My Blog

Just another WordPress.com weblog

Imam Ibn ul Hajj Al-Maliki As-Sufi al-Ashari

Posted by muhammedm on June 24, 2012

As-Salamu ‘Alaykum, أبدأُ بالحمدِ مُصَلِّياً على مُحمَّدٍ خَيِر نبيْ أُرســـــِلا

This is a continuation proving the ascription of scholars to a particular school of theology. The following are words of Imam Ibn ul Hajj, the student of the famous Ashari Sufi who needs no introduction in the scholarly scholar Ibn Abi Jamrah, Allah ta’ala have mercy on him. The following words in regards to the Ayat of Sifat indicate his preferred school of Aqidah, namely the Ashari School.

The Imam, on pg. 32 of the 2nd volume of al-Madkhal, under the chapter heading of “Words regarding verses and narrations those that have difficult apparent (Thahir – wording)” states: “He shouldn’t have with him books that are read and it contains difficult narrations for the listener in regards to the apparent wording, and at the same time there is no one to clarify the rulings and meaning, and clear the difficult passages, and even if there is somone who can clarrify the difficult wording then it a must that his voice encompass everyone that is in the gathering just like the voice of the recitor of Quran which encompasses it’s listeners, because if he doesn’t raise it then most likely there will be some who will leave (the gathering) and will carry with them doubts in regards to creed. Imam Malik was asked regarding the narration of the funeral of Sayyidina Sa’ad bin Mu’adh in regards to the throne shaking, and in regards to the narration “Allah ta’ala created Adam in his Surah” and regarding “the Saaq”, so he said (Imam Malik) “They should not be narrated nor should that which an individual wants to be narrated while knowing it is (a cause for) confusion. Ibn al-Qasim said, “it is not proper for the one who fears Allah ta’ala to narrate narrations similar to this, it was said to him, what about the hadith of “Indeed Allah ta’ala laughs” then he didn’t consider it from it and allowed it (the narration thereof).” After Ibn Rush narrates the complete narrations he says, “Imam Malik prohibited from narrating these two narrations and the narration of Allah ta’ala creating Adam in His Surah and those similar to it because their apparent wording necessitates resemblence (tashbih). If a narration is authentic regarding it, then it is (permitted) to interpret upon that which would negate resemblence to Allah ta’ala with any of His creation, as is done with that which has come in the Quran, the apparent of which necessitates resemblences and they are plenty, such as “al-Ityan (the Coming), al-Maji’ (Coming).” (And that) leaves two possibilities (in terms of solutions), one of which is the meaning of His words, “… Allah ta’ala will come” meaning (the coming) of His punishment and revenge if He is rejected”..”The second possibility the meaning would be appearance (Ath-Thuhur) for there is no difference between the Dunya (this world) and the Afterlife in relation to Him, Glory be to Him, for the veil is to us (from Him), for when He unveils the curtain (Hijab) from us, He will appear to us without limit (Hadd) and modality (Takyif) of form and howness, Glory be to Him… Imam Ibn ul-Hajj ends the discussion with saying “and if that is like that (the different possibilites of interpretations), then the matter is divided into three types, (the first one) and it is the best rather it is that which should not be turned away from, it is returning to the words of Imam Malik: not to narrate these narrations from fear upon the weak for some fitnah entering their beliefs, then how can that be done to the Laymen and the women, for the predominant nature is that they enter (the masjid) while believing and leave while being Maftun (subject to confusion)”

Translated with ommited portions.

The above clearly indicates the position of Imam Ibnul Hajj in regards the verses and narrations on the Sifat of Allah ta’ala. His agreement and position is taken from the early Maliki scholars including Imam Ibn al-Qasim and Imam Malik himself. It is only proper that Imam Malik’s words be interpreted and expanded from those who are experts in his thought, and Imam Ibn Rush and Imam Ibnul Hajj are two of those personalities. The above words of Imam Ibnul Hajj leaves no doubt as to his ascription to the Ashari school as the above is in line with the predominant Ashari position.

