law in 2000 and then again 2005 and in 2010 those very Judges are talking about Sadiq and Ameen???? Why didn’t they resigned en masse when Musharraf elevated them from High Courts to Supreme Court to legalize Martial Law.

When Musharraf and Generals enforced Martial Law on 12 Oct 1999 they created a department called National Accountability Bureau and one of the most important prosecutor [a lady lawyer] was appointed on a key post in NAB. Guess what! Before Martial Law she was defending one of the accused under arrest since 1996 [when the second government of PPP was dismissed] and after 12 Oct 1999 the same Prosecutor was leading NAB against the same. I wont any name but many leading Lawyers of Free Judiciary Movement [not the Lahore wala] were very close to her. This is the reality of “Accountability Bureau of Musharraf, Ehtisab Bureau of Nawaz Sharif, Ehtisab Commission of Leghari and Justice [R] Ghulam Mujjaddid Mirza and Corruption References filed by Ghulam Ishaq Khan [he within two years accepted Zardari as Caretaker Fed. Minister (message was delivered by Roedad Khan - the Anti NRO Chap) after filing the reference against him], GIK and his Roedad Khan saw to it [between 1990 - 1993] that Cases against BB/AAZ are handled properly and they get bail regularly [what was the purpose to file reference when you have accepted AAZ as Minister]

Ayaz Amir wrote.....

That was the mother of all sins. So how strange and dripping with irony this omission: about that seminal event, which set in train all the sorrows the nation was to reap thereafter, their lordships in their “historic” judgment have nothing to say. For this of course we must understand the problems of the past. For in 2000, a few months after the mother of all sins, when this matter came before the then Supreme Court headed by Chief Justice Irshad Hasan Khan, the nation witnessed another of those electrifying performances which have made “the doctrine of necessity” so famous in our land, the Supreme Court validating Musharraf’s coup and, what’s more, allowing him a grace period of three years to hold elections. In its generosity, it also gave Musharraf the authority to amend the Constitution for purposes of holding elections. So just as the Anwarul Haq Supreme Court gave a clean chit to General Ziaul Haq’s coup of 1977, another Supreme Court signed a papal bull conferring legitimacy on another illegitimate offspring of our political adventures. Now for an inconvenient fact. On the bench headed by Chief Justice Irshad Hasan Khan there sat an up-and-coming jurist, stern of eye and distinguished of look, by the name of Iftikhar Muhammad Chaudhry. Yes, he was among the illustrious upholders of the law and the Constitution who bathed Musharraf and his generals in holy water. ---- Talking of Musharraf’s military rule, what was the role of our present lordships when Triple One Brigade, our highest constitutional authority, reinterpreted the Constitution once again on the long afternoon of Oct 12, 1999? A few judges — Chief Justice Saiduzzaman Siddiqui comes to mind — did not take oath under the Provisional Constitution Order (PCO) issued two months later. But if imperfect memory serves, all of their present lordships, at one time or the other, took oath under the PCO. Not only that, some of them were on the bench which validated Musharraf’s takeover. A few, including My Lord the Chief Justice, were on the bench which validated Musharraf’s takeover for the second time in the Zafar Ali Shah case (2005). Of course, we must let bygones be bygones and deal with the present. But then this principle should be for everyone. We should not be raising monuments to selective memory or selective condemnation. If the PCO of 2007 was such a bad idea, in what category should we place the PCO of 2000? And if in this Turkish bath all are like the emperor without his clothes, the least this should inculcate is a sense of humility. REFERENCE: Writing of history or triumph of amnesia? Friday, August 07, 2009 By Ayaz Amir  http://www.thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDetail.aspx?ID=191800&Cat=9&dt=8/7/2009  The road to hell — and similar destinations Islamabad diary Friday, January 01, 2010 Ayaz Amir http://www.thenews.com.pk/TodaysPrintDetail.aspx?ID=216323&Cat=9&dt=1/1/2010

Do keep in mind that Hafeez Pirzada who was opposing the NRO was one of the leading attorney in Zardari Cases. If you would go through the details of Cases and Parties these Lawyers [who run Judiciary Movement] have handled you would be amazed. Akram Sheikh daily appear on GEO TV for the sake of Judiciary and Rule of Law whereas he was General Aslam Beg’s Lawyer in Mehran Bank Scandal Case [case is pending since 1996], Hafeez Pirzada was one of the beneficiary of Mehran Bank [The recipients included Khar two million, Hafeez Pirzada three million We never learn from history – 7 By Ardeshir Cowasjee August 12, 2007 Dawn]

At the over three-hour-long dinner meeting, the 35 senior lawyers, including four former presidents of the Supreme Court Bar Association (SCBA), Aitzaz Ahsan, Justice (retd) Tariq Mehmood, Ali Ahmed Kurd and Muneer A. Malik, were unanimous in their view that Barrister Ahsan still held sole authority to issue any protest calls or set any line of action, one of the participants told Dawn on condition of anonymity. Senior lawyers back Aitzaz Ahsan By Nasir Iqbal Thursday, 04 Feb, 2010 http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/dawn-content-library/dawn/the-newspaper/front-page/16-senior-lawyers-back-aitzaz-hs-07 Lawyers divided over strike call By Nasir Iqbal Tuesday, 26 Jan, 2010 http://www.dawn.com/wps/wcm/connect/dawn-content-library/dawn/the-newspaper/national/12-lawyers-divided-over-strike-call-710–bi-11

Earlier it was revealed that SCBA’s Qazi Anwar was sentenced nine months in jail for possessing explosives in 1979, adding Lahore High Court curtailed his punishment; however, his charge was kept unchanged. PBC approached for Qazi Anwar’s ineligibility Updated at: 1445 PST, Monday, February 01, 2010 http://www.thenews.com.pk/updates.asp?id=97613 Latest is as under: Monday, February 08, 2010, Safar 23, 1431 A.H http://www.jang.com.pk/jang/feb2010-daily/08-02-2010/u20419.htm

’عدلیہ کی آزادی کے باوجود کچھ نہیں بدلا‘
http://www.bbc.co.uk/urdu/pakistan/2009/09/090907_kurd_hit_judiciary_rr.shtml
Monday, 7 September, 2009, 12:58 GMT 17:58 PST

عدلیہ انتظامیہ جھگڑے میں نیا موڑ
رفاقت علی
بی بی سی اردو ڈاٹ کام، لندن
آخری وقت اشاعت: اتوار, 14 فروری, 2010, 22:17 GMT 03:17 PST
http://www.bbc.co.uk/urdu/pakistan/2010/02/100213_judiciary_executive.shtml

