[Majlisul Ulama]
REFUTATION OF A MORON JAAHIL’S VIEW ON HADITH CRITICISM
“Verily, those who dispute in Our Aayaat without any proof having come to them, in their hearts there is nothing but a pride (whose objective) they will not attain. Therefore seek refuge with Allah. Verily, He is The Hearer, The See-er ” (Aayat 56 Surah Al Mu’min)
Some jaahil groveling in his quagmire of jahl-e-murakkab (compound ignorance), cunningly in an article peddles the haraam view that “criticism of Hadith is not a new enterprise.” In this statement he subtly implies that every modernist Tom, Dick and Harry moron has the right to submit the Ahaadith of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) to the vagaries of his wildly fluctuating nafs in whose grip labours his brains.
The moron seeks to acquit himself as an authority of the Shariah by disgorging some facts which he has gleaned from some academic kutub. His jahaalat constrains him to drive a wedge between the Qur’aan and the Ahaadith of Nabi-e-Kareem (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). Whilst the buffoon concedes that there does exist a concept such as ‘Sunnah’, he perpetrates the kufr of denying that Allah Ta’ala has defined the Sunnah. This is indeed a subtle rejection of the Qur’aan itself, for Allah Azza Wa Jal states in His Kalaam:
“Verily, for you (O Muslimeen!) there is in Rasulullah a Beautiful Uswah (lifestyle), for him who has hope in Allah and the Last Day.”
Then Allah Ta’ala states a dozen times “Obey Allah and obey the Rasool.” The theme of strict obedience to the Sunnah of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) is a solid, conspicuous thread permeating the entire Qur’aan Majeed. Allah Ta’ala warns of severe punishment – the punishment of the Fire – deprivation from Jannah for those who do not obey His Commands and Prohibitions, viz., His Shariah. The absolute severity of the Divine Warnings mentioning of the roasting bodies in Hell fire; being cast upside in Jahannam; being force-fed boiling water and the thorns of Zaqqoom in Jahannam, etc., etc., totally preclude the slightest ambiguity in the Sunnah, that Sunnah which the Ummah has to follow meticulously to secure Najaat (Salvation) in the Aakhirah.
THE SUNNAH IS NOT AMBIGUOUS
Most assuredly, Allah Ta’ala after having imposed the Sunnah lifestyle on us and after issuing dire warnings and threats of the severest consequences for disobedience, did not leave us to dwell and grope in the darkness of nafsaani vacillation in the endeavour to discover the Sunnah. The Sunnah is not a concept which is the consequence of our discovery, its not a discovery developing from the application of man’s opinion bogged down and contaminated by a variety of inimical forces. The Sunnah is the lifestyle created by Allah Azza Wa Jal for His Makhlooq, and defined meticulously by the practical example of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) and his noble Sahaabah, hence he declared:
“Honour my Sahaabah, for verily, they are the best of you; then those who followed them (the Taabieen), then those who followed them (Tab-e-Taabieen). Then after them kithb (falsehood and lies, especially modernist lies disgorged by morons) will prevail.”
The Qur ‘aan-e-Hakeem does not deal with modernist fiction. It expounds incumbent facts for us to compulsorily adopt in practical life in the precise way exemplified by Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) and his illustrious Sahaabah. The Sunnah is not a stupid conundrum which has been left for extrapolating concepts of life in kufr evolutionary style in the way the Yahood and Nasaara have mutilated and transmogrified the Shariahs of Nabi Musa (alayhis salaam) and Nabi Isa (alayhis salaam). There is no ambivalence in the Sunnah. The attempt to convey the devilish idea that the Sunnah is a riddle to be solved by the brains of the modernist juhala by way of submitting the Ahaadith to their personal opinion is kufr. Such ‘believers’ are zindeeqs. They seek to scuttle Islam in subtle and cunning ways by retaining the name ‘Islam’ for the hotch potch of which is the quotient of their wild conjecturing.
There is no ambiguity and no conundrum in the Sunnah. Allah Ta’ala did not command us to submit to a conundrum or to a concept stricken with ambiguity and darkness, then threaten us with the severest punishment for acts which are in conflict of the Sunnah despite our unawareness of what that Sunnah actually is.
THE QUR’AAN AND THE SUNNAH The modernist jaahil concedes that the Qur’aan unequivocally proclaims that whatever Muhammad (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) spoke was divine inspiration – Wahi from Allah Ta’ala. How then can his Sunnah be an ambiguity consigned to posterity for unraveling? What then was the purpose of the Rasool? Nabi (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) did not indulge in mental gymnastics, riddles and crossward puzzles. The Sunnah is a serious way of life ordained for the Ummah by Allah Ta’ala. It is inconceivable that the definition of the Sunnah was left for the pastime hobby of modernist morons who mushroom in this age in close proximity to Qiyaamah. What does the jaahil seek to achieve by engaging on a topic which has already been solved and settled many centuries ago? What sinister plot does the moron conceal with his satanic attempt to fault Bukhaari Shareef, etc. in this age in which the Ummah should be concerned with only the practical Sunnah lifestyle as it has been reliably transmitted to us down the long corridor of Islam’s history by means of authentic narration and practice of the Sahaabah?
There is absolutely no scope for adjusting and reinterpreting the Shariah which has come down to us most reliably from the Sahaabah and Taabieen. The focus of these modernist morons is on the production of a new ‘shariah’ – Yahood and Nasara style, hence the devious and pernicious idea of the validity of criticizing the Ahaadith on which the entire edifice of the Shariah is structured. In fact, without Ahaadith there is no Qur’aan. The very authenticity and immutability of the Qur’aan are firmly based on Ahaadith. There is absolutely no other avenue for corroborating the Qur’aan’s authenticity other than Ahaadith.
IMPUGNING THE HADITH HADITH CRITICISM
The attempt to impugn the lofty status of the Ahaadith by citing differences of Ulama is contemptible and satanic. The authorities – the true Ulama of bygone times were not like these modernist juhhaal. They were qualified in all sciences of the Shariah. It is ludicrous and laughable that modernist morons of this age are seeking to arrogate to themselves the authority of the Ulama, Fuqaha, Muhadditheen and Mufassireen who were the Heirs of the Ambiya occupying the highest station in the concept of Waraathat-e-Ambiya.
The sole repositories of the highest degree of Shar’i Authority were the Sahaabah, Taabieen and Tab-e-Taabieen. This was a demarcation enacted by Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) himself, hence it is the divine demarcation which excludes all conflicting concepts, views and theories which developed beyond the boundaries of this sacred demarcation. Making explicit reference to this fact, Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) branded all post Khairul Quroon ‘religious’ innovations and ideas as Kithb (falsehood) which are the effects of simaanah (obesity).