The link to the work: http://www.archive.org/download/Almad5al_Ibn_Al7aj/Almad5al_02.pdf

Ma’ Salam

Posted in 'Aqidah, Miscellaneous, Scholars | Leave a Comment »

The Mufassir JalaludDin al-Mahalli an Ashari

Posted by muhammedm on March 27, 2012

As-Salamu ‘Alaykum

One of the many Tafasir that has gained prominence amongst ulema is Tafsir al-Jalalyn. This work was authored by Imam Mahalli then completed by Imam Suyuti. Besides Imam Mahalli’s work on Tafsir, his other works on Usul al-Fiqh have gained prominance as well. His commentary on Waraqat is taught by many scholars including the Hanbali scholars Shaykh Namla whose lectures on the work are online. Another work of his is his commentary on the wonderful work on Usul al-Fiqh by Imam Subki entitled Jam’ ul Jawami’, a work that has received careful attention by scholars of all schools as their commentaries show. Imam al-Mahalli has authored a commentary on this wonderful work entitled “al-Badr ut-Tali’ fi Hal Jam’ ul Jawami'”, which can be read online. In this work, Imam Subki towards the end of his work writes about Usul ud Din or Principles of religion (Articles of Faith). Towards the end of the section on Aqidah, Imam Subki writes, “(we believe) Abu al-Hasan al-Ashari to be the Imam of Sunnah given precedence” Imam Mahalli writes the following, giving tacit approval of Imam Subki’s words by writing the following (in brackets are Imam Subki’s words):
“(And) we believe (Abu al-Hasan) ‘Ali bin Isma’il (al-Ashari) and he’s from the progeny of Abu Musa al-Ashari the Companion of the Prophet. (Leader in/of the Sunnah) meaning the theological path trodden (given precedence) in it above others such as Abi Mansur al-Maturidi. One should not give ear to those who speak in regards to him (negatively) for he is free from it.”

To Allah ta’ala belongs all praise.

More to follow in regards to other scholars who were affiliated with the Ashari school.

Posted in 'Aqidah, Miscellaneous, Scholars | Leave a Comment »

Imam Abu Ishaq Shirazi an Ashari

Posted by muhammedm on December 27, 2011

In the name of Allah, the Most Gracious Most Merciful.

There are several ways to know an individual’s affiliation with a particular theological school. Few of those ways can be differed upon while others everyone has to accept. One can gauge an individual’s affiliation through their works, testimony of contemporaries, testimonies of historians, dealings with different individuals of a particular group and testimonies of opponents. Imam Shirazi, a great Usuli and Faqih of the Shafi’I school, is an individual whom the Ashariah take pride in. There are many proofs for him to be rightly attributed to the Asharis as opposed to the Hanbali or the so called Hanbali school of today, the Salafis. Several proofs are given below with the different methods of ascription.

Testimony of Ashari scholars

Several scholars have ascribed Imam Shirazi to the Ashari School, from them Hafidh Ibn ‘Asakir, Imam Subki and Abu Ja’far Sharif al-Hanbali (refer below).

Historical events
Hafidh Ibn Kathir in his Bidaya wa an-Nihaya writes on pg. 1845 of pdf, “turmoil broke out in Shawwal between the Hanabilah and Ashariah because of Ibn al-Qushayri when he entered Baghdad and taught in Madrasa an-Nidhamiya. He took to censuring Hanabilah and attributing corporeality to them, and Abu Sa’id Sufi aided him and Shaykh Abu Ishaq Shirazi leaned towards him…The Khalifah gathered Shirazi, Sharif, and Abi Nasr bin al-Qurayshi in front of the Wazir. The Wazir turned towards Sharif and paid tribute in his words and actions, and Shaykh Shirazi stood up and said, “I was the one whom you knew when I was a young man and this is my book on Usul in which I say “this is opposed to the Ashairah” then he kissed Abi Ja’far’s head. Abu Ja’far said to him, “you’re saying the truth except that when you were a poor (chad) you didn’t make evident what was in you, but when helpers, the leader and Khawaja Buzurk, meaning Nidhamiya al-Mulk, came you showed what was hidden in yourself”. Refer to Al-Muntazim of Ibn al-Jawzi year 469 Hijri.
The actions and words of Abu Ja’far indicate that Shirazi agreed with the Ashariah even though his works might indicate otherwise.

