|| Topic: Gems from the Silsilah - Khabr Ahaad and a refutation of Mad Dog Ma'ribee
Joined: Oct 2002
From the magnificent book ?Silsilah al-Ahaadeeth as-Saheehah wa shai min fiqhihaa was fawaaidihaa? by the Noble Imaam, the Mujaddid, the Mujaahid, Abu Abdur Rahmaan Muhammad Naasir ud-Deen al-Albaanee (rahimahullaah).
Hadeeth No. 134, Page 259
The Bequest of Nuh (alayhissalaam)
"Verily, the Prophet Nuh said to his son, when death approached him, ?I will narrate to my bequest. I order you with two things and prohibit you from two others. I order you with Laa Ilaaha illallaah (there is no deity worthy of worship except Allaah), for truly if the seven heavens and the seven earths were placed on one side of the scale, and Laa Ilaaha illallaah was placed on the other, the scale would tip its balance toward Laa Ilaaha illallaah. If the seven heavens and the seven earths were a circle (handkerchief closed with a knot), Laa Ilaaha illallaah would sever it. Furthermore, I order you with ?Subhaan Allaah wa bi hamdihi?, for verily they are the prayers of everything and by means of these, all beings are provided with their sustenance. And I prohibit you from shirk and kibr (pride).?
I said (or it was said), ?O Messenger of Allah, this shirk is known to us, but what is pride? Is it when one of us has special sandals and laces??, he (sallallaahualaihi wasallam) replied, ?No!?. ?Is it when one of us has friends to sit with??, he (sallallaahualaihi wasallam) replied, ?No!?. It was said, ?O Messenger of Allaah, then what is pride??. He (sallallaahualaihi wasallam) replied, ?To disregard the truth (be ignorant of it and make light of it)and to have contempt for the people (i.e. look down upon them, curse them, and regard them as worthless).?
Reported by al-Bukhaaree in ?al-Adab al-Mufrad? (548), Ahmad (2/169-170, 225) and al-Baihaqee in ?al-Asmaa? (59).
Abdullaah bin Amr said, ?We were sitting with the Messenger of Allaah, (sallallaahualaihi wasallam) when a Bedouin man, wearing an outer garment from Sijan, buttoned with silk brocade, came up to us and said, ?This companion of yours has unsaddled (or wants to) every rider and has elevated every foot soldier.? The Messenger of Allaah grabbed the man by the opening of his cloak and said, ?Do I not see you wearing the clothes of those who have no intellect?? The he (sallallaahualaihi wasallam) said, ??and he mentioned the hadeeth??
I say: This is a saheeh chain.
And al-Baihaqee said, ?It was reported by Ahmad and at-Tabaraanee in this form, and in another narration there is the additional phrase, ? I order you with tasbeeh, for it is the worship of the creation and with takbeer.? It was reported by al-Bazzaar from the hadeeth of Ibn Umar and the narrators of Ahmad are all trustworthy.?
The Shaikh then explains some of the difficult words of the hadeeth which I have tried to express in the translation above or in brackets.
The Naasir-us-Sunnah (rahimahullaah) then says:
The benefits of the hadeeth
I say: The hadeeth has many benefits, I shall suffice by mentioning only some of them:
1) The legislation of a will or bequest upon approaching death.
2) The excellence of tahleel (saying Laa Ilaaha illallaah) and tasbeeh (saying Subhaan Allaah) and that they are a means for the sustenance of the creation.
Baarak Allahu feekum -pay close attention to point 3
3) That the Scales of the Day of Judgement is an established truth and it has two pans. And this is the belief of Ahl us-Sunnah as opposed to the Mutazilah and their followers in the current times, from amongst those who do not believe in that which is established in the authentic narrations. They claim that these are Ahaad narrations and do not give rise to certainty (laa tufeed al-yaqeen) and I have explained the falsity of this claim in my book ?Ma?a ustaadh Tantaawee?, may Allaah make its completion easy.
The ?Khaadim-us-Sunnah an-Nabawiyah? (rahimahullaah) then brings more benefits and says,
4) That there are seven earths just as there are seven heavens. And regarding this topic there are many narration in the two Saheehs and other than them. And maybe we will have some free time to follow them up and make takhreej of them. And this fact is supported by the saying of Allaah, the Blessed, the Most High, ?It is Allaah who created the seven heavens and of the earth the like thereof.? (at-Talaaq, 12) - meaning in creation and in number.