It is indeed the epitome of jahaalat to assault the Ahaadith with stray opinions of scholars who had appeared on the scene 6, 7, 8 and 10 centuries after Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). No one is the Muqallid of Imaam Suyuti (rahmatullah alayh). Hence, if there is some anomaly in a view of Imaam Suyuti, it may not be imposed on the Ummah as a valid opinion despite its glaring conflict with the Opinion which has flourished in the Ummah since the epoch of Khairul Quroon, for this is the boundary cast in solid divine Rock by Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). Consider the following stupidity attributed to Ibn Qayyim and trumpeted by the modernist jaahil in his abortive bid to substantiate his baseless idea of meddling and fiddling in the Ahaadith with the objective of scuttling the Shariah:
“Ibn Qayyim said ahadith that says: “He who loves, keeps chaste and dies, does a martyr” are forged. Even if the narrators’ chain was as bright as the sun., he said it would still be wrong.”
Undoubtedly there is something drastically wrong with the brains of the one who had propounded this ludicrous, irrational and haraam view. The very authenticity of the Qur’aan is established on the basis of such Ahaadith whose narrators’ chains are as “bright as the sun”. This innovated theory attributed to Ibn Qayyim in the belated age of several centuries after Khairul Quroon is pure ghutha (rubbish) which the modernist juhhaal find most palatable.
THE ISNAAD AND THE MATAN The fundamental basis of authenticity of Hadith is the Isnaad, not the Matan. Thus, regardless of perceived irrationality and apparent contraction in Hadith narrations, these elements will never be factors for the rejection or denigration of a Hadith whose authenticity is corroborated by a Chain of Narrators, “bright as the sun”. Reason and rationality are relative concepts. What may appear unreasonable to someone, may be reasonable to another. Ahaadith with Isnaads “as bright as the sun” are in entirety independent of the test of rationality. All the raka’ts of Salaat are based on Ahaadith whose authenticity is “as bright as the sun”. No one may tamper with these raka’ts or doubt their correctness on the basis of rationality, moreover if such rationality is an aberration of the modernist juhhaal who proliferate Muslim society of this age.
Relative to the Authorities who flourished during Khairul Quroon, the likes of Ibn Qayyim recede into the realm of oblivion. It is laughable to even cite Ibn Qayyim or any post Khairul Quroon Scholar in negation of the entrenched beliefs, practices and concepts which had existed during that early era in which the Divinely Sealed Shariah was delivered to the Ummah.
Expounding his jahaalah, the modernist Ghabi says:
“It is clear from these and other verses, and there is no doubt, that Muhammad (s) is, for us, an exemplar and a model. Nor should there be doubt that rejecting his Sunnah is a grave error. No wonder, then, that it is generally accepted among most Muslims that his Sunnah is the second most important source of legislation and guidance.”
This moron with his smattering of ‘academic’ knowledge’, suffering from the disease of oblique mental vision, just does not know what he has blurted out. Alternatively, his disgorgement is a subtle stunt to dislodge the Sunnah and the Shariah, hence the ghutha of the “secondary nature” of the Sunnah which according to the Qur’aan is the primary and only way of life for Muslims. The Sunnah embodied in the Ahaadith being the second source of legislation should not be confused with the Sunnah which has been ordained to be the practical lifestyle of the Ummah. The Sunnah which is confirmed and corroborated by either the First or the Second or the Third or the Fourth Source of legislation is the only Sunnah for practical implementation – implementation which is Waajib. Nothing detracts from the incumbency and the imperative importance of any Sunnah act confirmed by any one of the Four Sources of legislation. What has been confirmed as the Sunnah in Khairul Quroon, is the Sunnah whose practical adoption the Qur’aan commands regardless of the status of the confirmatory source.
The averment that rejection of the Sunnah is “a grave error” is grossly erroneous. Rejection of Sunnah is kufr – kufr which expels the rejector from the fold of Islam. Observance of the Sunnah is commanded by the Qur’aan. In this Sunnah there is no ambiguity, and this Sunnah is not subservient to the reasoning process of the dumb modernist juhhaal.
The modernist ghabi peddling his haraam kufr wares, seeks assistance from a Scholar who is in relation to the Sahaabah and Taabieen a veritable non- entity. Thus he says:
“Jalal al-Din Suyuti’s statement on matn criticism is now axiomatic: “If you encounter a hadith contrary to reason, or principles, then you should know that it is forged.”
This statement carries absolutely no weight – it is devoid of Shar’i substance in the face of a Hadith whose authenticity is based on a Chain “as bright as the sun”. It is a forgery attributed to Imaam Suyuti (rahmatullah alayh). The moron or whoever has schooled him in his lamentable smattering of hadith knowledge, has torn the principle from its context. The manner in which the jaahil has presented Imaam Suyuti’s statement has been deliberately or ignorantly calculated to convey the spurious notion that this statement is a general principle for scrutiny and acceptance of Hadith narrations when in fact this idea is baseless – a figment of the moron’s hallucination. The axiom mentioned by the moron has applicability only if the narration’s chain is of a dubious nature or uncorroborated by the requisite evidence for establishing authenticity. In such an event, the narration will not be entertained even in the domain of Fadhaaila domain which allows room for Dhaeef Ahaadith. Furthermore, the moron did not even understand what he has read or heard about the alleged ‘axiom’. The aforementioned statement has been torn from its context by the moron who has failed to understand either the statement or the context.
The statement mentioned above applies to such Maudhoo’ (Fabricated) narrations which cannot be interpreted to reconcile with the Shariah. It does not even apply to Maudhoo’ in general.
The ghabi has attempted to pass himself off as an authority by citing the name of Imaam Suyuti (rahmatullah alayh) to impress other juhhaal of his ilk. He has attributed a calumny against Imaam Suyuti. Imaam Suyuti’s statement does not mean what the jaahil is bandying out.
It is indeed the height of ghabaawah to even suggest the rejection of a Hadith of the Mutawaatir class on the basis of a moron’s reasoning or simply because the matan of the Hadith militates against the density of the moron’s brains. Every jaahil will find almost every juz’i mas’alah of every Shar’i Institution to be in conflict with his defective reasoning. Innumerable ahkaam of Hajj will be found to be in conflict with ‘reason’ – the reason of ghabis. Must we then reject all these ahkaam substantiated by Ahaadith simply because morons perceive a conflict with their reasoning process? The ghabaawah of the modernist juhhaal is indeed axiomatic.
WHAT IS THE SUNNAH? Flaunting his jahaalah , the moron asks:
“After that acknowledgement, however, it gets tricky. The question that follows is: how do we know what his Sunnah is.”
The Imaan of this moron appears to have been extinguished hence this ludicrous question bordering on kufr. Every Muslim is aware that the Sunnah of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) has been acquired from the Sahaabah who had transmitted it to Taabieen who in turn transmitted it to the Tab-e-Taabieen who in turn transmitted it to the succeeding generation, and so on by way of reliable transmission the Sunnah has reached us intact, and so shall it be transmitted intact until the Day of Qiyaamah from generation to generation.
