AL-ALBANI UNVEILED

Al-Albani Unveiled An Exposition of His Errors and Other Important Issues Compiled by Sayf ad-Din Ahmed Ibn Muhammad All Correspondence to: Sayf ad-Din Ahmed Ibn Muhammad Ground Floor 296 Holloway Road London N7 6NJ ​CONTENTS​ ​PREFACE​ ​1​ ​AL-ALBANI’S WEAKENING OF SOME OF IMAM BUKHARI AND MUSLIM’S AHADITH​ ​4​ ​SELECTED TRANSLATIONS FROM VOLUME 1​ ​4​ ​AL-ALBANI’S INADEQUACY IN RESEARCH​ ​5​ ​FURTHER EXAMPLES OF AL-ALBANI’S CONTRADICTIONS​ ​7​ ​SELECTED TRANSLATIONS FROM VOLUME 2​ ​10​ ​AL-ALBANI AND HIS DEFAMATION AND AUTHENTICATION OF NARRATORS AT WILL​ ​12​ ​MOVING THE FINGER IN TASHAHHUD​ ​16​ ​THE PLACING OF HANDS IN PRAYER​ ​18​ ​RAF-UL-YADAYN: THE RAISING OF HANDS IN PRAYER​ ​20​ ​THE ABROGATION OF PERFORMING PRAYER SITTING: BEHIND A SITTING IMAM​ ​27​ ​GOING DOWN INTO PROSTRATION (SAJDAH): HANDS OR KNEES FIRST?​ ​29​ ​AHADITH ON INTERPRETING THE HOLY QUR’AN WITHOUT SOUND KNOWLEDGE​ ​30​ ​TARAWEEH PRAYER: 8 OR 20 RAK’AHS?​ ​32​ ​DA’EEF AHADITH AND THEIR APPLICABILITY TO ISLAMIC DECREES (FATAWA)​ ​40​ ​IJTIHAD, TAQLEED AND THE ‘SALAFIYYA’ SECT:-​ ​44​ ​Hafiz Ibn al-Qayyim al-Jawziyya - a Biography​ ​56​ ​Hafiz Ahmnad Ibn Taymiyya - a Biography in the light of scholarly opinions​ ​57​ ​WHO ARE THE AHL AS-SUNNAH WAL JAMAA’AH?​ ​67​ ​THE ASH’ARI SCHOOL​ ​81​ ​CONCLUSION​ ​83​ ​BIBLIOGRAPHY​ ​84​ الرحيم الرحمن هللا بسم​ ​In the Name of Allah, Most Gracious, Most Merciful​ ​PREFACE​ ​All​​praise​​be​​to​​Allahu​​Ta’ala.​​Peace​​and​​blessings​​be​​on​​His​​final​​Messenger,​​Sayyidina​​Muhammad.​ ​Auspicious​​salutations​​be​​on​​his​​pure​​Ahl​​al-Bayt​​(people​​of​​the​​Prophet’s​​House)​​and​​on​​all​​his​​just​​and​ ​devoted​ ​Companions​ ​(may​ ​Allah​ ​be​ ​pleased​ ​with​ ​them​ ​all);​ ​and​ ​last​ ​but​ ​not​ ​least​ ​praise​ ​be​ ​upon​ ​the​ ​glorious​ ​pious​ ​predecessors​ ​(Salaf​ ​as​ ​Salihin)​ ​and​ ​their​ ​successors​ ​who​ ​are​ ​the​ ​Ahl-as-Sunnah​ ​wal​ ​Jama’ah (People of the Sunnah and Community) of the four existing schools of Sacred Law (Fiqh).​ ​O​​you​​who​​believe!​​What​​you​​are​​about​​to​​read​​is​​of​​dire​​importance​​to​​the​​believer​​who​​accepts​​the​ ​authority​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Noble​ ​Hadith,​ ​second​ ​only​ ​to​ ​the​ ​Holy​ ​Qur’an​ ​al-Karim.​ ​I​ ​here​ ​present​ ​to​ ​the​ ​open​ ​minded​​believer​​an​​exposition​​of​​the​​mistakes​​and​​contradictions​​of​​probably​​the​​foremost​​Hadith​​Shaykh​ ​of​​the​​‘Salafiyya’​​sect,​​by​​the​​name​​of​​Shaykh​​Muhammad​​Nasiruddeen​​al-Albani.​​I​​was​​asked​​by​​some​ ​brothers​​on​​the​​status​​and​​rank​​of​​al-Albani,​​and​​fearing​​the​​declaration​​of​​Allah’s​​Messenger​​(Peace​​be​ ​upon​​him):​​“He​​who​​is​​asked​​something​​he​​knows​​and​​conceals​​it​​will​​have​​a​​bridle​​of​​fire​​put​​on​ ​him​​on​​the​​Day​​of​​Resurrection​​(Sunan​​Abu​​Dawood​,​​3/3650,​​English​​ed’n);​​I​​decided​​to​​compile​​this​ ​short​​work.​​Let​​me​​stress​​at​​the​​outset,​​this​​work​​was​​primarily​​compiled​​to​​correct​​some​​notions​​held​​by​ ​al-Albani​​and​​secondarily​​the​​“Salafi”​​sect;​​hence​​the​​last​​part​​of​​this​​work​​has​​been​​entitled:​​“and​​Other​ ​Important Issues.”​ ​This​​short​​piece​​of​​work​​has​​been​​edited​​and​​abridged​​from​​the​​four​​volume​​set​​which​​emphatically​​and​ ​clearly​​outlines​​al-Albani’s​​mistakes,​​contradictions,​​slanders​​and​​even​​lies​​in​​the​​honourable​​and​​sacred​ ​Islamic​ ​Science​ ​of​ ​Hadith​ ​(Uloom​ ​al​ ​Hadith),​ ​by​ ​the​ ​well-known​ ​scholar,​ ​Al-Shaykh​ ​Hasan​ ​ibn​ ​Ali​ ​al-Saqqaf​​(may​​Allah​​reward​​him​​for​​his​​effort)​​of​​Amman,​​Jordan;​​from​​his​​work​​entitled:​​“Tanaqadat​ ​al-Albani al-Wadihat” (The Clear Contradictions of al-Albani)​.​ ​Shaykh​​Saqqaf​​is​​a​​contemporary​​Shafi’i​​scholar​​of​​Hadith​​and​​Fiqh.​​His​​Shaykhs​​include​​Hashim​ ​Majdhub​ ​of​ ​Damascus​ ​in​ ​Shafi’i​​Fiqh,​​Muti’​​Hammami​​in​​estate​​division,​​Muhammad​​Hulayyil​​of​ ​Amman​​in​​Arabic​​Grammar,​​and​​he​​has​​been​​given​​written​​authorization​​(Ijaza)​​in​​the​​field​​of​​Hadith​​from​ ​one​​of​​the​​greatest​​Hadith​​scholars​​of​​our​​time​​-​​Shaykh​​Abdullah​​Muhammad​​al-Ghimari​​(may​​the​ ​Mercy​ ​of​ ​Allah​ ​be​ ​upon​ ​him)​ ​of​ ​Tangiers,​ ​Morocco​ ​[born​ ​1910​ ​C.E;​ ​died​ ​Feb.​ ​1413/1993​ ​C.E];​ ​an​ ​ex-Professor​​of​​Hadith​​at​​Al-Azhar​​University,​​author​​of​​nearly​​150​​works,​​his​​late​​brother:​​Ahmad​​ibn​ ​Muhammad​ ​(Allah’s​ ​mercy​ ​be​​upon​​him)​​was​​a​​great​​Hafiz​​of​​Hadith,​​(see​​later​​for​​the​​definition​​of​ ​Hafiz​ ​of​ ​Hadith).​ ​Shaykh​ ​Ghimari​ ​has​ ​declared​ ​in​ ​one​ ​of​ ​his​ ​published​ ​Fatwas​ ​that​ ​al-Albani​ ​is​ ​an​ ​innovator​​(mubtadi)​​in​​Islam,​​(al-Albani​​has​​criticised​​Shaykh​​Ghimari’s​​classifications​​of​​Hadith​​in​​some​ ​of​​his​​works;​​but​​then​​contradicted​​himself​​in​​others​​-​​see​​the​​quotes​​from​​Shaykh​​Saqqaf​​later).​​Shaykh​ ​Saqqaf​ ​presently​ ​teaches​ ​a​ ​circle​ ​of​ ​students​ ​in​ ​Amman​ ​and​ ​has​ ​published​ ​over​ ​forty​ ​five​ ​books​ ​and​ ​treatises on Hadith, tenets of faith (Aqeeda), Fiqh and heresiology.​ ​So​​as​​to​​enlighten​​the​​reader​​who​​is​​unaware​​of​​al-Albani’s​​status,​​the​​following​​is​​a​​short​​biography​​as​ ​given​ ​in​ ​the​ ​inside​ ​back​ ​cover​ ​of​ ​the​ ​English​ ​translation​ ​of​ ​al-Albani’s​ ​booklet​ ​by​​the​​title​​‘Adaab​​uz​ ​Zufaaf’​​(The​​Etiquettes​​of​​Marriage​​and​​Wedding)​​as​​published​​by​​his​​followers​​in​​England​​(viz:​​“Jami’at​ ​Ihyaa Minhaj al Sunnah”) :-​ ​“Muhammad​​Naasir-ud-Deen​​Al-Albani​​was​​born​​in​​the​​city​​of​​Ashkodera,​​capital​​of​​Albania​​in​​1914​ ​C.E.​​While​​he​​was​​young,​​his​​parents​​migrated​​with​​him​​to​​Damascus,​​Syria.​​From​​an​​early​​age​​he​​became​ ​fascinated​​by​​the​​science​​of​​Hadith​​and​​thereafter​​spent​​his​​time​​devoted​​to​​seeking​​knowledge.​​In​​later​ ​life​ ​he​ ​was​ ​given​ ​Professorship​ ​of​ ​Hadith​ ​at​ ​the​ ​Islamic​ ​University​ ​of​​Madinah.​​He​​is​​well​​known​​to​ ​students​​and​​scholars​​for​​his​​knowledge​​and​​writings.​​He​​has​​many​​well​​known​​students​​and​​has​​visited​ ​places​​throughout​​the​​Middle​​East​​and​​Europe.​​He​​was​​forced​​to​​migrate​​from​​Syria​​to​​Jordan.​​He​​has​ ​1​ ​been​​of​​enormous​​service​​to​​the​​Prophetic​​Hadith,​​taking​​great​​pains​​to​​check​​and​​sort​​out​​the​​authentic​ ​from​ ​the​ ​weak​ ​and​ ​fabricated​ ​narrations.​ ​He​ ​has​ ​produced​ ​many​ ​pamphlets​ ​and​ ​books,​ ​some​ ​of​​them​ ​running​​into​​many​​volumes​​-​​on​​topics​​of​​great​​importance​​to​​the​​Muslims​​-​​and​​has​​fully​​checked​​many​ ​of​​the​​famous​​books​​of​​Hadith​​-​​the​​Sunan​​of​​Tirmidhi,​​Abu​​Dawood,​​An-Nasai​​and​​Ibn​​Majah,​​along​​with​ ​Suyooti’s​ ​huge​ ​“Jami-us-Sagheer”​ ​(NB-​ ​This​ ​work​ ​has​ ​previously​ ​been​ ​checked​ ​and​ ​commentated​ ​by​ ​Imam​ ​Munawi​ ​[died.​ ​1031/1622​ ​C.E;​ ​Rahimahullah]​ ​and​ ​also​ ​commentated​ ​by​ ​Shaykh​ ​al-Azizi​ ​[died​ ​1070/1660​ ​C.E;​ ​Rahimahullah])​ ​and​ ​“Mishkat-ul​ ​Masabih”​ ​(by​ ​Imam​ ​Wali-ad-Din​ ​al-Tabrizi,​ ​and​ ​not​ ​al-Suyooti​​as​​the​​unknown​​biographer​​asserts!).​​He​​is​​the​​foremost​​scholar​​of​​Hadith​​and​​related​​sciences​ ​of this age.”​ ​It​​is​​this​​last​​statement​​which​​is​​highly​​far-fetched,​​and​​it​​is​​the​​pre-dominantly​​imaginary​​belief​​of​​his​ ​misguided​​followers​​in​​certain​​parts​​of​​the​​world.​​Since​​only​​Allah​​knows​​who​​is​​the​​“foremost​​scholar​​of​ ​Hadith​​and​​related​​sciences​​of​​this​​age.”​​I​​say​​this​​because​​there​​are​​others​​who​​may​​well​​be​​the​​‘foremost​ ​scholar’.​​One​​thing​​that​​may​​be​​noticed​​from​​the​​above​​biography,​​is​​that​​al-Albani​​does​​not​​seem​​to​​have​ ​been​​given​​any​​authorization​​(ijaza)​​in​​Hadith​​from​​any​​recognized​​scholar​​of​​Hadith.​​I​​have​​read​​other​ ​biographies​ ​and​ ​asked​ ​some​ ​of​ ​his​ ​supporters​ ​in​ ​England​ ​to​ ​give​ ​me​ ​the​ ​name​ ​of​ ​al-Albani’s​ ​Hadith​ ​Shaykh;​​but​​to​​no​​avail.​​It​​seems​​that​​al-Albani​​“taught”​​himself​​the​​science​​of​​Hadith​​by​​spending​​many​ ​hours​ ​in​ ​the​ ​famous​ ​library​ ​of​ ​Damascus​ ​-​ ​al-Maktabatuz​ ​Zahiriyyah.​ ​In​ ​the​ ​biography​ ​written​ ​in​ ​the​ ​preface​ ​of​ ​the​ ​English​ ​edition​ ​of​ ​his​ ​work​ ​-​ ​“Sifah​ ​salah​ ​an-Nabee”,​ ​it​ ​was​ ​also​ ​stated​ ​that​ ​he​ ​was:​ ​“influenced​​by​​articles​​in​​‘al-Manaar’​​magazine.”​​The​​last​​named​​magazine​​was​​edited​​by​​the​​notorious​ ​freemason - Muhammad Rashid Ridah (d.1935 CE)!​ ​Al-Albani​ ​has​ ​not​ ​made​ ​a​ ​handful​​of​​forgivable​​errors,​​but​​rather​​well​​over​​1200,​​which​​are​​only​ ​forgivable​ ​if​ ​he​ ​himself​ ​admits​ ​and​ ​corrects​ ​his​ ​mistakes​ ​by​ ​repenting​ ​in​ ​front​ ​of​ ​the​ ​People​ ​of​ ​Knowledge,​​as​​well​​as​​the​​sincere​​believers​​who​​may​​have​​been​​relying​​on​​his​​‘classifications​​of​​Hadith’.​ ​The​​selected​​contradictions​​from​​,”Tanaqadat​​al-Albani​​al-Wadihat”​​have​​been​​derived​​for​​sake​​of​​brevity​ ​from​​volumes​​one​​and​​two​​only,​​and​​whenever​​the​​symbol​​*​​is​​indicated,​​this​​corresponds​​to​​the​​original​ ​reference​ ​to​ ​the​ ​Arabic​ ​edition.​ ​The​ ​reader​ ​should​ ​also​ ​remember​ ​that​ ​whenever​ ​anything​ ​appears​ ​in​ ​brackets,​​then​​these​​are​​usually​​my​​words​​and​​not​​that​​of​​Shaykh​​Saqqaf.​​It​​should​​also​​be​​said​​that​​Volume​ ​1​​of​​the​​original​​contains​​250​​Ahadith,​​in​​which​​al-Albani​​has​​said​​Sahih​​(an​​authentic​​Hadith)​​in​​one​​of​ ​his​ ​books​ ​and​ ​then​ ​contradicted​ ​himself​ ​by​ ​saying​ ​Daeef​ ​(a​ ​weak​ ​Hadith)​​in​​another​​of​​his​​books,​​or​ ​similar​​mistakes​​and​​contradictions.​​Volume​​2​​contains​​652​​Ahadith​​of​​the​​same​​description​​as​​the​​above,​ ​or​ ​similar​ ​contradictions​ ​in​​individual​​rijal​​(biography​​of​​a​​Hadith​​narrator)​​of​​the​​Sanad​​(the​​chain​​of​ ​transmission​​of​​a​​specific​​Hadith)​​of​​the​​Hadiths​​in​​question.​​In​​some​​instances​​(e.g.​​Vol.2,​​pp.​​63-64),​ ​Shaykh​​Saqqaf​​shows​​how​​a​​Hadith​​narrator​​is​​‘trustworthy’​​when​​al-Albani​​wants​​to​​use​​a​​Hadith​​to​​prove​ ​something,​​but​​becomes​​‘untrustworthy’​​when​​in​​a​​Hadith​​used​​by​​the​​person​​al-Albani​​is​​arguing​​against;​ ​an​​extremely​​embarrassing​​mistake​​for​​anyone​​of​​any​​scholarly​​integrity.​​These​​books​​by​​Shaykh​​Saqqaf​ ​have​ ​already​ ​done​ ​much​ ​to​​pull​​the​​rug​​from​​under​​‘Salafiyyism’​​in​​Jordan​​and​​even​​in​​‘Saudi’​​Arabia,​ ​where​​the​​first​​volume​​alone​​has​​seen​​no​​less​​than​​SIX​​reprints​​in​​a​​single​​year​​alone!​​These​​books​​are​ ​extremely​​hot​​property​​that​​any​​‘Salafi’​​(or​​anti-Salafi)​​who​​reads​​Arabic​​will​​want​​to​​buy.​​I​​ask​​you,​​how​ ​many​​times​​does​​an​​inept​​student​​of​​Hadith​​like​​al-Albani​​have​​to​​contradict​​himself​​before​​he​​ceases​​to​ ​be​​of​​authority?​​Can​​you​​find​​even​​ten​​such​​contradictions​​in​​the​​works​​of​​the​​traditional​​memorizers​​of​ ​Hadith​ ​(Huffaz),​ ​those​ ​who​ ​had​ ​memorized​ ​at​ ​least​ ​100,000​ ​Ahadith​ ​with​ ​their​ ​Sanads?​ ​The​ ​great​ ​scholars​​like​​AbuHanifah,​​Malik,​​Shafi’i,​​Ibn​​Hanbal,​​Bukhari,​​Muslim,​​Abu​​Dawood,​​Tirmidhi,​​Ibn​​Maja,​ ​al-Nasai,​​Daraqutni,​​Hakim,​​Asqalani​​and​​so​​on....​​Allah’s​​mercy​​be​​upon​​them.​​The​​discerning​​believer​ ​should​​know​​that​​al-Albani​​has​​not​​in​​his​​memory​​anywhere​​near​​a​​100,000​​Ahadith​​in​​his​​memory,​​in​​fact​ ​as​​far​​as​​we​​know​​there​​is​​no​​one​​who​​is​​a​​Hafiz​​of​​Hadith​​today!​​If​​there​​is,​​we​​say​​please​​come​​forward​ ​and prove it, and only Allah knows best!​ ​During​​the​​course​​of​​examining​​various​​Hadiths,​​Shaykh​​Saqqaf​​compared​​them​​to​​the​​written​​opinion​ ​of​ ​al-Albani.​ ​EventuallyShaykh​ ​Saqqaf​ ​began​ ​a​ ​compilation​ ​of​ ​al-Albani’s​ ​mistakes.​ ​He​ ​came​ ​across​ ​2​ ​contradictions,​ ​supposition,​ ​inadequate​ ​research​ ​and​ ​the​ ​blatant​​perversion​​of​​sayings​​quoted​​from​​the​ ​great​ ​scholars​ ​of​​Islam.​​He​​was​​especially​​worried​​by​​the​​fact​​that​​many​​students​​and​​members​​of​​the​ ​youth​ ​who​ ​do​ ​not​ ​have​ ​enough​ ​or​ ​no​ ​knowledge​ ​are​ ​simply​ ​not​ ​bothering​ ​to​ ​investigate​ ​the​ ​Hadiths​ ​classified​​by​​al-Albani,​​are​​being​​misled​​into​​blind​​ignorance;​​even​​though​​these​​very​​people​​are​​the​​ones​ ​calling​ ​staunchly​ ​and​ ​vociferously​ ​for​ ​the​ ​complete​ ​abandonment​ ​of​ ​Taqleed​ ​(usually​ ​translated​ ​as​ ​“blindfollowing”​​by​​the​​opponents,​​but​​in​​reality​​it​​is​​the​​following​​of​​qualified​​and​​verified​​scholarship​​of​ ​a​​Mujtahid​​Mutlaq​​[an​​absolutely​​independent​​scholar​​of​​the​​highest​​calibre]​​like​​the​​Imams​​Abu​​Hanifah,​ ​Malik,​​Shafi’i,​​Ibn​​Hanbal​​(Allah’s​​mercy​​be​​upon​​them)​​and​​the​​like,​​as​​well​​as​​the​​scholars​​who​​adhered​ ​to​​and​​promulgated​​a​​particular​​school​​of​​Fiqh​​[Madhhab]​​for​​the​​greater​​part​​of​​Islam’s​​history;​​Taqleed​​in​ ​simple​ ​language​ ​is​ ​the​ ​following​ ​of​ ​one​ ​of​ ​the​ ​four​ ​existing​ ​schools​​of​​Fiqh).​​These​​people​​seem​​to​ ​contradict​​themselves,​​as​​well​​as​​displaying​​hypocrisy​​when​​they​​go​​around​​making​​it​​a​​priority​​to​​attack​ ​the​ ​followers​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Hanafi,​ ​Maliki,​ ​Shafi’i​ ​or​ ​Hanbali​ ​schools​ ​of​ ​Sacred​ ​Law;​ ​even​ ​though​ ​they​ ​themselves are practising Taqleed of an individual(s)!​ ​Bearing​​in​​mind​​the​​Hadith​​reported​​by​​Abu​​Sa’eed​​al-Khudri​​(may​​Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​him)​​from​ ​the​​Holy​​Prophet​​(Peace​​and​​blessings​​be​​upon​​him):​​“Whoever​​sees​​an​​evil,​​he​​must​​prevent​​it​​with​ ​his​​hand,​​and​​if​​he​​has​​no​​power​​for​​this​​action,​​then​​he​​should​​prevent​​it​​with​​his​​tongue,​​and​​if​​he​ ​cannot​​do​​this,​​then​​he​​should​​at​​least​​consider​​it​​a​​vice​​in​​his​​heart,​​and​​this​​is​​a​​very​​low​​level​​of​ ​one’s​ ​Iman​ ​(faith).​ ​[see​ ​Sahih​ ​Muslim,​ ​Tirmidhi,​ ​Ibn​ ​Majah,​ ​Nisai​ ​-​ ​as​ ​recorded​ ​in​ ​Targheeb​ ​Wal-Tarheeb​​by​​Al-Hafiz​​Mundhiri,​​d.​​1258​​C.E;​​Rahimahumullah],​​and​​even​​more​​explicitly​​from​​Imam​ ​al-Darimi​ ​(Rahimahullah)​ ​who​ ​reported​ ​Ziyad​ ​Ibn​ ​Hudair​ ​(Rahimahullah)​ ​saying:​ ​“Umar​ ​(Allah​ ​be​ ​pleased​ ​with​ ​him)​ ​said​ ​to​ ​me:​ ​Do​ ​you​ ​know​ ​what​ ​can​ ​destroy​ ​Islam?”​ ​I​ ​said:​ ​“No.”​ ​He​ ​said:​ ​“It​​is​ ​destroyed​​by​​the​​mistakes​​of​​scholars,​​the​​argument​​of​​the​​hypocrites​​about​​the​​book​​(of​​Allah),​​and​ ​the​​opinions​​of​​the​​misguided​​leaders.”​​(see​​Mishkatul​​Masabih​,​​1/269,​​Trans.​​A.H.​​Siddiqui).​​We​​took​ ​the​​liberty​​to​​forewarn​​and​​guide​​the​​many​​sincere​​believers​​who​​are​​turning​​to​​their​​faith​​from​​blundering​ ​into miscomprehension and wrong by translating selectively from Shaykh Saqqaf’s books.​ ​In​​order​​to​​safe​​keep​​today’s​​youth​​from​​falling​​into​​heresy,​​Shaykh​​Saqqaf​​has​​embarked​​upon​​a​​quest​ ​to​ ​expose​ ​such​ ​a​ ​person​​who​​considers​​himself​​to​​be​​among​​the​​great​​scholars​​of​​Hadith​​like​​Imams​ ​al-Bukhari​​and​​Muslim​​(Rahimahumullah),​​to​​the​​extent​​that​​one​​of​​his​​deluded​​followers​​considered​ ​him​​to​​be​​in​​the​​rank​​of​​the​​Amir​​al-Mu’minin​​fil​​Hadith,​​Shaykh​​al-Islam​​al-Hafiz​​Ahmad​​Ibn​​Hajar​ ​al-Asqalani​​(the​​Shafi’i​​Imam​​who​​authored​​the​​most​​famous​​commentary​​of​​Sahih​​al-Bukhari​​and​​many​ ​other books, d. 852/1449 C.E; Rahimahullah).​ ​As​​for​​Shaykh​​Saqqaf,​​the​​respected​​reader​​may​​get​​the​​impression​​that​​he​​has​​an​​uncompromising​ ​demeanour​ ​in​ ​some​ ​of​ ​his​ ​comments​ ​made​ ​straight​ ​after​​he​​exposes​​an​​error​​of​​al-Albani.