سپریم کورٹ نے خود کئی بار ججز کیس کی دھجیاں بکھیریں اور ایک بار
تو لاہور ہائی کے ایک ایسے جج کو سپریم کورٹ میں تعینات کر دیا جن کا ہائی کورٹ میں ججوں کی سینارٹی لسٹ پر سولہواں نمبر تھا۔ جب سپریم کورٹ میں ججز کیسز کی واضح خلاف ورزی کو چیلنج کیا گیا تو سپریم کورٹ نے حکم صادر کیا کہ وہ کسی جج کو سپریم کورٹ کا جج بنا سکتی ہے۔ ججوں کی تعیناتی کے سلسلے میں سپریم کورٹ نے اپنی ضرورت کےمطابق کئی متضاد فیصلے صارد کر رکھے ہیں اور شاید موجودہ سپریم کورٹ کو بھی ’پی سی او سپریم کورٹ‘ کےایک فیصلے کا بھی سہارا لینا پڑے گا جس کے تحت صدر کے اس اختیار کو مانا گیا تھا کہ وہ ہائی کورٹ کے سینئر جج کو سپریم کورٹ میں تعینات کر سکتا ہے۔
چیف جسٹس آف پاکستان جسٹس افتخار محمد چودھری جسٹس خواجہ شریف کو لاہور ہائی کورٹ کا چیف جسٹس رکھنے پر کیوں بضد ہیں اس کا کسی کو علم نہیں ہے۔ جسٹس خواجہ شریف کو میاں نواز شریف کے دور حکومت میں لاہور ہائی کورٹ کا جج مقرر کیا گیا تھا۔
لاہور ہائی کے سینئر جج جسٹس میاں ثاقب نثار کو بھی نواز شریف دور میں ہائی کورٹ کا جج مقرر کیا گیا۔ جسٹس ثاقب نثار میاں نواز شریف دور کے وزیرِ قانون خالد انور کے جونیئر تھے اور اسی دور حکومت میں انہوں نے سیکرٹری قانون کا قلمدان بھی سنبھالے رکھا

Crucial History of Appointment of Judges Case is under: Appointment of Judges: History 1993 – 1997. http://chagataikhan.blogspot.com/2010/01/appointment-of-judges-history-1993-1997.html Saqib Nisar and Khalid Anwer [PML-N] - NRO: Kamran Khan & Dirty Role of Barrister Khalid Anwer. http://chagataikhan.blogspot.com/2010/01/nro-kamran-khan-dirty-role-of-barrister.html

PAKISTAN: International Commission of Jurists http://www.icj.org/IMG/pdf/pakistan.pdf

The independence of the judiciary was largely undermined by the order by General Musharraf in January 2000 that Pakistani judges take a fresh oath of loyalty to his administration. In May 2000, the Supreme Court, reconstituted after the dismissal of six judges who refused the oath, upheld General Musharraf’s military coup of 1999, under the doctrine of state necessity. Pakistan is a constitutional republic. On 15 October 1999, the Government promulgated the Provisional Constitution Order, (PCO), No.1 of 1999, overriding the 1973 Constitution of the Islamic Republic of Pakistan, previously suspended following the 12 October 1999 military coup led by General Pervez Musharraf. The PCO provided for the suspension of the National Assembly, the Provincial Assemblies and the Senate and mandated General Musharraf to serve as the new Chief Executive.

On 20 June 2001, General Musharraf became President of Pakistan after dismissing the incumbent President, Muhammad Rafiq Tarar. On 12 May 2000, the Supreme Court validated the October 1999 coup under the doctrine of state necessity. However, the Court ordered that the Government hold national and provincial elections by 12 October 2002. In response, President Musharraf presented a four-phase programme aimed at returning the country to democratic rule, with local elections to be held from December 2000 until August 2001. Subsequently, a series of local elections were held in December 2000, March 2001, May 2001 and July-August 2001. However, political parties were prohibited from participating in the contests and party leaders were disqualified from holding political office.
===
Basic Principles on the Independence of the Judiciary
http://www2.ohchr.org/english/law/indjudiciary.htm
Adopted by the Seventh United Nations Congress on the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders held at Milan from 26 August to 6 September 1985 and endorsed by General Assembly resolutions 40/32 of 29 November 1985 and 40/146 of 13 December 1985

Whereas in the Charter of the United Nations the peoples of the world affirm, inter alia , their determination to establish conditions under which justice can be maintained to achieve international co-operation in promoting and encouraging respect for human rights and fundamental freedoms without any discrimination,

Whereas the Universal Declaration of Human Rights enshrines in particular the principles of equality before the law, of the presumption of innocence and of the right to a fair and public hearing by a competent, independent and impartial tribunal established by law,

Whereas the International Covenants on Economic, Social and Cultural Rights and on Civil and Political Rights both guarantee the exercise of those rights, and in addition, the Covenant on Civil and Political Rights further guarantees the right to be tried without undue delay,

Whereas frequently there still exists a gap between the vision underlying those principles and the actual situation,

Whereas the organization and administration of justice in every country should be inspired by those principles, and efforts should be undertaken to translate them fully into reality,
Whereas rules concerning the exercise of judicial office should aim at enabling judges to act in accordance with those principles,

Whereas judges are charged with the ultimate decision over life, freedoms, rights, duties and property of citizens,

Whereas the Sixth United Nations Congress on the Prevention of Crime and the Treatment of Offenders, by its resolution 16, called upon the Committee on Crime Prevention and Control to include among its priorities the elaboration of guidelines relating to the independence of judges and the selection, professional training and status of judges and prosecutors,

Whereas it is, therefore, appropriate that consideration be first given to the role of judges in relation to the system of justice and to the importance of their selection, training and conduct,

The following basic principles, formulated to assist Member States in their task of securing and promoting the independence of the judiciary should be taken into account and respected by Governments within the framework of their national legislation and practice and be brought to the attention of judges, lawyers, members of the executive and the legislature and the public in general. The principles have been formulated principally with professional judges in mind, but they apply equally, as appropriate, to lay judges, where they exist.

Independence of the judiciary

1. The independence of the judiciary shall be guaranteed by the State and enshrined in the Constitution or the law of the country. It is the duty of all governmental and other institutions to respect and observe the independence of the judiciary.

2. The judiciary shall decide matters before them impartially, on the basis of facts and in accordance with the law, without any restrictions, improper influences, inducements, pressures, threats or interferences, direct or indirect, from any quarter or for any reason.

3. The judiciary shall have jurisdiction over all issues of a judicial nature and shall have exclusive authority to decide whether an issue submitted for its decision is within its competence as defined by law.

4. There shall not be any inappropriate or unwarranted interference with the judicial process, nor shall judicial decisions by the courts be subject to revision. This principle is without prejudice to judicial review or to mitigation or commutation by competent authorities of sentences imposed by the judiciary, in accordance with the law.

5. Everyone shall have the right to be tried by ordinary courts or tribunals using established legal procedures. Tribunals that do not use the duly established procedures of the legal process shall not be created to displace the jurisdiction belonging to the ordinary courts or judicial tribunals.

6. The principle of the independence of the judiciary entitles and requires the judiciary to ensure that judicial proceedings are conducted fairly and that the rights of the parties are respected.

7. It is the duty of each Member State to provide adequate resources to enable the judiciary to properly perform its functions.

Freedom of expression and association

8. In accordance with the Universal Declaration of Human Rights, members of the judiciary are like other citizens entitled to freedom of expression, belief, association and assembly; provided, however, that in exercising such rights, judges shall always conduct themselves in such a manner as to preserve the dignity of their office and the impartiality and independence of the judiciary.