So do not pay any attention to those who explain this by false interpretation to negate likeness of the earth to the heavens in number (i.e. seven of each) deceived by what has reached them from the Europeans of their (so-called) ?advancement and progression? - that they don?t know what the seven earths are. This is despite the fact that they don?t know what the seven heavens are either!! Shall we reject the Speech of Allaah and the speech of His Messenger (sallallaahualaihi wasallam) because of the ignorance of the Europeans and other than them, along with their recognition of the fact that whenever they increase in knowledge about the universe they increase in their ignorance of it?
And verily Allaah has spoken the truth when He said, ?And of knowledge you have been given only a little.? (al-Israa, 85)
5) That wearing beautiful clothes is not from pride at all. Rather it is something legislated because Allaah is Beautiful and He loves beauty, as he (sallallaahualaihi wasallam) said in this regard, based on what is reported by Muslim in his Saheeh.
6) That the pride which is associated with and attached to shirk, and that which prohibits entry into Paradise for whoever has an atoms weight of it in his heart, is pride against the truth, and rejecting the truth after its clarification, and cursing the righteous people without right.
So let the Muslim beware of being described with anything from the like of this pride, just as he should beware of being described with anything from the Shirk which causes its doer to dwell in Fire eternally.
The Naasir us-Sunnah also says in another place:
Hadeeth no. 1963, Page 605
The Excellence of Abu Ubaidhah and the Hujjah of Khabr Ahaad
From Anas bin Maalik, (radiallahu anhu),
?That the people of Yemen approached the Messenger of Allaah (sallallaahualaihi wasallam) and said, ?Send with us a man who will teach us the Sunnah and Islaam.? Anas said, ? So he took hold of Abu Ubaidah?s hand and said, ?This is the trustworthy one of this ummah? -meaning Abu Ubaidah.?
Reported by Muslim (1297) and al-Haakim (3/267) and Ahmed (3/125) and Abu Ya?laa (2/831) by way of Hamaad bin Salamah from Thaabit from Anas.
The above wording is that of Muslim and the wording of al-Haakim contains ??to teach us the Qur?aan..? and he (al-Haakim) said, ?The hadeeth is Saheeh according to the conditions of Muslim, but he did not report it with the mention of the Qur?aan.?
I say: The hadeeth contains an important benefit, and it is that the Khabr Ahaad is a proof in matters of aqeedah, just as they it is a proof in ahkaam (rulings of halaal and haram). This is because we know by necessity that the Prophet (sallallaahualaihi wasallam) would not send Abu Ubaidah to the people of Yemen to teach them the ahkaam only, rather he sent him to teach them aqeedah as well. And if Khabr ul-Ahaad did not give rise to al-Ilm ash-Shar?ee in matters of belief, and could not be used as proof in those matters, then sending Abu Ubaidah alone, to those people to teach them, would resemble something of mockery. And this is something that the legislator is free of. So it is established with certainty that it (Khabr Ahaab) leads to knowledge, and that is the intent.
And regarding this important matter I have two well known works which have been published several times so let the one who wishes to obtain more detail in this matter, refer to them.
The two books that the Shaikh makes reference to are, ?Al-Hadeeth Hujjah binafsihbi fil Aqeedah wal Ahkaam? (The Hadeeth is a proof in and of itself in matters of belief and rulings) and ?Wujoob al-Akhd bi hadeeth fil Aqeeedah war-radd ala Shubhil Mukhaalifeen.? (The obligation to accept hadeeth in aqeedah and a refutation of the doubts of those who oppose this)
So what will the defenders of Mad Dog Ma'ribee al-Mu'tazilee say after this????
Joined: Apr 2003
Jazakallaah khayr for these beneficial quotes. |
I don't think my reply was understood the first time round.
|"So what will the defenders of Mad Dog Ma'ribee al-Mu'tazilee say after this????"|
This is what they will say: "You are Muqallid Haddaadees!"
This is their reply. A reply to reject the truth!