Hafidh Ibn Kathir writes in Tabaqat as-Shafi’yah, pg. 430, “He studied Usul al-Kalam from Abi Hazim al-Qazwini student of Qadi Baqqallani”
Hafidh Ibn Kathir writes in Tabaqat as-Shafi’yah, pg.439, “Ibn ‘Asakir writes in his Tabaqat Ashab As-Ashairah in the end of his work, “Tabyin Kidhb al-Muftari ‘ala Abi al-Hasan al-Ashari, states, “I saw in the handwriting of some of the truthful, “What is the opinion of the great jurist scholars regarding a group who gather to curse the Asharis and pass verdicts of kufr on them, what should be their consequence? Give us a verdict. A group answered, “ the Ashairah are the people of Sunnah, who stood up to refute the innovators such as the Qadariyya, Rafidah, and others. So whoever reviles them reviles Ahlus Sunnah, and it is incumbent upon those who are over lookers of the matters of Muslim to discipline them such that it prevents others (from cursing). Ibrahim bin ‘Ali al-Fayrazabadi wrote, “I say, “as for the way of Shaykh Abul Hasan ‘Ali bin Isma’il al-Ashari in regards to the Attributes after he left the Mu’tazilities, rather after he entered Baghdad and took from the Ashab al-Hadith such as Zakariyya As-Saji and others for it is the most correct of paths and way because it affirms the Sifat of ‘Aqliyya and al-Jabarriya, none of it is denied or done takyif upon, and this is the path of the Salaf and the Imams of Ahlus Sunnah. May Allah ta’ala raise us in their ranks and cause us to die following them and loving them for He is the Hearer of supplications, the Generous the Bountiful. And upon this mode and manner did the Imams from the companions of Al-Ashari such as Abi ‘Abdillah bin Mujahid, Qadi Abi Bakr al-Baqqallani and their likes followed, May Allah ta’ala have mercy on them.

Testimony of Salafi works

The link below states that the reason for the spread of the Ashari school was because of the assistance and spreading of the Madhab due to the Fuqaha of the Maliki and Shafi’I school, scholars such as Shirazi, Juwayni, Ghazzali, etc.
http://dorar.net/enc/firq/143

Imams Contemporaries and acquaintances
A question must be asked if Imam Shirazi was opposed to the Ashari school, rather the claim put forward by Ibn Abdil Hadi in his refutation on Ibn Asakir that he would distance and oppose the Asharis all together, why did Imam Shirazi keep the company of well known and outspoken Asharis such as Imam al-Juwayni and Ibn al-Qushayri? Why did he praise and encourage seeking knowledge from Imam al-Juwayni? All of the above proofs leave no doubt that Imam Shirazi was an Ashari and not a Salafi!

To Allah ta’ala belongs all praise.

Posted in 'Aqidah, Scholars | Leave a Comment »

Relationship of the Ashari Maliki Qadi Baqillani and Imam Daraqutni

Posted by muhammedm on October 31, 2011

Bismillah

“Abul Walid al-Baji writes in his work entitled “Ikhtisar firaq al-Fuqaha” under the section on Qadi ibn Baqillani, “Shaykh Abu Dharr (Narrator of Sahih Bukhari) informed me, and he used to lean towards his madhab (being Ashari’), so I asked him, “Where did you get this from?” He said, “I was walking in Baghdad with Hafidh Daraqutni and we met Abu Bakr bin at-Tayyib (Qadi Baqillani), Shaykh Abul Hasan (Imam Daraqutni) hugged him and kissed his face and his two eyes. When we left him (Qadi), I said to him, “who is this whom I have seen you do something to whom I have never seen done towards, while you are the Imam of your time?” He (Imam Daraqutni) said, “He is the Imam of the Muslims, who defends the Din, He is Qadi Abu Bakr Muhammed bin At-Tayyib”. Abu Dhar continues and says, “from that time, I have frequented him (Qadi) with my father. Every land that I entered such as Khurasan and others, no one would be singled out from the Ahlus Sunnah except that the person was on his Madhab and methodology.”
Imam Dhahabi continues and says, “…in his work on defense of Imam Ashari he (Qadi) Says, “we have elucidated our religion and the creed of Ahlu Sunnah that the Attributes are to be passed on as they have come without modality, limitations, type, or image.” I (Imam Dhahabi) say, “this methodology is that of the Salaf, and this is what Abul Hasan (Imam Ashari) and his companions were upon which is acceptance of the text of the Book and Sunnah, and this was held by Ibn Baqillani, Ibn Fawrak, and the elders until the time of Abil Ma’ali, then the time of Shaykh Abi Hamid; then differences occured, we seek Allah ta’ala forgiveness.”
Siyar al-‘Alam an-Nubala Pg. 197 Under the section on Abu Dhar al-Hirawi.