9. Judges shall be free to form and join associations of judges or other organizations to represent their interests, to promote their professional training and to protect their judicial independence.

Qualifications, selection and training

10. Persons selected for judicial office shall be individuals of integrity and ability with appropriate training or qualifications in law. Any method of judicial selection shall safeguard against judicial appointments for improper motives. In the selection of judges, there shall be no discrimination against a person on the grounds of race, colour, sex, religion, political or other opinion, national or social origin, property, birth or status, except that a requirement, that a candidate for judicial office must be a national of the country concerned, shall not be considered discriminatory.

Conditions of service and tenure

11. The term of office of judges, their independence, security, adequate remuneration, conditions of service, pensions and the age of retirement shall be adequately secured by law.

12. Judges, whether appointed or elected, shall have guaranteed tenure until a mandatory retirement age or the expiry of their term of office, where such exists.
13. Promotion of judges, wherever such a system exists, should be based on objective factors, in particular ability, integrity and experience.

14. The assignment of cases to judges within the court to which they belong is an internal matter of judicial administration.

Professional secrecy and immunity

15. The judiciary shall be bound by professional secrecy with regard to their deliberations and to confidential information acquired in the course of their duties other than in public proceedings, and shall not be compelled to testify on such matters.

16. Without prejudice to any disciplinary procedure or to any right of appeal or to compensation from the State, in accordance with national law, judges should enjoy personal immunity from civil suits for monetary damages for improper acts or omissions in the exercise of their judicial functions.

Discipline, suspension and removal

17. A charge or complaint made against a judge in his/her judicial and professional capacity shall be processed expeditiously and fairly under an appropriate procedure. The judge shall have the right to a fair hearing. The examination of the matter at its initial stage shall be kept confidential, unless otherwise requested by the judge.

18. Judges shall be subject to suspension or removal only for reasons of incapacity or behaviour that renders them unfit to discharge their duties.

19. All disciplinary, suspension or removal proceedings shall be determined in accordance with established standards of judicial conduct.

20. Decisions in disciplinary, suspension or removal proceedings should be subject to an independent review. This principle may not apply to the decisions of the highest court and those of the legislature in impeachment or similar proceedings.
=====================================
As per International Criminal Court, Judges must follow the following principles while they are Judges:

Noting the solemn undertaking required by article 45 of the Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court (the “Statute”) and rule 5 (1) (a) of the Rules of Procedure and Evidence (the “Rules”);

Recalling the principles concerning judicial independence, impartiality and proper conduct specified in the Statute and the Rules;

Recognising the need for guidelines of general application to contribute to judicial independence and impartiality and with a view to ensuring the legitimacy and effectiveness of the international judicial process;

Having regard to the United Nations Basic Principles on the Independence of the Judiciary (1985) and other international and national rules and standards relating to judicial conduct;

Mindful of the international character of the Court and the special challenges facing the judges of the Court in the performance of their responsibilities;

Have agreed as follows:

Code of Judicial Ethics

Article 1

Adoption of the Code

This Code has been adopted by the judges pursuant to regulation 126 and shall be read subject to the Statute, the Rules and the Regulations of the Court.

Article 2

Use of terms

In this Code of Judicial Ethics the terms “Court”, “Statute”, “Rules” and “Regulations” shall have the meaning attached to them in the Regulations of the Court.

Article 3

Judicial independence

1. Judges shall uphold the independence of their office and the authority of the Court and shall conduct themselves accordingly in carrying out their judicial functions.

2. Judges shall not engage in any activity which is likely to interfere with their judicial functions or to affect confidence in their independence.

Article 4

Impartiality

1. Judges shall be impartial and ensure the appearance of impartiality in the discharge of their judicial functions.

2. Judges shall avoid any conflict of interest, or being placed in a situation which might reasonably be perceived as giving rise to a conflict of interest.

Article 5

Integrity

1. Judges shall conduct themselves with probity and integrity in accordance with their office, thereby enhancing public confidence in the judiciary.

2. Judges shall not directly or indirectly accept any gift, advantage, privilege or reward that can reasonably be perceived as being intended to influence the performance of their judicial functions.

Article 6

Confidentiality

Judges shall respect the confidentiality of consultations which relate to their judicial functions and the secrecy of deliberations.

Article 7

Diligence

1. Judges shall act diligently in the exercise of their duties and shall devote their professional activities to those duties.

2. Judges shall take reasonable steps to maintain and enhance the knowledge, skills and personal qualities necessary for judicial office.

3. Judges shall perform all judicial duties properly and expeditiously.

4. Judges shall deliver their decisions and any other rulings without undue delay.

Article 8

Conduct during proceedings

1. In conducting judicial proceedings, judges shall maintain order, act in accordance with commonly accepted decorum, remain patient and courteous towards all participants and members of the public present and require them to act likewise.

2. Judges shall exercise vigilance in controlling the manner of questioning of witnesses or victims in accordance with the Rules and give special attention to the right of participants to the proceedings to equal protection and benefit of the law.

3. Judges shall avoid conduct or comments which are racist, sexist or otherwise degrading and, to the extent possible, ensure that any person participating in the proceedings refrains from such comments or conduct.

Article 9

Public expression and association

1. Judges shall exercise their freedom of expression and association in a manner that is compatible with their office and that does not affect or appear to affect judicial independence or impartiality.

2. While judges are free to participate in public debate on matters pertaining to legal subjects, the judiciary or the administration of justice, they shall not comment on pending cases and shall avoid expressing views which may undermine the standing and integrity of the Court.

Article 10

Extra-judicial activity

1. Judges shall not engage in any extra-judicial activity that is incompatible with their judicial function or the efficient and timely functioning of the Court, or that may affect or may reasonably appear to affect their independence or impartiality.

2. Judges shall not exercise any political function.

Article 11

Observance of the Code

1. The principles embodied in this Code shall serve as guidelines on the essential ethical standards required of judges in the performance of their duties. They are advisory in nature and have the object of assisting judges with respect to ethical and professional issues with which they are confronted.

2. Nothing in this Code is intended in any way to limit or restrict the judicial independence of the judges.

Monday, March 16, 2009

Allama Niyaz Fatehpuri and his Faith - 33


IS RELIGION FROM GOD OR MAN-MADE?