Nothing of the Sunnah has been omitted in the process of transmission. He who ventures such a kufr claim of the Sunnah being imperfect or incomplete or that part of it has been lost in the transmission process is in abnegation of the Qur’aan. Allah Ta’ala Himself has undertaken the responsibility of safeguarding this Deen of Islam. It will remain in its pristine purity until Qiyaamah regardless of the deviation, baatil, bid’ah and kufr which modernist morons and other types of juhhaal innovate from time to time. Thus the Sunnah has been extant since the time of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). Islam is the final Deen. Nubuwwat has been terminated. No new code of life will be revealed. This pre-supposes the perpetual existence of the original Sunnah and Shariah in their pristine purity. The attempt to cloak the Sunnah with ambiguity is underlined with a satanic motive, and that motive is to disfigure the Sunnah and the Shariah to accommodate the concepts of kufr of the modernist juhhaal such as the moron who deems himself qualified enough to masquerade as an ‘authority’ on Hadith.
The moron further exhibits his gross ignorance by saying that the Ahaadith merely “contain clues of what the Sunnah was, but they are not the Sunnah” To him the Sunnah “was”. It is something antique, no longer in existence. The Ahaadith are not mere clues of the Sunnah. The entire structure of the Sunnah is the Qur’aan and the Ahaadith. There is no other source of the Sunnah other than the Qur’aan and Ahaadith. That certain Ahaadith do not form part of practical Sunnah notwithstanding their authenticity, does not detract from the fact that the foundation of the Sunnah is the Ahaadith.. Only a moron has the audacity and who is sufficiently stupid to believe that in the Ahaadith are only ‘clues’ of the Sunnah. We wonder if the jaahil possesses adequate expertise in the Sunnah style of Istinja.
The Ahaadith do not provide only a ‘glimpse’ of the Sunnah as the moron alleges. It provides the whole of the Sunnah, hence the Qur’aan commands: “Obey Allah and obey the Rasool.” The Sunnah of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) is preserved in the minutest detail in the Ahaadith, and all the Ahaadith which constitute the Sunnah have already been authenticated and documented. Ijtihaad in the field of Hadith is a closed book. There remains not the slightest scope for revision and revisiting the Ahaadith to structure a new ‘sunnah’ to conform to the brains of modernist morons. The Sunnah remains unadulterated. It exists as it had existed during the age of the Sahaabah, albeit very little of it is being practically implemented by Muslims of this era. But the Sunnah is not hidden.
AHAADITH TOO, PROTECTED BY ALLAH TA’ALA
Disgorging another figment of his satanic hallucination, the Ghabi says: “……the Qur’ an has been protected by Allah; the ahadith have not.” Here the moron implies that Allah’s Shariah is the victim of change, interpolation and disfigurement in the way the Shariahs of previous Ambiya had suffered at the hands of their respective followers. The averment is a veiled rejection of the Finality of Nubuwwat and of the Qur’aan’s proclamation of the completion and perfection of this Deen of Islam. In the Qur’aan, Allah Ta’ala declares:
“This Day have I perfected for you your Deen, and I have completed for you My Bounty (of the Perfect Deen), and have chosen for you Islam as (your) Deen.” (Aayat 4, Al-Maaidah)
On what basis does the jaahil claim that the Ahaadith on which the edifice of the Shariah has been raised are not protected by Allah Ta’ala? The Divine Protection of the “Thikr” mentioned in the Qur’aan brings within its purview the whole of the immutable Deen whose perfection and completion Allah Ta’ala has announced in the Qur’aan. The protection is not confined to the text of the Qur’aan Majeed. Allah’s promised Protection extends over the entire Deen which He says He has completed and perfected. But the jaahil with vermiculated brains speculates that the Ahaadith on which is based the authenticity of the Qur’aan and which constitute the bulwark of the Shariah have remained unprotected to be fodder for the corrupt interpretations of the modernist juhhaal.
If the Ahaadith did not enjoy Divine Protection, then today there would have been no Qur’aan and no immutable Shariah. The compilation of the Qur’aan Majeed during the age of the Sahaabah was a sacred Task accomplished on the foundation of Ahaadith. Narrations which do not form part of the Shariah should not be cynically and deceptively confused with the Protected Ahaadith which constitute not only the foundation, but also the super edifice of the Shariah. For the protection of the text of the Qur’aan, Allah Ta’ala has created the Institution of the Huffaaz. For the protection of the Shariah, Allah Ta’ala has created the Institution of the Ulama. This Institution is divided into several categories. For the protection of the Ahaadith, Allah Ta’ala has created the Jamaat of the Muhadditheen. After the accomplishment of their sacred Task of compiling the Ahaadith, the Institution of the Muhadditheen was terminated since the objective had been achieved. Hence, after the era of the Muhadditheen, we no longer find Ulama of the Muhadditheen calibre. The ‘muhadditheen’ of later centuries were not Muhadditheen in the meaning of the Institution as it existed in the era of Khairul Quroon. Thus, the averment that the Ahaadith has been left unprotected is kufr. It is a plot of the modernist juhhaal plot to introduce and innovate kufr views and ideas into Islam. The motive underlying this stupid averment of kufr is to leave open a window through which baatil and kufr could be introduced by stealth.
Regardless of the classification of Ahaadith by the Muhadditheen of the post Aimmah Mujtahideen era, the Sunnah and the Shariah, were already well defined and entrenched in the Ummah, long before the appearance of the Muhadditheen. The Sunnah as it was handed to the Ummah by the Sahaabah to the Taabieen is independent of and not in need of the Hadith classification science of the later Muhadditheen. The Sahaabah and the Aimmah Mujtahideen did not need Imaam Bukhaari (rahmatullah alayh) and Imaam Muslim (rahmatullah alayh) for establishing the Edifice of the Sunnah with its concomitant Shariah. The Muhadditheen could not and did not discard any aspect of the inherited Sunnah on the basis of their classification of Ahaadith. On the contrary, they would make amal on (practically implement) the inherited Sunnah even it appeared to be in conflict with the text of any Hadith which they had classified Saheeh.
The Sunnah is not subservient to the Science formulated by the later Muhadditheen. The modernist Juhhaal are making baboons and donkeys of themselves with their stupid attempts of shoving their ludicrous snouts into this sacred Domain. The Domain of Hadith does not admit any dalliance with the stupidities of morons who attempt to project themselves as authorities of the Shariah. The moron’s superficial mention of the Hadith classes is simply an exercise to flaunt ‘expertise’ in the Science of Hadith. But the moron is bankrupt in this sphere.
HADITH CLASSIFICATION?
The modernist zindeeq moron avers: “An examination of these classifications is sufficient indication that hadith criticism is not new. Indeed hadith criticism has existed from the time the first ahadith were narrated.”