There are few things that this narration and event clarifies and shows; one of them is the fabrication or fantasy that Qadi used to be afraid of coming out in public, as the report from Kurji indicates. The text quoted by Imam Dhahabi is clear that Qadi is not only walking in public without fear, he’s being given the utmost respect by the Imam of hadith in his time, Imam Daraqutni, this is excluding the fact that Qadi was a Qadi which means he was in front of the public during the duration of his tenure. Another lie that is spread is that the madhab of Imam Ashari spread in the time of Ibn Turmut, but as the quote of Abu Dhar, the Ashari narrator of Sahih Bukhari, indicates, that anywhere he would go, Asharis were the ones that were considered to be defenders of Ahlu Sunnah. The text also shows Imam Dhahabi’s full acceptance of Qadi’s, and consequently the early Asharis, methodology as he says that the salaf were upon that methodology. The last indication from the quote is that there were no differences between Imam Daraqutni and Qadi in Aqida, for had there been, Imam Daraqutni mustn’t have shown the respect that he showed towards Qadi, for it is forbidden to praise let alone kiss the cheek and eyes of an innovator, and Qadi was far from being an innovator, as these great scholars themselves held Qadi to be a defender of Ahlus Sunnah Wal Jama’ah.

To Allah ta’ala belongs all praise.

Posted in 'Aqidah, Scholars | 2 Comments »

‘Aqidah Gems from Imam Tabari’s works!

Posted by muhammedm on December 29, 2010

أبدأُ بالحمدِ مُصَلِّياً على مُحمَّدٍ خَيِر نبيْ أُرســـــِلا

The following are few quotes from Imam Tabari regarding the issue of Huduth and Kalam. Another post will be devoted to the statement “the Quran is Hadith or Muhdath!”

-Imam Tabari says in his Muqaddimah to his Tarikh, “That (essence) which is not devoid of al-Hadath (accidents) there is no doubt that it is Muhdath (has a beginning).”
A jahil has said that this statement is that of Ahlul Bida’ Mutakallimin, and has stated that the scholars of Ahlus Sunnah have obtained this statement not because it is rationally correct but from Jahm intending thereby that Maturidis and Asharis are descendents of Jahm! What ignorance!

-Imam Tabari says in Tabsir, “He’s the speaker (al-Mutakallim) upon whom silence is not allowed (i.e. It is negated).” The salafi editor of this work writes this position is similar to “what the Asharis say regarding Kalam Nafsi” and continues and rejects Imam Tabaris words saying, “It is not allowed to negate silence (sukut).” Then continues to put his own spin on Imam Tabaris words!

-He says in another place, “There is consensus of the people of Tawhid from the Ahlul Qiblah upon the incorrectness or falacy of qualifying Allah ta’ala with Harakat (movement) and Sukun (stillness).”

-He says in his tafsir, “Indeed Allah ta’ala negated regarding Himself through it (the following): change (Taghayur), movement (tanaqqul) from one place to another, occurrence of change which occurs in humans and other creation,”

-Imam Tabari says in At-Tabsir fi Ma’alim ad-Din, “And whoever rejects what we said regarding it, it will be said to him, “tell us about the speech which you described that the Eternal is Mutakallim, did He created it in His Essence or created it in something else or subsists in His essence? “If he believes that He created it in His Essence then he has necessitated that His Essence is a locus for creation, and this is Kufr according to everyone.”

Ma’ Salamah

Correction: The quote of Intiqal from place to place is attributed to “Others” by Imam Tabari, I translated what the Nokhbah site had quoted, though I should’ve checked the original source.

Posted in 'Aqidah | 3 Comments »

‘Allamah ‘Abdul Hayy al-Lucknawi and ’Allamah Saffarini al-Khalwati on layman doing taqlid of a madhab.

Posted by muhammedm on December 25, 2010

أبدأُ بالحمدِ مُصَلِّياً على مُحمَّدٍ خَيِر نبيْ أُرســـــِلا

This particular post is written due to the fuss that some have created saying that the Deobandi Ulema always talk about the taqlid and following hawa. The three Ulema below state the opinion of their times and also that following of hawa’ is real and not just a tactic for the populace to following a particular thought.

‘Allamah Lucknawi in his Fatawa writes, “The early and the later scholars are in disagreement regarding taqlid of a particular madhab (one madhab), some are of the opinion that it is wajib such as ‘Allamah Mahalli in Jam’ ul Jawami’…’Allamah Lucknawi says after quoting the different opinions, “Even though the correct and preferred opinion amongst the Muhaqqiqin is that Taqlid of a particular madhab is not wajib but in our times the preferred opinion of the verdict is that to do taqlid of a particular madhab is wajib or something preferred which is according to the opinion of some (of the early scholars), and the Mufti should take extreme caution to not let the general populace know the preferred opinion which is it’s not wajib…
‘Allamah Lucknawi quotes Shah Sahib, “these four codified researched madhabs, the Ummah has agreed upon the permissibility of doing it’s taqlid, and in it are many benefits which are not hidden especially in our times in which aspirations have decreased, the nafs has drunken hawa (lower desires), and each individual prefers his own opinion,; what Ibn Hazm held that taqlid is haram is a mistake.