Books and Documents 03 Mar 2009, NewAgeIslam.Com

The War Within Islam: Niyaz Fatehpuri’s Struggle Against The Fundamentalists by JUHI SHAHIN

Excerpts from a newly published book in Pakistan: The War Within Islam: Niyaz Fatehpuri’s Struggle Against The Fundamentalists

URL: http://www.newageislam.com/NewAgeIslamArticleDetail.aspx?ArticleID=1221

Late. Allama Niyaz Fatehpuri [1884-1966]

And religion because I was educated in a religious atmosphere and I got the opportunity to study the religious ulama. However, the whole colonial discourse of Islam being backward and medieval, was familiar to him and he kept trying to dispel this notion by saying that what the Ulama were saying and doing was not the only way to look at Islam. Fatehpuri was very clear about who was responsible for a state of affairs in which asking questions is tantamount to unbelief; it was the Ulama. Regarding the reluctance of the Ulama in particular, he stated: “There are many ways of avoiding Zakat in the books of fiqh, and many of our Ulama-i-Karam use them.”He ridiculed the artificial division that had been created between them by the Ulama, if one is religious, it should automatically mean that one is a good person, lives in harmony with others, and helps those in need. Arrogance is the antithesis of having Akhlaq – an attitude he observed in the Ulama, since they believed they knew best about the religion and its practices, and aggressively condemned any re-thinking. The Ulama-i-Karam who consider Muslims with bad Akhlaq to be Naji (free of sin). Most people would just find it easier to follow the ready-made solutions offered by the Ulama, rather than think for themselves. [New Age Islam]

==========================

Part - 9

Religious Scholars - Ulama-i-Karam - Mullah - Mufti - Qazi - Muttawwa - Ayatullah - Mujtahids:



O you who believe! Obey Allâh and obey the Messenger (Muhammad SAW), and those of you (Muslims) who are in authority. (And) if you differ in anything amongst yourselves, refer it to Allâh and His Messenger (SAW), if you believe in Allâh and in the Last Day. That is better and more suitable for final determination. [The Noble Qur'an 4:59]

Linguistically, taqleed means: Placing something around the neck, which encircles the neck. Technically it means: Following he whose sayings is not a proof (hujjah).

"QUOTE"

Exlcuded from our saying, "following he whose saying is not a proof" is: following the Sunnah of the Prophet (SAW).

"Indeed the people of Truth and the Sunnah do not follow anyone [unconditionally] except the messenger of Allaah SAW, the one who does not speak from his desires - it is only revelation revealed to him." [by Shaykh Ibn Taymiyyah, Majmoo'ah al-Fataawaa, vol 3, page 216, Daar Ibn Hazm Print, Trans: Aboo 'Abdis-Salaam]


Abu Haneefah (d. 150H) (rahimahullaah) said: "Adhere to the athar (narration) and the tareeqah (way) of the Salaf (Pious Predecessors) and beware of newly invented matters for all of it is innovation" [Reported by As-Suyootee in Sawn al Mantaq wal-Kalaam p.32]

Ibn al-Qayyim said,


" And it is as Abu Umar (ibn Abdul Barr) said: Indeed, the people do not differ about the fact that knowledge is the realisation attained from proof, but without proof, it is only taqleed."


Ibn al-Qayyim said,

"There are three sayings about the permissibility of giving fatwaa based upon taqleed:


1) It is not permissible to give fatwaa based upon taqleed, because it is not knowledge; since issuing a fatwaa without knowledge is forbidden. This is the saying of most of the Hanbalee scholars and the majority of the Shaafi'iyyah.


2) That it is permissible with regards to himself, but it is not permissible to give a fatwaa to others based upon taqleed.


3) That it is permissible when there is a need for it, and there is no mujtahid scholar. And this is the most correct of the sayings and is what is acted upon."'


Imam Ibn Katheer, rahimahullaah, said:


"And what is apparent, and Allaah knows best, is that it is general for all those who are in authority (oolul-amr), from the rulers and the scholars."


Shaykhul-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah said:


"This is why those who are in authority are of two groups: the scholars and the rulers. If they are upright, the people will be upright; if they are corrupt, the people will be corrupt."

"It should be realised that the rulers are to be obeyed if they command what knowledge necessitates. So obedience to them follows on from obedience to the scholars. Indeed obedience is only in that which is good and that which is obligated by knowledge. So just as obedience to the scholars follows on from obedience to the Messenger, then obedience to the rulers follows on from obedience to the scholars." [Imaam Ibn al-Qayyim, r.a.]

The Problem

"Blind" following refers to following a person (including self) when the instructions are clearly not in accordance with Qur'an and Sunnah. To do so is a form of shirk, because at its core is a denial of a part of the Revelation, and to deny a single ayat of Revelation is to deny it all.

Many muslims treat the noble Imaams (Imaam Shafii, Imaam Malik, etc.) as though their words are protected from error. For some people, the words of an Imaam are taken as "gospel" and followed exclusively (as if it were revelation). Even if a verse from the Quraan or an authentic saying of the Messenger is brought as an argument against what their chosen Imaam said, their followers forsake what Allah or the Messenger, saaws, said and follow their Imaams. This dangerous position leads to blind taqleed (following) of humans at the expense of revelation.

One such example of this is that Imaam Malik did not raise his hands during the takbeer because they had been crippled to where he could not raise them as should be done in the salah. Muslims who choose to blindly follow Imaam Malik will not raise their hands during the takbeer, even though their is clear proof to do so. There are examples too numerous to list here, examples of senseless adherence to the ways or teachings of men, teachings that are contradictory to the proof.

Some muslims blindly follow modern leaders (such as W. Deen Mohammed, the Tableegh, or the highly deviating Imaam at the local masjid), even when the man calls the people to actions and beliefs that are clearly opposing Quran and Sunnah. Once again, this is an act of elevating a person's words over the Speech of Allah (i.e. the Quran), if at any time we reject the clear revelation and instead act upon or embrace the contrary teachings of a person.

Just like we are to obey our parents unless they call us to the haram (prohibited), we may follow the guidance of men unless they call us to error.

This condition of ignorance and blind following was given by Revelation from Allah to the Messenger, Muhammed, saaws, who said:

Verily, Allah does not take away knowledge by snatching it from the people, but (this is done) by causing (the death) of the scholars until none of them is left alive. People would then appoint ignorant leaders for themselves who would be consulted in matters of religion and they would give Fatawas without knowledge, falling into misguidance and misguiding others. [Muslim].

Shaykhul-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah, Rahimahullaah, said:

"And the four Imaams, may Allaah be pleased with them, all forbade the people from blindly following them in all that they may say; and this was an obligation upon them [to do]."

Abu Haneefah (Rahimahullaah) said:

"When a hadeeth is found to be saheeh, then that is my madhhab." [Ibn 'Aabideen in al-Haashiyah (1/63) and in his essay Rasm al-Mufti (1/4 from the Compilation of the Essays of Ibn 'Aabideen), Shaikh Saalih al-Fulaani in Eeqaaz al-Himam (p. 62) and others. Ibn 'Aabideen quoted from Sharh al-Hidaayah by Ibn al-Shahnah al-Kabeer, the teacher of Ibn al-Humaam]


"It is haram (prohibited) for someone who does not know my evidence to give fatwaa (verdicts) on the basis of my words." Another narration adds, "... for we are mortals: we say one thing one day, and take it back the next day." [Ibn 'Abdul Barr in Al-Intiqaa' fi Fadaa'il ath-Thalaathah al-A'immah al-Fuqahaa' (p. 145), Ibn al-Qayyim in I'laam al-Mooqi'een (2/309), Ibn 'Aabideen in his Footnoes on Al-Bahr ar-Raa'iq (6/293) and in Rasm al-Mufti (pp. 29, 32) & Sha'raani in Al-Meezaan (1/55) with the second narration. Similar narrations exist on the authority of Abu Haneefah's companions Zafar, Abu Yoosuf and 'Aafiyah ibn Yazeed; cf. Eeqaaz (p. 52). Ibn al-Qayyim firmly certified its authenticity on the authority of Abu Yoosuf in I'laam al-Mooqi'een (2/344).]