The Ghabi has only exhibited his scandalous jahaalat by this stupid averment. Criticism of Hadith is tantamount to criticism of the Qur’aan. There never existed a ‘science’ called ‘Hadith Criticism’. The Authorities of the Shariah did not indulge in the kufr act of criticizing Ahaadith. The consequence of criticizing Ahaadith was execution in the early days. Hadith classification is not Hadith criticism. Rejection of a Hadith due to its spurious chain of narration or lack of a viable chain or on the basis of any other principle of the Muhadditheen, is not to be confused with Hadith criticism. The examination of the chains of narration by the Muhadditheen was for establishing the authenticity of the Ahaadith, not for criticizing the Matan (the body or the actual narration). The Task of the Muhadditheen was Hadith Compilation, not Hadith interpretation and not formulation of masaail on the basis of Ahaadith. That was a function superbly and adequately executed by the Aimmah-e-Mujtahideen centuries prior to the age of the Muhadditheen.
Therefore, it is not permissible to wrought any change in the Sunnah and the Shariah on the basis of any interpretation of the much later Ulama such as Imaam Suyuti, Ibn Qayyim, Shawkaani, etc. if such interpretation conflicts with the Sunnah and Shariah which have been handed down to the Ummah from the era of Khairul Quroon. These later Ulama, comparatively speaking, are non-entities in relation to the Sahaabah and the Aimmah Muijtahideen and the Fuqaha Mutaqaddimeen. Furthermore, these illustrious later Ulama were not in conflict with the Sunnah and Shariah expounded and practised by the Mutaqaddimeen Authorities. But the juhhaal of these times bamboozle the ignorant and the unwary by citing statements of these Ulama totally out of context, as well as on the basis of their extremely deficient understanding of what they read in the kutub. The Domain of Hadith is for these juhhaal foreign territory. It is dangerous and forbidden for them to even contemplate traversing the Valleys of Ahaadith. The domain for the modernist moron is the pre-Maktab class, for he is still donning the diapers of infants. If he has any idea of the meaning of Imaan, then he should not destroy the Treasure with reckless disgorgement of kufr.
There did not exist any Hadith Criticism branch of Knowledge in Islam. To say that “criticism of hadith is not a new enterprise’ is to advertise jahl – jahl murakkab (compound ignorance) or jahaalat piled on top of jahaalat – ignorance consisting of multiple of layers. Hadith criticism is haraam. It is kufr. It is not a permissible enterprise. Criticism of the Isnaad is not criticism of the Hadith.
The moron attempts to extravasate capital for his kufr idea from the rejection of narrations by the Muhadditheen. In the rejection of narrations by Imaam Bukhaari and other Muhadditheen there is no support for the corrupt view of the jaahil. The setting aside of narrations was determined by the status of the Isnaad (chain of narration), not by the Matan as the moron abortively attempt to convey. Matan was a Scrutiny of the principle invoked in exceptional cases in the absence of a viable Isnaad.
IMAAM BUKHAARI’S METHODOLOGY
Commenting on Imaam Bukhaari’s methodology of Hadith Compilation, the moron avers:
“It is said that he (Imaam Bukhaari) had collected more than 600,000 ahadith. However, only 3,500 appear in his collection; he rejected the rest as not fulfilling his criteria for authenticity. For him, every hadith was fake until it was proven authentic.”
The setting aside of Ahaadith which did not conform to Imaam Bukhaari’s criteria is not a daleel for such narrations being fake and fabrications. Many other Muhadditheen had accepted and compiled numerous Ahaadith which are not to be found in Imaam Bukhaari’s Compendium. Furthermore, he had set aside the narrations in terms of his criteria applicable to the Isnaad. But, his acceptance and setting aside of Ahaadith did not adversely affect the Sunnah and the Shariah which were in existence and practically implemented by even Imaam Bukhaari (rahmatullah alayh), not in terms of his Hadith Compilation, but according to the Inherited Sunnah and Shariah. The objective of Hadith collection was not to effect change in the Sunnah and Shariah.. On the contrary, the plot of the modernist juhhaal underlying their stupid ‘hadith criticism’ exercises is to scuttle the Sunnah and to undermine the Shariah.
The averment that Imaam Bukhaari (rahmatullah alayh) believed every Hadith to be ‘fake’ is a dastardly slander hurled at this great Authority of Hadith. Truly, we are living in the age of Juhhaal. The density of the brains of these morons is indeed shocking. This moron believes that he is on the pedestal of Imaam Bukhaari. He hallucinates that he is an authority of Hadith hence capable of submitting any Hadith to the scrutiny of his nafs and stercoraceous skull to enable him to disgorge his skullduggery. Thus he says: “….it is very instructive to examine (historical) matn criticism before we ignorant people decide to do our own.” Here His jahaalat boggles the imagination.
Here we have a modernist moron deficient in even the Sunnah methodology of Istinja, believing that a superficial reading and ‘examination of matn criticism’ qualifies him to be a Bukhaari or a Muslim or a Nisaai’, etc. We must concede that nothing by way of naseehat is capable of penetrating the layer of density in which the brains of a modernist Juhhaal is ensconced.
NABI AADAM’S HEIGHT
In his endeavour to find room for his haraam enterprise of hadith criticism, the moron says:
“Bukhari’s hadith that Adam’s height was 60 cubits was criticized by Ibn Hajar, arguing that archeological measurements of homes of ancient people show they were not abnormally tall.”
But archeological measurements show that ancient animals were extremely massive. Whilst morons are swift in their acknowledgement of the ‘correctness’ of the huge size of extinct animals such as dinosaurs, they react with kufr at the size of Hadhrat Aadam (alayhis salaam) stated in the Saheeh Hadith. The existence and massive size of dinosaurs and other ‘pre-historic’ animals of huge sizes established by archeological discoveries, dubious calculations and spurious theories of conjecture and guesswork are accepted by the modernist juhhaal as if these are effects of divine revelation (Wahi), but the height of Hadhrat Aadam (alayhis salaam) substantiated by Wahi is not only frowned on, but rejected by the modernist Zanaadiqah. Whatever the western atheists excrete into their mouths, the modernist morons ingest it with relish. This confirms their kufr.
It is quite logical – a rationality which even a child of discernment will comprehend that to ride and rein in huge animals of the massive size of dinosaurs, the people had to be of proportionate size. The people who had lived in that age of huge animals must themselves have been huge. A miniature modernist moron of this age would not have been able to sit on a dinosaur or a horse of that size. In fact, he would drown in the animal’s urine, and the ton of faeces let out with force would annihilate him in the way lava is shot out by an erupting volcano.
The moron, in citing Ibn Hajar, has either perpetrated chicanery or has genuinely stated what he has stupidly understood from his excessively deficient ‘research’ of the writings of moron professors of universities, or from some crash course administered by his ilk. Ibn Hajar has NOT faulted the authenticity of Hadith whose Isnaad is beyond the slightest vestige of reproach. The Hadith in question is of the highest degree of Authenticity. It is narrated by Bukhaari, Muslim and all Authorities of Hadith. None of the illustrious Muhadditheen or any of the noble Fuqaha of any age, had ever criticized the Hadith, whether Sanad or Matan.