‘Allamah Saffarini al-Khalwati in his Lawami’ writes after giving various different opinions regarding a layman doing taqlid of one madhab, “And what is more famous or well-known now is that he (the layperson) should follow a (particular) madhab. Pg. 576
Ma’ Salamah

The above doesn’t imply that all scholars are agreed on this, rather the reason for the fatwa for obligating taqlid is following hawa’ which is present in our day and age.

Posted in Fatawa, Fiqh | 2 Comments »

Psuedo-hanbalis rant on taqlid in Usul

Posted by muhammedm on December 23, 2010

أبدأُ بالحمدِ مُصَلِّياً على مُحمَّدٍ خَيِر نبيْ أُرســـــِلا

One of the fitan of our times is the distortion of information. Anyone who reads the material of some of these people who place themselves as flagbearers of the truth can see the hypocrisy and ignorance embedded in their writing, mostly due to hatred for one group or another. With the object of destroying the Ahlus Sunnah Kalam schools, this individual, unknowingly, contradicted the school that he claims to be with, the same was done by the scholar that his likes reference frequently. The mas’alah in this particular post is regarding the first thing that is wajib on a person. The individual said, “This obligation of ‘not being a Muqallid in Aqeedah’ has everything to do with Ilm al-Kalam principle of ‘the first obligation of a human’ – which according to them is to do ‘Nathar’ or ‘to look into the world to find out via Aql that Allah exists – both layman and scholar are the same in this’.” Now I’ll present the views of the true Hanbali scholars who spent their lives learning and teaching the Athari creed, unlike the individual who made the remark.

-‘Allamah as-Saffarini al-Khalwati in his Mandhuma writes, “the first wajib on the slave is ma’rifah (knowledge) of God with certainty.”

– Shaykh ‘AbdulBaqi al-Muwahabi al-Hanbali writes, “The knowledge (ma’rifah) of Allah ta’ala is wajib according to the law, from that which has come from the law is an-Nadhar (reflecting) in the existance and that which exists upon every able responsible person, and it is the first Wajib from Allah ta’ala.” Pg 29 al-‘Ayn wal Athar

– ‘Allamah as-Saffarini writes in his commentary, “Our Ulema (the Hanabilah) and others prohibit taqlid in the knowledge (ma’rifa) of Allah ta’ala, in Tawhid, Risalah, and likewise in the five pillars and those similar to it which are known through tawatur and are famous according to Imam Ahmed and most (of the scholars). Abu al-Khattab has mentioned that the opinion is according to the ‘Aama (most or general) of the scholars, and others have mentioned that it’s the opinion of the majority as is stated in Sharh Tahrir. And al-Halwani and others from our companions (Hanabilah) have stated that it’s prohibited to do taqlid in Usul al-Din.” Page 220.

– This opinion is also held by Imam Ibn Hamdan al-Hanbali, Qadi Abu Ya’la and others from the Hanabilah.

– Imam Saffarini also says, “yes his state is that which can decrease (when doing taqlid), and sometimes the individual (who does taqlid) is mutazalzil al-Iman (his faith is shaky), so the truth is that he is sinful for leaving contemplation (an-Nathar) even though he has iman.

So where does this psuedo-hanbali come from criticizing the ‘Ashariah and the Maturidis. Even though some have said taqlid is not allowed at all, this is a minority opinion in all of the three schools, but the Rajih opinion is Iman of a Muqallid is Sahih. For a detailed discussion refer to ‘Allama Saffarini’s discussion in his Lawami’ and Nihayatul Mubtadi’in of Ibn Hamdan for the proofs.

Ma’ Salamah

Posted in 'Aqidah | Leave a Comment »