"When I say something contradicting the Book of Allah the Exalted or what is narrated from the Messenger (saaws), then ignore my saying." [Al-Fulaani in Eeqaaz al-Himam (p. 50), tracing it to Imaam Muhammad and then saying, "This does not apply to the mujtahid, for he is not bound to their views anyway, but it applies to the muqallid."]

Imaam Maalik ibn Anas (Rahimahullaah) said:

"Truly I am only a mortal: I make mistakes (sometimes) and I am correct (sometimes). Therefore, look into my opinions: all that agrees with the Book and the Sunnah, accept it; and all that does not agree with the Book and the Sunnah, ignore it." [Ibn 'Abdul Barr in Jaami' Bayaan al-'Ilm (2/32), Ibn Hazm, quoting from the former in Usool al-Ahkaam (6/149), and similarly Al-Fulaani (p. 72)]


Imaam Shaafi'i (Rahimahullaah) said:

"The sunnahs of the Messenger of Allah (saaws) reach, as well as escape from, every one of us. So whenever I voice my opinion, or formulate a principle, where something contrary to my view exists on the authority of the Messenger of Allah (saaws), then the correct view is what the Messenger of Allah (saaws) has said, and it is my view." [Related by Haakim with a continuous sanad up to Shaafi'i, as in Taareekh Dimashq of Ibn 'Asaakir (15/1/3), I'laam al-Mooqi'een (2/363, 364) & Eeqaaz (p. 100).]

Ahmad ibn Hanbal (Rahimahullaah) said:

"Do not follow my opinion; neither follow the opinion of Maalik, nor Shaafi'i, nor Awzaa'i, nor Thawri, but take from where they took." [Fulaani (p. 113) & Ibn al-Qayyim in I'laam (2/302).]


"Do not copy your Deen from anyone of these, but whatever comes from the Prophet (sallallaahu `alaihi wa sallam) and his Companions, take it; next are their Successors, where a man has a choice."

"Following (ittibaa') means that a man follows what comes from the Prophet (sallallaahu `alaihi wa sallam) and his Companions; after the Successors, he has a choice." [Abu Daawood in Masaa'il of Imaam Ahmad (pp. 276-7)]

"The opinion of Awzaa'i, the opinion of Maalik, the opinion of Abu Haneefah: all of it is opinion, and it is all equal in my eyes. However, the proof is in the narrations (from the Prophet (sallallaahu `alaihi wa sallam) and his Companions)." [Ibn `Abdul Barr in Jaami' Bayaan al-'Ilm (2/149).]


"Whoever rejects a statement of the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahu `alaihi wa sallam) is on the brink of destruction." [Ibn al-Jawzi (p. 182)2)]

Muslims should be obedient to their Imam except when given evidence that is clearly contrary to the Imam's guidance on any particular matter. This evidence should be from the Qur'an and/or Sunnah, as explained by the righteous Islamic scholars of the first three generations of righteous muslims after the revelation of the Qur'an. Sharh Usool ul-I'tiqaad (1/9) - Imaam al-Laalikaa'ee (d. 418H) (rh) said:

"That which is most obligatory upon a Muslim:

And among the mightiest of statements and clearest of proofs and understandings is:


1. The Book of Allaah, the Manifest Truth


2. Then the saying of the Messenger of Allaah


3. And of his Companions, the chosen, pious ones


4. Then that which the Salaf us-Saalih were unanimously agreed upon


5. The holding fast to all of that and remaining firm upon it till the Day of Judgement


6. Then turning away from the innovations and from listening to them - from amongst those things the astray people have invented"

"UNQUOTE"

Tuesday, February 10, 2009

HANAFI FIQH VERSUS SALAFIS - 2

War within the Sunni Islam [Courtesy - Abu Alqamah]

Extracts from “ Bayan Talbees Al Muftari Muhammad Zahid Al Kawthari aw Radul Kawthari ‘ala Kawthari” of Ahmad ibn Muhammad ibn Sidiq Al Ghumari.

Slander of Kawthari against Khateeb Al Baghdadi and Ibn Hajar Al Asqalani

Kawthari said p 188 of his Taneeb : “ The strangeness from these pious pure is taking easy the matter of Qazf ( slandering) Shani’ in which one can not think of bringing proves, with their knowledge of Allah’s hukm for Qazf, and this is only because of their little religion and lack of intelligence”


Then he accused in his majalis Hafiz ibn Hajar of following prostitutes and once he followed one and when she uncovered face then she was an old woman.

Also he accused Khateeb of drinking wine p 11 of Taneeb quoting from strange book : “ Mu’jamul Adibaa”.

He also quoted a long story in his Taneeb p 12 from Sibtu ibnul Jawzi from his book “ Al Miratu Zamani fi Tarikh A’yani” telling that Khateeb was doing homosexuality and pedophilia with boys.

Ghumari said : this story is nothing except a lie, that one rejects from first time, and they do not remain except in books of the Ustaz ( Al Kawthari) witnessing of his Qazf shameless…Is there a majnoon reaching his level of junoon making himself famous for fisq…he makes his nafs enter in rooms of liars, expanding fahishah among believers… it is not suitable for anyone believing in Allah and in last Day to attack the honor of any Muslim like that, what about Imam from Aimah of muslimeen ?”

Kawthari and Anas ibnu Malik

Ghumari said that when Kawthari could not find any defect in hadeeth of saheehayn that Prophet saw ordered people from Akl and Uraynah to drink urine of camels, then to defend his madhab, he went on to say that Anas ibn Malik lost memory when he became old, so he weakened the narration.

Kawthari said p 107 from his Nukat : “ Then Abu Haneefah, if he was considering Sahabah ‘Adil, but he did not claim their being protected from mistakes from which human can not be protected…as little memory, and forgetting because of Umiyati ( not reading) or being old, and there is no doubt that Anas ibn Malik lived a long life among Sahabah, and there is nothing forbidding that some problems/gaps occurred to his memory, as it is the case of human”

In narration of Tirmidhi, Anas ibn Malik told this to Hajjaj after this one asked what was the most severe punishment given by the Prophet saw, so Al Kawthari said that if Anas has his senses, then he would not help this Thalim.

And Ghumari answered all these doubts

Now in all narrations of Bukhari and Muslim, Anas ibn Malik told that without mentioning that to Hajjaj, so there is nothing preventing he narrated this hadeeth before when young, and also when he was old at time of Hajjaj.

Secondly, one should not hide knowledge, so if Hajjaj misuses this knowledge, then Anas is not responsible.

Thirdly how many old people do not lose memory, especially for Anas, for whom Prophet saw made du’a for his long age and chidren as in Adab Mufrad of Bukhari and otherts, declared saheeh by Ibn Hajar in Fath.

Also some ghulat from Hanafiyah mentioned that Abu Haneefah met Anas ibn Malik and listened from him in old age.