​​I​​make​​no​ ​apology​​for​​his​​style​​of​​exposition,​​since​​many​​Allah​​fearing​​scholars​​have​​been​​uncompromising​​in​​the​ ​past​​when​​it​​comes​​to​​enjoining​​the​​Good​​and​​Forbidding​​the​​Evil​​as​​has​​been​​prescribed​​in​​the​​Qur’an​​and​ ​Sunnah​​(e.g.​​in​​the​​refutations​​against​​the​​heretical​​sects​​like​​the​​Khawarij,​​Mu’tazila,​​Shi’ah....),​​so​​long​ ​as​ ​it​ ​forewarns​ ​the​ ​general​ ​masses​ ​from​ ​accepting​ ​the​ ​falsities​ ​of​ ​the​​heretics​​and​​other​​like​​minded​ ​“scholars”.​​Maybe​​Shaykh​​Saqqaf​​considers​​al-Albani​​to​​be​​an​​innovator,​​just​​as​​his​​late​​teacher​​-​​Shaykh​ ​Ghimari​​(Rahimahullah)​​considered​​him​​to​​be.​​There​​are​​many​​Hadith​​which​​command​​us​​to​​detest​​the​ ​Heretics.​​For​​example,​​Ibrahim​​ibn​​Maisara​​reported​​Allah’s​​Messenger​​(Peace​​be​​upon​​him)​​as​​saying:​ ​“He​​who​​showed​​respect​​to​​an​​innovator​​he​​in​​fact​​aided​​in​​the​​demolishing​​of​​Islam.”​​(​Bayhaqi​​-​​see​ ​Mishkatul Masabih​, 1/189, English ed’n).​ ​I​ ​hope​ ​the​ ​esteemed​ ​reader​ ​will​ ​read​ ​this​ ​short​ ​piece​ ​of​ ​work​ ​with​ ​vigilance​ ​and​ ​an​ ​open​​mind,​ ​especially​​those​​who​​have​​been​​loyal​​readers​​and​​supporters​​of​​al-Albani’s​​books​​and​​decrees.​​I​​sincerely​ ​hope​​that​​this​​work​​will​​be​​of​​great​​benefit​​to​​all​​who​​read​​it​​and​​pray​​that​​Allah​​accept​​it​​as​​a​​good​​deed​ ​done​ ​purely​ ​for​ ​His​ ​pleasure.​ ​I​ ​would​ ​also​ ​like​ ​to​ ​thank​ ​all​ ​those​ ​brothers​ ​who​ ​assisted​ ​me​ ​in​ ​the​ ​compilation​ ​of​​this​​work,​​especially​​to​​the​​brother​​who​​supplied​​me​​with​​Shaykh​​Saqqaf’s​​books.​​May​ ​Allah forgive us for any shortcomings and errors. Amin.​ ​3​ ​AL-ALBANI UNVEILED​ ​AL-ALBANI’S WEAKENING OF SOME OF IMAM​ ​BUKHARI AND MUSLIM’S AHADITH.​ ​Al-Albani​​has​​said​​in​​“​Sharh​​al-Aqeedah​​at-Tahaweeah​,​​pg.​​27-28”​​(8th​​edition,​​Maktab​​al-Islami)​ ​by​​Shaykh​​Ibn​​Abi​​al-Izz​​al-Hanafi​​(Rahimahullah),​​that​​any​​Hadith​​coming​​from​​the​​Sahih​​collections​ ​of​​al-Bukhari​​and​​Muslim​​is​​Sahih,​​not​​because​​they​​were​​narrated​​by​​Bukhari​​and​​Muslim,​​but​​because​ ​the​​Ahadith​​are​​in​​fact​​correct.​​But​​he​​clearly​​contradicts​​himself,​​since​​he​​has​​weakened​​Ahadith​​from​ ​Bukhari and Muslim himself! Now let us consider this information in the light of elaboration :-​ ​SELECTED TRANSLATIONS FROM VOLUME 1​ ​No 1 : (*Pg. 10 no.1)​ ​Hadith:​ ​The​ ​Prophet​ ​(Peace​​and​​blessings​​be​​upon​​him)​​said:​​“Allah​​says​​I​​will​​be​​an​​opponent​​to​​3​ ​persons​ ​on​ ​the​ ​day​ ​of​ ​resurrection:​ ​(a)​ ​One​ ​who​ ​makes​ ​a​ ​covenant​ ​in​ ​my​ ​Name​ ​but​ ​he​ ​proves​ ​treacherous,​​(b)​​One​​who​​sells​​a​​free​​person​​(as​​a​​slave)​​and​​eats​​the​​price​​(c)​​And​​one​​who​​employs​​a​ ​labourer​ ​and​ ​gets​ ​the​ ​full​ ​work​ ​done​ ​by​ ​him,​ ​but​ ​doesn’t​ ​pay​ ​him​ ​his​ ​wages.”​ ​[​Bukhari​ ​no.​ ​2114-Arabic version, or see the English version 3/430 pg. 236].​ ​Al-Albani​​said​​that​​this​​Hadith​​was​​DAEEF​​in​​“Daeef​​al-Jami​​wa​​Ziyadatuh,​​4/111​​no.​​4054”​.​​Little​ ​does​​he​​know​​that​​this​​Hadith​​has​​been​​narrated​​by​​Ahmad​​and​​Bukhari​​from​​Abu​​Hurayra​​(Allah​​be​ ​pleased with him)!!​ ​No 2 : (*Pg. 10 no. 2)​ ​Hadith:​​“Sacrifice​​only​​a​​grown​​up​​cow​​unless​​it​​is​​difficult​​for​​you,​​in​​which​​case​​sacrifice​​a​​ram.”​ ​[Muslim no. 1963-Arabic edition, or see the English version 3/4836 pg. 1086].​ ​Al-Albani​​said​​that​​this​​Hadith​​was​​DAEEF​​in​​“Daeef​​al-Jami​​wa​​Ziyadatuh,​​6/64​​no.​​6222.”​​Although​ ​this​ ​Hadith​ ​has​ ​been​ ​narrated​ ​by​​Imams​​Ahmad,​​Muslim,​​Abu​​Dawood,​​Nisai​​and​​Ibn​​Majah​​from​ ​Jaabir​​(Allah be pleased with him)!!​ ​No 3 : (*Pg. 10 no. 3)​ ​Hadith:​ ​“Amongst​ ​the​ ​worst​ ​people​ ​in​ ​Allah’s​ ​sight​​on​​the​​Day​​of​​Judgement​​will​​be​​the​​man​​who​ ​makes love to his wife and she to him and he divulges her secret.”​​[​Muslim​​no. 1437- Arabic edition].​ ​Al-Albani​ ​claims​ ​that​ ​this​ ​Hadith​ ​is​ ​DAEEF​ ​in​ ​“Daeef​ ​al-Jami​ ​wa​ ​Ziyadatuh,​ ​2/197​ ​no.​ ​2005.”​ ​Although it has been narrated by​​Muslim from Abi Sayyed​​(Allah be pleased with him)!!​ ​No 4 : (*Pg. 10 no. 4)​ ​Hadith:​​“If​​someone​​woke​​up​​at​​night​​(for​​prayers)​​let​​him​​begin​​his​​prayers​​with​​2​​light​​rak’ats.”​ ​[​Muslim​ ​no.​ ​768].​ ​Al-Albani​ ​stated​ ​that​ ​this​ ​Hadith​ ​was​ ​DAEEF​ ​in​ ​“Daeef​ ​al-Jami​ ​wa​ ​Ziyadatuh,​ ​1/213​ ​no.​ ​718.”​ ​Although​ ​it​ ​is​ ​narrated​ ​by​ ​Muslim​ ​and​ ​Ahmad​ ​from​ ​Abu​ ​Hurayra​ ​(may​ ​Allah​ ​be​ ​pleased with him)!!​ ​No 5 : (*Pg. 11 no. 5)​ ​4​ ​AL-ALBANI UNVEILED​ ​Hadith:​​“You​​will​​rise​​with​​shining​​foreheads​​and​​shining​​hands​​and​​feet​​on​​the​​Day​​of​​Judgement​​by​ ​completing Wudhu properly........”​​[​Muslim​​no. 246].​ ​Al-Albani​​claims​​it​​is​​DAEEF​​in​​“Daeef​​al-Jami​​wa​​Ziyadatuh,​​2/14​​no.​​1425.”​​Although​​it​​has​​been​ ​narrated by​​Muslim from Abu Hurayra​​(Allah be pleased​​with him)!!​ ​No 6 : (*Pg. 11 no. 6)​ ​Hadith:​ ​“The​ ​greatest​ ​trust​ ​in​ ​the​ ​sight​ ​of​ ​Allah​ ​on​ ​the​​Day​​of​​Judgement​​is​​the​​man​​who​​doesn’t​ ​divulge the secrets between him and his wife.”​​[​Muslim​​no.’s 124 and 1437]​ ​Al-Albani​​claims​​it​​is​​DAEEF​​in​​“Daeef​​al-Jami​​wa​​Ziyadatuh,​​2/192​​no.​​1986.”​​Although​​it​​has​​been​ ​narrated by​​Muslim, Ahu​ ​mad and Abu Dawood from Abi Sayyed​​(Allah be pleased​​with him)!!​ ​No 7 : (*Pg. 11 no. 7)​ ​Hadith:​​“If​​anyone​​READS​​the​​last​​ten​​verses​​of​​Surah​​al-Kahf​​he​​will​​be​​saved​​from​​the​​mischief​​of​ ​the Dajjal.”​​[​Muslim​​no. 809].​ ​Al-Albani​​said​​that​​this​​Hadith​​was​​DAEEF​​in​​“Daeef​​al-Jami​​wa​​Ziyadatuh,​​5/233​​no.​​5772.”​​NB-​​The​ ​word​​used​​by​​Muslim​​is​​MEMORIZED​​and​​not​​READ​​as​​al-Albani​​claimed;​​what​​an​​awful​​mistake!​​This​ ​Hadith​​has​​been​​narrated​​by​​Muslim,​​Ahmad​​and​​Nisai​​from​​Abi​​Darda​​(Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​him)!!​ ​(Also recorded by Imam Nawawi in “Riyadh us-Saliheen, 2/1021” of the English ed’n).​ ​No 8 : (*Pg. 11 no. 8)​ ​Hadith:​​“The​​Prophet​​(Peace​​and​​blessings​​be​​upon​​him)​​had​​a​​horse​​called​​al-Laheef.”​​[​Bukhari​,​​see​ ​Fath​ ​al-Bari​ ​of​ ​Hafiz​ ​Ibn​ ​Hajar​ ​6/58​ ​no.2855].​ ​But​ ​Al-Albani​ ​said​​that​​this​​Hadith​​was​​DAEEF​​in​ ​“Daeefal-Jami​​wa​​Ziyadatuh,​​4/208​​no.​​4489.”​​Although​​it​​has​​been​​narrated​​by​​Bukhari​​from​​Sahl​ ​ibn Sa’ad​​(Allah be pleased with him)!!!​ ​Shaykh​​Saqqaf​​said​:​​“This​​is​​only​​anger​​from​​anguish,​​little​​from​​a​​lot​​and​​if​​it​​wasn’t​​for​​the​​fear​​of​ ​lengthening​​and​​boring​​the​​reader,​​I​​would​​have​​mentioned​​many​​other​​examples​​from​​al-Albani’s​​books​ ​whilst reading them. Imagine what I would have found if I had traced everything he wrote?”​ ​AL-ALBANI’S INADEQUACY IN RESEARCH​ ​(*Vol. 1 pg. 20)​ ​Shaykh​​Saqqaf​​said​:​​“The​​strange​​and​​amazing​​thing​​is​​that​​Shaykh​​al-Albani​​misquoted​​many​​great​​Hadith​ ​scholars​​and​​disregards​​them​​by​​his​​lack​​of​​knowledge,​​either​​directly​​or​​indirectly!​​He​​crowns​​himself​​as​ ​an​​unbeatable​​source​​and​​even​​tries​​to​​imitate​​the​​great​​scholars​​by​​using​​such​​terms​​like​​“Lam​​aqif​​ala​ ​Sanadih”,​​which​​means​​“I​​could​​not​​find​​the​​chain​​of​​narration”,​​or​​using​​similar​​phrases!​​He​​also​​accuses​ ​some​​of​​the​​best​​memorizers​​of​​Hadith​​for​​lack​​of​​attention,​​even​​though​​he​​is​​the​​one​​best​​described​​by​ ​that!”​ ​Now for some examples to prove our point:​ ​No 9 : (*Pg. 20 no. 1)​ ​5​ ​AL-ALBANI UNVEILED​ ​Al-Albani​​said​​in​​“Irwa​​al-Ghalil,​​6/251​​no.​​1847”​​(in​​connection​​to​​a​​narration​​from​​Ali):​​“I​​could​ ​not find the Sanad.”​ ​Shaykh​​Saqqaf​​said​:​​“Ridiculous!​​If​​this​​al-Albani​​was​​any​​scholar​​of​​Islam,​​then​​he​​would​​have​​known​ ​that​​this​​Hadith​​can​​be​​found​​in​​“Sunan​​al-Bayhaqi,​​7/121”​​:-​​Narrated​​by​​Abu​​Sayyed​​ibn​​Abi​​Amarah,​​who​ ​said​​that​​Abu​​al-Abbas​​Muhammad​​ibn​​Yaqoob​​who​​said​​to​​us​​that​​Ahmad​​ibn​​Abdal​​Hamid​​said​​that​​Abu​ ​Usama​​from​​Sufyan​​from​​Salma​​ibn​​Kahil​​from​​Mu’awiya​​ibn​​Soayd​​who​​said,​​‘I​​found​​this​​in​​my​​fathers​ ​book from Ali (Allah be pleased with him).’”​ ​No 10 : (*Pg. 21 no. 2)​ ​Al-Albani​​said​​in​​‘Irwa​​al-Ghalil,​​3/283’​:​​Hadith​​of​​Ibn​​Umar​​‘Kisses​​are​​usury’,​​“I​​could​​not​​find​​the​ ​Sanad.”​ ​Shaykh​​Saqqaf​​said:​​“This​​is​​outrageously​​wrong​​for​​surely​​this​​is​​mentioned​​in​​‘Fatawa​​al-Shaykh​​ibn​ ​Taymiyya​​al-Misriyah​​(3/295)’​:​​‘Harb​​said​​Obaidullah​​ibn​​Mu’az​​said​​to​​us,​​my​​father​​said​​to​​me​​that​ ​from​ ​Jiballa​ ​who​ ​heard​ ​Ibn​ ​Umar​ ​(Allah​ ​be​ ​pleased​ ​with​​him)​​as​​saying:​​Kisses​​are​​usury.’​​And​​these​ ​narrators are all authentic according to Ibn Taymiyya!”​ ​No 11 : (*Pg. 21 no. 3)​ ​Hadith​​of​​Ibn​​Masood​​(Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​him):​​“The​​Qur’an​​was​​sent​​down​​in​​7​​dialects.​​Everyone​ ​of​​its​​verses​​has​​an​​explicit​​and​​implicit​​meaning​​and​​every​​interdiction​​is​​clearly​​defined.”​​Al-Albani​ ​stated​ ​in​ ​his​ ​checking​ ​of​​“Mishkat​​ul-Masabih,​​1/80​​no.​​238”​​that​​the​​author​​of​​Mishkat​​concluded​ ​many​​Ahadith​​with​​the​​words​​“Narrated​​in​​Sharh​​us-Sunnah,”​​but​​when​​he​​examined​​the​​chapter​​on​​Ilm​​and​ ​in Fadail al-Qur’an he could not find it!​ ​Shaykh​​Saqqaf​​said​:​​“The​​great​​scholar​​has​​spoken!​​Wrongly​​as​​usual.​​I​​wish​​to​​say​​to​​this​​fraud​​that​​if​​he​ ​is​​seriously​​interested​​in​​finding​​this​​Hadith​​we​​suggest​​he​​looks​​in​​the​​chapter​​entitled​​‘Al-Khusama​​fi​ ​al-Qur’an’​ ​from​ ​Sharh-us-Sunnah​ ​(1/262)​,​ ​and​ ​narrated​ ​by​ ​Ibn​ ​Hibban​ ​in​ ​his​ ​Sahih​ ​(no.​ ​74),​ ​Abu​ ​Ya’ala​ ​in​ ​his​ ​Musnad​ ​(no.​ ​5403),​ ​Tahawi​ ​in​ ​Sharh​ ​al-Mushkil​ ​al-Athar​ ​(4/172),​ ​Bazzar​ ​(3/90​ ​Kashfal-Asrar)​​and​​Haythami​​has​​mentioned​​it​​in​​Majmoo’a​​al-Zawaid​​(7/152)​​and​​he​​has​​ascribed​​it​​to​ ​Bazzar, Abu Ya’ala and Tabarani in al-Awsat who said that the narrators are trustworthy.”​ ​No 12 : (*Pg. 22 no. 4)​ ​Al-Albani​​stated​​in​​his​​“Sahihah,​​1/230”​​while​​he​​was​​commenting​​on​​Hadith​​no.​​149:​​‘The​​believer​​is​ ​the​​one​​who​​does​​not​​fill​​his​​stomach....​​The​​Hadith​​from​​Aisha​​as​​mentioned​​by​​Al-Mundhiri​​(3/237)​ ​and​​by​​Al-Hakim​​from​​Ibn​​Abbas,​​I​​(Albani)​​could​​not​​find​​it​​in​​Mustadrak​​al-Hakim​​after​​checking​​it​ ​in his ‘Thoughts’ section.”​ ​Shaykh​​Saqqaf​​said​:​​“Please​​don’t​​encourage​​the​​public​​to​​fall​​into​​the​​void​​of​​ignorance​​which​​you​​have​ ​tumbled​ ​into!​ ​If​ ​you​ ​check​ ​Mustadrak​ ​al-Hakim​ ​(2/12)​ ​you​ ​will​ ​find​ ​it!​ ​This​ ​proves​ ​that​ ​you​ ​are​ ​unskilled at using book indexes and the memorization of Hadith!”​ ​No 13 : (*Pg. 23)​ ​Another​ ​ridiculous​​assumption​​is​​made​​by​​al-Albani​​in​​his​​“Sahihah,​​2/476”​​where​​he​​claims​​that​​the​ ​Hadith:​​“Abu​​Bakr​​is​​from​​me,​​holding​​the​​position​​of​​(my)​​hearing”​​is​​not​​in​​the​​book​​‘Hilya’​.​​We​ ​suggest you look in the book​​“Hilya, 4/73!”​ ​6​ ​AL-ALBANI UNVEILED​ ​No 14 : (*Pg. 23 no. 5)​ ​Al-Albani​​said​​in​​his​​“Sahihah,​​1/638​​no.​​365,​​4th​​edition”​:​​“Yahya​​ibn​​Malik​​has​​been​​ignored​​by​​the​​6​ ​main scholars of Hadith, for he was not mentioned in the books of Tahdhib, Taqreeb or Tadhhib.”​ ​Shaykh​ ​Saqqaf​:​ ​“That​ ​is​ ​what​ ​you​ ​say!​ ​It​ ​is​ ​not​ ​like​ ​that,​ ​for​ ​surely​ ​he​ ​is​ ​mentioned​ ​in​ ​Tahdhib​ ​al-Tahdhib​​of​​Hafiz​​ibn​​Hajar​​al-Asqalani​​(12/19​​Dar​​al-Fikr​​edition)​​by​​the​​nickname​​Abu​​Ayoob​ ​al-Maraagi!!​ ​So beware!​ ​FURTHER EXAMPLES OF AL-ALBANI’S​ ​CONTRADICTIONS​ ​No 15 : (*Pg. 7)​ ​Al-Albani​ ​has​ ​criticized​ ​the​ ​Imam​ ​al-Muhaddith​ ​Abul​ ​Fadl​ ​Abdullah​ ​ibn​ ​al-Siddiq​ ​al-Ghimari​ ​(Rahimahullah)​​for​​mentioning​​in​​his​​book​​“al-Kanz​​al-Thameen”​​a​​Hadith​​from​​Abu​​Hurayra​​(Allah​​be​ ​pleased with him) with reference to the narrator Abu Maymoona:​​“Spread salam, feed the poor....”​ ​Al-Albani​​said​​in​​“Silsilah​​al-Daeefa,​​3/492”​,​​after​​referring​​this​​Hadith​​to​​Imam​​Ahmad​​(2/295)​​and​ ​others:​​“I​​say​​this​​is​​a​​weak​​Sanad,​​Daraqutni​​has​​said​​‘Qatada​​from​​Abu​​Maymoona​​from​​Abu​​Hurayra:​ ​Unknown,​ ​and​ ​it​ ​is​ ​to​ ​be​ ​discarded.’”​ ​Al-Albani​ ​then​ ​said​ ​on​ ​the​ ​same​ ​page:​ ​“Notice,​ ​a​ ​slapdash​ ​has​ ​happened​​with​​Suyuti​​and​​Munawi​​when​​they​​came​​across​​this​​Hadith,​​and​​I​​have​​also​​shown​​in​​a​​previous​ ​reference, no. 571, that​​al-Ghimari​​was also wrong​​for mentioning it in al-Kanz.”​ ​But​​in​​reality​​it​​is​​al-Albani​​who​​has​​become​​slapdashed,​​because​​he​​has​​made​​a​​big​​contradiction​​by​​using​ ​this​​same​​Sanad​​in​​“Irwa​​al-Ghalil,​​3/238”​​where​​he​​says,​​“Classified​​by​​Ahmad​​(2/295),​​al-Hakim​...​ ​from​​Qatada​​from​​Abu​​Maymoona,​​and​​he​​is​​trusted​​as​​in​​the​​book​​‘al-Taqreeb’,​​and​​Hakim​​said:​​‘A​​Sahih​ ​Sanad’, and​​al-Dhahabi​​agreed with Hakim!​ ​So,​​by​​Allah​​glance​​at​​this​​mistake!​​Who​​do​​you​​think​​is​​wrong,​​the​​Muhaddith​​al-Ghimari​​(also​​Suyuti​​and​ ​Munawi) or al-Albani?​ ​No16 : (*Pg. 27 no. 3)​ ​Al-Albani​​wanted​​to​​weaken​​a​​Hadith​​which​​allowed​​women​​to​​wear​​golden​​jewellery,​​and​​in​​the​​Sanad​​for​ ​that​​Hadith​​there​​is​​Muhammad​​ibn​​Imara​.​​Al-Albani​​claimed​​that​​Abu​​Haatim​​said​​that​​this​​narrator​ ​was:​​“Not that strong,”​​see the book​​“Hayat al-Albani​​wa-Atharu… part 1, pg. 207.”​ ​The​​truth​​is​​that​​Abu​​Haatim​​al-Razi​​said​​in​​the​​book​​‘al-Jarh​​wa-Taadeel,​​8/45’:​​“A​​good​​narrator​​but​ ​not that strong..”​​So note that al-Albani has removed​​the phrase “A good narrator !”​ ​NB-​ ​(al-Albani​ ​has​ ​made​ ​many​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Hadith​ ​which​ ​forbid​ ​Gold​ ​to​ ​women​ ​to​ ​be​ ​Sahih,​​in​​fact​​other​ ​scholars​ ​have​ ​declared​ ​these​ ​Hadith​ ​to​ ​be​​Daeef​​and​​abrogated​​by​​other​​Sahih​​Hadith​​which​​allow​​the​ ​wearing​​of​​gold​​by​​women.​​One​​of​​the​​well​​known​​Shaykhs​​of​​the​​“Salafiyya”​​-​​Yusuf​​al-Qardawi​​said​​in​ ​his​​book:​​‘Islamic​​awakening​​between​​rejection​​and​​extremism,​​pg.​​85:​​“In​​our​​own​​times,​​Shaykh​​Nasir​ ​al-Din​ ​al-Albani​ ​has​ ​come​ ​out​ ​with​ ​an​ ​opinion,​​different​​from​​the​​consensus​​on​​permitting​​women​​to​ ​adorn​​themselves​​with​​gold,​​which​​has​​been​​accepted​​by​​all​​madhahib​​for​​the​​last​​fourteen​​centuries.​​He​ ​7​ ​AL-ALBANI UNVEILED​ ​not​​only​​believes​​that​​the​​Isnad​​of​​these​​Ahadith​​is​​authentic,​​but​​that​​they​​have​​not​​been​​revoked.​​So,​​he​ ​believes,​ ​the​ ​hadith​ ​prohibit​ ​gold​ ​rings​ ​and​ ​earrings.”​ ​So​ ​who​ ​is​ ​the​​one​​who​​violates​​the​​Ijma​​of​​the​ ​Ummah with his extreme opinions?!)​ ​No 17 : (*Pg. 37 no. 1)​ ​Hadith:​​Mahmood​​ibn​​Lubayd​​said,​​“Allah’s​​Messenger​​(Peace​​and​​blessings​​be​​upon​​him)​​was​​informed​ ​about​​a​​man​​who​​had​​divorced​​his​​wife​​3​​times​​(in​​one​​sitting),​​so​​he​​stood​​up​​angrily​​and​​said:​​‘Is​​he​ ​playing​​with​​Allah’s​​book​​whilst​​I​​am​​still​​amongst​​you?’​​Which​​made​​a​​man​​stand​​up​​and​​say,​​‘O​ ​Allah’s Messenger, shall I not kill him?’”​​(​al-Nisai​).​ ​Al-Albani​​declared​​this​​Hadith​​to​​be​​Daeef​​in​​his​​checking​​of​​“​Mishkat​​el-Masabih,​​2/981​,​​3rd​​edition,​ ​Beirut,​​1405​​A.H;​​Maktab​​al-Islami”,​​where​​he​​says:​​“This​​man​​(the​​narrator)​​is​​reliable,​​but​​the​​Isnad​​is​ ​broken or incomplete for he did not hear it directly from his father.”