YES! EVERY HADITH IN THE SIHAAH
SITTAH IS SAHEEH
Bereft of any Shar’i daleel, or even a logical argument, and unable to intelligently respond to our refutation of the Salafi Flotsam pertaining to the Rainwater Treatment Hadith as well as to issues beyond this specific Hadith, the neo-Salafis – those who masquerade as Hanafis – clasping at straws, resort to what they always despise and detest, viz., Taqleed.
Now that they are unable to utilize their brains to engage in rational argument, they expect us to be cowed by their brand of ‘taqleed’. Although these deviate Salafis perpetually disgorge anti-Taqleed effluvium, they call us to make Taqleed of Ulama of the very recent past. Thus, the morons says:
“Do you believe that any of the akabir has the opinion that Mufti Desai is espousing here, that every single hadeeth in the 6 collections is saheeh including those hadeeths which the authors themselves have classified as weak, rejected, not strong etc. in those very collections? Do you think Mawlana Abdul Hayy Laknawi, Mawlana Rasheed Ahmad Gangohi, Mawlana Ashraf Ali Thanawi, Mawlana Anwar Shah Kashmiri, Mawlana Khalil Ahmad Saharanpuri, Mawlana Zafar Ahmad al-Thanawi, Mawlana Badr Alam Miruthi, Mawlana Yusuf Binnori, Mufti Muhammad Shafi and the countless other akabir actually believed this? Or any of the countless muhaddithin or fuqaha that came before them?
There is no statement from any of them that every hadeeth in the six books are saheeh. In fact, it is against the teaching and understanding of every one of them. I don't understand how anyone can accept such a batil statement or opinion.”
Yes, we reiterate: every single hadeeth in the 6 collections is saheeh including those hadeeths which the authors themselves have classified as weak.......” The array of names cited by the morons makes no difference. Why run to seek refuge now in taqleed, and that too, the taqleed of our Ulama of very recent times. We are the Muqallideen of Imaam Abu Hanifah and the Aimmah of the first century. Do not refer us to Allaamah Lucknowi and others. Our Akaabir did not refute the stance we are adopting.
The neo-Salafi statement: “There is no statement from any of them that every hadeeth in the six books are saheeh.”, is not a daleel. It is in fact, a stupid averment of one who is academically bereft of Shar’i and logical arguments. Why are all the Ahaadith in the Sihaah Sittah (The Six Most Authentic books of Hadith) not Saheeh? That our Ulama of very recent times have not mentioned this fact is not a basis for claiming that all the Ahaadith in the Sihaah Sittah are not Saheeh. Furthermore, what the neo-Salafis are attributing to our Akaabir is baseless.
The very presence in the Sihaah is adequate for the authenticity of the narrations otherwise it is meaningless to dub these famous Kitub, Sihaah. In his Muqaddimah Imaam Tirmizi categorically states that every Hadith in his Sunan is Ma’mool Bihi, and the two exceptions despite not being Ma’mool Bihi are nevertheless Saheeh. The Amal of the Ulama of the first century overrides the Ahaadith despite theor authenticity.
Imaam Abu Dawood states about his Sunan: “There is nothing in the Sunan which I have compiled (narrated) from someone who is matrookul hadith (whose narrations have been shunned).” What he mentions of ‘munkar’ and ‘dhaeef’ narrations in his Sunan is technical stuff which does not condemn such narrations to the trash can. All these Ahaadith in these Kutub are worthy of being Mustadallaat.
In substantiation of our claim, we present here the averment of just one Authority, Imaam Suyuti who said:
“Everything contained in these five kutub (Bukhaari, Muslim, Saheeh of Ibn Hibbaan, Mustadrak of Haakim and Al-Mukhtaarah of Al-Maqdeesi) is Saheeh......Similarly, is it with whatever is in Muwatta of Maalik, the Saheeh of Ibn Khuzaimah, Saheeh of Abu Awaanah, of Ibn Sakan and Al-Muntaqa of Ibn Jaarud, and Al-Mustakh-rajaat........And, everything that is in Musnad Ahmad is acceptable because the Dha’eef therein approximates Hasan.”
(I'laaus Sunan, Vol. 19, pages 67, 69)
The moron neo-Salafis have conveniently ignored our detailed response to their question which they have simply vomited again as a red herring to distract from the detailed response in our book. For the benefit of unbiased searchers of the Truth, we reproduce here the relevant discussion which more than adequately answers the stupid objection raised by the moron.