Ghumari said : “ And this is nothing except playing with the religion, and a war with Hujjah Nasi’ah, and with Daleel Qati’ maqbool, and pure rejection of the Sunnah of Rasoolillah saw”

Then Ghumari said : “ I swear by Allah, without being Hanith, that if Allah sent Prophet saw again and he told him that Abu haneefah was mistaken, then you would make kufr of it, and you would reject his risalah, as you are rejecting now the sharee’ah and the Sunnah with this shameful game”

Another Ta’n in Anas, in Nukat of Kawthari p 77, where Kawthari rejected the hadeeth from Saheehayn from Anas that Prophet saw freed Safiyah, and married her, and made her freedom the Sidaq ( Mahr).

Kawthari said : “ When Anas did not know whether Prophet saw gave her Mahr, then he said : He made her nafs as Mahr, this is why Abu tayib At tabari, ibnul Murabit said that the saying of Anas is from himself”

Ghumari answered : this means he ( Anas) lied on the Prophet saw by imputing this hukm ghareeb to him, this kind of precipitation ( without knowledge) make someone loses ‘Adalah and thiqah from narrations, then Malediction on Thalimeen”

Then Ghumari said that in Ihqaqul Haqq Kawthari criticized this Abu tayib Tabari.

And he concluded about Kawthari : “ This man is not except majnoon from madness of ta’asub, he deserves to have pity on him or to be treated”

Ta’n of Kawthari on Ibn “Abbas and Abu Hurayrah

Kawthari said p 197 of his Nukat about the hadith reported by Ibn Abi Shaybah from ‘Ata that Mu’awiyah prayed one witr, and he was criticized for that, and ibn Abbas was asked about that and he said : he reached the Sunnah”

Kawthari answered : “ If this is saheeh from Ibn Abbas then it is considered as Taqiyah, as he was fighting him under flag of Ali”

Ghumari said : meaning he would lie on the Prophet saw on the Sharee’ah and religion, that Mu’awiah reached the Sunnah, and he was not believing that, rather he was thinking Sunnah is opposing this, and it is what Abu Haneefah thinks about three witr, and he tells people contrary to what he knows and he narrates from the Prophet saw and attributes him what he did not do !

Then Ghumari said : Look at this criminal with little religion…

While Kawthari said himself about such actions, imputing Taqiyah to Sahabah in his notes on “ Ath Thuyul” p 186 is breaking pillars of religion, where he said : “ And considering this from what is permitted ( by Syasiyah politics) without daleel is opening the doors of destroying pillars of religion”

Kawthari said in his Nukat p 150 about hadeeth of Abu Hurayrah in both Saheehayn that Prophet saw said : One should not forbid his neighbor to put piece of wood in his wall, then Abu Hurayrah said : why do I see you turning away from this ?, By Allah I will beat it on your shoulders”

Kawthari said : “ Abu Hurayrah was getting close to Marwan during his imarah in Medinah, and ibn Juwaini considered this saying of Abu Hurayrah as during the days of Marwan”

Then he said after : His saying : “why do I see you turning away from this” shows that people to whom Abu Hurayrah talked were not seeing this wajib, and they are from Sahabah and Tabieen, and it is far that these matters remain hidden from them, and the silence of one who remained silent towards the saying of the one who leans to Marwan ( meaning Abu Hurayrah) does not mean they agreed with him, and sometimes the Ameer can be severe from mandoob when he sees people turning away from it, then Abu Hurayrah’s words are from this kind”

Then Ghumari answered : meaning he ( Abu Hurayrah) did tashaddud in mandoob matters, and attributed to the Prophet saw what he did not say, and lied on him… May Allah’s curse be on this taqleed that leads to such levels. And he ( Kawthari) rejected the Sunnah of Ish’ar of camels for Hajj because Ibn Abbas, Aishah, Miswar ibn makhramah were only to report this from the Prophet saw, and he thought that tafarud ( being alone) from these is not enough to establish this Sunnah that Abu Haneefah did not like, as they are not amen in reporting this when it contradicts opinion of Abu Haneefah.

He said p 26 of his Nukat : and only a little group did report hadeeth of Ish’ar. Ibn Abbas reported it and the words of hadeeth are what we mentioned, and Msiwar ibnul makhramah narrated this, and in his hadeeth there is mention of Ish’ar without mention of expression used, then Miswar even if we do not make inkar of his Fadl and Fiqh, but he was born two years after Hijrah, and Aishah narrated this”

Ghumari answered : Meaning they are not enough and not maqbool, their narrations are mardood, it will not be a hujjah on Abi Haneefah, and it is not correct to accuse him of opposing Sunnah with this.

Ta'n on Malik

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 ?”

Then Ghumari quoted that Kawthari said in Taneeb p 27 that Imam Malik was making mistakes in Arabic while speaking from narration of Asma’I, then on p 54 of Taneeb, Kawthari told that this Asma’I was accused of lying when it came to narrations of Asma’I blaming Abu Haneefah.

Ghumari said : “ Then Asma’I is Kazzab when he quotes on Abu Haneefah and his companions, and thiqah when he narrates about Malik ”

Then Kawthari said in p 172 of his Nukat : This hadeeth that was reported by Malik, then it is declared saheeh for those who consider Malik to be thabit”

Ghumari answered : meaning Malik would be mukhtalaf in being Thiqah and Thabat, and one who turns to think he is thiqah, then he takes daleel from that, and the one not, then no. This is the muntaha of disrespect, and little shame showing his little religion rather lack of religion. We ask Allah protection from the misguidance of taqleed, By Allah it is a great test and a great calamity…similar to this disrespectful criminal towards Islam.

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 denied Imam Shafii to be a Qureyshi, he declared saheeh the fabrication that a man of this Ummah named Muhammad ibn Idrees would be more harmful than Shaytan.

On p 28, he accused Imam Shafii of rejecting half of the Sunnah, and they are hadeeth mursal.

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”

Kawthari and Mursal

Kawthari said in Ihqaqul Haqq p 28 : “ And opposition of Athar is lazim for the one who rejects Mursal acted upon, and it is half of the Sunnah, and rejection of mursal is an innovation that started after 200 years”

He said in introduction of Nasb Ar rayah p 27 : “ There is no doubt that neglecting to take from mursal, especially mursal from kibar tabieen is leaving half of the Sunnah”

He blamed Shafii in his Ihqaqul haqq p 27 : “ And Abu Haneefah was not permitting eating flesh of the animal on which tasmiyah was left on purpose, nor nikah of a man with the daughter created from his water ( in zinah), and he was not leaving action on mutawatir Sunnah, nor maraseel that were acted by the Fuqahah of this Ummah before 200 years until it was rejected”

Ghumari said : Then he rejected many mursal, and affirmed they are not hujjah. He rejected the mursal of ‘Ata : That Prophet saw was giving Khutbah and he said to people to sit, and Abullah ibn Masood heard this while he was on the door, he sat and he said : O Abdallah, enter”

He ( Kawthari) said in his Nukat p 201 : “ And in all cases, this is a mursal khabar, Ata did irsal, and the khabar is not salih except with Muttasil sanad exempted from all defection”

And he rejected the mursal of Sha’bi that Prophet saw did rajam of a jew and woman jew, and he said in p 10 of his Nukat after rejecting all agreed upon hadeeth on this topic : “ and the last khabar is mursal”

On p 28 he rejected mursal of Hilal ibn Yasaf.