​ ​Al-Albani​ ​then​ ​contradicts​ ​himself​ ​in​ ​the​ ​book​ ​“Ghayatul​ ​Maram​ ​Takhreej​ ​Ahadith​ ​al-Halal​ ​wal​ ​Haram​​no. 261, pg. 164, 3rd Edn, Maktab al-Islami,​​1405 A.H”: by saying it is​​SAHIH!!!​ ​No 18 : (*Pg. 37 no. 2)​ ​Hadith:​​“If​​one​​of​​you​​was​​sleeping​​under​​the​​sun,​​and​​the​​shadow​​covering​​him​​shrank,​​and​​part​​of​ ​him​​was​​in​​the​​shadow​​and​​the​​other​​part​​of​​him​​was​​in​​the​​sun,​​he​​should​​rise​​up.”​​Al-Albani​​declared​ ​this​ ​Hadith​ ​to​ ​be​ ​SAHIH​ ​in​ ​“Sahih​ ​al-Jami​ ​al-Sagheer​ ​wa​ ​Ziyadatuh​ ​(1/266/761)”​,​ ​but​ ​then​ ​contradicts​​himself​​by​​saying​​it​​is​​DAEEF​​in​​his​​checking​​of​​“Mishkat​​ul-Masabih,​​3/1337​​no.​​4725​,​ ​3rd Edn” and he has referred it to the Sunan of Abu Dawood!”​ ​No 19 : (*Pg. 38 no. 3)​ ​Hadith:​​“The​​Friday​​prayer​​is​​obligatory​​on​​every​​Muslim.”​​Al-Albani​​rated​​this​​Hadith​​to​​be​​DAEEF​ ​in​ ​his​ ​checking​ ​of​ ​“Mishkat​ ​al-Masabih,​ ​1/434”​,​ ​and​ ​said:​ ​“Its​ ​narrators​ ​are​ ​reliable​ ​but​ ​it​ ​is​ ​discontinuous​​as​​is​​indicated​​by​​Abu​​Dawood”.​​He​​then​​contradicts​​himself​​in​​“Irwa​​al-Ghalil,​​3/54​​no.​ ​592”​, and says it is​​SAHIH!!!​ ​So beware o wise men!​ ​No 20 : (*Pg. 38 no. 4)​ ​Al-Albani​​has​​made​​another​​contradiction.​​He​​has​​trusted​​Al-Muharrar​​ibn​​Abu​​Hurayra​​in​​one​​place​​and​ ​then​​weakened​​him​​in​​another.​​Al-Albani​​certifies​​in​​“Irwa​​al-Ghalil,​​4/301”​​that​​Muharrar​​is​​a​​trustee​ ​with​​Allah’s​​help,​​and​​Hafiz​​(Ibn​​Hajar)​​saying​​about​​him​​“accepted”,​​is​​not​​accepted,​​and​​therefore​​the​ ​Sanad is​​Sahih​.​ ​He​ ​then​ ​contradicts​ ​himself​ ​in​ ​“Sahihah​ ​4/156”​ ​where​ ​he​ ​makes​ ​the​ ​Sanad​ ​DAEEF​​by​​saying:​​“The​ ​narrators​​in​​the​​Sanad​​are​​all​​Bukhari’s​​(i.e;​​used​​by​​Imam​​al-Bukhari)​​men,​​except​​for​​al-Muharrar​​who​​is​ ​one​ ​of​ ​the​ ​men​ ​of​ ​Nisai​ ​and​ ​Ibn​​Majah​​only.​​He​​was​​not​​trusted​​accept​​by​​Ibn​​Hibban,​​and​​that’s​​why​ ​al-Hafiz Ibn Hajar did not trust him, Instead he only said ‘accepted!’”​ ​So beware of this fraud!​ ​No 21 : (*Pg. 39 no. 5)​ ​8​ ​AL-ALBANI UNVEILED​ ​Hadith:​ ​Abdallah​​ibn​​Amr​​(Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​him):​​“The​​Friday​​prayer​​is​​incumbent​​on​​whoever​ ​heard​ ​the​ ​call”​ ​(​Abu​ ​Dawood​).​ ​Al-Albani​ ​stated​ ​that​ ​this​ ​Hadith​ ​was​ ​HASAN​ ​in​ ​“Irwa​ ​all-Ghalil​ ​3/58”​,he then contradicts himself by saying it is​​DAEEF​​in​​“Mishkatul Masabih 1/434 no. 1375”!!!​ ​No 22 : (*Pg. 39 no. 6)​ ​Hadith:​​Anas​​ibn​​Malik​​(Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​him)​​said​​that​​the​​Prophet​​(Peace​​and​​blessings​​be​​upon​ ​him)​​used​​to​​say:​​“Do​​not​​be​​hard​​on​​yourself,​​otherwise​​Allah​​will​​be​​hard​​on​​you.​​When​​a​​people​ ​were hard on themselves, then Allah was hard on them.”​​(​Abu Dawood​)​ ​Al-Albani​​stated​​that​​this​​Hadith​​was​​DAEEF​​in​​his​​checking​​of​​“Mishkat,​​1/64”​,​​but​​he​​then​​contradicts​ ​himself by saying that this Hadith is​​HASAN​​in​​“Ghayatul​​Maram, pg. 141”!!​ ​No 23 : (*Pg. 40 no. 7)​ ​Hadith​ ​of​ ​Sayyida​ ​Aisha​ ​(Allah​ ​be​​pleased​​with​​her):​​“Whoever​​tells​​you​​that​​the​​Prophet​​(Peace​​be​ ​upon​ ​him)​ ​used​ ​to​ ​urinate​ ​while​ ​standing,​ ​do​ ​not​ ​believe​ ​him.​ ​He​ ​never​ ​urinated​ ​unless​ ​he​ ​was​ ​sitting.”​​(​Ahmad, Nisai and Tirmidhi​)​ ​Al-Albani​​said​​that​​this​​Sanad​​was​​DAEEF​​in​​“Mishkat​​1/117.”​​He​​then​​contradicts​​himself​​by​​saying​​it​ ​is​​SAHIH​​in​​‘Silsilat al-Ahadithal-Sahihah 1/345 no.​​201’!!!​ ​So take a glance dear reader!​ ​No 24 : (*Pg. 40 no. 8)​ ​Hadith:​​“There​​are​​three​​which​​the​​angels​​will​​never​​approach:​​The​​corpse​​of​​a​​disbeliever,​​a​​man​​who​ ​wears ladies perfume, and one who has had sex until he performs ablution.”​​(​Abu Dawood​).​ ​Al-Albani​​corrected​​this​​Hadith​​in​​“Sahih​​al-Jami​​al-Sagheer​​wa​​Ziyadatuh,​​3/71​​no.​​3056”​​by​​saying​ ​it​​was​​HASAN​​in​​the​​checking​​of​​“Al-Targhib​​1/91”​​[Also​​said​​to​​be​​Hasan​​in​​the​​English​​translation​​of​ ​‘The​​Etiquettes​​of​​Marriage​​and​​Wedding,​​pg.​​11].​​He​​then​​makes​​an​​obvious​​contradiction​​by​​saying​​that​ ​the​​same​​Hadith​​was​​DAEEF​​in​​his​​checking​​of​​“Mishkatul-Masabih,​​1/144​​no.​​464”​​and​​says​​that​​the​ ​narrators​​are​​trustworthy​​but​​the​​chain​​is​​broken​​between​​al-Hasanal-Easri​​and​​Ammar​​(Allah​​be​​pleased​ ​with him) as al-Mundhiri had said in al-Targhib (1/91)!!​ ​No 25 : (*Pg. 42 no. 10)​ ​It​​reached​​Malik​​(Rahimahullah)​​that​​Ibn​​Abbas​​(Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​him)​​used​​to​​shorten​​his​​prayer,​​in​ ​distances​ ​such​ ​as​ ​between​ ​Makkah​ ​and​ ​Ta’if​ ​or​ ​between​ ​Makkah​ ​and​ ​Usfan​ ​or​ ​between​ ​Makkah​ ​and​ ​Jeddah....​ ​Al-Albani​​has​​weakened​​it​​in​​“Mishkat,​​1/426​​no.​​1351”​,​​and​​then​​contradicts​​himself​​by​​saying​​it​​is​ ​SAHIH​​in​​“Irwa al-Ghail,3/14”!!​ ​No 26 : (*Pg. 43 no. 12)​ ​Hadith:​​“Leave​​the​​Ethiopians​​as​​long​​as​​they​​leave​​you,​​because​​no​​one​​takes​​out​​the​​treasure​​of​​the​ ​Ka’ba​​except​​the​​one​​with​​the​​two​​weak​​legs​​from​​Ethiopia.”​​Al-Albani​​has​​weakened​​this​​Hadith​​in​​his​ ​checking​ ​of​ ​“Mishkat​ ​3/1495​ ​no.​ ​5429”​ ​by​ ​saying:​ ​“The​ ​Sanad​​is​​DAEEF​.”​​But​​then​​he​​contradicts​ ​himself as is his habit, by correcting it in​​“Sahihah,​​2/415 no. 772.”​ ​9​ ​AL-ALBANI UNVEILED​ ​An example of al-Albani praising someone in one place​ ​and then disparaging him in another place in his books​ ​No 27 : (*Pg. 32)​ ​He​ ​praises​ ​Shaykh​ ​Habib​ ​al-Rahman​ ​al-Azami​ ​in​ ​the​ ​book​ ​‘Sahih​​alTarghib​​wa​​Tarhib​,​​page​​63’,​ ​where​​he​​says:​​“I​​want​​you​​to​​know​​one​​of​​the​​things​​that​​encouraged​​me​​to....​​which​​has​​been​​commented​ ​by​​the​​famous​​and​​respected​​scholar​​Shaykh​​Habib​​al-Rahman​​al-Azami”....​​And​​he​​also​​said​​on​​the​​same​ ​page,​​“And​​what​​made​​me​​more​​anxious​​for​​it,​​is​​that​​its​​checker,​​the​​respected​​Shaykh​​Habib​​al-Rahman​ ​al-Azami has announced....”​ ​Al-Albani​​thus​​praises​​Shaykh​​al-Azami​​in​​the​​above​​mentioned​​book;​​but​​then​​makes​​a​​contradiction​​in​ ​the​ ​introduction​ ​to​ ​‘Adaab​ ​uz​ ​Zufaaf​ ​(The​​Etiquettes​​of​​Marriage​​and​​Wedding),​​new​​edition​​page​​8’,​ ​where​​he​​said:​​“Al-Ansari​​has​​used​​in​​the​​end​​of​​his​​letter,​​one​​of​​the​​enemies​​of​​the​​Sunnah,​​Hadith​​and​ ​Tawhid,​​who​​is​​famous​​for​​that,​​is​​Shaykh​​Habib​​al-Rahman​​al-Azami.....​​For​​his​​cowardliness​​and​​lack​​of​ ​scholarly deduction....”​ ​NB​​-​​(The​​above​​quotation​​from​​Adaab​​uz​​Zufaaf​​is​​not​​found​​in​​the​​English​​translation​​by​​his​​supporters,​ ​which​​shows​​that​​they​​deliberately​​avoided​​translating​​certain​​parts​​of​​the​​whole​​work).​​So​​have​​a​​glance​​at​ ​this!​ ​SELECTED TRANSLATIONS FROM VOLUME 2​ ​No 28 : (*Pg. 143 no. 1)​ ​Hadith​​of​​Abi​​Barza​​(Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​him):​​“By​​Allah,​​you​​will​​not​​find​​a​​man​​more​​just​​than​​me.”​ ​(​Sunan al-Nisai , 7/120 no. 4103​).​ ​Al-Albani​​said​​that​​this​​Hadith​​was​​SAHIH​​in​​“Sahih​​al-Jami​​wa​​Ziyadatuh,​​6/105​​no.​​6978”​,​​and​​then​ ​he astonishingly contradicts himself by saying it is​​DAEEF​​in​​“Daeef Sunan al-Nisai, pg. 164 no. 287.”​ ​So beware of this mess!​ ​No 29 : (*Pg. 144 no.2)​ ​Hadith​​of​​Harmala​​ibn​​Amru​​al-Aslami​​from​​his​​Uncle:​​“Throw​​pebbles​​at​​the​​Jimar​​by​​putting​​the​ ​extremity of the thumb on the fore-finger.”​​(​Sahih​​Ibn Khuzaima, 4/276-277 no. 2874​)​ ​Al-Albani​​acknowledged​​its​​weakness​​in​​“Sahih​​Ibn​​Khuzaima”​​by​​saying​​that​​the​​Sanad​​was​​DAEEF​,​​but​ ​then contradicts himself by saying it is​​SAHIH​​in​​“Sahih al-Jami wa Ziyadatuh, 1/312 no. 923!”​ ​No 30 : (*Pg. 144 no. 3)​ ​Hadith​​of​​Sayyidina​​Jabir​​ibn​​Abdullah​​(Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​him):​​“The​​Prophet​​(Peace​​be​​upon​​him)​ ​was​​asked​​about​​the​​sexually​​defiled​​[Junubi]..​​can​​he​​eat,​​or​​sleep...​​He​​said​​:’Yes,​​when​​this​​person​ ​makes Wudhu.’”​​(​Ibn Khuzaima no. 217 and Ibn Majah​​no. 592​).​ ​Al-Albani​ ​has​ ​admitted​ ​its​ ​weakness​ ​in​ ​his​ ​comments​ ​on​ ​“Ibn​ ​Khuzaima,​ ​1/108​ ​no.​ ​217”​,​ ​but​ ​then​ ​contradicts himself by correcting the above Hadith in​​“Sahih Ibn Majah, 1/96 no. 482”!!​ ​10​ ​AL-ALBANI UNVEILED​ ​No 31 : (*Pg. 145 no. 4)​ ​Hadith​​of​​Aisha​​(Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​her):​​“A​​vessel​​as​​a​​vessel​​and​​food​​as​​food.”​​(​Nisai,​​7/71​​no.​ ​3957​).​ ​Al-Albani​​said​​that​​it​​was​​SAHIH​​in​​“Sahih​​al-Jami​​wa​​Ziyadatuh,​​2/13​​no.​​1462”​,​​but​​then​​contradicts​ ​himself in​​“Daeef Sunan al-Nisai, no .263 pg. 157”​,​​by saying it is​​DAEEF!!!​ ​No 32 : (* Pg. 145 no. 5)​ ​Hadith​​of​​Anas​​(Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​him):​​“Let​​each​​one​​of​​you​​ask​​Allah​​for​​all​​his​​needs,​​even​​for​ ​his sandal thong if it gets cut.”​ ​Al-Albani​ ​said​ ​that​ ​the​ ​above​ ​Hadith​ ​was​ ​HASAN​ ​in​ ​his​ ​checking​ ​of​ ​“Mishkat,​​2/696​​no.​​2251​​and​ ​2252”​, but then contradicts himself in​​“Daeef al-Jami​​wa Ziyadatuh, 5/69 no. 4947 and 4948”!!!​ ​No 33 : (*Pg. 146 no. 6)​ ​Hadith​ ​of​ ​Abu​ ​Dharr​ ​(Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​him):​​“If​​you​​want​​to​​fast,then​​fast​​in​​the​​white​​shining​ ​nights of the 13th, 14th and 15th.”​ ​Al-Albani​​declared​​it​​to​​be​​DAEEF​​in​​“Daeef​​al-Nisai,​​pg.​​84”​​and​​in​​his​​comments​​on​​“Ibn​​Khuzaima,​ ​3/302​​no.​​2127”​,​​but​​then​​contradicts​​himself​​by​​calling​​it​​SAHIH​​in​​“Sahih​​al-Jami​​wa​​Ziyadatuh,​ ​2/10 no. 1448”​​and also corrected it in​​“Sahih al-Nisai,​​3/902 no. 4021”!!​​So what a big contradiction!​ ​NB-​​(Al-Albani​​mentioned​​this​​Hadith​​in​​‘Sahih​​al-Nisai’​​and​​in​​‘Daeef​​al-Nisai’,​​which​​proves​​that​​he​​is​ ​unaware of what he has and is classifying, how inept!)​ ​No 34 : (*Pg. 147 no. 7)​ ​Hadith​​of​​Sayyida​​Maymoonah​​(Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​her):​​“There​​is​​nobody​​who​​has​​taken​​a​​loan​​and​ ​it is in the knowledge of Allah....”​​(​Nisai, 7/315​​and others​).​ ​Al-AIbani​ ​said​ ​in​ ​“Daeef​ ​al-Nisai,​ ​pg.​ ​190”​:​ ​“Sahih,​ ​except​ ​for​ ​the​ ​part​ ​al-Dunya.”​ ​Then​ ​he​ ​contradicts​​himself​​in​​“Sahih​​al-Jami​​wa​​Ziyadatuh,​​5/156”​,​​by​​saying​​that​​the​​whole​​Hadith​​is​​SAHIH,​ ​including the al-Dunya part​. So what an amazing contradiction!​ ​No 35 : (*Pg. 147 no. 8)​ ​Hadith​​of​​Burayda​​(Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​him):​​“Why​​do​​I​​see​​you​​wearing​​the​​jewellery​​of​​the​​people​ ​of​​hell.”​​(Meaning​​the​​Iron​​ring),​​[​Nisai,​​8/172​​and​​others...].​​Al-Albani​​has​​said​​that​​it​​was​​SAHIH​​in​ ​“Sahih​​a-Jami​​wa​​Ziyadatuh,​​5/153​​no.​​5540”​,​​but​​then​​contradicts​​himself​​by​​saying​​it​​is​​DAEEF​​in​ ​“Daeef al-Nisai, pg. 230”!!!​ ​No 36 : (*Pg. 148 no. 9)​ ​Hadith​​of​​Abu​​Hurayra​​(Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​him):​​“Whoever​​buys​​a​​carpet​​to​​sit​​on,​​he​​has​​3​​days​​to​ ​keep it or return it with a cup of dates that are not brownish in colour.”​​(​Nisai 7/254​​and others).​ ​Al-Albani​ ​has​​weakened​​it​​with​​reference​​to​​the​​‘3​​days’​​part​​in​​“Daeef​​Sunan​​al-Nisai,​​pg.​​186”​,​​by​ ​saying:​​“Correct;​​except​​for​​3​​days.”​​But​​the​​‘genius’​​contradicts​​himself​​by​​correcting​​the​​Hadith​ ​and​​approving the ‘3 days’​​part in​​“Sahih al-Jami​​wa Ziyadatuh, 5/220 no. 5804”​.​ ​So wake up (al-Albani)!!​ ​11​ ​AL-ALBANI UNVEILED​ ​No 37 : (*Pg. 148 no. 10)​ ​Hadith​​of​​Abu​​Hurayra​​(Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​him):​​“Whoever​​catches​​a​​single​​Rak’ah​​of​​the​​Friday​ ​prayer​ ​has​ ​caught​ ​(the​ ​whole​ ​prayer).”​ ​(​Nisai​ ​3/112,​ ​Ibn​ ​Majah​ ​1/356​ ​and​ ​others).​ ​Al-Albani​ ​has​ ​weakened​​it​​in​​“Daeef​​Sunan​​al-Nisai,​​no.​​78​​pg.​​49”​,​​where​​he​​said:​​/”Abnormal​​(shadh),​​where​​Friday​ ​is​​mentioned.”​​He​​then​​contradicts​​himself​​by​​saying​​SAHIH​,​​including​​the​​Friday​​part​​in​​“Irwa,​​3/84​​no.​ ​622.”​​May Allah heal you!​ ​AL-ALBANI AND HIS DEFAMATION AND​ ​AUTHENTICATION OF NARRATORS AT WILL!​ ​No 38 : (*Pg. 157 no. 1)​ ​KANAAN IBN ABDULLAH AN-NAHMY​​:-​ ​Al-Albani​​said​​in​​his​​“Sahihah,​​3/481”​​:​​“Kanaan​​is​​considered​​Hasan,​​for​​he​​is​​attested​​by​​Ibn​​Ma’een.”​ ​Al-Albani then contradicts himself by saying,​​“There​​is weakness in Kanaan.”​​(see​​“Daeefah, 4/282”​)!!​ ​No 39 : (*Pg. 158 no. 2)​ ​MAJA’A IBN AL-ZUBAIR​​:-​ ​Al-Albani​ ​has​ ​weakened​​Maja’a​​in​​“Irwa​​al-Ghalil,​​3/242”​,​​by​​saying,​​“This​​is​​a​​weak​​Sanad​​because​ ​Ahmad has said: ‘There is nothing wrong with Maja’a’, and Daraqutni has weakened him…”​ ​Al-Albani​ ​then​ ​made​ ​a​ ​contradiction​ ​in​ ​his​ ​“Sahihah,​ ​1/613”​ ​by​​saying:​​“His​​men​​(the​​narrators)​​are​ ​trusted​​except for Maja’a who is a good narrator of​​Hadith​.” An amazing contradiction!​ ​No 40 : (* Pg. 158 no. 3)​ ​UTBA IBN HAMID AL-DHABI​:-​ ​Al-Albani​​has​​weakened​​him​​in​​“Irwa​​al-Ghalil,​​5/237”​​by​​saying:​​“And​​this​​is​​a​​weak​​(Daeef)​​Sanad​ ​which​​has​​three​​defects....​​the​​second​​defect​​is​​the​​weakness​​of​​al-Dhabi​,​​the​​Hafiz​​said:​​‘A​​truthful​ ​narrator with hallucinations’”.​ ​Al-Albani​​then​​makes​​an​​obvious​​contradiction​​in​​“Sahihah,​​2/432”​,​​where​​he​​said​​about​​a​​Sanad​​which​ ​mentions​ ​Utba:​ ​“And​ ​this​ ​is​ ​a​ ​good​ ​(Hasan)​ ​Sanad​,​​Utba​​ibn​​Hamid​​al-Dhabi​​is​​trustworthy​​but​​has​ ​hallucinations, and the rest of the narrators in the Sanad are trusted.”!!​ ​No 41 : (*Pg. 159 no. 4)​ ​HISHAM IBN SA’AD :-​ ​Al-Albani​​said​​in​​his​​“Sahihah,​​1/325”​:​​“Hisham​​ibn​​Sa’ad​​is​​a​​good​​narrator​​of​​Hadith.”​​He​​then​ ​contradicts​ ​himself​ ​in​ ​“Irwa​ ​al-Ghalil,​ ​1/283”​ ​by​ ​saying:​ ​“But​ ​this​ ​Hisham​ ​has​ ​a​ ​weakness​ ​in​ ​memorizing.”​ ​So what an amazement!!​ ​No 42 : (*Pg. 160 no. 5)​ ​UMAR IBN ALI AL-MUQADDAMI​​:-​ ​Al-Albani​​has​​weakened​​him​​in​​“Sahihah,​​1/371”​,​​where​​he​​said:​​“He​​in​​himself​​is​​trusted​​but​​he​​used​ ​to​​be​​a​​very​​bad​​forger,​​which​​makes​​him​​undependable....”​​Al-Albani​​then​​contradicts​​himself​​again​ ​in​ ​“Sahihah,​ ​2/259”​ ​by​ ​accepting​ ​him​ ​and​ ​describing​ ​him​ ​as​ ​being​ ​trustworthy​ ​from​ ​a​ ​Sanad​ ​which​ ​12​ ​AL-ALBANI UNVEILED​ ​mentions​ ​Umar​ ​ibn​ ​Ali.​ ​Al-Albani​ ​says:​​“Classified​​by​​Hakim,​​who​​said:​​‘A​​Sahih​​Isnad​​(chain​​of​ ​transmission)’,​ ​and​ ​al-Dhahabi​ ​went​ ​along​ ​with​ ​it,​ ​and​ ​it​ ​is​ ​as​ ​they​ ​have​ ​said.”​ ​So​ ​what​ ​an​ ​amazement!!!​ ​No 43 : (*Pg. 160 no. 6)​ ​ALI IBN SA’EED AL-RAZI​:-​ ​Al-Albani​​has​​weakened​​him​​in​​“Irwa,​​7/13”​,​​by​​saying:​​“​They​​have​​said​​nothing​​good​​about​​al-Razi.”​ ​He​​then​​contradicts​​himself​​in​​another​​‘fantastic’​​book​​of​​his,​​“Sahihah,​​4/25”​,​​by​​saying:​​“This​​is​​good​ ​(Hasan) Sanad and the narrators are all trustworthy.”​​So beware !!!​ ​No 44 : (*Pg. 165 no. 13)​ ​RISHDIN IBN SA’AD​​:-​ ​Al-Albani​​said​​in​​his​​“Sahihah,​​3/79”​​:​​"In​​it​​(the​​sanad)​​is​​Rishdin​​ibn​​Sa’ad,​​and​​he​​has​​been​​declared​ ​trustworthy​.”​​But​​then​​he​​contradicts​​himself​​by​​declaring​​him​​to​​be​​DAEEF​​in​​“Daeefah,​​4/53”​;where​ ​he said:​​“And Rishdin ibn Sa’ad is also Daeef.”​​So​​beware!!​ ​No 45 : (*Pg. 161 no. 8)​ ​ASHAATH IBN ISHAQ IBN SA’AD​​:-​ ​What​ ​an​ ​amazing​ ​fellow​ ​this​ ​Shaykh!!​ ​Al-Albani!!​ ​Proves​ ​to​​be.​​He​​said​​in​​“Irwa​​al-Ghalil,​​2/228”​:​ ​“His​​status​​is​​unknown,​​and​​only​​Ibn​​Hibban​​trusted​​him.”