This message was edited by abu.abdul.barr on 7-18-03 @ 6:25 PM
Joined: Oct 2002
An old post which has had one or two updates. It is highly appropriate to what our brother Abu Naasir has quoted above: |
Name of the book:
|An-Nukat alaa Nuzhat in-Nadhar Fee Tawdeeh Nukhbat il-Fikr Lil-Haafidh Ibn Hajar al-Asqalaani|
|Alee Hasan bin Alee bin Abdul Hameed|
|First edition 1412H, latest edition (6th print) 1422H, corresponding to 2001CE|
|The position concerning Khabarul-Waahid without supporting factors (qaraa'in), Does it amount to certain knowledge or not?|
|Its relationship to the position of Ahl ush-Shaam on Abul-Hasan al-Misree, the Innovator, who came to cast doubts about the Sunnah of al-Mustafaa, and to cast doubts the rulings of Ahl us-Sunnah upon the Innovators who depart from the Sunnah|
Quotes and Observations:
Concerning al-Mutawaatir, Ibn Hajar says, "...and that is the Mutawaatir, and all of it is accepted, due to it providing certainty, by way of the truthfulness of the one who narrated it, as opposed to other than it from the Akhbaar ul-Aahaad." (pp.71-72)
Alee Hasan comments:
|And the truth is "That the khabar al-waahid of an 'adl (upright trustworthy person) from someone like him, up until the Messenger of Allaah (sallallahu alaihi wasallam) necessitates knowledge and action together", just as Ibn Hazm said in "Ihkaam ul-Ahkaam" (1/119). And whoever claimed other than that, then without any evidence. And al-Allaamah Ibn al-Qayyim (rahimahullaahu ta'aalaa has a comprehensive investigation in "as-Sawaa'iq al-Mursalah alaa al-Jahmiyyah wal-Mu'attilah" (2/232-442), affirmation of the khabar ul-waahid, and that it amounts to knowledge and action together, and of the obligation of seeking proof by way of it in aqeedah. And our Shaykh, Al-Albaani - may Allaah bring benefit through him - has two printed risaalahs (small works) on this issue". (pp.72)|
1) So does Abul-Hasan al-Misree have any evidence for his position? The answer is no, in light of the above. If not, then what is most befitting. Defending him in falsehood, or supporting and aiding the Imaam of al-Jarh wat-Ta'deel
2) When the Imaam of al-Jarh wat-Ta'deel quoted the whole passage from as-Sawaa'iq of Ibn al-Qayyim (in the third of his three part refutation of Abul-Hasan on the subject of khabarul-waahid), the same one alluded to above by Alee Hasan, then was it more befitting to support him and announce that the truth is with him, and his observations are correct and that he defended the Sunnah from the one who wanted to cast doubt about it, or was it more befitting to defend Abul-Hasan al-Misree in falsehood?
3) When the Imaam of al-Jarh wat-Ta'deel said to Abul-Hasan al-Misree "Don't try to rub your filth on Shaykh al-Albaani" and explained (in the course of his three part refutation of Abul-Hasan concerning khabar ul-waahid) that Imaam al-Albaani has two separate complete works on the subject, and that Abul-Hasan was deceptive, then was it more befitting for Ahl ush-Shaam to corroborate this, and to acknowledge it, and to announce it, and to promote it, and to support the one who said it, or was it more befitting to defend Abul-Hasan al-Misree, the one who casts doubts about the Sunnah of al-Mustafaa, the one who reviles Moosaa and Daawood (alaihimaa as-salaam), the one who reviled the Sahaabah, and showed no remorse and fought against those who advised him, up until, his arrogance could survive no longer?
Then on the next page (p.73) Ibn Hajr speaks about the khabar that does not have any factor which associates it either with the category (of akhbaar) in which the characteristic of truthfulness is found or the category in which the characteristic of lying is found - that such a khabar, therefore, is one that is not acted upon, and hence it becomes like the rejected (al-mardood). So Alee Hasan comments:
|(Meaning) from the angle of not acting by it. And I have already just mentioned that the khabar ul-waahid whose sanad is authentic, that it necessitates both knowledge and action together, and whoever distinguished (i.e. between it necessitating knowledge and it necessitating action), then he does so without any support (i.e. any evidence).|
1) So does Abul-Hasan al-Misree have any support for his distinction? The answer is no, in light of the above. If not, then what is most befitting. Defending him in falsehood, or supporting and aiding the Imaam of al-Jarh wat-Ta'deel in his defence of the Sunnah of al-Mustafaa?
2) And if this was a tahqeeq of the correct position, and a mountain such as the likes of Ibn Hajr al-Asqalaani can have his words commented upon in this manner, then by Allaah, what about an Ikhwaani Innovator, such as the likes of Abul-Hasan al-Misree? So where are the scales, and where is the defence of the truth?
Then on the same page, Ibn Hajr speaks about about the issue of khabar ul-waahid that has supporting factors providing investigative knowledge (al-ilm an-nadharee), and in Ibn Hajr's sharh of his own words, he says that the difference on this issue is in wording, saying that the one who applied the label of "knowledge" to the khabar ul-waahid that is surrounded by supporting factors, did so but he meant investigative knowledge (meaning that it only amounts to knowledge after research and investigation, to the one who has researched and investigated). And that the one who did not apply the label of "knowledge" to khabar ul-waahid, applied it specifically and only to the mutawaatir, and that in the view of such a one, whatever is besides mutawaatir is "dhannee". However, that such a one at the same time does not negate that whatever from the khabar ul-waahid is surrounded by supporting factors, is to be deemed more stronger (arjahu) than that which does not have these supporting factors (whilst still remaining in the domain of "dhann").