On p 54 he rejected mursal of Zuhri about return or woman to his kafir husband after he becomes muslim with first nikah.

on p 84, he rejected mursal of Hassan : “ one who kills his slave we will kill him…” saying : “ Hassan did irsal, and kalam on his mursal is known, and Taylasi added Samurah after Hassan, so it would be Muttasil for ibnul Madini, but majority of Ahlul Ilm despair of narration of Hassan from Samurah, and Shubah and ibn Ma’een said : Hassan did not listen from Samurah”

Ghumari said about Mursal : “ That is Hujjah for Abi Haneefah and its rejection is an innovation that started after 200 H”

Kawthari rejected mursal of ibn Musayab about approximation of dates p 101.

P 133, Kawthari rejected the mursal of Sha’bi about killing of the one who insults Prophet saw saying : “ As for two khabar here, the first is mursal and second, meaning hadith ibn Umar, being mawqoof, it is majhool, so it is not Hujjah”

Kawthari rejected Mursal of Muhammad ibn Baqir on p 155 saying : First hadith is mursal’

He rejected Mursal of Mujahid and Tawoos on cutting hand of thief with gift from one who was stolen, he said p 163 : “ These two hadeeth are mursal with ikhtilaf in words and meaning”

He rejected the mursal of Sa’eed ibn Yassar in Muwatta that Prophet saw prayed witr on camel, and he commented p 165 : “ As you see it is mursal".

He rejected the hadith of Qays ibn Amr that is mawsool in Qadha of Sunnah of Fajr after Salah Subh as some narrators narrated it in a mursal way, and he also rejected mursal of ‘Ata on this topic and he said p 178 : “ Although the hadith of Qays ibn Amr is reported by Abu Dawood with this sanad” then he said : “ And Abdu Rabihi and Yahya son of Sa’eed narrated this hadeeth in a mursal way” and he said after : “ And the hadeeth of ‘Ata is mursal”

He rejected hadith forbidding prayer between graves with many weak reasons among them : the khabar of Hassan is mursal.

And he said on p 180 : "The khabar of Amr ibn Yahya from Hakim and Tirmidhi is ma’lool because of irsal of Thawri”

And he rejected the hadeeth about raising voice for Ameen because Alqamah ibn Wail did not listen from his father, so the hadith is mursal.

He rejected the hadith of ibn Abi Laylah about Qadha of Sunnah of Thuhr on saying p 214 : “I say : the first is mursal”

And he rejected the hadith of Abu Hurayrah reported in Muwatta and two Saheeh from many way : If one finds his property in a man that becomes muflis, then he is more rightful” and he said p 238 : “ Malik narrated in a mursal way”

And he did not consider that it is mawsool, not mursal in two saheeh, so irsal would be a reason of weakening even if other do report it mawsool.

And he rejected the hadith : There is no right for the ‘irq Thalim, saying in Ihqaqul Haqq p 48 : “ Reported by Nassai, Tirmidhi, Abu Dawood and others, some narrating it mawsool way and other mursal, and narrators of Muwatta agreed to narrate it in a mursal way, and it is not salih to take daleel from it on the base of Shafii because of the Sanad”

Ghumari answered : And you are Hanafi, and Abu Haneefah is not muqalid of Shafii in leaving ihtijaj from mursal, what do you have with base of Shafii, maybe Abu Haneefah was shafii when he rejected these mursal that are narrated in your books”

Kawthari and Majhool.

He said in his Nukat p 11 : “and similar is what happened for Ibn Jareer, rather there is majhool in it, so we do not take ihtijaj from it”

P 254 he said : “ the hadeeth of Abu Hurayrah in ibn Hazm, its sanad is majhool”

On p 257 : And Aktal narrator from Suwaid is majhool”

Ghumari said : From the greatest strangeness, and shocking action ghareeb, the extreme disrespect, the end of treachery in heart of realities, and destruction of Sharee’ah’s existence, what bring curse on one who does it, he made the ibham ( not knowing who it was) of questioner to the Prophet saw from Majhool, whose narration is not accepted, and whose khabar is not taken as prove.

He said p 57 of his Nukat in trying to weaken the agreed upon hadeeth from a group of Sahabah : “ A man came to the Prophet saw and said : I cut hair before sacrifice, and he said : Do sacrifice there is no haraj ( problem), he said : I did sacrifice before rami ( stoning), and he said : do rami there is no haraj”

Kawthari said : “ I say : These people asking in these narrations are majhool, and in narrations recorded in Saheeh and Sunnan, there is no mention of any famous Sahabi”

Ghumari said : This is the worst of disrespect, a crime, little shame, a little religion…mockery of religion, belittling Sharee’ah of Saydil Mursaleen, this is by Allah the greatest daleel that the heart of the man saying this is free from Iman, and he is a shaytan send to play with religion, and this is greatest prove on truth on what we said many times, that he is prepared for kufr of Nabi saw and rejecting his sayings if it leads to mistake of Abu Haneefah. And this is, as you can see breaking ijma of muslim intelligences…because the intelligence necessarily decides that there is no entering of ibham of questioner and ignorance of them in narrations, because they are not narrators…”

And Kawthari himself said p 129 : “ I say, in first hadith there is a sahabi majhool, nut jahl of Sahabi is not defective for jumhoor”

Ghumari said : the questioner can be Abu Bakr or Ali or Salman or Abu Zar or their similar from big Sahabah. This is by Allah, a great Buhtan, and Fujoor after all fujoor, and this cannot come from except someone Allah blinded his heart, and destroyed his vision …”

Then Kawthari did ihtijaj for his madhab with majhool narrators

Ghumari said : “Majhool is hujjah when it is in accordance with the opinion of Abu Haneefah, Nabi of A’jam and Prophet of ghulatul Mubtadi’ah”

Kawthari to justify his madhab that woman doing apostasy is not killed brought on p 227 of his Nukat a narration of Tabarni in Kabeer and there is one narrator above makhool that is Ibn Abi Talha Al Ya’muri.

Ghumari said : “The shaykh of Makhool in this lie to the Prophet saw is majhool, we do not know who he is. But when it is in support the opinion of Abu Haneefah…then it is maqbool, although there is also in the sanad weakness” Halabi said : Fazari, he is Muhammad ibn Ubaydillah Al Arzami : matrook.

Kawthari said in his taneeb p 142 : “ Muhammad, meaning ibnul Hassan, said that Abu Haneefah told him, that a man told him from Muhammad ibnul Hanafiyah : “‘Aqeeqah was in Jahiliyah, and when Islam came it was finished” Muhammad said : we take from this and this is the saying of Abu Haneefah”

Ghumari said that Kawthari mocked Shafii and criticized him for saying : “ A thiqah reported me that”, while his Imam worshiped ( Ma’bood) said : “ A man narrated us” and Kawthari said about term of Shafii that narrator remains majhool despite Imam Shafii saying he was thiqah.