​​But​​then​​he​​contradicts​​himself​​by​​his​ ​usual​​habit!​​Because​​he​​only​​transfers​​from​​books​​and​​nothing​​else,​​and​​he​​copies​​without​​knowledge;​​this​ ​is proven in​​“Sahihah, 1/450”​, where he said about​​Ashaath:​​“Trustworthy”​.​ ​So what an amazement!!!​ ​No 46 : (*Pg. 162 no. 9)​ ​IBRAHIM IBN HAANI​:-​ ​The​​honourable!!​​The​​genius!!​​The​​copier!!​​Has​​made​​Ibrahim​​ibn​​Haani​​trustworthy​​in​​one​​place​​and​​has​ ​then​ ​made​ ​him​ ​unknown​ ​in​ ​another.​ ​Al-Albani​ ​said​ ​in​ ​‘Sahihah,​ ​3/426’​:​ ​“Ibrahim​ ​ibn​ ​Haani​ ​is​ ​trustworthy”​,​​but​​then​​he​​contradicts​​himself​​in​​“Daeefah,​​2/225”​,​​by​​saying​​that​​he​​is​​unknown​​and​ ​his Ahadith are refused!!​ ​No 47 : (*Pg. 163 no. 10)​ ​AL-IJLAA IBN ABDULLAH AL-KUFI​:-​ ​Al-Albani​​has​​corrected​​a​​Sanad​​by​​saying​​it​​is​​good​​in​​“Irwa,​​8/7”​,​​with​​the​​words:​​“And​​its​​Sanad​​is​ ​good,​ ​the​ ​narrators​ ​are​ ​trustworthy,​ ​except​ ​for​ ​Ibn​ ​Abdullah​ ​al-Kufi​ ​who​ ​is​ ​truthful.”​ ​He​ ​then​ ​contradicts​ ​himself​ ​by​ ​weakening​ ​the​ ​Sanad​ ​of​ ​a​ ​Hadith​ ​where​​al-Ijlaa​​is​​found​​and​​has​​made​​him​​the​ ​reason​ ​for​ ​declaring​ ​it​ ​DAEEF​ ​(see​ ​‘Daeefah,​ ​4/71’​);​ ​where​ ​he​ ​said:​ ​“Ijlaa​ ​ibn​ ​Abdullah​ ​has​ ​a​ ​weakness.”​ ​Al-Albani​ ​then​ ​quoted​ ​Ibn​ ​al-Jawzi’s​ ​(Rahimahullah)​ ​words​ ​by​ ​saying:​ ​“Al-Ijlaa​ ​did​ ​not​ ​know what he was saying.”!!!​ ​No 48 : (*Pg. 67-69)​ ​ABDULLAH IBN SALIH : KAATIB AL-LAYTH​​:-​ ​Al-Albani​​has​​criticised​​Al-Hafiz​​al-Haythami,​​Al-Hafiz​​al-Suyuti,​​Imam​​Munawi​​and​​the​​Muhaddith​ ​Abul-Fadl​​al-Ghimari​​(Allah’s​​mercy​​be​​upon​​them)​​in​​his​​book​​“Silsilah​​al-Daeefah,​​4/302”​,​​when​ ​checking​​a​​Hadith​​containing​​the​​narrator​​Abdullah​​ibn​​Salih.​​He​​says​​on​​page​​300:​​“How​​could​​Ibn​​Salih​ ​be​​alright​​and​​his​​Hadith​​be​​good,​​even​​though​​he​​has​​got​​many​​mistakes​​and​​is​​of​​little​​awareness,​​which​ ​also made some fraudulent Hadiths enter his books, and he narrates them without knowing about them!”​ ​13​ ​AL-ALBANI UNVEILED​ ​He​ ​has​ ​not​ ​mentioned​ ​that​ ​Abdullah​ ​ibn​ ​Salih​ ​is​ ​one​ ​of​ ​Imam​ ​al-Bukhari’s​ ​men​ ​(i.e.​ ​used​ ​by​ ​al-Bukhari),​ ​because​ ​it​​does​​not​​suit​​his​​mode,​​and​​he​​does​​not​​state​​that​​Ibn​​Ma’een​​and​​some​​of​​the​ ​leading​​critics​​of​​Hadith​​have​​trusted​​him.​​Al-Albani​​has​​contradicted​​himself​​in​​other​​places​​in​​his​​books​ ​by making Hadiths containing Abdullah ibn Salih to be good, and here they are :-​ ​Al-Albani​​said​​in​​“Silsilah​​al-Sahihah,​​3/229”​:​​“And​​so​​the​​Sanad​​is​​good,​​because​​Rashid​​ibn​​Sa’ad​​is​ ​trustworthy​​by​​agreement,​​and​​who​​is​​less​​than​​him​​in​​the​​men​​of​​Sahih,​​and​​there​​is​​also​​Abdullah​​ibn​ ​Salih​​who​​has​​said​​things​​that​​are​​unharmful​​with​​Allah’s​​help!!”​​Al-Albani​​also​​said​​in​​“Sahihah,​ ​2/406”​​about​​a​​Sanad​​which​​contained​​Ibn​​Salih:​​“a​​good​​Sanad​​in​​continuity.”​​And​​again​​in​​“Sahihah​​,​ ​4/647”: “He’s a proof with continuity.”​ ​NB-​​(Shaykh​​Saqqaf​​then​​continued​​with​​some​​important​​advice,​​this​​has​​been​​left​​untranslated​​for​​brevity​ ​but one may refer to the Arabic for further elaboration).​ ​By​​the​​grace​​of​​Allah,​​this​​is​​enough​​from​​the​​books​​of​​Shaykh​​Saqqaf​​to​​convince​​any​​seeker​​of​​the​​truth,​ ​let​​alone​​the​​common​​folk​​who​​have​​little​​knowledge​​of​​the​​science​​of​​Hadith.​​If​​anyone​​is​​interested​​for​ ​hundreds​​of​​other​​similar​​quotes​​from​​Shaykh​​Saqqaf,​​then​​I​​suggest​​you​​write​​to​​the​​following​​address​​to​ ​obtain his book​​Tanaqadat al-Albani al Wadihat​​(The​​Clear Contradictions of al-Albani).​ ​THE IMAM AL-NAWAWI HOUSE​ ​P.O.BOX 925393​ ​AMMAN​ ​JORDAN​ ​[The​​cost​​for​​volume​​1​​is​​$4.00​​US​​plus​​shipping​​and​​the​​cost​​for​​volume​​2​​is​​$7.00​​plus​​shipping].​​Allah​ ​knows best.​ ​HERE ENDS THE QUOTATIONS FROM SHAYKH SAQQAF​ ​This​​has​​been​​just​​48​​selected​​contradictions​​from​​the​​works​​of​​al-Albani,​​as​​derived​​by​​Shaykh​​Saqqaf.​ ​During​​the​​course​​of​​my​​research​​into​​al-Albani’s​​works​​which​​have​​been​​translated​​into​​English​​by​​his​ ​followers​​in​​England,​​I​​myself​​came​​across​​some​​startling​​errors.​​I​​was​​given​​some​​publications​​coming​ ​from​​his​​supporters​​in​​England​​[Jami’at​​Ihyaa​​Minhaaj​​al-Sunnah]​;​​one​​by​​the​​title:​​“Daeef​​Ahadith​​of​ ​Abu​​Dawud’s​​Sunan​​(according​​to​​Shaikh​​al-Albaanee,​​No’s​​according​​to​​the​​English​​Translation​​of​ ​Professor​​Ahmad​​Hasan,​​published​​in​​1411/1991​​C.E.)”​,​​and​​the​​other​​by​​the​​title:​​“Daeef​​Ahadith​​of​ ​an-Nawawi’s​ ​Riyaad-us-Saaliheen​​(according​​to​​the​​checking​​of​​Naasir​​ud-Deen​​Al-Albaani,​​No’s​ ​according to the English Translation of S. M. Madni Abbasi)”​.​ ​I​ ​found​ ​some​ ​serious​ ​contradictions​​when​​I​​cross-referenced​​the​​above​​named​​publications;​​but​​I​ ​content​​myself​​by​​quoting​​just​​two​​of​​the​​contradictions,​​so​​that​​a​​round​​figure​​of​​fifty​​errors​​is​​achieved!​ ​Besides​​these​​errors​​there​​are​​others​​which​​will​​be​​displayed​​in​​the​​following​​pages,​​from​​the​​one​​who​ ​claims​​to​​be​​giving​​us​​the​​most​​‘authentic’​​Sunnah​​through​​his​​‘classifications​​of​​Ahadith’!​​The​​main​ ​aim​​in​​carrying​​out​​the​​latter​​exercise​​is​​for​​the​​benefit​​of​​those​​believers​​who​​do​​not​​and​​can​​not​​read​​the​ ​Arabic​​works​​of​​al-Albani​​for​​one,​​and​​secondly​​to​​give​​the​​opportunity​​to​​any​​doubting​​“Thomas”;​​who​ ​may​​or​​may​​not​​be​​one​​of​​al-Albani’s​​supporters​​at​​the​​time​​of​​reading​​this​​short​​exposition,​​to​​actually​​go​ ​along​ ​and​ ​check​ ​the​ ​references​ ​I​ ​have​​quoted​​from​​(mainly​​in​​English).​​By​​doing​​this,​​Insha’Allah,​​all​ ​doubts​​about​​the​​authenticity​​of​​this​​exposition​​will​​be​​alleviated​​and​​the​​hearts​​of​​those​​who​​doubt​​may​ ​become content! Allah knows best.​ ​14​ ​AL-ALBANI UNVEILED​ ​No 49 :-​ ​Hadith:​​Aisha​​(Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​her)​​reported​​the​​Apostle​​of​​Allah​​(Peace​​and​​blessings​​be​​upon​​him)​ ​as​​saying:​​“Allah​​and​​His​​Angels​​bless​​those​​who​​are​​on​​the​​right​​flanks​​of​​the​​rows​​(in​​prayer).”​​[See​ ​Sunan​​Abu​​Dawood,​​1/676​​pg.​​175,​​English​​ed’n​​and​​Riyadh-us-Saliheen,​​2/1094​​pg.​​548]​.​​When​​I​ ​checked​​the​​authenticity​​of​​the​​above​​Hadith​​by​​using​​the​​list​​“Daeef​​Ahadith​​of​​Abu​​Dawud’s​​Sunan”,​​it​ ​was​​not​​counted​​amongst​​the​​Daeef​​ones,​​which​​means​​to​​the​​user​​of​​this​​list​​that​​the​​above​​Hadith​​is​ ​SAHIH​​(or at least​​HASAN​) according to the checking​​of al-Albani!​ ​But,​​when​​I​​found​​the​​same​​Hadith​​In​​Riyadh-us-Saliheen,​​it​​was​​declared​​to​​be​​DAEEF​​by​​al-Albani.​ ​The​ ​actual​ ​words​ ​used​ ​by​ ​the​ ​author​ ​of​ ​“Daeef​ ​Ahaadith​ ​of​ ​an-Nawawi’s​ ​Riyadh-us-Saliheen”,​ ​was:-​ ​“Al-Albaanee​​brings​​a​​long​​note......​​The​​wording​​(‘upon​​those​​on​​the​​right​​rows’)​​is​​Shaadh​​or​​Munkar​​-the​ ​correct​​narration​​being​​:​​(‘upon​​those​​who​​join​​the​​rows’)​​-see​​Mishkaat,​​no.​​1096,​​“'Daeef​​Abi​​Daud”,​​no.​ ​153…”!!!​ ​NB-​​al-Imam​​Nawawi​​(Allah’s​​mercy​​be​​upon​​him)​​said​​that​​the​​above​​Hadith​​has​​been​​cited​​on​​the​ ​terms of​​Imam Muslim​​by​​Imam Abu Dawood​​(see the above​​reference in ‘Riyadh’).​ ​No 50:-​ ​Hadith:​​Abu​​Umamah​​(Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​him)​​says​​that​​the​​Holy​​Prophet​​(Peace​​be​​upon​​him)​​said:​ ​“A​​person​​who​​did​​not​​take​​part​​in​​jihad​​or​​failed​​to​​equip​​a​​fighter,​​or​​did​​not​​look​​well​​after​​the​ ​family​​of​​a​​fighter,​​would​​be​​severely​​punished​​by​​Allah​​before​​the​​day​​of​​judgement.”​​(​Abu​​Dawood,​ ​2/2497, pg. 693 and Riyadh-us-Saliheen, 2/1348, pg. 643​)​ ​When​ ​I​ ​checked​ ​the​ ​authenticity​​of​​the​​above​​Hadith​​by​​using​​the​​list​​‘Daeef​​Ahadith​​of​​Abu​​Dawud’s​ ​Sunan”,​​it​​was​​not​​listed​​as​​being​​DAEEF​,​​hence​​it​​has​​been​​declared​​to​​be​​SAHIH​​(or​​at​​least​​HASAN​)​ ​in​ ​al-Albani’s​ ​checking​ ​of​ ​Abu​ ​Dawood!​ ​But​ ​when​ ​I​ ​found​ ​the​ ​above​ ​Hadith​ ​in​ ​Riyadh-us-Saliheen,​ ​al-Albani​ ​declared​ ​it​ ​to​ ​be​ ​DAEEF​.​ ​The​ ​actual​ ​words​ ​used​ ​by​ ​the​ ​author​ ​of​ ​‘Da’eef​ ​Ahaadith​ ​of​ ​An-Nawawi’s​​Riyaad-us-Saaliheen’​​was:​​“Its​​isnad​​contains​​al-Waleed​​ibn​​Muslim-a​​mudaliis-​​and​​he​​has​ ​used ‘an-anah’ here (‘from…’). See ‘at-Ta’leeq-ur-Ragheeb’, 2/200.”​ ​NB-​​Imam​​an-Nawawi​​said​​that​​the​​above​​Hadith​​has​​been​​related​​with​​a​​Sahih​​Isnad​,​​besides​​that,​ ​according​ ​to​ ​Shaykh​ ​Shu’ayb​ ​al-Arnaoot​’s​ ​checking​ ​of​ ​the​ ​above​ ​Hadith​ ​in​ ​his​ ​edition​ ​of​ ​Riyadh-us-Saliheen,​ ​the​ ​above​ ​Hadith​ ​is​ ​not​ ​Daeef​ ​(this​ ​information​ ​has​ ​been​ ​derived​ ​from​ ​another​ ​publication​ ​of​ ​‘Jami’at​ ​Ihyaa​ ​Minhaaj​ ​al-Sunnah,​ ​by​ ​the​ ​title​ ​“List​ ​of​ ​Daeef​ ​Ahadiths​ ​in​ ​Riyaad-as-Saliheen​​according​​to​​Shuaib​​Amaoutt,”​​but​​as​​for​​the​​lists​​authenticity,​​I​​say:​​it​​needs​​to​​be​ ​checked). I leave you to decide whose checking you will adopt.​ ​Now​ ​that​ ​I​ ​have​ ​quoted​ ​you​ ​50​ ​mistakes​​of​​al-Albani​​in​​Hadith,​​I​​wish​​to​​delve​​into​​some​​rather​ ​important​​issues​​of​​Fiqh,​​especially​​by​​comparing​​al-Albani’s​​declarations​​with​​the​​views​​of​​other​​authors!​ ​For​​the​​record​​let​​me​​say​​at​​the​​outset,​​that​​most​​of​​the​​opinions​​that​​I​​will​​be​​quoting​​from​​al-Albani​​are​ ​sound​​and​​acceptable​​to​​one​​school​​of​​Fiqh​​or​​another.​​But​​if​​the​​reader​​may​​sometimes​​get​​the​​feeling​ ​that​ ​I​ ​have​ ​inclined​ ​too​ ​much​​towards​​one​​particular​​school,​​then​​I​​have​​only​​done​​so​​to​​defend​​other​ ​sound​​and​​acceptable​​views​​which​​have​​been​​and​​are​​still​​being​​practised​​by​​large​​sections​​of​​theUmmah,​ ​indifference​​to​​the​​views​​of​​al-Albani​​and​​others.​​To​​all​​of​​us,​​more​​than​​one​​view​​should​​be​​acceptable​​if​ ​a​​Mujtahid​​has​​used​​his​​personal​​reasoning​​to​​extract​​a​​ruling​​from​​the​​sources​​of​​the​​Shari’ah;​​since​​this​ ​was​ ​the​ ​attitude​ ​of​ ​the​ ​glorious​ ​Salaf​ ​as-Salihin​ ​(pious​ ​predecessors​ ​of​ ​the​ ​first​​three​​generations​​of​ ​Islam),​​may​​Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​them​​all.​​But​​as​​for​​al-Albani​​and​​the​​generality​​of​​his​​supporters​​they​ ​have​ ​adopted​ ​the​ ​tactless​ ​way​ ​of​​rejecting/criticising​​all​​other​​ways​​‘unacceptable’​​to​​their​​deductions​ ​from the Qur’an and Sunnah as you shall see below. Allah knows best.​ ​15​ ​MOVING THE FINGER IN TASHAHHUD​ ​MOVING THE FINGER IN TASHAHHUD​ ​With​​reference​​to​​al-Albani’s​​recently​​translated​​book​​“The​​Prophet’s​​Prayer​​described​​from​​the​ ​beginning​ ​to​ ​the​ ​end​ ​as​ ​though​ ​you​ ​see​ ​it​ ​(Sifah​ ​Salah-al-Nabee)​,​ ​al-Albani​ ​claimed​ ​(pg.​ ​66):​ ​“Further,​​the​​Hadith​​that​​he​​would​​not​​move​​his​​finger​​does​​not​​have​​an​​authentic​​Isnad​,​​as​​I​​have​ ​explained​​in​​Daeef​​Abi​​Daawood​​(175).​​“But​​when​​I​​looked​​this​​Hadith​​up​​in​​the​​English​​Translation​​of​​the​ ​Sunan​​of​​Imam​​Abu​​Dawood​​(1/984,​​pg.​​252)​​I​​found​​that​​Abdallah​​ibn​​al-Zubair​​(Allah​​be​​pleased​ ​with​ ​him​ ​)​ ​said​ ​:​ ​“The​ ​Prophet​ ​(Peace​ ​be​ ​upon​ ​him)​ ​used​ ​to​ ​point​ ​with​ ​his​ ​finger​ ​(at​ ​the​ ​end​ ​of​ ​Tashahhud) and he would not move it.”​ ​But​​lo​​and​​behold,​​this​​very​​Hadith​​has​​not​​been​​listed​​In​​“Daeef​​Ahadith​​of​​Abu​​Dawud’s​​Sunan”​,​​by​ ​his​​followers;​​which​​means​​to​​the​​user​​of​​this​​list​​that​​this​​Hadith​​is​​acceptable​​to​​them,​​and​​is​​either​​of​ ​the​​rank​​of​​SAHIIH​​or​​HASAN​​to​​the​​user​​of​​this​​list!​​Imam​​Muslim​​(Rahimahullah)​​also​​reported​​Ibn​ ​al-Zubair​ ​(Allah​ ​be​ ​pleased​ ​with​ ​him)​ ​narrating​ ​from​ ​his​ ​father:​ ​“That​​when​​the​​Messenger​​of​​Allah​ ​(Peace​​be​​upon​​him)​​sat​​for​​supplication,​​i.e.​​Tashahhud,​​he​​placed​​his​​right​​hand​​on​​his​​right​​thigh​ ​and​ ​his​ ​left​ ​hand​ ​on​ ​his​ ​left​ ​thigh,​ ​and​ ​pointed​ ​with​ ​his​ ​forefinger,​ ​and​ ​placed​ ​his​ ​thumb​ ​on​ ​his​ ​(middle)​​finger,​​and​​covered​​his​​knee​​with​​the​​palm​​of​​his​​left​​hand.”​​(​Sahih​​Muslim,​​1/1202,​​English​ ​ed’n​)​ ​According​​to​​the​​Hanafi,​​Hanbali​​and​​Shafi’i​​Madhhabs,​​one​​should​​not​​continuously​​make​​supplications​ ​with​​the​​fore-finger.​​It​​is​​written​​in​​the​​English​​translation​​of​​Fiqh-us-Sunnah​,​​by​​As-Sayyid​​Sabiq​,​​(vol.​ ​1,​​pg.​​157):​​“Wa’il​​ibn​​Hajr​​(Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​him)​​reported​​that​​the​​Prophet​​(Peace​​be​​upon​​him)​ ​would​​place​​his​​left​​palm​​on​​his​​left​​thigh​​and​​knee.​​He​​would​​place​​the​​end​​of​​his​​right​​elbow​​upon​ ​his​​right​​thigh​​and​​would​​then​​close​​his​​right​​hand,​​forming​​a​​circle.​​In​​another​​narration​​it​​states,​​he​ ​would​​make​​a​​circle​​with​​his​​middle​​finger​​and​​thumb​​and​​point​​with​​his​​index​​finger,​​and​​(Wa’il)​​saw​ ​him​ ​moving​ ​it​ ​to​ ​make​ ​supplications​ ​(related​ ​by​ ​Ahmad).”​ ​Explaining​ ​the​ ​Hadith,​ ​al-Bayhaqi​ ​(Rahimahullah)​ ​says,​ ​“The​​implication​​of​​‘he​​would​​move​​it’​​is​​that​​he​​would​​point​​with​​it,​​not​​that​​he​ ​would​ ​continue​ ​to​ ​move​ ​it.”​ ​This​ ​would​ ​be​​in​​agreement​​with​​the​​narration​​of​​Ibn​​az-Zubair​​(Allah​​be​ ​pleased​​with​​him),​​who​​reported,​​“The​​Prophet​​(Peace​​be​​upon​​him)​​would​​point​​with​​his​​finger​​while​ ​supplicating,​​and​​he​​would​​not​​move​​it.”​​This​​is​​related​​by​​Abu​​Dawud​​with​​a​​Sahih​​chain​.​​An-Nawawi​ ​also​​mentioned​​it​​(NB​​-​​Both​​Imams​​al-Bayhaqi​​and​​Nawawi​​were​​great​​Shafi’i​​scholars​​of​​Hadith​​who​ ​followed this Hadith of Ibn al-Zubair, besides so many other scholars of Hadith).​ ​Now,​ ​there​​is​​also​​a​​footnote​​(​no​​11​)​​by​​the​​translator​​Jamal​​Zarabozo​​who​​said,​​“In​​his​​notes​​to​ ​Mishkat​​al-Masabih,​​al-Albani​​has​​discussed​​the​​Hadith​​of​​Wa’il​​ibn​​Hajr​​and​​of​​Ibn​​az-Zubair.​​He​​said​​that​ ​the​ ​first​ ​Hadith​ ​has​ ​a​ ​Sahih​ ​chain.​ ​The​ ​narrators​ ​of​ ​the​ ​latter​ ​Hadith​ ​(i.e.​ ​of​ ​Ibn​ ​al-Zubair)​ ​are​ ​all​ ​trustworthy​.​ ​Muharnmad​ ​ibn​ ​Ijlan​ ​(a​ ​narrator​ ​in​ ​the​ ​chain​ ​going​ ​back​ ​to​ ​Ibn​ ​az-Zubair)​ ​has​ ​some​ ​weakness​​due​​to​​his​​memory,​​but​​his​​memory​​was​​not​​so​​poor​​as​​to​​drop​​to​​the​​rank​​of​​Hasan​​(a​​good​ ​Hadith).​​Therefore,​​the​​statement​​recorded​​by​​Sabiq​​that​​the​​chain​​is​​Sahih​​is​​incorrect​​(i.e​​only​​if​​you​ ​accept​​al-Albani’s​​classification​​of​​Hadith);​​The​​important​​words​​in​​the​​latter​​Hadith​​are,​​‘and​​he​​would​ ​not move it.’ According to al-Albani this addition is irregular and rejected (Shadh and munkar).”​ ​And​​I​​say:​​“al-Albani’s​​followers​​have​​not​​said​​that​​it​​is​​Shadh​​and​​munkar​​in​​their​​Daeef​​Ahadith​​of​ ​Abu Dawud’s Sunan​!”​ ​Again​​referring​​to​​Fiqh-us-Sunnah​​(vol.​​1,​​pg.​​158),​​Sabiq​​says:​​“According​​to​​the​​Shafiyyah,​​one​ ​points​ ​with​ ​the​ ​finger​ ​only​ ​once,​ ​when​ ​saying​ ​‘except​ ​Allah’​ ​in​ ​the​ ​statement​ ​bearing​ ​witness.​ ​The​ ​Hanafiyyah​ ​raise​ ​the​ ​finger​ ​in​​the​​denial​​part​​of​​the​​Statement​​(there​​is​​no​​God)​​and​​put​​it​​back​​down​ ​during​ ​the​​confirmation​​part​​(except​​Allah).​​The​​Malikiyyah​​(see​​below​​for​​the​​Maliki​​view)​​move​​the​ ​finger​​to​​the​​left​​and​​to​​the​​right​​until​​they​​finish​​the​​prayer.​​The​​Hanbaliyyah​​point​​with​​the​​finger​​every​ ​time they mention Allah, as a reflection to the oneness of Allah, and they do not move it.”