The ‘Ulema on Imam Ibn Kullab

Posted by muhammedm on December 19, 2010

أبدأُ بالحمدِ مُصَلِّياً على مُحمَّدٍ خَيِر نبيْ أُرســـــِلا

– Imam At-Taj as-Subki says in his Tabaqat, “and Ibn Kullab in any case is from the Ahlus Sunnah… the father of Imam Razi, Diyaud Din al-Khatib, mentioned Ibn Sa’id (ibn Kullab) in the end of his book ‘Ghayatul Maram fi ‘Ilm al-Kalam’ that from the scholastic theologians of Ahlus Sunnah in the days of al-Ma’mun was ‘Abdullah bin Sa’id at-Taymi who destroyed the Mu’tazilites in the gatherings of al-Ma’mun…”
– Ibn ‘Asakir in Tibyan writes regarding Ibn Abi Zayd’s, known as the Little Malik, epistle to a Ibn Isma’il al-Baghdadi al-Mu’tazili, “and you’ve attributed Ibn Kullab to Bida’, and then you didn’t mention anything that would be known as bida’ such that it be called bida’. And what has reached us is that he was a follower of Sunnah and took to refuting the Jahimites and others from the people of bida’h.”
– Ibn Qadi Shuhbah writes in his Tabaqat, “He was from the great scholastic theologians and from the Ahlus Sunnah, his path and that of Al-Harith al-Muhasibi, Imam Ashari’ followed.”
– Jamal ud Din al-Isnawi in Tabaqat as-Shafi’iyah writes, “He was from the great scholastic theologians and from the Ahlus Sunnah…. Al-‘Ibadi mentions him in the Tabaqah (rank in regards to level of students) of Abi Bakr As-Sayrifi that he said, “He is from our companions the Mutakallimin”.
– Imam Dhahabi in Siyar writes, “The man is closest of the scholastics theologians to the Sunnah rather he’s from their Munatharihim”. Shaykh Shu’ayb al-Arnaout writes under Imam Dhahabi’s comments, “He was an Imam of the people of Sunnah in his time and was their source. Imam al-Haramayn described him in al-Irshad as him being from “our companions”.”
– ‘Allamah Ibn Khuldun writes, “until Shaykh Abul Hasan al-Ashari came on the scene… he was on the path of ‘Abdillah bin Sa’id bin Kullab and Abi al-‘Abbas al-Qalanisi and al-Harith al-Muhasibi from the followers of Salaf and on the path of Sunnah.”
– ‘Allamah Bayadi writes, “And Imam Abu Muhammed ‘Abdullah bin Sa’id al-Qattan preceded Imam Ashari in defending the madhab of Ahlus Sunnah.”
– After Hafidh quotes Ibn Nadim’s words wherein he says Ibn Kullab is from the Hashawiya, “he means by it that he’s upon the way of the Salaf in leaving ta’wil of the Ayat and Ahadith related to the Sifat, and they are called al-Mufawwidah.”
– Hafidh says in al-Fath, “Imam Bukhari in what he narrates from the difficult tafsir he relates from the people of that fann (science) such as Abi ‘Ubaydah, An-Nadr bin Shumayl, al-Fara’ and others, as for juristic issues most of them from Shafi’, Abi ‘Ubayd and their likes, and issues of Kalam then most of them from Al-Karabisi, Ibn Kullab and their likes.”

As for Imam Ahmed’s censure of Karabisi, Ibn Kullab, al-Muhasibi was because of their delving into Kalam issue not because of their position. The Hanbalis took Imam Ahmed’s statement to another level such that they went against many of the Imams. Imam Bukhari himself says in Khalq, “as for what the two groups who ascribe to the Madhab of Imam Ahmed and each calling itself to it, for the narrations are not established, and sometimes they don’t understand the subtleness of his (Imam Ahmed’s) madhab, but what is well known from Ahmed and the people of knowledge is ‘the Kalam of Allah ta’ala is ghayr makhluq and whatever else besides it is makhluq, and they disliked delving into it and poking in matters that are difficult. And they avoided the people of Kalam and those who delved and argued except in matters that knowledge has been given and the Prophet’s explications.”

Imam Ahmed said, “whoever says the Quran is created is a Jahimi, and whoever says the Quran is the Kalam of Allah ta’ala but doesn’t say it’s ghayr mukhluq is Waqifi, and whoever says Lafhdi (my lafhd) of the Quran is makhluq is a Mubtadi’.” From the Imams who were explicit in their statements regarding the lafdh issue were Imam Bukhari, Imam Muslim, Imam Tabari, al-Karabisi and others. And the Hanbalis censured those who were explicit in their statements and went against Imam Ahmed’s statements, and from those who were attacked by the Hanbalis were Al-Karabisi, Imam Tabari, and others.

The Ibanah is also on the tariq of Ibn Kullab as the Imams have stated, yet some of the Hanabilah in the time of Imam Ashari didn’t accept his work. Refer to Siyar, Lisan al-Mizan and others. This is another proof that Imam Ibn Kullab was from the followers of the salaf as everyone agrees that Imam Ashari’s madhab was explicated in Ibanah which was written after Imam Ashari left the Mu’tazili madhab.