THE AHAADITH OF THE SIHAAH SITTAH – ALL SAHEEH
We reiterate that all the Ahaadith in the Sihaah Sittah as well as in other authentic Hadith kutub are valid for istidlaal. All the Ahaadith of these Kutub are Saheeh. In denying this, a deviate refers us to Maulana Abdul Hayy Sahib. In response we say that we are not the muqallideen of Maulana Abdul Hayy Sahib. If he had concluded the contrary, it is his opinion which is not binding on anyone. If Maulana Abdul Hayy's opinions conflict with the opinion of our Akaabireen, we conclude that such opinions of his are erroneous and devoid of Shar'i substance.
While there are valid differences among the authorities on this question, the contention we have made is not baseless. It cannot be baseless because it is not our opinion. We have not assumed this. On the basis of what the Akaabireen have said, we emphasise that all these kutub of Hadith contain Ahaadith which are valid for Istidlaal. By this we mean that every Hadith in the Sihaah Sittah and in other kutub annexed to the authentic Six, is a valid basis for formulating Shar'i rules.
The contention that according to some authorities most of these kutub contain many Dha’eef narrations, hence it is erroneous to claim that every Hadith in these kutub is fit for istidlaal, does not alter the position. If our contention sounds like a “sweeping claim” for the deviate, it is as a result of his defective research.
It goes without saying, that while certain narrations in this and that Compilation are Dha’eef to some Muhadditheen, they are Saheeh and Hasan and worthy of istidlaal according to other Muhadditheen. The verdict of one Muhaddith who is a Mujtahid in Hadith Knowledge, is not a hujjat against another Mujtahid in the same sphere. Ahaadith which Imaam Abu Hanifah regarded as authentic and which he used as mustadallaat, are dismissed as ‘weak' or Dhaeef by Imaam Shaafi' and the same is true vice versa. If the deviate cites a dozen Muhadditheen to bolster his claim, namely, that certain narrations in Tirmizi, for example, are not Saheeh, then there are other authorities who regard those self-same Ahaadith as being Saheeh.
Furthermore, inspite of some Ahaadith being recorded as weak in the Hadith Kutub of the later Muhadditheen, they were Saheeh according to the Aimmah-e-Mujtahiddeen decades and even centuries before.
We are not contending that there is unanimity among the Ulama on the claim we have made. But we had put forward a valid claim-- a claim which the Ulama have made--yes, great Ulama, even if the deviate is unaware of them due to his defective research. The fact that he is aghast at this revelation, and that when he read it in our book it was the first time he became aware of such a contention, speaks volumes for the “ knowledge” of this cardboard ‘mujtahid' and for the “level of his academic competence”.
The deviate and all of his ilk should understand that the illustrious Muhadditheen were not compilers of fables and fairy tales. They were not writing some silly ‘thesis' for some silly ‘doctorate' degree. They were men created by Allah Ta'ala for a sacred purpose -- to compile the Saheeh Ahaadith of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) for the benefit and for the safety of the Imaan of posterity. The suggestion or implication that Imaam Tirmizi, Imaam Ahmad Bin Hambal and other Aimmah-e-Hadith of this calibre included forgeries, fabrications and unreliable Ahaadith in their Sihaah is indeed lamentable and revulsive. Will an Imaam of Hadith of the status of Imaam Hambal and Imaam Tirmizi include unreliable narrations in their Works of Authenticity? No, never! This satanic implication cannever be accepted.
The technical and academic arguments on the categories of the narrations are entirely different issues, not open for satisfying the desires of deviates to scuttle ahkaam of the Deen. Imaam Ahmad Bin Hambal (rahmatullah alayh) was not dense in the mind nor a forgerer to include forgeries in his Saheeh. Imaam Tirmizi (rahmatullah alayh) was not a novice in the field of Hadith accreditation. He knew what all the deviates and all the pious Ulama of this age and ages beyond do not and did not and will not know about Hadith accreditation until the Day of Qiyaamah. To blabber in a manner which assails the lofty status and integrity of such Aimmah by targeting their Saheeh Compilations on the basis of technical factors such as idhtiraab and dhu'f is a display of a tendency of kufr which lurks concealed in the heart.