​ ​Another​​two​​Hadith​​on​​this​​issue​​have​​been​​related​​by​​Imam​​Muslim​​(Rahimahullah)​​in​​his​​Sahih​:​ ​“Ibn​​Umar​​(Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​him)​​reported​​that​​when​​the​​Messenger​​of​​Allah​​(Peace​​be​​upon​ ​16​ ​MOVING THE FINGER IN TASHAHHUD​ ​him)​​sat​​for​​the​​tashahhud​​he​​placed​​his​​left​​hand​​on​​his​​left​​knee,​​and​​his​​right​​hand​​on​​his​​right​ ​knee,​​and​​he​​raised​​his​​right​​finger,​​which​​is​​next​​to​​the​​thumb,​​making​​supplication​​in​​this​​way,​​and​ ​he​​stretched​​his​​left​​hand​​on​​his​​left​​knee.​​Another​​version​​on​​the​​authority​​of​​Ibn​​Umar​​(Allah​​be​ ​pleased​​with​​him)​​says:​​When​​the​​Messenger​​of​​Allah​​(Peace​​be​​upon​​him)​​sat​​for​​the​​tashahhud,​​he​ ​placed​​his​​left​​hand​​on​​his​​left​​knee​​and​​placed​​his​​right​​hand​​on​​his​​right​​knee,​​and​​he​​formed​​a​​ring​ ​like​ ​(Arabic​ ​number​ ​53)​ ​and​ ​pointed​ ​with​ ​his​ ​finger​ ​of​ ​attestation​.​ ​(Also)​ ​Ali​ ​ibn​ ​Abd​ ​al-Rahman​ ​al-Mu’awi​ ​reported:​ ​Abdullah​ ​ibn​ ​Umar​ ​(Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​him)​​saw​​me​​playing​​with​​pebbles​ ​during​​prayer.​​After​​finishing​​the​​prayer​​he​​forbade​​me​​(to​​do​​it)​​and​​said:​​Do​​as​​the​​Messenger​​of​ ​Allah​​(Peace​​be​​upon​​him)​​used​​to​​do.​​I​​said:​​How​​did​​Allah’s​​Messenger​​(Peace​​be​​upon​​him)​​do?​​He​ ​said​​that​​he​​(the​​Messenger​​of​​Allah)​​sat​​at​​tashahhud,​​placed​​his​​right​​palm​​on​​the​​right​​thigh​​and​ ​closed​​all​​his​​fingers​​and​​pointed​​with​​the​​help​​of​​the​​finger​​next​​to​​the​​thumb,​​and​​placed​​his​​palm​​on​ ​his right thigh.”​​(​Sahih Muslim, 1/1203-4​, English​​ed’n​)​ ​Imam​ ​Ibn​ ​Abi​ ​Zaid​​al-Qairawani​​(d.​​389​​AH;​​Rahimahullah)​​who​​is​​famed​​with​​the​​title​​‘little​ ​Malik’,​​gave​​the​​view​​of​​the​​Maliki​​Madhhab​​in​​his​​al-Risala​​(pg.​​31)​​in​​the​​following​​words:​​“At​​the​​time​ ​a​​worshipper​​reads​​the​​tashahhud,​​that​​is​​the​​tahiyyah,​​he​​places​​his​​hands​​on​​his​​thighs.​​He​​then​​folds​​the​ ​fingers​ ​of​ ​his​ ​right​ ​hand,​ ​but​ ​he​ ​leaves​ ​his​ ​index​ ​finger​ ​unfolded​ ​and​ ​pointing​ ​forward​ ​with​ ​its​ ​side​ ​pointing​ ​towards​ ​his​​face.​​There​​are​​differences​​of​​opinion​​about​​the​​interpretation​​of​​the​​state​​of​​the​ ​finger.​ ​Some​ ​believe​ ​that​ ​keeping​ ​the​ ​finger​ ​still​ ​signifies​ ​that​ ​Allah​ ​is​ ​one​​God.​​Those​​who​​shake​​it​ ​consider​ ​it​ ​a​ ​club​ ​with​ ​which​ ​to​ ​ward​ ​off​​the​​Satan.​​I​​consider​​that​​the​​interpretation​​of​​that​​is​​that​​it​ ​reminds​​the​​worshipper​​that​​he​​is​​in​​the​​state​​of​​prayer,​​and​​that​​moving​​the​​finger​​shall​​prevent​​him​​from​ ​forgetting​​himself.​​The​​worshipper​​then​​places​​his​​left​​hand​​on​​his​​left​​thigh​​with​​the​​palm​​downwards,​​he​ ​must not move it nor point with it.”​ ​Finally,​​it​​is​​written​​in​​the​​English​​translation​​of​​Umdat​​al​​Salik​​wa​​Uddat​​al-Nasik​​-​​{This​​book​ ​gives​ ​the​ ​Shafi’i​ ​Madhhab’s​ ​views}​ ​(The​ ​Reliance​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Traveller,​ ​by​​Shaykh​​Ahmad​​Ibn​​Naqib​ ​al-Misri​,​ ​d.​ ​769AH/1368​ ​CE;​​Rahimahullah,​​trans.​​Noah​​H.M.​​Keller,​​pg.​​142,​​f8.44):​​“One​​does​​not​ ​move​​it​​while​​it​​is​​thus​​raised​​(Shaykh​​Umar​​Barakat​​said​​in​​his​​commentary​​to​​Umdat​​al-Salik:​​following​ ​the​​Sunnah​​from​​a​​Hadith​​related​​by​​Abu​​Dawud.​​It​​is​​offensive​​to​​move​​it​​here,​​though​​some​​hold​​that​​it​​is​ ​recommended,​​the​​evidence​​for​​which​​is​​also​​from​​the​​Sunnah,​​in​​a​​Hadith​​related​​by​​Bayhaqi,​​who​​states​ ​both Hadiths are rigorously authenticated (Sahih).​ ​Precedence​​is​​given​​to​​the​​former​​Hadith​​(i.e​​of​​Ibn​​Az-Zubair),​​which​​negates​​moving​​the​​finger,​​over​​the​ ​latter​​Hadith,​​which​​affirms​​it,​​because​​scholars​​hold​​that​​what​​is​​sought​​in​​prayer​​is​​lack​​of​​motion,​​and​ ​moving​​it​​diminishes​​one’s​​humility).​​(I​​say:​​al-Albani’s​​comment​​on​​the​​Hadith​​of​​Ibn​​al-Zubair:​​‘Even​​if​ ​it​​were​​authentic,​​it​​is​​negatory,​​while​​the​​Hadith​​above​​is​​affirmatory:​​the​​affirmatory​​takes​​precedence​ ​over​ ​the​​negatory,​​as​​is​​well​​known​​among​​the​​scholars’​​[see​​pg.​​66​​of​​Sifah​​Salah​​an-Nabee]​​is​​of​​no​ ​consequence​​to​​what​​most​​of​​the​​Fuqaha​​(Jurisprudents)​​have​​said​​from​​amongst​​the​​Hanafi,​​Shafi’i​​and​ ​Hanbali​ ​scholars,​ ​but​ ​his​ ​opinion​ ​is​ ​only​ ​supported​ ​by​ ​the​ ​Malikiyyah,​ ​so​ ​do​ ​not​ ​be​ ​confused).​ ​The​ ​Prophet’s​​moving​​it​​was​​merely​​to​​teach​​people​​that​​it​​was​​permissible​​(and​​Shaykh​​Abdal-Wakil​​Durubi​ ​said:​​‘As​​it​​was​​the​​Prophet’s​​(Peace​​be​​upon​​him)​​duty​​to​​distinguish​​for​​his​​Community​​the​​acts​​that​ ​were​​offensive​​from​​those​​that​​were​​unlawful,​​and​​he​​was​​given​​the​​reward​​of​​the​​obligatory​​for​​doing​ ​such​​offensive​​acts’).​​Moreover,​​Bayhaqi​​says​​that​​the​​meaning​​of​​‘moving​​it’​​in​​the​​latter​​Hadith​​is​​simply​ ​raising​​it, so there is no actual contradiction).”​ ​From​ ​the​ ​above​ ​discussion​ ​we​ ​may​ ​briefly​ ​say​ ​in​ ​summary​ ​that​ ​al-Albani​ ​labelled​ ​the​ ​Hadith​​of​ ​Abdallah​​ibn​​al-Zubair​​as​​being​​DAEEF​​according​​to​​what​​he​​said​​in​​'Sifah-Salah​​an-Nabee,​​(pg.​​66),​​but​ ​his​ ​followers​ ​have​ ​not​ ​labelled​ ​it​ ​as​ ​being​ ​DAEEF​ ​in​ ​‘Daeef​ ​Ahadith​ ​of​ ​Abu​ ​Dawud’s​ ​Sunan’!!​ ​Also​ ​according​ ​to​ ​Jamal​ ​Zarabozo’s​ ​quotation​ ​from​ ​al-Albani’s​ ​checking​ ​of​ ​Mishkat​ ​ul-Masabih,​ ​this​ ​same​ ​Hadith​​was​​of​​the​​rank​​of​​HASAN​,​​and​​not​​DAEEF​​as​​he​​had​​said​​in​​‘Daeef​​Abi​​Dawood​​(no​​175)’;​​is​​this​ ​not​​a​​grave​​contradiction?​​We​​should​​rather​​accept​​the​​checking​​of​​such​​great​​memorizers​​of​​Hadith​​like​ ​the Imams Bayhaqi and Nawawi (Allah’s mercy be upon them). Allah knows best.​ ​17​ ​THE PLACING OF HANDS IN PRAYER​ ​THE PLACING OF HANDS IN PRAYER​ ​With​​regard​​to​​the​​placing​​of​​the​​hands​​below​​the​​navel​​in​​Salah​​(see​​Sifah​​Salah​​an-Nabee,​​appendix​​4,​ ​pg.​ ​102-103,​ ​English​ ​ed’n),​ ​al-Albani​ ​has​ ​declared​ ​all​ ​the​​Hadith​​that​​reached​​him​​on​​this​​issue​​to​​be​ ​Daeef,​​due​​to​​the​​presence​​of​​the​​narrator​​Abdar-Rahman​​ibn​​Ishaq​​al-Wasiti​​al-Koofi​.​​This​​may​​be​ ​true​​due​​to​​what​​the​​scholars​​of​​Hadith​​have​​said,​​but​​he​​has​​either​​overlooked​​the​​fact​​that​​there​​are​​many​ ​other​​Ahadith​​which​​order​​the​​placing​​of​​the​​hands​​below​​the​​navel,​​or​​has​​deliberately​​not​​bothered​​to​ ​mention​ ​them​ ​to​​his​​readers​​who​​are​​usually​​unaware​​of​​this​​fact!​​Al-Albani​​claims​​on​​page​​12​​of​​the​ ​same​​book​​:​​“To​​place​​them​​on​​the​​chest​​is​​what​​is​​proved​​in​​the​​Sunnah,​​and​​all​​that​​is​​contrary​​to​​it​​is​ ​either​ ​Daeef​ ​or​ ​totally​ ​baseless​.”​ ​But​ ​he​ ​contradicts​ ​himself​ ​on​​page​​102-103​​of​​the​​same​​book​​by​ ​saying:​​“What​​further​​points​​to​​its​​weakness​​(i.e.​​the​​Hadith​​of​​Abdar-Rahman​​ibn​​Ishaq)​​is​​that​​contrary​​to​ ​it​​has​​been​​narrated​​on​​the​​authority​​of​​Ali​​(Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​him)​​with​​a​​better​​Isnad:​​the​​Hadith​​of​ ​Ibn​​Jareer​​al-Dabbi​​an​​(from)​​his​​father,​​who​​said,​​‘I​​saw​​Ali​​holding​​his​​left​​arm​​with​​his​​right​​on​​the​ ​wrist,​​above​​the​​navel​​(I​​say:​​The​​statement​​above​​the​​navel,​​does​​not​​mean​​the​​chest,​​but​​literally​​above​ ​the​​navel​​and​​below​​the​​chest,​​since​​this​​is​​the​​opinion​​of​​the​​Shafiyyah​​scholars​​like​​Bayhaqi,​​Nawawi,​ ​Muslim​​and​​so​​on)​​-​​this​​Isnad​​is​​a​​candidate​​for​​the​​rank​​of​​HASAN​;​​Baihaqi​​(1/301)​​firmly​​designated​​it​ ​to be Hasan, and Bukhari (1/301) designated it with certainty while giving it an abridged, ta’leeq form.”​ ​Is this not a clear contradiction from within the same book? And this is not all my dear reader...​ ​Al-Albani​​claimed​​that​​it​​was​​found​​in​​Bukhari​​(1/301),​​but​​when​​I​​examined​​the​​Sahih​​al-Bukhari​ ​(Vol.​​1,​​Chapter.​​6,​​no.​​707,​​pg.​​396,​​English​​ed’n),​​I​​did​​not​​find​​this​​narration​​of​​Ibn​​Jarir​​al-Dabbi​​(Allah​ ​be​​pleased​​with​​him),​​but​​instead​​a​​Hadith​​from​​Sahl​​ibn​​Sa’ad​​(Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​him)​​who​​said:​ ​“The​​people​​were​​ordered​​to​​place​​the​​right​​hand​​on​​the​​left​​forearm​​in​​the​​prayer.”​​Abu​​Hazim​​said,​ ​“I​​knew​​that​​the​​order​​was​​from​​the​​Prophet​​(Peace​​be​​upon​​him).”​​[see​​also​​Muwatta​​of​​Imam​​Malik,​ ​section​​9.15,​​no​​50,​​pg​​70​​English​​trans’n​​by​​A.​​Abdarahman​​and​​Y.​​Johnson​​for​​a​​very​​similar​​narration].​ ​According​​to​​the​​author​​of​​Ja’al​​Haqq​,​​Shaykh​​Ahmad​​Khan,​​there​​is​​not​​even​​one​​Hadith​​in​​the​​Sahih​ ​collections of al-Bukhari and Muslim which specify where the hands should be placed!​ ​Now​​you​​have​​just​​read​​above​​that​​al-Albani​​classified​​the​​Hadith​​of​​Ibn​​Jarir​​al-Dabbi​​to​​be​​HASAN​,​ ​but​​when​​I​​found​​this​​very​​Hadith​​in​​the​​Sunan​​of​​Abu​​Dawood​​(1/756,​​pg.​​194,​​English​​ed’n​)​​and​​cross​ ​referenced​ ​it​​to​​the​​list,​​“Daeef​​Ahadith​​of​​Abu​​Dawud’s​​Sunan.”​​I​​found​​that​​his​​followers​​listed​​it​​as​ ​being​​DAEEF!!​​Imam​​Abu​​Dawood​​(Rahimahullah)​​said​​after​​relating​​the​​Hadith​​from​​Ibn​​Jarir​​al-Dabbi:​ ​“Sa’id​​ibn​​Jubair​​narrated​​the​​words:​​‘above​​the​​navel’.​​Abu​​Mijlaz​​reported​​the​​words:​​‘below​​the​​navel’.​ ​This​​has​​also​​been​​narrated​​by​​Abu​​Hurayra​​(Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​him).​​But​​that​​is​​not​​strong.”​​The​​latter​ ​quote is one which al-Albani failed to mention in “Sifah Salah an-Nabee!”​ ​Note​​also​​that​​al-Albani​​said​​with​​regard​​to​​the​​placing​​of​​the​​hands​​on​​the​​chest​​(see​​Sifah​​Salah​ ​an-Nabee,​ ​pg.​ ​12,​ ​in​ ​the​ ​footnote):​ ​“In​ ​fact,​ ​Imam​ ​Ishaq​ ​ibn​ ​Rahwaih​ ​acted​ ​on​ ​this​ ​Sunnah,​ ​as​ ​Marwazi​ ​said​ ​in​ ​‘Masaa’il​​(pg.​​222)​:​​‘Ishaq​​used​​to​​pray​​witr​​with​​us....​​he​​would​​raise​​his​​hands​​in​ ​qunoot,​ ​and​ ​make​ ​the​ ​qunoot​ ​before​ ​bowing,​ ​and​ ​place​ ​his​ ​hands​ ​on​ ​his​ ​breast​ ​or​ ​just​ ​under​ ​his​ ​breast​.’”​ ​But​​when​​I​​read​​the​​footnote​​to​​Abu​​Dawood’s​​Sunan​​(vol.​​1,​​pg.​​194,​​fn.​​345,​​English​​ed’n),​​I​​noticed​ ​that​​the​​author​​of​​Awn​​al​​Mabood​​(1,275),​​Shams​​al-Haqq​​Azimabadi​,​​claimed​​that​​both​​Abu​​Ishaq​ ​al-Marwazi​​and​​al-Hafiz​​Ishaq​​ibn​​Rahwaih​​(one​​of​​Imam​​al​​Bukhari’s​​teachers)​​held​​the​​position​​that​ ​the​ ​hands​ ​should​ ​be​ ​folded​ ​below​ ​the​​navel!​​In​​his​​Sahih​​Muslim​​sharif-Mukhtasar​​Sharh​​Nawawi​ ​(vol.​​2,​​pg.​​28,​​fn.​​23),​​Wahid​​az-Zaman​​(a​​late​​scholar​​of​​the​​‘Salafiyya’​​in​​Pakistan)​​also​​affirmed​​that​ ​the​​Imams​​Sufyan​​al-Thawri,​​Abu​​Hanifah,​​Ishaq​​ibn​​Rahwaih​​and​​Abu​​Ishaq​​al-Marwazi​​(Allah’s​​mercy​​be​ ​upon​ ​them)​ ​all​ ​used​ ​to​ ​place​ ​their​ ​hands​ ​below​ ​the​ ​navel!​ ​So​ ​who​ ​do​ ​you​ ​think​ ​is​ ​quoting​ ​correctly,​ ​al-Albani or al-Azimabadi and az-Zaman?​ ​18​ ​THE PLACING OF HANDS IN PRAYER​ ​Here​​is​​the​​full​​quote​​from​​Abu​​Dawood’s​​Sunan:​​“The​​question​​of​​folding​​hands​​in​​prayer​​below​​the​ ​navel​​is​​disputed​​amongst​​the​​jurists.​​According​​to​​Abu​​Hanifah,​​Sufyan​​al-Thawri,​​Ishaq​​ibn​​Rahwaih,​ ​Abu​ ​Ishaq​ ​al-Marwazi​ ​(I​ ​say:​ ​others​ ​who​ ​held​ ​the​ ​same​ ​view​ ​include​ ​the​ ​Mujtahids​ ​like​ ​Ibrahim​ ​al-Nakhai,​​Hammad​​ibn​​Abi​​Sulayman,​​Abu​​Yusuf,​​Muhammad​​al-Shaybani,​​Zufar​​ibn​​Hudayl​​and​ ​many​​other​​scholars,​​Allah’s​​mercy​​be​​upon​​them),​​the​​hands​​should​​be​​folded​​below​​the​​navel.​​This​ ​tradition​​is​​followed​​by​​them​​(I​​say:​​it​​is​​not​​just​​this​​tradition​​which​​lends​​support​​to​​placing​​the​​hands​ ​below​​the​​navel,​​but​​others​​as​​well).​​According​​to​​al-Shafi’i,​​the​​hands​​should​​be​​placed​​below​​the​​chest​ ​(I​ ​say:​ ​this​​is​​also​​the​​opinion​​of​​Imam​​Muslim​,​​according​​to​​the​​chapter​​heading​​used​​by​​him:​​‘The​ ​placing​​of​​the​​right​​hand​​over​​the​​left​​hand​​after​​the​​first​​takbir​​in​​prayer​​below​​the​​chest​​and​ ​above​​the​​navel​​and​​then​​placing​​them​​opposite​​the​​shoulders​​in​​prostration’​​-see​​Sahih​​Muslim,​​vol.1,​ ​pg.​​220,​​English​​ed’n​).​​Al-Nawawi​​says​​that​​this​​is​​the​​view​​of​​the​​majority​​of​​the​​jurists​​(this​​may​​have​ ​been​​in​​Imam​​Nawawi’s​​day,​​but​​it​​is​​well​​known​​that​​throughout​​the​​centuries​​of​​Islam​​in​​aggregate,​​most​ ​of​​the​​Ulama​​as​​well​​as​​the​​common​​folk​​have​​been​​placing​​their​​hands​​below​​the​​navel,​​by​​Allah’s​​decree​ ​and​ ​will).​ ​Two​ ​statements​ ​have​ ​been​ ​attributed​ ​to​ ​Ahmad​ ​ibn​ ​Hanbal​ ​(see​ ​al-Albani’s​ ​Sifah​ ​Salah​ ​an-Nabee,​ ​footnote​ ​on​ ​pg.​ ​51).​ ​According​ ​to​ ​the​ ​third​ ​view​ ​ascribed​ ​to​ ​him​ ​he​ ​does​ ​not​ ​give​ ​any​ ​preference​​to​​any​​of​​these​​two​​views.​​One​​has​​the​​choice​​of​​placing​​the​​hands.​​Malik​​is​​also​​reported​​to​ ​have​​held​​two​​different​​views.​​According​​to​​the​​second,​​he​​held​​that​​one​​should​​leave​​the​​hands​​in​​their​ ​natural position without folding them. One should not fold them, placing one on the other.”​ ​NB​-​ ​The​ ​most​ ​authoritative​ ​position​ ​of​ ​Imam​ ​Malik​ ​(Rahimahullah)​ ​has​ ​been​ ​recorded​ ​in​ ​al-Mudawwana​ ​al-Kubra​,​ ​by​ ​Qadi​ ​Sahnoon​ ​(d.​ ​240​ ​AH).​ ​This​ ​book​ ​contains​ ​the​ ​most​ ​authentic​ ​positions​ ​of​ ​al-Imam​ ​Malik​ ​and​ ​his​ ​illustrious​ ​disciples,​ ​namely​ ​Imam​ ​ibn​ ​al-Qasim​ ​and​​Imam​​ibn​ ​Wahb​.​​Qadi​​Sahnoon​​recorded​​the​​declarations​​of​​Imam​​Malik​​directly​​from​​Imam​​ibn​​al-Qasim,​​hence​ ​there​​is​​no​​real​​doubt​​in​​my​​mind​​that​​whatever​​has​​been​​recorded​​in​​this​​book​​is​​the​​Madhhab​​of​​al-Imam​ ​Malik,​​and​​usually​​the​​amal​​(practise)​​of​​the​​people​​of​​Madinah​​in​​his​​day.​​In​​al-Mudawwana​​(vol.​​1,​​pg.​ ​75-76),​​Imam​​Malik​​has​​been​​recorded​​to​​have​​said,​​“Putting​​the​​right​​hand​​on​​the​​left​​in​​salah,​​I​​have​ ​no​ ​knowledge​ ​of​ ​it​ ​in​ ​the​ ​compulsory​ ​(Fard)​ ​praver,​ ​it​ ​is​ ​thus​​disliked​​(Makrooh).​​But​​in​​the​ ​supererogatory​​(Nafl)​​prayer​​there​​is​​no​​harm​​(in​​folding​​the​​hands),​​it​​is​​left​​to​​the​​individual​​to​ ​decide.”​​This​​statement​​from​​Imam​​Malik​​is​​a​​strong​​proof​​against​​those​​who​​claim​​that​​Imam​​Malik​​only​ ​prayed​​with​​his​​hands​​at​​his​​sides,​​after​​he​​received​​a​​severe​​beating​​(see​​The​​Evolution​​of​​Fiqh​,​​pg.​​70,​ ​by A.A. Bilal Philips)!​ ​Al-Albani​​has​​only​​‘checked’​​six​​Hadith​​which​​allow​​the​​placing​​of​​the​​hands​​below​​the​​navel​​(see​​his​ ​‘Sifah’,​​pg.​​102,​​Appx.​​4).​​But​​there​​are​​more​​than​​6​​other​​Hadith​​(which​​allow​​the​​placing​​of​​the​​hands​ ​below​​the​​navel)​​which​​he​​has​​not​​bothered​​to​​mention/check;​​maybe​​he​​has​​not​​come​​across​​them!​​One​ ​of​​such​​Hadith​​is​​very​​similar​​to​​what​​al-Albani​​mentioned​​in​​“​Sifah​​Salah​​an-Nabee​,”​​pg.​​11:​​“We,​​the​ ​company​ ​of​ ​Prophets,​ ​have​ ​been​ ​commanded​ ​to​ ​hasten​​the​​breaking​​of​​the​​fast,​​to​​delay​​the​​meal​ ​before​ ​the​ ​fast,​​and​​to​​place​​our​​right​​arms​​on​​our​​left​​arms​​during​​prayer.”​​[from​​Ibn​​Hibban​​and​ ​Diyaa’,​​with​​a​​Sahih​​Isnad​​according​​to​​al-Albani].