So commenting upon this paragraph, Alee Hasan says:
|But what is the fruit (i.e. result) of this arjahiyyah? Istidlaal and Ihtijaaj with respect to the Sharee'ah in general? Or this Istidlaal and Ihtijaaj being restricted to some parts of it as opposed to others? And then does it also amount to knowledge and action together or one of them as opposed to the other? |
What is correct is what has already been mentioned. Yes, supporting factors make it stronger from the point of view of having greater satisfaction and contentment with it, not from the point of view of rejecting it when these factors are not present.
1) Here Alee Hasan's comments have the meaning that the presence of supporting factors only strengthens the narration, in the sense it adds to its certainty, and correctness, and that the absence of supporting factors does not mean that now the khabar is mardood. So the role of suppporting factors for the khabar ul-waahid is only to give a person further conviction in this khabar, and to increase the khabar in strength. Alee Hasan was kind of refuting the viewpoint contained in the words of Ibn Hajr al-Asqalaanee.
2) Abul-Hasan al-Misree said that without supporting factors, khabar ul-waahid is dhannee (amounts only speculation). So if what has been quoted above was a tahqeeq of the correct position according to Alee Hasan, and a mountain such as the likes of Ibn Hajr al-Asqalaani can have his words commented upon in this manner, then by Allaah, what about an Ikhwaani Innovator, such as the likes of Abul-Hasan al-Misree? So where are the scales, and where is the defence of the truth? So was it more befitting that the Imaam of al-Jarh wat-Ta'deel should be supported and defended, or was it more befitting to cause splits in the ranks of Ahl us-Sunnah by further dividing their word and claiming "al-Irhaab al-Fikree"?
Then on the next page (p.74) Ibn Hajr lists some of the supporting factors what add strength to the khabar ul-waahid (but without removing it from dhann), and amongst them is that the khabar is narrated in the two Saheehs of al-Bukhaaree and Muslim, since the Ummah has taken them with acceptance (a factor), and these two are specialists in the field (another factor) and they have precedence and are at the forefront of distinguishing the Saheeh from other than it (a third factor), and that the factor of "the Ummah having taken these akhbaar with acceptance (at-talaqqiyy)" is actually a stronger factor in showing that these akhbaar necessitate knowledge, than the mere chains of narration of the akhbaar themselves.
Alee Hasan comments on this last statement as follows:
|Our Shaikh, Shaikh al-Albaanee (hafidhahullaah) in his notes to "an-Nuzhah", and I quote from his own handwritten script, "And many people in the current times have neglected this "at-talaqqiyy" (taking with acceptance) and its importance, those who everytime a hadeeth whose isnaad is saheeh causes them a problem, they resort to rejecting it by the argument that it does not amount to certainty and definitiveness! So these people do not truly give the true scales of balance to the sayings of the Specialist Imaams, those who restrict their saying that the hadeeth al-aahaad amounts to dhann (speculation) by numerous restrictions. And amongst them is that this is when there is difference of opinion as to its acceptance (qubool). But as for when it has been taken with acceptance by the Ummah, especially when it is in the two Saheehs, in accordance with what the author has explained - rahimahullaah (i.e. Ibn Hajr) -, then it provides knowledge and certainty in their view. This is because the Ummah is free from making a mistake (at a collective level), due to his (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam's) saying, "My Ummah will not unite upon misguidance". Thus the authenticity of that in which there is speculation, but acting upon which is obligatory, then it is necessary so that it is also saheeh (authentic) at the same time, just as al-Allaamah Abu 'Amr Ibn as-Salaah said in his Muqaddamah (p.29), and al-Haafidh Ibn Katheer and others followed him..."|
1) Abul-Hasan al-Misree casts doubt even about these supporting factors that are mentioned by the scholars. As he says in Ittihaaf un-Nabeel:
Compare what is said by Alee Hasan above, quoting and affirming by way of Shaikh al-Albaanee (rahimahullaah), confirming those surrounding factors that make the khabar ul-aahaad to amount to yaqeen, and compare to what Abul-Hasan al-Misree has written which is nothing but causing confusion and doubt. Refer also to Shaikh Rabee's reply to this particular passage in his second refutation against al-Ma'ribee on the subject of khabar ul-aahaad.