So we ask todays so-called Hanbalis who use Imam Ahmed’s statement without context, who was correct Imam Ahmed or Imam Muslim, Imam Bukhari and others who were explicit in the lafdh issue? We also ask the reader to see the descrepency in the description of Ibn Kullab by the above scholars and todays’ so called Hanbalis wherien they insult Ibn Kullab and deem him to be a mubtadi’!

Ma’ Salamah

Posted in 'Aqidah, Scholars | 13 Comments »

Imam Ad-Dhahabi on the Mujaddid’s

Posted by muhammedm on December 4, 2010

أبدأُ بالحمدِ مُصَلِّياً على مُحمَّدٍ خَيِر نبيْ أُرســـــِلا

“Al-Hakim said, I heard Hassan bin Muhammed say, We were in the gathering of Ibn Surayj[i] in the year 303 hijri, a scholar from the people of knowledge stood up, and said, “gald tidings O Qadi (Ibn Surayj), for Allah ta’ala raises one who revives the matter of the religion in every century, and Allah ta’ala raised in the 1st century ‘Umar bin ‘AbdilAziz, in the 2nd century Muhammed bin Idris as-Shafi’, and has raised you in the 3rd century, then he began to say two of them have gone… I (Imam Dhahabi) say, “in the 4th century was Shaykh Abu Hamid al-Isfarayini, in the 5th century Abu Hamid al-Ghazali[ii], in the 6th century al-Hafidh ‘AbdulGhani, and in the 7th century our Shaykh Abul Fath Ibn Daqiq al-‘Id[iii]”. (Siyar Vol 3, page 470 under Ibn Surayj)

 


[i] In regards to the statement of Ibn Surayj saying, “we don’t uphold or believe in the ta’wil of Mu’tazili, al-As’ari, al-Jahimiya…” Then it should be known that the report is broken due to the gap of 74 years between the two narrators (Ibn Surayj who died in 306 Hijri and Az-Zanjani who died in the year 380 Hijri).

[ii] Imam Dhahabi after quoting Imam Ghazali’s aqidah points writes, “These beliefs, most of them are correct, and some of them I don’t understand, and some of them there is different between the people of madhab. It’s is suffienct for a muslim to believe in Allah ta’ala, His angels, His books, Hs prophets, destiny the good and bad, resurrection, and there is nothing like Allah ta’ala, and what has been mentioned regarding the divine attributes is true, and is passed as it has come. And the Quran is the speech of Allah ta’ala and what has been revealed, and it is not created and other (points of belief) which has consensus of the Ummah, the one who has deviated isn’t taken into consideration. So if the Ummah disagrees in a matter which is from the difficult Usul of the Din (Aqidah), it is necessary that we stay silent and to relegate it to Allah ta’ala and say, “Allah and His Prophet know best” So Allah ta’ala have mercy on Imam Abu Hamid, for where is someone who is like him in knowledge and virtue but we do not claim for him being free of mistakes, and there is no Taqlid in Usul.” (Imam Dhahabi in Siyar vol 4, page 566)

[iii] The Shafi’,Maliki Ashari’ Faqih. Ibn Hajar quotes Imam Dhahabi saying in the bio of Sa’d ud Din al-Harithi, “Ibn al-Daqiq al-‘Id would flee from him because of him affirming jiha (direction) and would say, “he’s a caller to it” he would prohibit mixing with him. And it is said, that he’s (al-Harithi) the one who wanted to remove or destroy the published work ‘al-Imam’ of Ibn Daqiq al-‘Id after he finished it, so nothing remained except for that which was printed in the author’s time.

Posted in Uncategorized | 2 Comments »

‘Allama Shamsul Haq’s commentary on hadith of Mujaddid

Posted by muhammedm on November 11, 2010

Regarding the hadith mentioned in Sunan Abi Dawud, “on the authority of the Prophet of Allah, peace be upon him, he said, “Allah ta’ala will raise for this Ummah at the head of every century who will revive for it it’s religion” ‘Allama Shamsul Haq al-Adhim Abadi says in his commentary on Sunan Abi Dawud, “(it’s religion) meaning explicate the Sunnah from the Bida’, spread knowledge, assist scholars, break the people of innovation and rebuke them. They (the scholars) say that the Mujaddid will only be one who is a scholar of the outward and the inward knowledge, as Munawi says in Fathul Qadir Sharh Jami’ as-Saghir. ‘Allama Shamsul Haq continues, “indeed you know from what has preceded that what is intended of revival is the revival of what has been left of the actions that are in accordance with the Book and the Sunnah, the matters that result from them, and destroying what has appeared of the innovation.” The author if Majalis al-Abrar said, “the Mujaddid is known except through preponderant opinion of those who are contemporaries of the Mujaddid through his contextual conditions and his benefiting others with his knowledge. Then the Mujaddid has to be one who has knowledge of the outward and the inward sciences, eliminating innovations, his knowledge is widespread in his times…”