The criticism of Zindeeqs, non-entities, juhhaal and modernist morons is of no significance and no consequence. One such total non-entity is Ibn Khaldun and another hardcore modernist murtad, Fareed Wajdi. Commenting on Ibn Khaldun’s stupidity, Allamah Anwar Shah Kashmiri (rahmatullah alayh) said: “What has constrained this person to refute a Saheeh Hadith (which is Saheeh) to the Nation (i.e. the illustrious Conglomerate of Muhadditheen)…….What would be appropriate is that these types of (kufr) arguments should be criticized with the Saheeh Hadith, not the other way around, i.e. to mutilate the Hadith (with arguments of kufr).”
Contrary to what the miserable modernist jaahil has peddled, Ibn Hajar did NOT fault the authenticity of the Hadith. He did not criticize the Sanad NOR the Matan of the Hadith. He had voiced his own lack of understanding in the light of the spurious archeological facts. It is indeed surprising that an authority of Ibn Hajr’s calibre being baffled by the ambiguity generated by archeological facts which in reality are the effects of conjecture which spawned ambiguity in Ibn Hajar’s understanding of the Hadith.
Ibn Hajar had failed to understand the Hadith in the light of archeological discoveries of the size of the houses which were assumed to be the homes of the Thamud nation. This is not the occasion to present a detailed refutation of the spurious nature of archeology. It will suffice to say that a Hadith whose authenticity is corroborated by Ijma’ of the Muhadditheen can never be criticized if the meaning of the text cannot be understood. Or if its meaning appears to be in conflict with defective human reasoning. When a fact is declared Saheeh by the Qur’aan or the Hadith, no other evidence in negation will be acceptable.
Despite Ibn Hajar having accepted the authenticity of the Hadith in question, and also the text of the Hadith, the ambiguity in his mind based on what the archeologists say is corrupt, spurious and mardood. The Hadith of Imaam Bukhaari on this issue stands while the trepidation of Ibn Hajar, which is bereft of Shar’i daleel must necessarily be dismissed.
The inability of an Aalim a thousand years after Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) to understand the meaning of the Hadith, is not a basis for justifying criticism of the Hadith or of the Shariah by modernist morons. Be that as it may. Hadith of this type does not form part of the practical Sunnah, observance of which is compulsory according to the Qur’aan. Whether Hadhrat Aadam (alayhis salaam) was 60 cubits tall or 10 cubits, is not Sanad nor the Sunnah. The Sunnah is to maintain silence on such issues of ambiguity. Since neither the Matan of this Hadith has been criticized by any Authority of the Shariah, the moron has only displayed his gross jahaalat by having introduced this Hadith in defence of his kufr concept of hadith criticism.
“IF TWO MUSLIM PARTIES FIGHT…”
In another abortive attempt to peddle his kufr, the moron says: “Another hadith in Bukhari that the Qur’anic verse ‘And if two parties of believers fall into fighting, make peace between them’ refers to the conflict between the Companions and Abdullah ibn Ubayy was criticized by Ibn Battal who said Ibn Ubayy had not embraced Islam at the time.”
A minor historical discrepancy or error of this nature does not detract from the validity and enduring nature of the Sunnah. The occasion of the revelation of the specific Qur’aanic verse is irrelevant in the context of the observance of the Sunnah. The Sunnah, when two groups of the Muslimineen fight/dispute, remains static and immutable. The historical error or the ambiguity of the occasion of the revelation does not result in any change of the Sunnah command of resolving mutual disputes. Regardless of when the aayat was revealed or who the disputing parties were at the time of the revelation, the Sunnah stated in the aayat remains unchanged. The ambiguity of the occasion cannot be presented as a basis for justifying hadith criticism by morons more than 14 centuries after Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam).
IBRAAHEEM, THE SON OF RASULULLAH (sallallahu alayhi wasallam)
Selecting another Hadith for baseless criticism, the moron avers: “Al-Nawawi, Ibn Abdul Barr and Ibn Al-Athir severely criticized the hadith that if Ibrahim, son of Muhammad had lived, he would have been a nabi. Shawkani listed it as a forged hadith.”
Notwithstanding the status of Imaam Nawawi and Ibn Abdul Barr, their criticism is misplaced and utterly baseless. In fact their decrepit view pertaining to this Hadith has been severely castigated by the Authorities of the Shariah. The errors of even the greatest Aalim are set aside and rejected. Those who establish the errors of seniors as their basis for argument display their lack or destruction of Imaan.
Allamah Abdul Wahhaab Sha’raani (rahmatullah alayh) said: “He who takes to the obscurities (and errors) of the Ulama, has made his exit from Islam.”
The errors, especially the glaring errors such as the error of Imaam Nawawi (rahmatullah alayh) and Ibn Abdul Barr (rahmatullah alayh) relevant to this particular Hadith, are to be incumbently set aside and discarded. Only a moron bereft of Imaan justifies an argument on the basis of such baseless views structured on pure error.
Commenting on this glaring error, Mullah Ali Qaari (rahmatullah alayh) states in Mirqaatul Mafaateeh:
“Of the established rules in Usool is that the Mauqoof of a Sahaabi, when it cannot be attributed to opinion, is in the category of Mar’foo’. Thus the rejection of Nawawi similar to that of Ibnul Barr, is either on account of them both being uninformed (on this issue) or due to their inability to effect (a suitable) ta’weel (interpretation). And Allah knows best.”
Allaamah As-Sindhi (rahmatullah alayh) states in Kifaayatul Haajat fi Sharhi Sunan Abu Maajah:
“Such a statement (which is mentioned in this specific Hadith) is not the effect of opinion. Verily a Jamaat of Sahaabah has maintained it. However, rejection of the Hadith of Anas (radhiyallahu anhu) by Ibn Abdul Barr…………..(this view of Ibnul Barr) is not a necessary corollary of the aforementioned Hadith.” (We have omitted the view of Ibnul Barr at this juncture – the author). “It appears that Nawawi had followed Ibn Abdul Barr (in his baseless view). This is indeed strange (ludicrous) in view of it (this Hadith) being narrated by three Sahaabah. He (Ibn Hajr) said in Al-Fath: ‘It is probable that he (Nawawi) did not remember the narration from three Sahaabah, hence he rejected it.”
In simple terms, the above means:
➡ A Hadith whose Isnaad terminates at a Sahaabi, is termed Mauqoof. If the content matter of the Hadith is not the opinion of the Sahaabi, then according to the established principles of Hadith, the narration is in the class of Marfoo’.
➡ Marfoo’ is a Hadith whose Isnaad links up with Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam).
➡ The particular Hadith in question states that if Ibraaheem (Rasulullah’s son who had died in infancy) had lived, he would have been a Nabi. This statement made by at least three Sahaabah cannot be attributed to the opinion of the Sahaabah. It is similar to Rasulullah’s statement reported in a Saheeh Hadith: “If there had to be a Nabi after me, it would be Umar.”
➡ Imaam Nawawi in all probability was unaware of the Hadith attributed to three Sahaabah or he had forgotten this fact, hence he simply latched on to the view of Ibn Abdul Barr who had preceded him.