Majhool Tabieen

Kawthari said in Ihqaqul Haqq p 34 : “ And from kibar Tabieen, if a thiqah narrates from them without jarh, then he is maqbool for narrations”

And Kawthari weakened many kibar from Tabieen as Ikrimah mawla ibn Abbas.

About the hadeeth that Prophet saw retruned his daughter to Abil ‘As after two years with first nikah, because of Ikrimah, and he said : “ And Ikrimah, kalam on him is a lot”

And he rejected hadeeth of the Tabi AberRahman ibn Mas’ood about approximation, and he said p 101 : “ And third hadith, there is AberRahman ibn Mas’ood, and he is majhool, Dhahabi said : he is not known” So here there is no jarh on this bid Tabii, then why weakening him ?


He rejected hadeeth of Bishr ibn Mihjan Dayli, from his father about one praying nafl being one praying fardh, and he said p 79 : “ This Bishr has been mentioned by Ibn Hibban in “ Thiqat” with his rule on tawtheeq of majaheel, and ibn Qattan said : his condition is not known” Why Kawthari does not follow his rule about kibar tabieen not being majrooh ?

And he rejected the hadith if Abu Umayr Abullah ibn Anas Tabii about praying Salatl Idd second day and he said p 89 : “ Abu Umayr Abdullah ibn Anas, Ibn Hibban mentioned him his Thiqat according to his known methodology, but Ibn Abdil barr said : Majhool, we do not take prove from him”

He rejected the hadeeth of Simak from Qaboos ibnul Mukhariq and they are both Tabii from Lubabah bintul Harith about thrwing water on urine of youn boyes and washing for urine of girls. Kawthari said : “ Qaboos is ony declared thiqah by ibn Hibban according to his method of tawtheeq of majaheel, when no jarh reached him, and this is ghayah of tasahul ( being easy)”

And Ghumari gave many other exemples of kibar Tabieen that were weakened by Kawthari, while Aimah said they were majhool, so if there were no jarh, Kawthari should have declared them saheeh.

P 84, 86, 150, 139, 143, 10, 123, 221, 28, 210, 217, 220, 222, 254, 257, 119, 197, 172, 173, 200, 184, 197, 201 on his nukat for more examples

But these hadeeth where against his madhab, so there is no other rule, his rule is only for majhool tabii that report according to Abu Haneefah…

And Ghumari showed many other rules of Kawthari and he changes them when it suits him, also him having two judgements of same narrators, wether it is for him or against him...

Shaykh Bakr Abu Zayd in his Risalah : " Tahreefu Nusus" also present in his book " Ar Rudood" showed many tahreefat of Abu Ghuddah Al Kawthari, leader of ikhwan al Muslimeen in Syriyah.

In p 134 of Manar Al Muneef with Ta'leeq of Abi Ghuddah, Abu Ghuddah quoted from Haythami : " Ibn 'Adi and others declared him thiqah, and other narrators are narrators of two saheeh"

While Haytami said : " Ibn 'Adi and others declared him thiqah, but there is weakness in him, and other narrators are narrators of two saheeh"

Why did he erase : "but there is weakness in him" ( fihi Da'fun) ?

Except to show that Ibnul Qayem was wrong in weakening this hadeeth, and Haytami said contrary to him, so Abu Ghuddah was the same as his teacher, except that he used other tactics, as he was living in Saudia and was head of ikhwan.

Bakr Abu Zayd mentionned many other clear tahreefat, omitting words from people of jarh and ta'deel so to decieve readers...

Also some Ta'n on Imam Bukhari, as many ghulat from Ahnaf do...

And Allamah Abu Zayd mentionned many tahreefat of Ali Sabooni, and some known tahreefat of Deobandi, Athami, Mahmoodul hassan, and others

May Allah protect us from the fitanh of Kawthariyah



Also you will find in Durul Mukhtar in introduction that Haskafi Al Hanafi claimed that when Prophet Issa aley salam will come back he will judge with Hanafi fiqh...

He also quoted the fabricated hadeeth that ABu Haneefah will be lamp of this Ummah and Muhammad ibn Idris will be more harmful than Shaytan...

So I do not think that ghulu of Ahnaaf is found in any other Madhab...

When Ibn Humam who was a Muhaqiq and he started to differ from madhab, then Ahnaf criticised him.

For instance Ibn Humam said like Shawafi that if a Zimmi insluts the Prophet (saw) then he should be killed while Hanafi Madhab says that his Thimah is not broken so he should not be killed...and in Bahru Raiq it is written from Qassim Qutlubagha that the heart of Moumin can lean to saying of Shawafi, but we do not take the views of our shaykh Ibn Humam that oppose the Madhab, as following it is Wajib...

So Mouqalid Ahnaf criticised Ibn Humam, Shah Waliullah, Luknawi and all Muahaqiq Ahnaf that ruled with hadeeth and left on some occasions their MAdhab.

These are words of Mahmdudul Hassan Deobandi in taqrir tirmidhi, published by Maktabah Rahmaniya lahore, p 49,

The book taqreer tirmidhi is in the beginning of Sunnan tirmidhi published by this deobandi maktabah and they have after the taqreer sunnan tirmidhi with other sharh from Anwar Shah Kashmiri and other.

But in the Taqreer it is said in chapter Buyu' on the subject on khyar majalis

" What is obtained is that the topic of khyar is among important topics and Abu Hanifa contradicted in it the majority and a lot of people from the first and later generations, they wrote rasail in refutation of his ( Abu Hanifa)'s madhab on this topic and maulana Shah Waliullah Muhadith gave tarjih in his rasail to the madhab of Shafi'i taking evidence from the ahadith and Nusus, and the same our shaykh ( Maybe Nanotwi ?) gave tarjih to his madhab and said the truth and justice in this topic is to give preference to Shafi'i and we are muqalid and it is wajib upn us the taqleed of our Imam Abu Hanifa. Allah knows best"

So deobandi are on thulm and batil, that is contrary to Haqq and Justice.

Opposing Allah's law, and nowdays they try to say we only make taqleed in matters where there is no daleel but we do not oppose Nusus ( which by the way is not taqleed as taqleed is accepting the saying of Imam without prove), we have hadeeth and you have also hadeeth, we give tarjih to some and you give to other, but here they don't have any daleel and there da'wah is only a lie for Awwam un Nass.

Imam Abu Hanifah said when the hadith is saheeh it is my madhab, and they say we are muqalid, his saying is Hujjah for us, Quran and Hadith are not Hujjah for us.

So these people are ennemies of Imam Abu Hanifah, ennemies of Saheeh hadith and ennemies of Islam.

So Mahmudul hassan Deobandi was shaykhul Hadeeth at darul Ulum deoband, so even if a hadeeth is saheeh, he will not rule by it, as hujjah for him is saying of Abu Haneefah and not saheeh Hadeeth.

HANAFI FIQH VERSUS SALAFIS - 1

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.