After quoting Imam Suyuti’s poem on the possible Mujaddids, ‘Allama writes, “from those who are also considered amongst the Mujaddidin are, in the 1st century Ibn Shihab Zuhri, Qasim bin Muhammed, Salim bin Abdillah, Hasan al-Basri, Muhammed bin Sirin, Muhammed al-Baqir, in the 2nd century the Imam of Jarh wa Ta’dil Yahya bin Ma’in, in the 3rd century Imam Nasa’I, the 4th century al-Hakim[i] and Abdul Ghani bin Sa’id al-Misri, in the 9th century Imam Suyuti as he claimed, in the 10th century Shamus Din bin Shihab ud Din ar-Ramli[ii]. Muhibbi wrote in Khulasatul at-Athar fi ‘Ayan al-Qarn al-Hadi al-‘Ashar in his biographical note, “a group of the scholars have considered him (Ar-Ramli) to be the Mujaddid of the 10th century.”

From the Mujaddids of the 11th century is Ibrahim bin Hasan al-Kurdi al-Kawrani[iii] the last of the Muhaqqiqin the pillar of the Musnidin (Hadith Scholars) resident of Madina. In the 12th century Shaykh Salih bin Muhammed bin Nuh al-Fulani resident of Medina, and Sayyid Murtada al-Husayni az-Zabidi[iv]. In the 13th century, Our Shaykh (after three lines of titles of praise) Sayyid Nadhir Husayn, Qadi Husayn bin Muhammed al-Ansari al-Khazraji as-Sa’di al-Yamani[v] and ‘Allamah Siddiq al-Hasan Khan Al-Bhopali al-Qunuji[vi], Allah ta’ala cover him with His forgiveness and enter him into Jannah. This is what I believe in regards to these three scholars that they are from the Mujaddidin of this 13th century.”

Source: ‘Awn ul Ma’bud Sharh Sunan Abi Dawud li Shamsil Haq


[i] The Author of al-Mustadrik and al-Ulum al-Hadith. He kept the company of Abu Uthman al-Maghribi. Ibn ‘Asakir includes him amongst the Asha’irah.

[ii] Faqih of Misr, he writes “to delve into ‘Ilm al-Kalam such that it is possible to provide evidence and remove doubts is Fard Kifayah upon all of those who are Mukallifin (responsible). Everyone of them is addressed in learning ‘Ilm al-Kalam, however if some of them learn it, then the responsibility is removed from the rest, but if everyone of them refuses to learn it, each individual who has no excuse and knows it’s his responsibility and can learn it sins.” Ghayatul Bayan Sharh Zubad ibn Raslan

[iii] Shah Waliullah writes, “Shaykh Ibrahim al-Kurdi was from the signs of Allah ta’ala in al-Aslein (Aqidah and Usul al-Fiqh), Jurisprudence, Hadith, and Tasawwuf. He has treatise in every science which indicates his powerful explication. He has authored works which no one similar to, especially in hadith, such as ‘Al-Amam’ and al-Musalsalat, and a treatise regarding the authentication of Ahadith mentioned by Sufis. In his time, people from all over the world would turn towards him in Tasawwuf, al-Aslein, Shafi’ fiqh and Hadith. Questions would be posed to him from the east and west which he would answer and were made into many treatises.” Page 105 Ithaf an-Nabih fima Yahtaj ilayhi al-Muhadith wal Faqih

[iv] The Hanafi, Sufi Mutakallim, author of Sharh ul Ihya.  The student of Shah Wailullah and ‘Allama as-Saffarini al-Khalwati al-Hanbali.

[v] He says in his Ijazah, “I used to frequent him (Shaykh Sulayman al-Ahdal), and I read parts of the Six books and others, Hizb of Imam Nawawi and it’s commentary by ‘Allama al-Jurhazi, Hizb of Ibn ‘Arabi and others. He gave me authorization in specific works and in general”. He was a student of ‘Allama Shawkani.

[vi] An admirer of Ibn Arabi and Qasidah Burdah. Refer to livingislam.org/o/spsr_e.html and his work Abjadul Ulum..

Posted in Miscellaneous, Scholars | Leave a Comment »