➡ Imaam Nawawi had not presented a single basis or evidence for arbitrarily saying that the Hadith is ‘baatil’.
➡ Ibn Abdul Barr’s view is likewise spurious which the Authorities have highlighted.
SELECTIVE CITATION
These modernist juhhaal are quick to selectively cite views of tenth century Ulama – views which appeal to their nafs. They swiftly adopt views which developed a thousand years after Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) while rejecting the decrees of the Sahaabah and the Aimmah-e-Mujtahideen. They adopt an eerie silence regarding the orthodox views of even the tenth century Scholars, but project some seemingly ‘liberal’ aspects of these Ulama in the nefarious attempt to eke out support for their vile opinions of kufr.
The ‘liberal’ views which the modernist morons cite appear ‘liberal’ when presented deceptively beyond the confines of their respective contexts.
Ulama such as Ibn Hajar and Imaam Suyuti were extremely orthodox and at one with the Fuqaha of the Khairul Quroon. They were staunch Muqallideen of the Aimmah Mujtahideen. They were not aberrations, deviates and morons as are the modernist juhhaal. If a view here and there of these great Ulama appears to be in conflict with the entrenched Sunnah practice of the Sahaabah and Taabieen, the solution is to posit a suitable interpretation for attaining reconciliation. The isolated view of conflict of some 10th Century Ulama is never a basis for the kufr fabrications of modernist morons. These miserable morons have no licence to quote Imaam Suyuti, etc. They are too stupid and dense in the brains to understand what these illustrious Ulama said.
FORGERIES
That there were and are forged narrations is not denied. But such forgeries have already been sifted out and labelled by the Muhadditheen. It is important to understand that nothing of the forged narrations form part of the Sunnah and the Shariah. There is not a single forged hadith which constitutes a mustadal for the masaail of the Shariah formulated by the Fuqha-e-Mutaqaddimeen. The job of the Muhadditheen was to sift out the forgeries. It never was their function to formulate the Shariah and to establish the Sunnah. This obligation was executed par excellence by Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) and the Sahaabah. The Muhadditheen were cast in a completely different role.
THE STATIC SUNNAH
Different interpretations of Ahaadith on abstract issues do not create latitude in the Sunnah and the Shariah for intrusion and interpolation by modernist morons. The Sunnah and the Shariah are immutably static. The accommodation of future and new developments into the fabric of the Sunnah and Shariah is likewise a static exercise since such incorporation is effected on the basis of static Usool which the Aimmah-e-Mujtahideen had formulated in the light of the Qur’aan and Sunnah. Thus the latitude and free play which the modernist jaahil searches for are not to be found within the framework of the Islam which Allah Ta’ala had completed and perfected during the very lifetime of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) thereby leaving absolutely no scope for moronist interference. With regard to these modernist juhhaal, the Qur’aan advises us:
When they (the Mu’mineen) hear laghw (the rubbish and nonsense of morons), they turn away from it, and they say: ‘For us are our deeds and for you are your deeds. Salaam on you. We do not follow the jaahileen (modernist morons).
The aim of the aforegoing brief discussion is merely to highlight the ignorance of the modernist who has set himself up as a ‘authority’ on Hadith. The purpose of this article is not to present a detailed refutation of the moron’s spurious arguments pertaining to the several Ahaadith which have been assailed by another moron professor-– a university in his writings from whence the local moron has lapped up his bunkum.
THE AIM OF THE MORON’S ESSAY The plot of the modernist juhhaal is to scuttle the 14 century Shariah of Islam and to substitute it with a Yahood-Nasaara type concocted religion which could be paraded under the name of ‘Islam’. The first step in this pernicious plot is to fault and denigrate the Ahaadith of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). To achieve this goal, the morons of our age have latched on to some rare criticism by some recognized Ulama who appeared on the scene many centuries after Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam).
Warning us to be on guard against these juhhaals Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said:
“Verily, I have been given the Qur’aan and a likeness with it. Soon will there be an obese man reclining on his couch saying: “Adhere to this Kitaab (the Qur’aan). Whatever you find halaal in it, regard it to be halaal. Whatever you find haraam in it, regard it to be haraam.” (Then Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) added): “Verily, whatever the Rasool has made haraam is just as what Allah has made haraam.”
This Hadith warns us of the likes of these modernist morons whose satanic mission it is to debunk the Ahaadith which do not find favour with their western kuffaar orientalist masters.
The morons aim to arrogate the right of criticizing Ahaadith to themselves, arguing that the rare criticism of some Ulama as well as their personal reasoning are evidence for the validity of their stupid kufr theory of hadith criticism. But criticizing Hadith is like criticizing the Qur’aan. The rare and obscure views of a couple of 6th, 7th, 8th, and 9th century Ulama have to be dismissed as baseless and unauthorized. In the face of the rulings and views of the Mutaqaddimeen Muhadditheen such as Imaam Bukhaari, Imaam Muslim and the many others of the Khairul Quroon era, the opinions of the stragglers who appeared hundreds of years later, have absolutely no footing and no significance. It is gross stupidity to cite a view of Imaam Nawawi or of Ibn Abdul Barr or of the deviate Ibn Qayyim in either negation of or to fault the narrations of the Sihaah Sittah. It is indeed laughable to present the criticism of Shawkaani or of Ibn Qayyim to attack the authenticity of the Ahaadith of Bukhaari.
The views of Ulama of the 8th and 9th centuries, if in conflict with the entrenched views of the Ulama of the Khairul Quroon era, have to be incumbently discounted and set aside as errors. The rulings of the Khairul Quroon era are authenticated by the Qur’aan. Qur’aanic command is to obey Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). He said: “The best of eras is my era, then the next era, then the next era…..” (i.e. the age of the Sahaabah, Taabieen and Tab-e-Taabieen). The Hadith continues: “Then after them will be people who will (make haste) to bear testimony whilst they are not called on to testify; they will betray trust and cannot be trusted; they will pledge and not fulfil their pledges…….Then will come people who will love obesity.” (That is: they will become fat, lazy and stupid with their indulgence in luxuries).
In another Hadith, Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said: “Honour my Sahaabah, for verily, they are your noblest; then those after them; then those after them. Thereafter kithb (falsehood/lies) will become prevalent.”
All of these modernist juhhaal are among the progeny of the obese liars mentioned by Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). Their first hurdle in the execution of their nefarious conspiracy of scuttling the Divine Shariah, is to denigrate and negate the primary basis of the Shariah, which is the Ahaadith on which the Edifice of the Sunnah is structured. It is for this reason that the moron has disgorged his article of hadith criticism. If a window to criticize the Ahaadith is opened through which these modernist obese liars could slink, they will wrought villainy and destruction to the Deen. But Allah Ta’ala has established the Institution of the Ulama-e-Haqq to take care of these obese liars and morons masquerading as Muslims and wellwishers of the Ummah. They are miserable sewer rats gnawing at the foundations of Islam.