​​The​​version​​I​​have​​is​​related​​by​​Hadrat​​Ali​​(Allah​​be​ ​pleased​​with​​him):​​“Three​​things​​are​​from​​the​​habits​​of​​Prophethood:​​To​​hasten​​the​​breaking​​of​​the​ ​fast,​​to​​delay​​the​​Sehri​​(pre-fast​​meal)​​as​​late​​as​​possible,and​​to​​place​​one’s​​right​​hand​​on​​top​​of​​the​ ​left hand below the navel.”​​(​transmitted by Hafiz​​Ibn Shaheen​)."​ ​To​​finish,​​As-Sayyid​​Sabiq​​quoted​​Imam​​Tirmidhi​​(Rahimahullah)​​as​​saying​​in​​Fiqh-us-Sunnah​​(vol.​​1,​ ​pg.​​132):​​“Knowledgeable​​Companions​​(Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​them​​all),​​their​​followers​​and​​those​ ​that​​came​​after​​them​​believed​​that​​one​​should​​put​​his​​right​​hand​​over​​the​​left​​during​​prayer,​​while​ ​some say above the navel and others say below the navel.”​ ​19​ ​RAF-UL-YADAYN: THE RAISING OF HANDS IN PRAYER​ ​RAF-UL-YADAYN: THE RAISING OF HANDS IN​ ​PRAYER​ ​Another​​point​​I​​wish​​to​​raise​​concerns​​the​​long​​disputed​​issue​​of​​raising​​the​​hands​​in​​prayer​​(Salah).​​It​ ​is​ ​a​ ​well​ ​known​ ​fact​ ​that​ ​al-Albani​ ​and​ ​the​ ​generality​ ​of​ ​people​ ​amongst​ ​the​ ​‘Salafiyya’​ ​have​ ​made​ ​a​ ​mountain​​out​​of​​a​​molehill,​​and​​have​​brewed​​a​​storm​​in​​a​​teacup​​with​​regards​​to​​this​​issue,​​such​​that​​many​ ​of​​them​​are​​bold​​enough​​to​​accuse​​those​​who​​do​​not​​raise​​their​​hands​​in​​Salah​​(i.e.​​after​​the​​initial​​raising​ ​called​​Takbir-Tahrimah)​​of​​not​​following​​the​​Sunnah,​​as​​well​​as​​going​​to​​the​​disgusting​​length​​of​​openly​ ​detesting and despising those who do not raise their hands after the first Takbir!​ ​I​​must​​also​​admit​​that​​among​​those​​who​​do​​not​​raise​​their​​hands​​in​​the​​subsequent​​stages​​of​​Salah,​ ​usually​ ​the​ ​ignorant​ ​people​ ​have​ ​accused​ ​those​ ​who​​raise​​the​​hands​​in​​the​​other​​stages​​of​​Salah​​to​​be​ ​‘Wahhabis!’​ ​This​ ​is​ ​due​ ​to​ ​ignorance​ ​and​ ​pride​ ​of​ ​both​ ​sides,​ ​which​ ​usually​ ​stems​ ​from​ ​the​ ​lack​ ​of​ ​knowledge​ ​of​ ​the​ ​opinion​ ​of​ ​our​ ​great​ ​Mujtahid​ ​Imams,​ ​and​ ​the​ ​Ahadith​ ​based​​evidences​​used​​by​​the​ ​research​​scholars​​in​​their​​respective​​defence​​of​​either​​raising​​or​​not​​raising​​the​​hands​​in​​the​​other​​stages​ ​of​ ​Salah.​ ​Our​ ​brothers​ ​and​ ​sisters​​who​​accuse​​those​​of​​raising​​the​​hands​​in​​the​​other​​stages​​of​​prayer​ ​should​​ask​​themselves:​​“Were​​the​​great​​Imams​​like​​al-Shafi’i​​and​​Ahmad​​ibn​​Hanbal​​(Allah’s​​mercy​​be​ ​upon​​them)​​Wahhabis?”​​I​​pose​​this​​question​​because​​it​​is​​well​​known​​that​​both​​of​​the​​latter​​named​​Imams​ ​used​ ​to​ ​practise​ ​Raful-Yadayn​ ​after​ ​the​ ​initial​ ​Takbir,​ ​besides​ ​many​​other​​Companions​​and​​successors​ ​(Tabi’een), may Allah be pleased with them all!​ ​It​​is​​a​​well​​known​​fact​​from​​the​​Mutawaatir​​Ahadith​​(a​​report​​of​​a​​large​​number​​of​​narrators​​whose​ ​agreement​​upon​​a​​lie​​is​​inconceivable)​​available​​to​​us,​​that​​the​​Holy​​Prophet​​(Peace​​and​​blessings​​be​​upon​ ​him)​ ​used​ ​to​ ​raise​ ​his​ ​hands​ ​when​ ​pronouncing​ ​the​ ​initial​ ​Takbir​ ​in​ ​Salah.​ ​Sayyid​ ​Sabiq​ ​stated​ ​in​ ​his​ ​Fiqh-us-Sunnah​​(vol.​​1,​​pg.​​129):​​“Says​​Ibn​​al-Mundhir​,​​‘All​​scholars​​agree​​that​​the​​Prophet​​(Peace​​be​ ​upon​ ​him)​ ​raised​ ​his​ ​hands​ ​at​ ​the​ ​beginning​ ​of​ ​his​ ​prayer.’​ ​Commenting​ ​upon​ ​this​ ​report,​ ​Ibn​ ​Hajar​ ​(al-Asqalani)​​says,​​‘The​​Prophet’s​​raising​​his​​hands​​at​​the​​beginning​​of​​his​​prayer​​has​​been​​narrated​​by​ ​fifty​ ​companions,​ ​including​ ​the​ ​ten​ ​who​ ​were​ ​given​ ​the​ ​tidings​ ​of​ ​Paradise.’​ ​Al-Bayhaqi​ ​related​ ​that​ ​al-Hakim​​said,​​“I​​do​​not​​know​​of​​any​​Sunnah​​other​​than​​this​​one​​which​​is​​accepted​​by​​the​​four​​rightly​ ​guided​ ​Khalifahs,​ ​the​ ​ten​ ​companions​ ​who​ ​were​ ​given​ ​the​ ​tidings​ ​of​ ​Paradise,​ ​and​ ​other​​Companions​ ​scattered​​across​​many​​lands.”​​(NB-​​In​​my​​own​​experience,​​the​​only​​people​​I​​have​​met​​who​​do​​not​​raise​ ​their​​hands​​in​​any​​stage​​of​​the​​Salah​​have​​been​​the​​remnants​​of​​a​​Kharijite​​sect​​called​​the​​Ibaadiyah​,​​nor​ ​do they fold their hands in Salah).​ ​Now,​​the​​difference​​in​​opinion​​stems​​on​​the​​question​​of​​whether​​the​​raising​​of​​the​​hands​​is​​necessary​ ​in​ ​the​ ​other​ ​stages​ ​of​ ​Salah,​ ​like​ ​when​ ​going​ ​into​ ​Rukoo,​ ​standing​ ​up​ ​from​ ​Rukoo,​ ​in​ ​between​ ​the​ ​prostrations (sajdah) and when standing up for the third rakah in Salah...​ ​Al-Albani​​said​​in​​“Sifah​​Salah​​an-Nabee,​​pg.​​42,​​fn.​​4”​:​​“The​​raising​​of​​the​​hands​​is​​reported​​as​ ​Mutawaatir​​from​​him​​(Peace​​be​​upon​​him),​​as​​is​​the​​raising​​of​​the​​hands​​on​​straightening​​up​​after​​Rukoo.​ ​It​ ​is​ ​the​ ​Madhhab​ ​of​ ​the​ ​three​ ​Imams​ ​Malik,​ ​Shafi’i​​and​​Ahmad​,​​and​​of​​the​​majority​​of​​scholars​​of​ ​Hadith​​and​​Fiqh.​​Imam​​Malik​​practised​​it​​right​​up​​to​​his​​death,​​as​​reported​​by​​Ibn​​Asakir​​(15/78/2).​ ​Some​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Hanafis​ ​chose​ ​to​ ​do​ ​it,​​among​​them​​Isam​​ibn​​Yusuf​​Abu​​Asamah​​al-Balkhi​​(died.​​210​ ​A.H.), a student of Imam Abu Yusuf, as has been explained in the introduction.”​ ​I​​wish​​to​​say​​to​​the​​bias​​of​​al-Albani,​​“You​​have​​quoted​​a​​portion​​of​​the​​truth​​correctly,​​but​​have​​also​ ​blundered​​in​​one​​of​​your​​opinions!”​​It​​is​​absolutely​​true​​that​​the​​great​​Mujtahid​​Imams​​like​​al-Shafi’i​​and​ ​Ahmad​ ​ibn​ ​Hanbal​ ​(Allah’s​​mercy​​be​​upon​​them)​​recommended​​the​​raising​​of​​the​​hands​​in​​the​​other​ ​subsequent​​stages​​of​​Salah,​​but​​it​​is​​a​​mistake​​to​​say​​that​​the​​great​​Imam​​of​​Madinah,​​Malik​​ibn​​Anas​ ​(Rahimahullah)​​“practised​​it​​right​​up​​to​​his​​death”​​as​​al-Albani​​claims,​​by​​quoting​​from​​Imam​​Ibn​​Asakir​ ​(a​​Shafi’i​​scholar​​of​​Hadith,​​and​​a​​staunch​​defender​​of​​the​​Imam​​Abul​​Hasan​​al-Ashari​,​​he​​wrote​​a​​work​ ​20​ ​RAF-UL-YADAYN: THE RAISING OF HANDS IN PRAYER​ ​entitled​ ​‘The​ ​Exposure​ ​by​ ​al-Imam​ ​Abul​ ​Hasan​ ​al-Ashari​ ​of​ ​Mischievous​ ​untruths’​,​ ​d.​ ​571​ ​AH;​ ​Rahimahullah).​ ​For​​the​​real​​and​​authoritative​​view​​of​​Imam​​Malik​​and​​his​​followers,​​one​​must​​study​​the​​books​​written​ ​by​​the​​Maliki​​Madhhab,​​and​​then​​quote​​their​​opinions!​​I​​say​​this​​due​​to​​the​​sensible​​advice​​given​​to​​me​​by​ ​one​​of​​my​​friends​​in​​a​​written​​communication.​​He​​said:​​“One​​lesson​​you​​should​​learn​​from​​all​​this​​is​​not​ ​to,​​for​​example,​​take​​Hadith​​from​​someone​​who​​is​​mainly​​specialized​​in​​Fiqh​​or​​some​​other​​subject,​​or​ ​take​ ​Hanafi​ ​dalils​ ​(evidences​ ​used​ ​to​​give​​legal​​verdicts)​​from​​someone​​who​​is​​not​​a​​specialist​​in​​the​ ​Hanafi​ ​madhhab’s​ ​methodological​ ​bases​ ​and​ ​evidences,​ ​or​ ​take​ ​a​ ​Hanbali​ ​scholar’s​ ​word​ ​about​ ​some​ ​ruling​ ​in​ ​a​ ​different​ ​madhhab,​ ​or​ ​take​ ​Hadith​ ​knowledge​ ​from​ ​scholars​ ​who​ ​make​ ​large​ ​numbers​ ​of​ ​mistakes, and so on. In general, one does not take an accounting problem to a shoe salesman.”​ ​For​​the​​most​​authentic​​view​​and​​stance​​of​​Imam​​Malik​​(Rahimahullah)​​and​​his​​disciples​​please​​refer​​to​ ​the​ ​appropriate​ ​title​ ​and​ ​discussion​ ​later,​ ​but​ ​as​ ​for​ ​what​ ​al-Albani​ ​quoted​ ​from​ ​Imam​ ​Ibn​ ​Asakir​ ​(Rahimahullah),​​then​​I​​say​​the​​authenticity​​of​​this​​report​​needs​​to​​be​​checked,​​since​​al-Albani​​has​​failed​​to​ ​classify​​it​​himself​​in​​his​​“Sifah​​Salah​​an-Nabee,”​​(does​​this​​not​​mean​​that​​he​​wants​​his​​readers​​to​​‘blindly’​ ​accept​​his​​verdicts?),​​and​​even​​if​​Hafiz​​Ibn​​Asakir’s​​reference​​proves​​to​​be​​Sahih,​​then​​there​​is​​no​​doubt​​in​ ​my​​mind​​that​​this​​statement​​coming​​from​​Imam​​Malik​​must​​be​​rejected​​in​​favour​​of​​the​​real​​position​​of​ ​Imam​ ​Malik​ ​himself.​ ​The​ ​statements​ ​that​ ​I​ ​shall​ ​be​ ​quoting​ ​in​ ​favour​ ​of​ ​Imam​ ​Malik’s​ ​authoritative​ ​opinion,​​comes​​directly​​from​​his​​most​​famous​​disciples,​​whereas​​the​​reference​​coming​​from​​Ibn​​Asakir​ ​as​​given​​by​​al-Albani,​​was​​recorded​​well​​over​​300​​years​​after​​the​​death​​of​​Imam​​Malik​​(NB-​​Imam​​Malik​ ​passed away in the year 179 AH; while Imam Ibn Asakir was born in the year 499 AH)!​ ​As​​you​​have​​read​​above​​al-Albani​​stated​​that​​the​​Imams​​Shafi’i​​and​​Ibn​​Hanbal​​(Allah’s​​mercy​​be​​upon​ ​them)​ ​performed​ ​Raful-Yadayn,​ ​but​ ​one​ ​should​ ​also​ ​know​ ​that​ ​on​ ​the​ ​other​ ​hand,​​the​​great​​Mujtahids​ ​amongst​​our​​Pious-Predecessors,​​like​​Abu​​Hanifah,​​Hammad​​ibn​​Abi​​Sulayman,​​Ibrahim​​al-Nakhai,​ ​Alqama,​ ​Aswad​ ​(two​ ​famous​ ​disciples​ ​of​ ​the​ ​great​ ​Companion​ ​Abdallah​ ​ibn​ ​Masood),​ ​Abu​ ​Yusuf,​ ​Muhammad​​al-Shaybani,​​Sufyan​​al-Thawri​​and​​many​​other​​Ulama​​(Allah’s​​mercy​​be​​upon​​them​​all)​​did​ ​not​​perform​​Raful-Yadayn,​​except​​in​​the​​initial​​Takbir,​​based​​on​​many​​sound​​chains​​of​​narration!​​So​​you​ ​may now ask: “Why the difference of opinion?”​ ​The​​answer​​to​​this​​small​​problem​​is​​simple;​​it​​is​​only​​due​​to​​preference​​given​​to​​the​​derived​​Ijtihad​​of​ ​the​​available​​Ahadith​​on​​this​​subject,​​by​​individual​​Mujtahids​​of​​the​​highest​​scholarly​​rank,​​and​​not​​that​​of​ ​the​ ​laity​ ​amongst​ ​the​ ​general​ ​masses​ ​of​ ​this​ ​Ummah.​ ​Since​ ​many​ ​a​ ​scholar​ ​has​ ​said​ ​that​ ​it​ ​is​ ​impermissible​​to​​derive​​legal​​verdicts​​from​​the​​Qur’an​​and​​Sunnah,​​if​​one​​is​​not​​qualified​​to​​do​​Ijtihad​ ​(see​​the​​section​​on​​Taqleed),​​but​​conversely,​​what​​do​​we​​see​​today​​(see​​later)?​​The​​Imams​​who​​held​​the​ ​view​ ​that​ ​Raful-Yadayn​ ​is​ ​unnecessary,​ ​besides​ ​the​ ​initial​ ​Takbir,​ ​have​ ​based​ ​their​ ​views​ ​from​ ​many​ ​authentic​​Ahadith​​coming​​from​​the​​Holy​​Prophet​​(Peace​​and​​blessings​​be​​upon​​him),​​as​​well​​as​​directly​ ​from the great Companions (May Allah be pleased with them all).​ ​The​​fact​​of​​the​​matter​​is,​​that​​in​​their​​view​​the​​practise​​of​​performing​​Raful-Yadayn​​in​​the​​other​​stages​ ​of​ ​prayer​ ​have​ ​been​ ​abrogated,​ ​and​ ​hence​ ​unnecessary​ ​in​ ​performance.​ ​Contrary​ ​to​ ​this,​ ​Imams​ ​like​ ​al-Shafi’i,​​Ibn​​Hanbal....​​believe​​it​​to​​be​​desirable​​to​​perform​​Raful-Yadayn,​​and​​in​​their​​view​​the​​practise​ ​has​​not​​been​​abrogated.​​Consequently,​​many​​of​​the​​well​​known​​and​​wise​​research​​scholars​​have​​said​​that​ ​one’s​​Salah​​is​​correct​​and​​acceptable​​by​​the​​practice​​of​​either​​mode!​​So​​please​​do​​not​​fall​​into​​the​​abyss​ ​of​ ​ignorance,​ ​by​ ​accusing​ ​and​ ​abusing​ ​each​ ​other​ ​of​ ​performing​ ​Salah​ ​incorrectly,​ ​since​ ​it​ ​was​ ​not​ ​generally​​the​​way​​of​​our​​foremost​​Mujtahids​​of​​the​​pious​​generations​​(see​​the​​discussion​​between​​Imam​ ​al-Azam Abu Hanifah and Imam al-Awzai later)!​ ​Al-Albani​​has​​said​​that​​some​​of​​the​​Hanafis​​like​​Shaykh​​Isam​​ibn​​Yusuf​​al-Balkhi​​(Rahimahullah)​​chose​ ​to​ ​perform​ ​Raful-Yadayn​ ​because​ ​he​ ​did​ ​not​ ​know​ ​the​ ​evidence​ ​of​ ​his​ ​Imams​ ​who​ ​held​​the​​view​​that​ ​Raful-Yadayn​​was​​unnecessary​​after​​the​​initial​​Takbir​​(See​​“Sifah​​Salah​​an-Nabee,​​pg​​xvii,”​​and​​also​​“The​ ​Evolution​​of​​Fiqh,​​pg.​​126”​,​​by​​A.A.​​Bilal​​Philips).​​I​​find​​it​​strange​​that​​Shaykh​​Isam​​ibn​​Yusuf​​did​​not​ ​21​ ​RAF-UL-YADAYN: THE RAISING OF HANDS IN PRAYER​ ​know​​the​​evidence​​for​​not​​performing​​Raful-Yadayn,​​since​​by​​simple​​logic​​one​​can​​deduce​​the​​fact​​that​​he​ ​must​ ​have​ ​seen​ ​his​ ​two​ ​main​ ​Imams​ ​(Muhammad​ ​al-Shaybani​ ​and​ ​Abu​ ​Yusuf)​ ​not​ ​performing​ ​Raful-Yadayn,​​and​​hence​​he​​must​​have​​been​​curious​​enough​​to​​ask​​his​​Imams​​for​​the​​evidence​​they​​used​ ​for​ ​not​ ​performing​​Raful-Yadayn!​​What​​seems​​more​​apt​​in​​a​​situation​​like​​this,​​is​​to​​say​​that​​probably​ ​Shaykh​​Isam​​ibn​​Yusuf​​felt​​that​​the​​evidence​​for​​performing​​Raful-Yadayn​​was​​more​​convincing​​to​​him,​ ​than the converse evidence for not performing Raful-Yadayn, and Allah knows best.​ ​One​​lesson​​which​​can​​be​​learnt​​from​​this​​incident,​​is​​that​​if​​Shaykh​​Isam​​ibn​​Yusuf​​was​​a​​Mujtahid​ ​within​​the​​Hanafi​​school,​​then​​like​​all​​other​​Mujtahid​​scholars​​it​​is​​incumbent​​on​​him​​to​​follow​​his​​own​ ​Ijtihad,​​even​​if​​it​​has​​at​​times​​contradicted​​the​​founder​​of​​the​​Madhhab​​he​​belonged​​to.​​Thus,​​Shaykh​​Isam​ ​had​​to​​follow​​his​​own​​Ijtihad.​​The​​proof​​for​​what​​I​​have​​just​​said​​has​​been​​agreed​​upon​​by​​most​​of​​the​ ​scholars​​who​​were​​specialized​​in​​the​​fundamentals​​(Usool)​​of​​Islam.​​For​​example,​​it​​is​​written​​in​​the​​book​ ​‘Principles​​of​​Islamic​​Jurisprudence’​,​​by​​Mohammad​​Hashim​​Kamali​​(pg.​​370):​​“The​​Ulema​​of​​Usul​ ​are​​in​​agreement​​that​​the​​Mujtahid​​is​​bound​​by​​the​​result​​of​​his​​own​​Ijtihad.​​Once​​he​​has​​deduced​​the​ ​ruling​​on​​a​​particular​​issue​​which​​is​​founded​​in​​his​​true​​conviction​​and​​belief,​​he​​may​​not​​imitate​ ​(Taqleed)​ ​other​ ​Mujtahids​ ​on​ ​that​ ​matter​ ​regardless​ ​as​ ​to​ ​whether​ ​they​ ​agree​ ​with​ ​him​ ​or​ ​otherwise​.​​For​​the​​Mujtahid,​​the​​conclusion​​that​​he​​reaches​​is​​tantamount​​to​​a​​divine​​command​​which​​he​ ​must​​observe.​​It​​is​​therefore​​unlawful​​for​​him​​to​​abandon​​it​​or​​to​​follow​​anyone​​else​​in​​respect​​of​​it.​​But​ ​if​​he​​had​​not​​rendered​​his​​own​​Ijtihad​​on​​an​​issue​​which​​is​​not​​urgent,​​and​​he​​has​​time​​to​​investigate,​​then​ ​according​​to​​some​​ulema​​he​​may​​imitate​​other​​Mujtahids.​​However,​​the​​preferred​​view​​is​​that​​he​​must​ ​avoid​​taqleed,​​even​​of​​one​​who​​might​​be​​more​​learned​​than​​him.​​Only​​the​​ammi​​(layman/non-Mujtahids)​ ​who​​is​​incapable​​of​​Ijtihad​​is​​allowed​​to​​follow​​the​​opinion​​of​​others.”​​(The​​above​​author​​has​​quoted​ ​from​ ​Imam​ ​Ghazzali’s​ ​Mustasfa​,​ ​vol.​ ​2​ ​pg.​ ​121;​ ​Imam​ ​Amidi’s​ ​Ihkam​,​ ​vol.​ ​4​ ​pg.​ ​204​ ​and​ ​from​ ​al-Kassab’s​​Adwa​, pg. 119).​ ​The​​above​​quote​​clears​​some​​of​​the​​misconceptions​​held​​by​​some​​people​​on​​the​​role​​of​​Mujtahids​​in​ ​Islam.​​For​​example,​​some​​people​​who​​try​​to​​refute​​the​​Taqleed​​of​​the​​Mujtahids,​​bring​​forward​​examples​ ​in​​which​​the​​disciples​​of​​the​​four​​main​​Imams​​contradicted​​the​​Ijtihad​​of​​their​​Masters​​on​​certain​​points.​ ​These​​people​​should​​always​​remember​​that​​if​​a​​disciple​​contradicts​​the​​opinion​​of​​his​​master,​​then​​this​​is​ ​the​​result​​of​​the​​natural​​prerogative​​bestowed​​upon​​him,​​when​​he​​attained​​the​​high​​and​​honourable​​grade​​of​ ​Ijtihad.​​There​​is​​a​​well​​known​​story​​related​​from​​the​​great​​Imam​​Abu​​Hanifah​​(d.​​150​​AH;​​Rahimahullah),​ ​who​ ​said:​ ​“I​ ​follow​ ​the​ ​book​ ​of​ ​Allah,​ ​and​ ​if​ ​I​ ​find​ ​no​ ​solution​ ​there,​ ​I​ ​follow​ ​the​ ​Sunnah​​of​​The​ ​Prophet​ ​(peace​ ​be​ ​upon​ ​him).​ ​If​ ​I​ ​find​ ​no​ ​solution​ ​in​ ​either​ ​the​ ​Qur’an​ ​or​ ​the​ ​Sunnah,​ ​I​ ​follow​ ​whichever​​of​​the​​pronouncements​​of​​the​​Sahabah​​I​​prefer,​​and​​leave​​whichever​​I​​wish.​​If​​there​​is​​a​ ​pronouncement​​on​​a​​particular​​matter​​by​​any​​of​​the​​Sahabah,​​I​​would​​not​​adopt​​any​​other​​made​​by​ ​any​​other​​scholar.​​But,​​if​​I​​found​​a​​solution​​only​​in​​the​​opinions​​of​​Ibrahim​​(al-Nakhai),​​al-Shabi,​​Ibn​ ​Sirin,​ ​Hasan​​al-Basri,​​Ata​​(ibn​​Abi​​Rabah)​​or​​Sa’eed​​ibn​​al-Musayyib​​(they​​were​​all​​Mujtahids),​​I​ ​would​ ​make​ ​Ijtihad​ ​just​ ​as​ ​they​ ​did​.”​ ​(vide:​ ​“Usul​ ​al-Fiqh​ ​al-Islami,”​ ​pg.​ ​64,​ ​by​ ​Taha​ ​Jabir​ ​al-Alwani​,​​who​​reported​​this​​account​​from​​Tarikh​​Baghdad​,​​vol.​​xxxi,​​pg.