|بقي أن يقال : وخبر الآحاد الذي تحفه قرينة هل يفيد اليقين؟ |
مثلوا لذلك بآحاد الصحيحين، والتي حفتها قرائن كثيرة مثل علو قدر الشيخين ورسوخ قدمهما في هذا الفن، وتلقي الأمة للكتابين بالقبول000 الخ ما ذكره العلماء في ذلك، فمنهم من جزم بإفادتها العلم اليقيني النظري( )
ومنهم من خالف( ). وعندي أن في الأمر تفصيلاً بخلاف الأحرف المنتقدة عليهما فمن أحاديث الشيخين، وإن كان آحاداً ما يقطع السامع له بصحته إلى النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم ومنها مالا يبلغ هذه المنزلة وذلك راجع إلى قرائن أخرى تحف بعض آحاد الصحيحين، خلاف ما سبق ذكره من قرائن.
فإن ما ذكروه من القرائن المشار إليها آنفاً لا يلزم منه القطع بخبر الآحاد.
It remains to be said, the khabar ul-aahaad which is surrounded by factors, does it amount to yaqeen? They gave example of this by way of the aahaad (hadeeths) of the Two Saheehs (al-Bukhaaree and Muslim), and which are surrounded by many factors, such as the great status of the two Shaikhs, and their being deeply-rooted in this particular science, and that the Ummah has taken the two books with acceptance, to the end of what the Scholars mentioned. So some of them were resolute that they provide certain, investigative knowledge (al-ilm al-yaqeenee an-nadharee) and amongst them are those who differ. What I hold is that there is detail to the matter, as opposed to (the case regarding) those few words which have been criticised against them (the two Saheehs). So amongst the ahaadeeth of the two Shaikhs, even if they are aahaad, then the one who hears them will be certain about their authenticity to the Prophet (sallallaahu alaihi wasallam) and amongst them are those that do not reach this level, and this then returns to other supporting factors that surround some of the aahaadeeth of the two Saheehs, which are different to the supporting factors already mentioned. Because those factors they mentioned which have just been alluded to just now, then certainty regarding the khabar ul-aahaad is not necessitated by them.
2) Abul-Hasan al-Misree has nothing that is of use or benefit to him from the positions of Shaikh al-Albaani, except that in which he lied and twisted and clipped.
3) Ahl ush-Shaam have left the way of Shaikh al-Albaani in evidence and proof and speaking the truth and defending it, and supporting it, and allying on account of it. This issue is a clear example. Because if one of them spoke about Ibn Hajar in the way that he did, whilst trying to affirm that the khabar ul-aahaad amounts to certain knowledge, and Ibn Hajar is a great Imaam, then why could they not show the same gheerah for the Sunnah and Hadeeth by speaking about a former Ikhwaanee, Takfeeree who entered into this science but not firmly grounded in it?
4) The position of Abul-Hasan al-Misree is "the most false of falsehoods" exactly as the scholars have mentioned.
5) Thus, was it more befitting that the Imaam of al-Jarh wat-Ta'deel should be supported and defended, or was it more befitting to cause splits in the ranks of Ahl us-Sunnah by further dividing their word and claiming "al-Irhaab al-Fikree"?
These are some serious issues that arise and which are very clear from the quotes from just this one book. My version printed by Daar Ibn al-Jawzee, Dammaam, Saudi Arabia.
1. Shaikh Rabee' is the Imaam of al-Jarh wat-Ta'deel. Like Imam al-Albaanee said, "The carrier of the flag of al-Jarh wat-Ta'deel, in our times, is, and in truth, our brother, Dr. Rabee. And those who refute him do not do so on the basis of knowledge, rather with him is all the knowledge". Thus, it was more befitting for the affair to be left in his hands, and that he not be contended with. Let alone reviled and spoken ill of, as occurred from some of them!
2. Abul-Hasan al-Misree is an Innovator who deceives and lies, and he most probably refuted Shaikh Rabee' knowing that he was upon falsehood - as some of the Scholars have expressed, like Shaikh Muhammad al-Banna.
3. Those who defended Abul-Hasan al-Misree did so upon lack of full knowledge of his realities, or lack of understanding, or due to defending Abul-Hasan in order to defend his manhaj, or due to placing themselves at a level they are not actually at to begin with.
Salaat and Salaam upon our Noble Messenger, his family and companions.
This message was edited by naasir.ud-deen on 7-19-03 @ 6:39 PM