Since the demarcation for the Divine Haqq is Khairul Quroon, we are not interested in the tafarrudaat, errors and obscurities of Ulama who flourished many centuries after the termination of Khairul Quroon. The Authority of the Shariah and the authentic Shariah and Sunnah are what had existed in the Three Golden Ages of Islam specifically demarcated by Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam). Regardless of the lofty status of any Aalim who existed a couple of centuries after the Golden Epoch, any view of his which conflicts with the view of the Sahaabah, Aimmah Mujtahideen and Muhadditheen of that epoch will be buried, albeit with decorum. It shall be interpreted as a slip or genuine error of the Aalim. Every good horse also slips. No man is beyond commission of error – in fact numerous errors.
It is indeed stupid, in fact treacherous, to cite Imaam Nawawi or Ibn Abdul Barr, and Ibn Qayyim who has no rank in relation to the former two authorities, in negation of any Islamic ruling or practice which had existed during the age of the Sahaabah or the Taabieen. We are not the muqallideen of Imaam Nawawi or of Ibn Abdul Barr or of Shawkaani or of Ibn Qayyim. We are the Muqallideen of the Aimmah Mujtahideen of the Khairul Quroon era. The moron may bamboozle other modernist morons with these names and chicanery. He may perhaps succeed with his skullduggery in the ranks of his likes. But for those of true Ilm, to cite feather-weights and non-weights as ‘authorities with the power of abrogation’ is ludicrous and laughable. The morons simply make a laughing stock of themselves when they disgorge absolute rubbish which they attempt to pass off as products of academic study.
When a view on Hadith, which developed 300 years after Imaam Bukhaari, clashes with Bukhaari’s authentication, the Deen and Intelligence will summarily refute that view as baatil. That belated view may not be presented in negation of Imaam Bukhaari’s accreditation of Ahaadith. Why did this later view not exist during the age of Khairul Quroon? Why was Imaam Bukhaari’s accreditation valid and accepted by all authorities during the 300 year gap between him and Imaam Nawawi? It is indeed ridiculous to reject Imaam Bukhaari’s accreditation and authentication on the basis of a baseless view which developed three centuries after him. Imaam Nawawi’s view of the specific Hadith being baatil, It is an arbitrary opinion unsubstantiated by any evidence. He presents no daleel for his view. Relative to Imaam Bukhaari and the Aimmah Mujtahideen of the Khairul Quroon, Ulama who appeared many centuries thereafter hold no rank. All of them were the Muqallideen of one of the Four Mathhabs. Their isolated and decrepit views cannot denigrate the Shariah as it was known and taught by the Sahaabah and the Aimmah Mujtahideen.
Consider the statement of Ibn Qayyim: he says that even if the Isnaad is as bright as the sun, the Hadith is not acceptable. We are constrained to say that something had gone drastically wrong with his intellectual grasp at the time when he was blabbering this gutha. The bedrock of Hadith Autenticity is its Isnaad, not its Matan. Regardless of how irrational the content matter of the Hadith may appear to modernist morons, if the Isnaad is Saheeh, then that Hadith is authentic whether it forms part of the Sunnah or not. And, rejection of a Hadith whose Isnaad is as bright as the sun, is not tantamount to kufr. It is in reality kufr. The Asaaneed of Ahaadith Mutawaatarah and Mashhoorah are in fact “as bright as the sun.” They are in the category of Qur’aanic aayaat. Ibn Qayyim had indeed uttered a heinous notriety by unthinkably blurting out such ghutha.
The sinister aim for propagating the haraam theory of hadith criticism, and citing the rarities and obscurities of some 10th century Ulama in an abortive attempt to justify the haraam exercise, is to arrogate for themselves (i.e. for the modernist juhhaal) the right to submit to their corrupt opinion any Hadith appearing in Sihaah Sittah, then on the basis of their understanding heavily contaminated by the indoctrination of western education, they desire to re-classify the Ahaadith which were authenticated by the Muhadditheen and Aimmah Mujtahideen of the noble Khairul Quroon era. Thus, if a modernist moron reasons that the Hadith on which is based, for example, the Shariah’s ruling that a grandson does not inherit his deceased father’s share in the estate of his father (the grandson’s grandfather) since the father (the grandson’s father) had pre-deceased his father, is unreasonable, then the Hadith may be excised and deposited in the dirt bin to enable the juhhaal to issue a new ruling allowing the grandson to inherit in this case.
Or, if a modernist moron understands in terms of his kufr westernized reasoning process that the Hadith on which is based the ruling that the father has the right to have his minor daughter married, is irrational, then he is allowed to ‘attack’ the Hadith in the manner in which Al-Ismaaili or Imaam Nawawi or Ibn Abdul Barr or Shawkaani had ‘attacked’ some Ahaadith. In short, the modernist ignoramuses indoctrinated by the orientalist enemies of Islam, are striving to arrogate to themselves the right to freely criticize just any Hadith which they believe is in conflict with western rationalism.
In fact, the ultimate kufr plot is to subject even the Qur’aan Majeed to the same treatment of kufr criticism. This process has already been subtly and devilishly initiated. Qur’aanic verses which explicitly declare the superiority of men and the subservience of women, especially the aayat which allows for the grossly disobedient wife to be beaten, are being subjected to interpretation which is baseless and kufr. The initial stage is to interpret away such Qur’aanic verses which do not conform to the rationalism of the western kuffaar. The next phase to excise these aayat from the Qur’aan in the way the Yahood and Nasaara have mutilated the Tauraah and the Injeel. But, as far as the Qur’aan and even the Ahaadith are concerned, they will miserably fail. Allah Ta’ala Himself has undertaken the responsibility of guarding this Deen – every aspect of it.
The first move in the kufr process of transmogrifying or destroying the Shariah is the pernicious creation of a vast chasm between the Qur’aan and the Ahaadith. Thus, the modernist moron says: ‘the Qur’an has been protected by Allah; the ahadith have not.”
The moron’s brains have become vermiculated with this shaitaani waswasah. The Hadith is what Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) said and did, hence the Qur’aan says: “He (Muhammad) does not speak of (his) desire. It (i.e. whatever he says) is Wahi which is revealed to him.”
Again the Qur’aan says: “Whatever the Rasool gives you, accept it (resolutely), and whatever he forbids you of, abstain from it.”
This, in fact, is Hadith on which has been raised the superstructure of the Sunnah.
What is truly mind boggling is the naked and stupid audacity of these juhhaal to equate themselves to the Aimmah Mujtahideen and the noble Muhadditheen. They seek to elevate themselves to the pedestal of Imaam Bukhaari, Imaam Muslim, etc. Truly, brains have gone haywire.
While the “hadith criticism enterprise” of these modernist morons is pure kufr designed to undermine and scuttle the Shariah, the enterprise of the Muhadditheen was to safeguard the Shariah for posterity by compiling and codifying the Mustadallaat of the Ahkaam of the Shariah. The obligation of the early Muhadditheen was merely to sift out fabrications and to compile the authentic Ahaadith. The aim was to safe guard and preserve in book form the authentic Ahaadith on which the entire Edifice of the Shariah has been constructed.