​​368,​​al-Intiqa​​of​​Ibn​​Abdal​ ​Barr, pg. 142, and​​Mashayikh Balkh al-Hanafiyah​, pg.​​190).​ ​This​​report​​exemplifies​​the​​prerogative​​of​​a​​Mujtahid,​​as​​well​​as​​why​​Shaykh​​Isam​​ibn​​Yusuf​​may​​have​ ​held​​different​​opinions​​from​​his​​Masters.​​I​​must​​stress,​​the​​above​​discussion​​only​​refers​​to​​those​​who​​can​ ​perform​​Ijtihad,​​and​​not​​to​​those​​who​​are​​unable​​to​​fulfil​​the​​conditions​​recognized​​by​​the​​scholars​​of​ ​Usool​​for​​carrying​​out​​the​​duties​​of​​a​​Mujtahid.​​Those​​who​​are​​not​​Mujtahids​​are​​bound​​to​​the​​opinions​​of​ ​qualified Mujtahids, and this is Taqleed.​ ​Al-Albani​​said​​in​​‘Sifah​​Salah​​an-Nabee’​,​​(pg.​​105-6):​​“About​​raising​​the​​hands​​on​​going​​into​​Ruku​ ​and​ ​rising​ ​from​ ​it,​ ​many​ ​Ahadith​ ​have​ ​been​ ​narrated​ ​from​ ​the​ ​Prophet​​(Peace​​be​​upon​​him):​​they​​are​ ​actually​​mutawaatir​​in​​the​​eyes​​of​​the​​scholars;​​in​​fact,​​raising​​the​​hands​​with​​every​​takbir​​is​​proven​​on​​his​ ​authority​​in​​many​​Ahadith;​​whereas​​not​​raising​​the​​hands​​is​​not​​authentically​​related​​from​​him​​except​ ​once​ ​via​ ​Abdallah​ ​ibn​ ​Masood​ ​(Allah​ ​be​ ​pleased​ ​with​ ​him),​ ​but​ ​this​ ​is​​not​​suitable​​for​​putting​​into​ ​22​ ​RAF-UL-YADAYN: THE RAISING OF HANDS IN PRAYER​ ​practise,​​for​​it​​is​​naaf​​(negatory).​​It​​is​​firmly​​established,​​in​​the​​eyes​​of​​the​​Hanafis​​and​​others,​​that​​the​ ​muthbit​​(affirmatory)​​takes​​precedence​​over​​the​​naaf​​(negatory);​​this​​is​​even​​when​​the​​affirmatory​​is​​on​ ​its​ ​own,​ ​let​ ​alone​ ​the​ ​case​ ​when​ ​it​ ​is​ ​a​ ​multitude​ ​of​ ​narrations,​ ​as​ ​in​ ​this​ ​issue!​​On​​the​​basis​​of​​this​ ​principle,​​and​​in​​the​​absence​​of​​anything​​contrary,​​this​​renders​​it​​binding​​on​​them​​to​​adopt​​the​​raising​​of​ ​the​​hands,​​and​​not​​to​​stick​​zealously​​to​​the​​Madhhab​​after​​the​​establishment​​of​​proof.​​However,​​it​​is​​a​​pity​ ​that​​only​​a​​handful​​of​​the​​earlier​​or​​later​​ones​​have​​adopted​​it,​​so​​much​​so​​that​​not​​raising​​the​​hands​​has​ ​become a landmark for them!​”​ ​The​​above​​quote​​shows​​the​​limited​​and​​superficial​​knowledge​​of​​al-Albani,​​in​​the​​evidences​​used​​by​​the​ ​Hanafi​​scholars​​for​​not​​performing​​Raful-Yadayn!​​It​​is​​true​​that​​the​​Ahadith​​confirming​​Raful-Yadayn​​are​ ​Mutawaatir,​​but​​what​​the​​reader​​should​​also​​know,​​is​​that​​not​​performing​​it​​has​​also​​come​​down​​to​​us​​in​​a​ ​Mutawaatir​​way!​​In​​fact​​there​​are​​more​​than​​50​​Ahadith​​proving​​the​​converse​​of​​what​​the​​“great​​scholar,”​ ​al-Albani holds, as well as those who bolster his claims!​ ​Al-Albani​​claims​​that​​not​​raising​​the​​hands​​has​​come​​to​​us​​authentically​​only,​​“once​​through​​Abdallah​ ​ibn​ ​Masood,​ ​but​ ​this​ ​is​ ​not​ ​suitable​ ​for​ ​putting​ ​into​ ​practise.”​ ​To​ ​which​ ​I​​reply,​​why​​should​​it​​not​​be​ ​possible​​to​​put​​into​​practise​​the​​Hadith​​related​​by​​the​​great​​Companion​​Ibn​​Masood​​(Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​ ​him)? Did he (Allah forbid) lie or fabricate from the Prophet (Peace be upon him)?​ ​Please​​do​​not​​forget​​that​​there​​are​​many​​other​​authentic​​Ahadith​​to​​back​​up​​the​​opinion​​of​​the​​Hanafis​ ​(and​​Malikis)!​​Al-Albani​​only​​explains​​this​​Hadith​​of​​Ibn​​Masood​​away​​by​​bringing​​in​​the​​jurisprudential​ ​principle​​of,​​“the​​affirmative​​takes​​precedence​​over​​the​​negatory”,​​but​​his​​argument​​is​​fallacious​​in​​this​ ​case,​ ​since​ ​I​ ​have​ ​already​​said​​that​​the​​Hanafis​​believe​​that​​the​​performance​​of​​Raful-Yadayn​​has​​been​ ​abrogated​​by​​many​​other​​Ahadith,​​hence​​the​​above​​principle​​is​​inapplicable​​in​​this​​case!​​He​​claims​​the​ ​Hadith​​from​​Ibn​​Masood​​(Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​him)​​has​​been​​only​​related​​authentically​​once.​​I​​say​​this​​is​ ​incorrect,​​and​​only​​due​​to​​his​​ignorance​​of​​all​​the​​available​​routes​​(Asanid)​​coming​​from​​Ibn​​Masood.​​As​ ​far​ ​as​ ​I​ ​know​ ​he​ ​has​ ​not​ ​listed​ ​the​ ​Hadith​ ​of​ ​Ibn​ ​Masood​ ​to​ ​be​ ​Daeef,​ ​in​​his​​checking​​of​​Imam​​Abu​ ​Dawood’s​ ​Sunan,​ ​since​ ​his​ ​followers​ ​have​ ​not​ ​recorded​ ​it​ ​in​ ​their​ ​“Daeef​ ​Ahadith​ ​of​ ​Abu​ ​Dawud’s​ ​Sunan”​.​ ​The​​Hadith​​in​​question​​is​​from​​Alqamah​​(Rahimahullah),​​who​​said:​​“Abdallah​​ibn​​Masood​​(Allah​​be​ ​pleased​​with​​him)​​said:​​‘Should​​I​​pray​​in​​the​​way​​the​​Apostle​​of​​Allah​​(Peace​​be​​upon​​him)​​had​​performed​ ​it?’​​He​​said:​​‘He​​prayed,​​raising​​his​​hands​​only​​once​.’”​​[​Abu​​Dawood​,​​1/747,​​pg.​​193,​​English​​ed’n].​ ​Since​ ​it​ ​has​ ​not​ ​been​ ​listed​​in​​the​​above​​mentioned​​publication,​​this​​means​​that​​the​​above​​narration​​is​ ​either​ ​Sahih​,​ ​or​ ​at​ ​least​ ​Hasan​ ​to​ ​the​ ​user​ ​of​ ​the​ ​list.​ ​Note​ ​also,​ ​according​ ​to​ ​Shams​ ​al-Haqq​ ​Azimabadi​,​​in​​his​​book​​Awn​​al-Mabood​​(1,272-73),​​the​​above​​Hadith​​was​​regarded​​to​​be​​Hasan​​by​​Hafiz​ ​Ibn​ ​Ma’een​ ​(Rahimahullah),​ ​and​​it​​is​​well​​known​​that​​Imam​​Tirmnidhi​​(Rahimahullah)​​rated​​it​​to​​be​ ​Hasan​​(see​​Sunan al Tirmidhi​, 2/257, pg. 40-41, edited​​by Ahmad Muhammad Shakir).​ ​The​​above​​Hadith​​has​​been​​related​​from​​Imam​​al-Azam​​Abu​​Hanifah​​(Rahimahullah),​​through​​an​ ​absolutely​ ​SAHIH​ ​chain​ ​(all​ ​the​ ​narratives​ ​given​ ​below​ ​were​ ​well​ ​known​ ​Mujtahids​ ​and​ ​absolutely​ ​truthful),​ ​and​ ​here​ ​it​​is:​​Imam​​Abu​​Hanifah​​(Rahimahullah)​​has​​related​​to​​us​​from​​his​​teacher,​​Imam​ ​Hammad​​ibn​​Abi​​Sulayman​​(Rahimahullah),​​who​​related​​from​​his​​teacher,​​Imam​​Ibrahim​​al-Nakhai​ ​(Rahimahullah),​​who​​related​​from​​his​​two​​teachers​​Imam​​Alqamah​​and​​Imam​​Aswad​​(Allah’s​​mercy​​be​ ​upon​​them),​​the​​two​​distinguished​​pupils​​of​​Ibn​​Masood​​(Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​him),​​who​​related​​from​​Ibn​ ​Masood​​(Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​him),​​who​​related​​from​​the​​Holy​​Prophet​​(Peace​​and​​blessings​​be​​upon​ ​him).​​The​​reference​​for​​this​​is​​given​​after​​the​​discussion​​between​​Imam​​Abu​​Hanifah​​and​​Imam​​al-Awzai​ ​(Allah’s​ ​mercy​ ​be​​upon​​them),​​please​​see​​below.​​So​​my​​dear​​reader,​​I​​have​​just​​proven​​to​​you​​that​​the​ ​Hadith​ ​from​ ​Ibn​ ​Masood​ ​has​ ​come​ ​to​ ​us​ ​authentically,​ ​through​ ​at​​least​​two​​authentic​​routes,​​as​​given​ ​above. Can you now believe in al-Albani’s assertion that it has only come through one authentic narration?​ ​As​​for​​al-Albani​​saying,​​“However,​​it​​is​​a​​pity​​that​​only​​a​​handful​​of​​the​​earlier​​or​​later​​ones​​(i.e.​ ​Hanafis)​​have​​adopted​​it,​​so​​much​​so​​that​​not​​raising​​the​​hands​​has​​become​​a​​landmark​​for​​them​!”​​I​ ​say​​this​​statement​​is​​due​​to​​his​​ignorance,​​lack​​of​​scholarly​​deduction​​and​​knowledge​​of​​the​​principles​​and​ ​23​ ​RAF-UL-YADAYN: THE RAISING OF HANDS IN PRAYER​ ​proofs​​held​​by​​the​​Hanafis!​​He​​claims​​that​​it​​has​​become​​a​​“landmark”,​​for​​the​​Hanafis​​only!​​I​​say,​​“O​ ​‘Shaykh’,​ ​have​ ​you​ ​not​ ​contradicted​ ​yourself​​by​​admitting​​that​​others​​besides​​the​​Hanafis​​do​​not​​raise​ ​their​​hands​​in​​Salah​​in​​the​​same​​book?”​​Here​​is​​al-Albani’s​​admission​​that​​it​​is​​not​​just​​the​​Hanafis​​who​ ​have​​made​​it​​a​​“landmark”;​​he​​said​​in​​“Sifah​​Salah​​an-Nabee,”​​(footnotes​​to​​pg.​​91):​​“The​​Ibaadiyyah​​have​ ​distorted​​this​​hadeeth:​​their​​scholar​​Rabee’​​has​​related​​it​​in​​his​​unreliable​​Musnad​​with​​a​​different​ ​wording​ ​to​ ​justify​ ​their​ ​view​ ​that​ ​raising​ ​the​ ​hands​ ​with​ ​takbeer​​invalidates​​the​​Prayer!​​That​ ​wording​​is​​false,​​as​​I​​have​​explained​​in​​ad-Da’eefah​​(6044).”!!!​​This​​by​​Allah,​​is​​a​​grave​​contradiction​ ​from​​within​​the​​same​​book,​​and​​tantamount​​to​​his​​admission​​that​​besides​​the​​Hanafis,​​the​​Ibaadiyyah​ ​sect​​do​​not​​also​​raise​​their​​hands!​​In​​fact​​we​​have​​on​​record​​some​​scholars​​who​​stopped​​performing​​it​ ​altogether,​​except​​for​​the​​initial​​Takbeer;​​when​​they​​had​​taken​​into​​account​​all​​the​​arguments​​and​​evidence.​ ​Two of such great scholars are as follows:-​ ​(A) Imam Abu Ja’far al-Tahawi (d. 321 AH; Rahimahullah):​ ​He​​was​​a​​Mujtahid​​in​​specific​​issues​​(Mujtahid​​fi​​al-Masa’il)​​and​​also​​the​​famous​​author​​of​​the​​work​ ​‘Al-Aqeeda​​al-Tahawiyya’​​(The​​Muslim​​Belief​​According​​to​​al-Tahawi),​​which​​has​​been​​translated​​into​ ​English​ ​by​ ​two​ ​different​ ​organisations,​ ​and​ ​many​ ​other​ ​works​ ​on​ ​Hadith.​ ​He​ ​was​ ​originally​ ​a​ ​Shafi’i​ ​scholar​ ​who​ ​gained​ ​mastery​ ​in​ ​Shafi’i​ ​Fiqh​ ​from​ ​his​ ​famous​ ​uncle​ ​Imam​ ​al-Muzani​ ​(Rahimahullah)​ ​[mentioned​ ​in​ ​Sifah​ ​Salah​ ​an-Nabee,​ ​pg.​ ​xvi],​ ​who​ ​was​ ​the​ ​famous​ ​disciple​ ​of​ ​Imam​ ​al-Shafi’i​ ​(Rahimahullah).​ ​But​ ​later​ ​in​ ​his​ ​life​ ​he​ ​joined​ ​the​ ​Hanafi​ ​school​ ​and​ ​hence​ ​stopped​ ​performing​ ​Raful-Yadayn​​indifference​​to​​the​​Shafi’i​​view​​of​​performing​​it.​​Imam​​Tahawi​​lived​​in​​a​​time​​when​​most​​of​ ​the​ ​Hadith​ ​had​ ​been​ ​collected​ ​(after​ ​Bukhari,​ ​Muslim​ ​etc),​ ​hence​ ​he​ ​had​ ​an​ ​ideal​ ​opportunity​ ​to​ ​sift​ ​through​ ​the​ ​Hadith​ ​on​ ​Raful-Yadayn​ ​and​ ​he​ ​came​ ​to​ ​the​ ​conclusion​ ​that​ ​Imam​ ​Abu​ ​Hanifah’s​ ​(Rahimahullah)​ ​view​ ​point​ ​was​ ​more​ ​convincing​ ​to​ ​him,​ ​and​ ​in​ ​this​ ​regard​ ​he​ ​quoted​ ​some​ ​Hadiths​ ​negating the practise of Raful-Yadayn in some of his works.​ ​(B) Imam Muhammnad Amin ibn Abidin (d. 1252/1836; Rahimahullah):​ ​He​​was​​also​​originally​​a​​Shafi’i​​scholar​​who​​changed​​his​​school​​and​​became​​the​​foremost​​Hanafi​​Imam​ ​of​​his​​time.​​Hence​​he​​also​​changed​​his​​original​​opinion​​of​​performing​​Raful-yadayn,​​to​​not​​performing​​it.​ ​His​ ​most​ ​famous​ ​work​ ​is​ ​‘Hashiya​ ​Radd​ ​al-Mukhtar’.​ ​Al-Albani​ ​has​ ​quoted​ ​from​ ​him​ ​in​ ​‘Sifah​ ​Salah​ ​an-Nabee’ (pgs. viii, xvii).​ ​The View of Imam Malik and his Madhhab on​ ​Raf-ul-Yadayn​ ​I​​have​​already​​quoted​​the​​opinion​​of​​al-Albani​​with​​regard​​to​​his​​quotation​​from​​Imam​​ibn​​Asakir.​ ​Al-Albani​​has​​claimed​​that​​Imam​​Malik​​used​​to​​perform​​Raful-Yadayn​​right​​up​​to​​his​​death.​​But​​this​​is​​in​ ​direct​​contradiction​​to​​what​​has​​been​​related​​from​​Imam​​Malik​​(Rahimahullah)​​by​​his​​famous​​disciple,​ ​Imam​ ​ibn​ ​al-Qasim.​ ​The​ ​foremost​ ​book​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Maliki​ ​Madhhab​ ​in​ ​terms​ ​of​ ​Fiqh​ ​is​ ​a​ ​book​ ​called​ ​‘Al-Mudawwanah’​​(A Book of Legal Cases).​ ​It​​is​​a​​recension​​of​​Qadi​​Sahnoon​​(Rahimahullah),​​containing​​his​​questions,​​answered​​by​​Imam​​Ibn​ ​al-Qasim​ ​(Rahimahullah).​ ​These​ ​answers​ ​repeat​ ​the​ ​literal​ ​words​ ​of​ ​Imam​ ​Malik​ ​(Rahimahullah)​ ​by​ ​occasional​​personal​​interpretation​​of​​Ibn​​al-Qasim​​himself.​​It​​is​​written​​in​​“al-Mudawwanah”​,​​(vol.​​1,​ ​pg.​​71):​​“Imam​​Malik​​has​​said​​that​​he​​does​​not​​know​​of​​Raful-Yadayn​​being​​done​​in​​any​​Takbeer,​ ​even​​when​​going​​into​​(Rukoo)​​or​​rising​​from​​it,​​except​​in​​the​​Takbeer​​Tahrimah​​(the​​initial​​Takbeer),​ ​24​ ​RAF-UL-YADAYN: THE RAISING OF HANDS IN PRAYER​ ​then​ ​ibn​ ​al-Qasim​ ​said​ ​that​ ​in​ ​the​ ​opinion​ ​of​ ​Imam​ ​Malik​ ​the​ ​performance​​of​​Raful​​Yadayn​​was​ ​Daeef (a weak practice).”​ ​The​​diligent​​reader​​may​​have​​noticed​​that​​Imam​​Malik​​has​​quoted​​two​​Hadith​​which​​seems​​to​​support​ ​the​​practice​​of​​performing​​Raful-Yadayn,​​in​​his​​celebrated​​al-Muwatta!​​The​​Hadith​​quoted​​is​​as​​follows,​ ​“Yahya​​related​​to​​me​​from​​Malik​​from​​Ibn​​Shihab​​from​​Salim​​ibn​​Abdullah​​from​​Abdullah​​ibn​​Umar​​(Allah​ ​be​​pleased​​with​​them)​​that​​the​​Messenger​​of​​Allah,​​may​​Allah​​bless​​him​​and​​grant​​him​​peace​​used​​to​ ​raise​​his​​hands​​to​​the​​level​​of​​his​​shoulders​​when​​he​​began​​the​​prayer​​and​​when​​he​​raised​​his​​head​ ​from​​ruku​​he​​raised​​them​​in​​the​​same​​way,​​saying,​​‘Allah​​hears​​whoever​​praises​​him,​​our​​Lord​​and​ ​praise​​belongs​​to​​You.’​​He​​did​​not​​raise​​them​​in​​sujud​​(prostration).”​​Also,​​“Yahya​​related​​to​​me​​from​ ​Malik​​from​​Nafi​​that​​Abdullah​​ibn​​Umar​​used​​to​​raise​​his​​hands​​to​​the​​level​​of​​his​​shoulders​​when​​he​ ​began​ ​the​ ​prayer​ ​and​ ​when​ ​he​ ​raised​ ​from​ ​the​ ​ruku​ ​he​ ​would​ ​raise​ ​them​ ​less​ ​than​ ​that.”​ ​(see​ ​Muwatta​​section​​3.4,​​no.​​17​​and​​21,​​pg.​​27,​​trans.​​by​​A.​​Abdarahman​​and​​Y.​​Johnson).​​The​​above​​Hadith​ ​has​​also​​been​​related​​by​​Imams​​Bukhari​​and​​Muslim​​in​​their​​respective​​collections,​​besides​​many​​other​ ​books of Hadith with slight variations in wording and description.​ ​The​​above​​Hadith​​has​​been​​one​​of​​the​​main​​proofs​​used​​to​​prove​​the​​performance​​of​​Raful-Yadayn​​by​ ​some​​great​​scholars.​​But,​​the​​Hanafi​​and​​Maliki​​schools​​put​​forward​​some​​of​​the​​following​​arguments​​to​ ​explain their contention.​ ​The​​Imam​​Abu​​Dawood​​(Rahimahullah)​​reported​​a​​Hadith​​very​​similar​​to​​the​​one​​above,​​he​​said​​that​ ​Imam​​Nafi​​said​​on​​the​​authority​​of​​Ibn​​Umar​​(Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​him)​​that​​when​​he​​began​​his​​prayer,​​he​ ​uttered​​the​​Takbeer​​(Allah​​is​​most​​great)​​and​​raised​​his​​hands;​​and​​when​​he​​bowed​​(he​​raised​​his​​hands);​ ​and​​when​​he​​said:​​‘Allah​​listens​​to​​him​​who​​praises​​Him,”​​(he​​raised​​his​​hands);​​and​​when​​he​​stood​​up​​at​ ​the​​end​​of​​two​​rak’ahs,​​he​​raised​​his​​hands.​​He​​(Ibn​​Umar)​​traced​​that​​back​​to​​the​​Apostle​​of​​Allah​​(may​ ​peace​​be​​upon​​him).​​Abu​​Dawood​​then​​said:​​“What​​is​​correct​​is​​that​​the​​tradition​​reported​​by​​Ibn​ ​Umar​​does​​not​​go​​back​​to​​the​​Prophet​​(may​​peace​​be​​upon​​him).”​​Abu​​Dawood​​then​​said:​​“The​​narrator​ ​Baqiyyah​​(found​​in​​the​​Isnad)​​reported​​the​​first​​part​​of​​this​​tradition​​from​​Ubaid​​Allah​​and​​traced​​it​​back​​to​ ​the​ ​Prophet​ ​(may​ ​peace​ ​be​ ​upon​ ​him);​ ​and​ ​the​ ​narrator​ ​al-Thaqafi​ ​reported​ ​it​ ​from​ ​Ubaid​ ​Allah​ ​as​ ​a​ ​statement​​of​​Ibn​​Umar​​himself​​(not​​from​​the​​Prophet).​​In​​this​​version​​he​​said:​​‘When​​he​​stood​​at​​the​​end​ ​of​​two​​rak’ahs​​he​​raised​​them​​up​​to​​his​​breasts.​​And​​this​​is​​the​​correct​​version.”​​Abu​​Dawood​​then​​said:​ ​“This​​tradition​​has​​been​​transmitted​​as​​a​​statement​​of​​Ibn​​Umar​​(and​​not​​of​​the​​Prophet)​​by​​alLayth​​ibn​ ​Sa’ad,​​Malik,​​Ayyub,​​and​​Ibn​​Juraij;​​and​​this​​has​​been​​narrated​​as​​a​​statement​​of​​the​​Prophet​​(Peace​ ​be​ ​upon​ ​him)​​by​​Hammad​​ibn​​Salamah​​alone​​on​​the​​authority​​of​​Ayyub.​​Ayyub​​and​​Malik​​did​​not​ ​mention​ ​his​ ​raising​ ​of​ ​hands​ ​when​ ​he​ ​stood​ ​after​ ​two​ ​prostrations,​ ​but​ ​al-Layth​ ​mentioned​ ​it​ ​in​ ​his​ ​version.​​Ibn​​Juraij​​said​​in​​his​​version:​​I​​asked​​Nafi,​​“Did​​Ibn​​Umar​​raise​​(his​​hands)​​higher​​for​​the​​first​ ​time?”​​He​​said,​​‘No.’​​I​​said,​​‘Point​​out​​to​​me.’​​He​​then​​pointed​​to​​the​​breasts​​or​​lower​​than​​that.’”​​(see​ ​Sunan Abu Dawood​, 1/740, pg. 191, English ed’n).​ ​Now,​​the​​Hadith​​related​​by​​Ibn​​Umar​​(Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​him)​​stated​​that​​the​​Prophet​​(Peace​​be​ ​upon​​him)​​“used​​to”​​perform​​Raful-Yadayn;​​although​​Imam​​Malik​​(Rahimahullah)​​quoted​​this​​particular​ ​Hadith​ ​it​ ​does​ ​not​ ​necessarily​ ​mean​ ​that​ ​he​​himself,​​as​​well​​as​​Ibn​​Umar​​(Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​him)​ ​performed​​Raful-Yadayn!