We state with the greatest degree of emphasis, conviction and without the slightest fear for contradiction which may emanate from the mudhilleen, zanaadaqah and mulhideen, that every Hadith in the Compilations of Imaam Ahmad, Imaam Tirmizi, Imaam Abu Daawood, Imaam Nasaa'i and other Aimmah Mujtahideen of this calibre, is Saheeh and worthy of istidlaal notwithstanding the technicalities of ilal (defects) in the chains of narration. Elevation and promotion of lesser categories of narrations is a branch of this science of Usool-e-Hadith which has hitherto been beyond the scope of the defective ‘research' of the deviate. It is precisely for this reason that he not only refutes a Hadith when he sees the terms idhtiraab' and ‘dhaeef' , but he actually gloats.
By denying the validity of the claim we have made, the short-sighted deviate is aiding in the process of opening the avenue for the destruction of the Deen. It is the ludicrous contention of the modernist zindeeqs and mulhids (all products of kuffaar universities) that the Shariah is the edifice which the Ulama erected from Ahaadith, the whole lot of which is ‘spurious’. According to the zindeeqs and mulhids , ‘only’ the Qur'aan, i.e. only its text, is Islam and nothing else. Obedience to the Rasool which the Qur'aan commands is of no significance in the religion of kufr of these modernist deviates. But, such obedience is submission to the Ahaadith from which the practical Sunnah is derived. And, this Divine Immutable Sunnah of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) is not confined to the Compilations of Imaam Bukhaari and Imaam Muslim in the unanimous ruling of the Fuqaha, Ulama and Muhadditheen of all times. This reality has been explicitly asserted by these two illustrious Imaams of Hadith as well.
Denial of this contention of the Ulama, which we have stated, is to open the way for modernists, deviates, morons, mulhids and zindeeqs to simply dissect these kutub at whim and fancy and to discard just any Hadith of Rasulullah (sallallahu alayhi wasallam) which is unpalatable to their westernized palates.
For the benefit of the deviates, our contention does not posit that every Hadith in each one of these kutub is valid for istidlaal or acceptable for istidlaal to each and every one among those qualified to formulate ahkaam. It means that the very same Hadith which has been set aside by one authority on the basis of his assessment, can be a valid mustadal for another qualified person. The process of istidlaal, however is not available to deviates who believe that they are among the Mujtahideen. Indeed the vile manner in which freelancers with their defective ‘research’ have made a toy out of the Sihaah Sittah and the other Hadith kutub more or less of the same level of authenticity, is despicable. They have exposed themselves to kufr. The ikhtilaafaat of the Muhadditheen may not be seen as latitude and licence for justifying personal and nafsaani opinions of baatil and shaitaaniyat -- to legalize haraam, as the deviates are guilty of.
Every modernist deviate who possesses some ‘doctorate' degree acquired from kuffaar institutions or some westernized institution of ‘Islamic' theology feels himself competent to expunge from the Shariah just any immutable hukm of Allah Ta'ala. In justification of such kufr the deviates cite the ‘dhuf' and the ‘idhtiraab ' of Saheeh Ahaadith.
For almost any mustadal there is scope for criticism. Deviates will for example produce the comments of some Muhaddith to refute the mustadallaat of a particular Math-hab, not because they happen to be followers of another valid Math-hab, but in order to expunge the hukm from the Shariah.
We shall cite here just one reference to enlighten the deviate on the issue of the Istidlaal - value of all the Ahaadith in the Sihaah Sittah.
Imaam Suyuti says :
“ Everything contained in these five kutub (Bukhaari, Muslim, Saheeh of Ibn Hibbaan, Mustadrak of Haakim and Al-Mukhtaarah of Al-Maqdeesi) is Saheeh......Similarly, is it with whatever is in Muwatta of Maalik, the Saheeh of Ibn Khuzaimah, Saheeh of Abu Awaanah, of Ibn Sakan and Al-Muntaqa of Ibn Jaarud, and Al-Mustakh-rajaat........And, everything that is in Musnad Ahmad is acceptable because the Dha’eef therein approximates Hasan.”
(I'laaus Sunan, Vol. 19, pages 67, 69)
2 Rabiuth Thaani 1436 – 24 January 2015
|< Prev||Next >|