The objective of the modernist desire for hadith criticism is to dismantle the Shariah. On the contrary, the purpose of the Muhadditheen was to solidify and safeguard the Foundation of the Shariah which the authentic Ahaadith constitute. The two objectives are thus self repellant. The one is the antithesis of the other.
This brings us to the Compilation of Saheeh Bukhaari.
SAHEEH BUKHAARI – THE MYSTERY OF THE 597,000 AHAADITH
Demonstrating his gross ignorance, the moron says:
“It is said that he (Imaam Bukhaari) had collected more than 600,000 ahadith. However, only 3,500 appear in his collection; he rejected the rest as not fulfilling his criteria for authenticity. For him every hadith was fake until it was proven authentic.”
The moron has lapped up this rubbish vomit from the writings of another moron Professor of Moronism of some maloon orientalist university in Calcutta, India. It is indeed a vile slander to accuse that Imaam Bukhaari (rahmatullah alayh) had considered every Hadith ‘fake’ prior to his personal scrutiny. It is also downright stupid to claim that the 597,000 Ahaadith which do not form part of Saheeh Bukhaari are forgeries and unauthentic, hence Imaam Bukhaari did not include them in his Kitaab.
Bukhaari Shareef is a compendium or a comprehensive summary of a vast work which is the 600,000 Ahaadith. The objective of compiling this Saheeh was not to encompass all the authentic Ahaadith. The objective was to safeguard the Foundation of the Sunnah and the Shariah covering all branches of the Deen. Commenting on Imaam Bukhaari’s system of compilation, Al-Ismaaili (died 371 Hijri) said: “I have heard from those who n arrate from him that he had said: “I have not recorded in this Kitaab except (Ahaadith which are) Saheeh, and I have left out the majority of the Saheeh (narrations).” Thus, whatever he (Imaam Bukhaari) has recorded is Saheeh. Its authenticity is categorical. Whatever he has left out is not because he has negated (their authenticity) …………..He sufficed with a small quantity from a large quantity (of authentic Ahaadith).” (Taghleequt Ta’leeq)
In Muqaddamah fi Usooli’ l deen it is mentioned: “The Saheeh Ahaadith are not confined to the Saheeh of Bukhaari and the Saheeh of Muslim nor do these two Kitaabs encompass all the Saheeh Ahaadith. On the contrary, these two Kitaabs are restricted to Saheeh Ahaadith. Furthermore, such narrations which are authentic to them on the basis of their criteria, (all of them) have not been included by them in their two Kitaabs, leave alone that which (is Saheeh) according to other (Muhadditheen).
Bukhaari said: “I have not recorded in this Kitaab except what is Saheeh, and I have left out numerous of the Sihaah (authentic narrations).” Muslim said: “What I have recorded in this Kitaab (Saheeh Muslim) from the Ahaadith are Saheeh. I do not claim that whatever I have left out is Dhaeef (Weak/unreliable).”
Al-Haakim Abu Abdullah An- Naisaapuri compiled a Kitaab which he named Al-Mustadrak (The Emmender), in which is recorded authentic narrations which Bukhaari and Muslim have left out (from their Compendiums). Some of the narrations (recorded in this Kitaab, i.e. Al-Mustadrak) are on the basis of the criteria of Shaikhain (i.e. Imaam Bukhaari and Imaam Muslim); some are on the criteria of one of them, and some (of the recorded authentic Ahaadith herein) are not on the basis of their criteria.
The criticism of the (existence of) paucity of Saheeh Ahaadith has been refuted by the fact that Imaam Bukhaari and Imaam Muslim did not claim that there are no other Saheeh Ahaadith besides what they have recorded in their two Kitaabs.”
“Al-Haazmi said: ‘It is thus clear that the intention of Imaam Bukhaari was to compile a brief summary in Hadith. He did not contemplate encompassment (of all the Saheeh Ahaadith), neither regarding the narrators nor regarding the Hadith. There remains a huge portion of Saheeh Ahaadith not recorded in the two Saheeh Kitaabs.” (Al-Imaam Ibn Maajah Wa Sunnanunu)
Innumerable Saheeh Ahaadith not to be found in Bukhaari Shareef are record in numerous other authentic Hadith Kutub such as Mustadrakul Haakim, Saheeh Ibn Khuzaimah, Saheeh Ibn Hibbaan, Al-Mukhtaaratu lil Muqaddisi, Saheeh Abi Uwaanah, Al-Saheeh Ibnus Sakan, Muntaqi libnul Jaarood, Abu Dawood, Ad-Daaruqutni, Saheeh Abi Bakr Al-Ismaaili, Al-Saheeh Burqaani, Saheeh Abi Nu’aim Al-Isbihaani, Musnad Imaam Ahmad, Musnad Imaam Abu Hanifah, At Taqaaseem Wal Anwaa’, and many more Saheeh Hadith kutub.
The moron’s claim that Imaam Bukhaari had abandoned 597,000 Ahaadith because he regarded them as ‘fakes and forgeries’, is manifestly and slanderously false.
THE PLOT OF THE WESTERN ORIENTALIST
The local moron who has written his silly article on hadith criticism, has simply regurgitated what he has lapped up from a book written by a moron professor on the subject of Hadith literature. The poor moron professor, a product of the western orientalist enemies of Islam, clearly lacks understanding of the Shariah in general, and of the sanctity and status of Ahaadith in particular. He has treated Hadith as if it is simply another secular topic to be rendered subservient to personal whim and fancy. He does not have the haziest idea of the prime importance and significance of the Sihaah Sittah. He believes that any modernist jaahil qualification and kaafir orientalist have the necessary to dissect and reject any Hadith of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) which does not conform to the reasoning of brains colonized by westernism. The (Chain of Narration) Isnaad of the most authentic Hadith on par with the Qur’aan Majeed is of no significance to these westernized morons if in their opinion the Hadith happens to be in conflict with their defective reasoning, or if in their opinion of kufr the Hadith promises massive thawaab for acts of ibaadat. What do those wallowing in najaasat and janaabat know and understand of the value of ibaadat or the value one Tasbeeh of Subhaanallaah whose effulgence can fill the space between the earth and the heaven? Their brains and hearts are bogged in the quagmire of materialism and nafsaaniyat. In the words of the Qur’aan: They are more astray than the dumb animals. They eat and excrete like animals, yet they deem themselves qualified to elevate themselves to the lofty Pedestals occupied by the Sahaabah, the Aimmah-e-Mujtahideen and the Muhadditheen of Imaam Bukhaari’s calibre.
It should be clearly understood that Hadith criticism is haraam. It is kufr. It has been designed by the western orientalist enemies of Islam to undermine and dismantle the more than 14 Century Shariah of Islam about which the Qur’aan declares:
“This Day have I (Allah Ta’ala) perfected for you your Deen, and completed for you My Bounty, and chosen for you Islam as your Deen.”
Salaam on those who follow the Hidaayat of Islam!
Islam Reigns 