​​In​​fact​​we​​have​​to​​remember​​that​​Ibn​​Umar​​(Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​him)​​said​​that​ ​the​​Prophet​​(Peace​​be​​upon​​him),​​“used​​to”​​perform​​Raful-Yadayn.​​I​​say​​this​​because​​we​​have​​many​​other​ ​Ahadith​​which​​have​​been​​related​​from​​Abdullah​​Ibn​​Umar​​(Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​him)​​himself​​which​​prove​ ​that​ ​he​ ​did​ ​not​ ​always​ ​perform​ ​Raful-Yadayn,​ ​as​ ​well​ ​as​ ​indicating​ ​that​ ​the​ ​Holy​ ​Prophet​ ​(Peace​ ​and​ ​blessings​​be​​upon​​him)​​himself​​stopped​​performing​​Raful-Yadayn;​​but​​Allah​​knows​​best!​​Here​​follows​​a​ ​few of these Ahadith from Ibn Umar (Allah bepleased with him):-​ ​(A)​ ​The​ ​Imam​ ​of​ ​Hadith,​ ​Abu​ ​Awaanah​ ​(Rahimahullah)​ ​related​ ​in​ ​his​ ​“Sahih”​ ​(vol.​ ​2,​ ​pg.​ ​90)​​from​ ​Sufyan​​ibn​​Uyayna​,​​who​​related​​from​​Ibn​​Shihab​​al-Zuhri​,​​who​​related​​from​​Salim​​ibn​​Abdullah​,​​who​ ​related​​from​​his​​father​​Abdullah​​ibn​​Umar​,​​who​​said:​​“I​​saw​​the​​Prophet​​(Peace​​be​​upon​​him)​​raise​ ​25​ ​RAF-UL-YADAYN: THE RAISING OF HANDS IN PRAYER​ ​both​​his​​hands​​up​​to​​the​​shoulders​​when​​starting​​Salah,​​but​​he​​did​​not​​raise​​his​​hands​​when​​going​​into​ ​rukoo, or when rising from it; not even between the prostrations (sujud).”​ ​(B)​ ​The​ ​Imam​ ​of​ ​Hadith​ ​and​ ​teacher​ ​of​ ​Imam​ ​al-Bukhari,​ ​Abdullah​ ​Ibn​ ​Zubair​ ​al-Humaidi​ ​(Rahimahullah)​​related​​in​​his​​“Musnad”​​(2/614,​​pg.​​277)​​from​​Sufyan​​ibn​​Uyayna​,​​who​​related​​from​​Ibn​ ​Shihab​​al-Zuhri​,who​​related​​from​​Salim​​ibn​​Abdullah​,​​and​​he​​from​​his​​father​​Ibn​​Umar​:​​“I​​saw​​the​ ​Prophet​​(Peace​​be​​upon​​him)​​raise​​both​​his​​hands​​at​​the​​beginning​​of​​Salah​​up​​to​​his​​shoulders,​​but​ ​when​​going​​into​​Rukoo​​and​​when​​raising​​his​​head​​from​​rukoo​​he​​did​​not​​raise​​his​​hands,​​not​​even​ ​between the prostrations.”​ ​(C)​​The​​Hanafi​​scholar​​of​​Hadith,​​Imam​​Yusuf​​al-Zaylai​​(d.​​762​​AH;​​Rahimahullah)​​quoted​​in​​his​​book​ ​“Nasb​​ar-Rayah”​​(vol.​​1,​​pg.​​404),​​a​​narration​​from​​Abdallah​​ibn​​al-Kharraz​,​​who​​related​​from​​Imam​ ​Malik​,​​who​​related​​from​​Ibn​​Shihab​​al-Zuhri​,​​and​​he​​from​​Salim​​ibn​​Abdallah​,​​who​​related​​from​​Ibn​ ​Umar​,​​who​​said:​​“The​​Prophet​​(Peace​​be​​upon​​him)​​raised​​his​​hands​​when​​beginning​​Salah,​​and​​he​ ​never repeated again.”​ ​(D)​​The​​two​​well​​known​​scholars​​of​​Hadith,​​Imam​​Tahawi​​and​​Imam​​Ibn​​Abi​​Shaybah​​(Allah’s​​mercy​​be​ ​upon​​them),​​related​​that​​Imam​​Mujahid​​(the​​disciple​​of​​Ibn​​Abbas;​​Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​them)​​said:​​“I​ ​prayed​​many​​times​​behind​​Ibn​​Umar,​​but​​he​​raised​​his​​hands​​only​​once​​at​​the​​beginning.”​​(see​​Ja’al​ ​Haqq​, pg. 55, by Mufti Ahmad Y. Khan)​ ​These​​four​​narrations​​give​​strong​​evidence​​in​​favour​​of​​the​​Hanafi​​and​​Maliki​​views​​that​​Raful-Yadayn​ ​has​​been​​abrogated.​​So​​now​​ask​​yourselves,​​“Can​​the​​opinions​​of​​al-Albani​​be​​relied​​upon,​​if​​he​​does​​not​ ​base​​his​​opinions​​from​​the​​books​​of​​the​​Hanafi​​and​​Maliki​​Schools,​​plus​​the​​proofs​​used​​by​​them​​for​​not​ ​performing Raful-Yadayn?”​ ​Now,​​I​​leave​​it​​to​​you​​to​​decipher​​for​​yourself,​​why​​certain​​Imams​​decided​​to​​perform​​Raful-Yadayn​ ​and​​others​​not​​to;​​but​​before​​I​​finish​​on​​this​​issue​​let​​me​​relate​​to​​you​​a​​famous​​incident​​that​​took​​place​ ​between​​the​​Imams​​Abu​​Hanifah​​and​​al-Awzai​​(Allah’s​​mercy​​be​​upon​​them)​​of​​Syria,​​when​​they​​met​​in​ ​Makkah.​ ​The​ ​purpose​ ​of​ ​the​ ​following​ ​debate​ ​is​ ​to​ ​show​ ​that​ ​even​ ​though​ ​the​ ​two​ ​great​ ​Imams​ ​had​ ​different​ ​narrations​ ​to​ ​prove​ ​their​ ​particular​ ​opinions,​ ​they​​did​​not​​abuse​​or​​despise​​each​​other​​in​​the​ ​derogatory​​way​​that​​some​​of​​us​​have​​become​​accustomed​​to!​​Insha’Allah,​​we​​should​​respect​​each​​other’s​ ​opinions, if it has a sound basis from the sources of the Shari’ah.​ ​Imam​​al-Awzai​​said,​​“Why​​do​​you​​not​​raise​​your​​hands​​just​​before​​rukoo​​and​​after?”​​Imam​​Abu​​Hanifah​ ​replied,​ ​“There​ ​is​ ​no​ ​recorded​ ​word​ ​or​ ​action​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Messenger​ ​of​ ​Allah​ ​(peace​ ​be​ ​upon​ ​him),to​ ​authenticate​​this​​(any​​longer).”​​“How​​so?”,​​replied​​al-Awzai,​​“When​​al-Zuhri​​has​​reported​​this​​to​​me​​on​ ​the​​authority​​of​​Salim​​and​​that​​of​​his​​father​​(Ibn​​Umar)​​who​​said​​that​​the​​Prophet​​(Peace​​be​​upon​​him)​ ​used​ ​to​ ​raise​ ​his​ ​hands​ ​at​ ​the​ ​beginning​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Salah​ ​and​ ​before​ ​and​​after​​rukoo?”​​Abu​​Hanifah​​also​ ​reported,​​“Hammad​​related​​to​​me​​through​​Ibrahim,​​through​​Alqamah,​​through​​al-Aswad,​​and​​through​​Ibn​ ​Masood,​​that​​the​​Messenger​​of​​Allah​​(Peace​​be​​upon​​him),​​only​​raised​​his​​hands​​at​​the​​beginning​​of​​the​ ​Salah​ ​and​ ​did​ ​not​ ​repeat​ ​this​ ​action​ ​again.”​ ​Al-Awzai​ ​then​ ​suggested​ ​that​ ​his​ ​authorities​ ​were​ ​more​ ​reliable​​than​​those​​of​​Abu​​Hanifah​,​​who​​countered,​​“Hammad​​was​​more​​knowledgeable​​than​​al-Zuhri,​​and​ ​Ibrahim​​was​​more​​knowledgeable​​than​​Salim.​​And​​if​​Ibn​​Umar​​is​​to​​be​​credited​​as​​a​​Companion​​of​​the​ ​Prophet,​​then​​al-Aswad​​has​​many​​merits.​​And​​the​​merits​​of​​Abdullah​​ibn​​Masood​​speak​​for​​themselves.”​ ​At​​this,​​al-Awzai​​remained​​silent.​​(Vide:​​‘The​​Ethics​​of​​Disagreement​​in​​Islam’​​pg.​​59-60,​​by​​Taha​​Jabir​ ​al-Alwani;​​also​​see​​‘Imam​​Abu​​Hanifah:​​Life​​and​​Work’​​pg.​​66-67,​​by​​Shibli​​Numani).​​This​​incident​​has​ ​also​ ​been​ ​recorded​ ​with​ ​slight​ ​variations​ ​by​ ​Hafiz​ ​Ibn​ ​al-Humam​ ​in​ ​his​ ​‘Fath​ ​al-Qadir’​;​ ​and​ ​Shah​ ​Waliullah Dehlawi’s​​‘Hujjat Allah al-Baligha’​. Allah​​knows best.​ ​26​ ​THE ABROGATION OF PERFORMING PRAYER SITTING…​ ​THE ABROGATION OF PERFORMING PRAYER​ ​SITTING: BEHIND A SITTING IMAM​ ​Al-Albani​​stated​​in​​‘Sifah​​Salah​​an-Nabee’​​(pg.​​4):​​“He​​(Peace​​be​​upon​​him)​​prayed​​sitting​​during​​the​ ​illness​​of​​which​​he​​died.​​He​​also​​prayed​​sitting​​on​​another​​occasion​​before​​that,​​when​​he​​was​​injured,​​and​ ​the​​people​​behind​​him​​prayed​​standing;​​so​​he​​indicated​​to​​them​​to​​sit,​​so​​they​​sat​​(and​​prayed).​​When​​he​ ​finished,​​he​​said,​​You​​were​​going​​to​​do​​as​​the​​Persians​​and​​the​​Romans​​do​​:​​stand​​for​​their​​kings​​who​ ​sit.​​So​​do​​not​​do​​so,​​for​​the​​Imam​​is​​there​​to​​be​​followed:​​When​​he​​makes​​ruku,​​make​​ruku,​​when​​he​ ​rises,​​rise,​​and​​when​​he​​prays​​sitting,​​pray​​sitting​​(all​​of​​you).”​​(See​​Sahih​​Muslim​,​​1/824,​​pg.​​227,​ ​English ed’n).​ ​The​​above​​statement​​made​​by​​al-Albani​​seems​​to​​indicate​​his​​lack​​of​​knowledge​​about​​the​​Hadiths​​on​ ​this​​rare​​issue;​​or​​to​​be​​safe​​we​​may​​say​​that​​again​​he​​has​​given​​us​​half​​of​​the​​‘story’.​​According​​to​​Shah​ ​Waliullah​​Dehlawi​​(Rahimahullah),​​the​​above​​command​​is​​concerned​​with​​the​​earlier​​period​​when​​the​ ​present​​mode​​of​​prayer​​was​​made​​obligatory.​​The​​Holy​​Prophet​​(Peace​​be​​upon​​him)​​stressed​​this​​point​ ​with​ ​a​ ​view​ ​to​ ​effacing​ ​out​ ​of​ ​the​ ​minds​ ​of​ ​his​ ​people​ ​the​ ​undue​ ​respect​ ​and​ ​reverence​ ​which​ ​the​ ​neighbouring​ ​people​ ​of​ ​Persia​​and​​Rome​​showed​​to​​their​​kings.​​They​​kept​​standing​​before​​them​​in​​all​ ​humility​​and​​dared​​not​​sit​​down​​before​​them.​​The​​Holy​​Prophet​​(Peace​​be​​upon​​him)​​did​​not​​approve​​of​ ​this​​type​​of​​respect​​which​​is​​against​​the​​dignity​​of​​man.​​He,​​therefore,​​in​​contravention​​of​​the​​practises​ ​amongst​ ​the​ ​Romans​ ​and​ ​the​ ​Greeks,​ ​ordered​ ​them​​to​​sit​​down​​when​​the​​Imam​​was​​sitting​​and​​not​​to​ ​observe​​this​​type​​of​​ceremonious​​respect.​​But​​when​​the​​sense​​of​​human​​dignity​​and​​equality​​took​​hold​​of​ ​the​​minds​​of​​the​​Muslims,​​then​​this​​practise​​was​​abrogated​​and​​the​​Muslims​​were​​permitted​​to​​say​​their​ ​prayer​​standing​​behind​​a​​sitting​​Imam,​​when​​there​​is​​no​​valid​​reason​​for​​it,​​as​​standing​​in​​prayer​​is​​part​​of​ ​prayer​​and​​it​​should​​not​​be​​abandoned​​in​​normal​​circumstances​​(​Hujjatullah-al-Baligha​,​​vol.​​2,​​pg.​​27,​ ​quoted in the English translation of​​Sahih Muslim​,​​vol. 1, fn. 633, pg. 227).​ ​The​​proof​​against​​al-Albani’s​​opinion​​is​​found​​in​​the​​Sahih​​collections​​of​​al-Bukhari​​and​​Muslim​;​ ​and​ ​it​ ​is​ ​of​ ​greater​ ​authority​ ​as​ ​evidence​ ​than​ ​the​ ​Hadith​ ​quoted​ ​by​ ​al-Albani.​ ​I​ ​say:​ ​so​ ​much​ ​for​ ​al-Albani​​giving​​his​​followers​​the​​most​​authentic​​Sunnah,​​when​​he​​himself​​has​​contradicted​​the​ ​authentic​​Sunnah​​by​​not​​realising​​that​​his​​opinion​​has​​been​​clearly​​abrogated​​by​​a​​later​​practise​ ​of​​the​​Holy​​Prophet​​(Peace​​be​​upon​​him)!​​Imam​​Muslim​​has​​a​​chapter​​heading​​titled:​​‘The​​Imam​​is​ ​authorised​​to​​appoint​​one​​as​​his​​deputy​​when​​there​​is​​a​​valid​​reason​​for​​it​​(for​​example,​​illness​​or​​journey​ ​or​​any​​other),​​and​​if​​an​​Imam​​leads​​the​​prayer​​sitting​​as​​he​​cannot​​do​​so​​standing,​​his​​followers​​should​​say​ ​prayer​​standing​​provided​​they​​are​​able​​to​​do​​it​​and​​there​​is​​an​​abrogation​​of​​saying​​prayer​​sitting​​behind​​a​ ​sitting​​Imam.’​​(see​​Sahih​​Muslim​,​​vol.​​1,​​pg.​​228,​​English​​ed’n).​​The​​actual​​Hadith​​that​​proves​​our​​point​​is​ ​found​​in​​a​​long​​narration​​reported​​from​​Ubaidullah​​ibn​​Abdullah​​ibn​​Utba​​(Rahimahullah)​​from​​Aisha​ ​(Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​her);​​the​​most​​important​​part​​of​​the​​Hadith​​is​​as​​follows:​​“Abu​​Bakr​​(Allah​​be​ ​pleased​​with​​him)​​was​​leading​​the​​people​​in​​prayer.​​When​​Abu​​Bakr​​(Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​him)​​saw​ ​him​​(the​​Prophet,​​peace​​be​​upon​​him),​​he​​began​​to​​withdraw,​​but​​the​​Apostle​​of​​Allah​​(Peace​​be​​upon​ ​him)​​told​​him​​not​​to​​withdraw.​​He​​told​​his​​two​​(companions)​​to​​seat​​him​​down​​beside​​him​​(Abu​​Bakr).​ ​They​ ​seated​ ​him​ ​by​ ​the​ ​side​ ​of​ ​Abu​ ​Bakr.​ ​Abu​ ​Bakr​ ​(Allah​ ​be​ ​pleased​ ​with​ ​him)​ ​said​ ​the​ ​prayer​ ​standing​​while​​following​​the​​prayer​​of​​the​​Apostle​​(Peace​​be​​upon​​him)​​and​​the​​people​​said​​prayer​ ​(​standing​)​​while​​following​​the​​prayer​​of​​Abu​​Bakr.​​The​​Apostle​​(Peace​​be​​upon​​him)​​was​​seated​.”​​(for​ ​full​ ​Hadith​ ​see​ ​Muslim​,​ ​1/832,​ ​pg.​ ​228-229​ ​and​ ​Bukhari​,​ ​1/655,​ ​pg.​ ​371-372)​​NB-​​Imam​​Bukhari​ ​(Rahimahullah)​​said,​​“The​​Imam​​is​​appointed​​to​​be​​followed.​​The​​Prophet​​(Peace​​be​​upon​​him)​​in​​his​​fatal​ ​illness​​led​​the​​people​​in​​prayer​​while​​he​​was​​sitting​​(and​​the​​people​​were​​standing)....”​​(see​​Bukhari​​vol.​ ​1, chapter 51, pg. 370, English ed’n).​ ​27​ ​THE ABROGATION OF PERFORMING PRAYER SITTING…​ ​Imam​​al-Bukhari​​(Rahimahullah)​​also​​quoted​​Imam​​al-Humaidi​​(Rahimahullah)​​as​​saying:​​“The​ ​saying​​of​​the​​Prophet​​(Peace​​be​​upon​​him):​​‘Pray​​sitting,​​if​​he​​(Imam)​​prays​​sitting’​​was​​said​​in​​his​ ​former​​illness​​(during​​his​​early​​life)​​but​​the​​Prophet​​(Peace​​be​​upon​​him)​​did​​not​​order​​them​​to​​sit.​ ​We​ ​should​ ​follow​ ​the​ ​latest​ ​actions​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Prophet​​(Peace​​be​​upon​​him)”​​(see​​Bukhari​,​​1/657,​​pg.​ ​373).​ ​Finally,​​Abdul​​Hamid​​Siddiqi​​said​​in​​his​​footnotes​​to​​Sahih​​Muslim​​(vol.​​1,​​footnote​​632,​​pg.​​226):​ ​“According​ ​to​ ​Imam​ ​Awzai​ ​and​ ​Imam​ ​Malik​,​ ​this​ ​mode​ ​is​ ​essential​ ​in​ ​offering​ ​(i.e​ ​according​ ​to​ ​al-Albani’s​ ​opinion).​ ​Imam​ ​Shafi’i​ ​and​ ​Imam​ ​Abu​ ​Hanifah​ ​(as​​well​​as​​al-Bukhari,​​Muslim​​and​​many​ ​others)​​are​​of​​the​​opinion​​that​​it​​is​​not​​advisable​​to​​say​​prayer​​sitting​​behind​​an​​Imam​​who​​has​​not​​been​ ​obliged​​to​​say​​рrayer​​in​​a​​sitting​​posture​​due​​to​​illness​​or​​some​​other​​reason…”​​But​​according​​to​​Shams​ ​al-Haqq​ ​Azimabadi​ ​in​ ​Awn​ ​al-Ma’bood​ ​(1,233-234),​ ​Imam​ ​Malik​​does​​not​​allow​​anyone​​to​​lead​​the​ ​prayer sitting! (see​​Abu Dawood​, vol. 1, fn. 266, pg. 159 English ed’n).​ ​28​ ​GOING DOWN INTO PROSTRATION (SAJDAH): HANDS OR KNEES FIRST?​ ​GOING DOWN INTO PROSTRATION (SAJDAH):​ ​HANDS OR KNEES FIRST?​ ​Al-Albani​​is​​of​​the​​firm​​opinion​​that​​when​​one​​goes​​into​​Sajdah,​​he​​or​​she​​should​​place​​his​​hands​​onto​ ​the​​ground​​before​​his​​knees.​​He​​stated​​in​​‘Sifah​​Salah​​an-Nabee’​​(pg.​​52):​​“He​​(the​​Prophet,​​peace​​be​ ​upon​​him)​​used​​to​​place​​his​​hands​​on​​the​​ground​​before​​his​​knees.”​​Then​​al-Albani​​said​​in​​the​​footnote​​of​ ​the​​same​​page​​(pg.​​52,​​fn.​​2):​​“Ibn​​Khuzaimah​​(1/76/1),​​Daraqutni​​and​​Hakim,​​who​​declared​​it​​Sahih​​and​ ​Dhahabi​ ​agreed.​ ​All​​the​​Ahadith​​which​​contradict​​this​​are​​inauthentic​.​​This​​way​​has​​been​​endorsed​​by​ ​Malik,​​and​​similar​​is​​reported​​from​​Ahmad​​in​​Ibn​​al-Jawzi’s​​al-Tahqeeq​​(108/2).​​Also,​​al-Marwazi​​quoted​ ​with​​a​​Sahih​​isnad​​Imam​​al-Awzai​​in​​his​​Masaa’il​​(1/147/1)​​as​​saying:​​‘I​​found​​the​​people​​placing​​their​ ​hands​ ​before​ ​their​ ​knees.’​ ​Then​ ​al-Albani​ ​continued​ ​on​ ​the​ ​same​ ​page:​ ​“He​ ​used​​to​​instruct​​likewise,​ ​saying:​​When​​one​​performs​​Sajdah,​​he​​should​​not​​kneel​​like​​a​​camel,​​but​​should​​place​​his​​hands​​before​​his​ ​knees.” (related by​​Abu Hurayra​, see​​Abu Dawood​, 1/839,​​pg. 215 English ed’n).​ ​Al-AIbani​​has​​quite​​categorically​​claimed​​that​​the​​Ahadith​​which​​prove​​that​​one​​should​​place​​one’s​ ​knees​​down​​before​​one’s​​hands​​are​​all​​‘Inauthentic’​​according​​to​​his​​‘classification’​​standards.​​But​​as​ ​usual​​when​​there​​seems​​to​​be​​‘contradictory’​​Ahadith,​​al-Albani​​fails​​to​​tell​​his​​readers​​that​​many​​other​ ​scholars​​of​​Hadith​​and​​even​​the​​Mujtahid​​Imams​​like​​Abu​​Hanifah​​and​​al-Shafi’i​​(Allah’s​​mercy​​be​​upon​ ​them) are indifference to his view of placing the hands on the ground before the knees!​ ​In​​fact​​Sayyid​​Sabiq​​said​​in​​Fiqh-us-Sunnah​​(vol.​​1,​​pg.​​151):​​“Most​​scholars​​prefer​​that​​one​​place​ ​his​ ​knees​ ​on​ ​the​ ​floor​​before​​his​​hands.​​Ibn​​al-Mundhir​​related​​this​​from​​Umar​​(ibn​​al-Khatab)​,​ ​an-Nakhai​,​​Muslim​​ibn​​Yasar​,​​Sufyan​​al-Thauri​,​​Ahmad​​(ibn​​Hanbal,​​according​​to​​one​​of​​two​​views​ ​reported​ ​from​ ​him),​ ​Ishaq​ ​(ibn​ ​Rahwaih)​ ​and​ ​other​ ​jurists​ ​including​ ​Ibn​ ​al-Mundhir​ ​himself.​ ​Abu​ ​at-Tayyeb​ ​said​ ​that​ ​most​ ​jurists​ ​agree​ ​with​ ​this.​ ​Ibn​ ​al​ ​Qayyim​ ​(al-Jawziyya,​ ​the​ ​disciple​ ​of​ ​Ibn​ ​Taymiyyah​)​ ​said:​ ​‘When​ ​the​ ​Prophet,​ ​upon​ ​whom​ ​be​​peace,​​prayed,​​he​​would​​place​​his​​knees​​(on​​the​ ​floor)​ ​before​ ​his​ ​hands,​ ​then​ ​his​ ​hands,​ ​his​ ​forehead​ ​and​ ​nose.​ ​This​​is​​what​​is​​authentic​​and​​has​​been​ ​related​​by​​Shuraik​​from​​Asim​​ibn​​Kaleeb​​on​​the​​authority​​of​​his​​father​​from​​Wa’il​​ibn​​Hajr​​(Allah​​be​ ​pleased​​with​​him)​​who​​said:​​I​​saw​​the​​Messenger​​of​​Allah,​​upon​​whom​​be​​peace,​​while​​prostrating,​​place​ ​his​​knees​​(on​​the​​floor)​​before​​his​​hands.​​Upon​​getting​​up,​​he​​would​​raise​​his​​hands​​before​​his​​knees.​​I​ ​never​​saw​​him​​do​​otherwise.’”​​(see​​Abu​​Dawood​,​​1/837-838,​​pg.​​215).​​Sayyid​​Sabiq​​then​​gave​​the​​opinion​ ​of​​Malik,​​al-Awzai,​​Ibn​​Hazm,​​and​​Ahmad​​(according​​to​​his​​other​​opinion)​​whose​​opinions​​coincide​​with​ ​al-Albani’s.​ ​The​​Hadith​​from​​Wa’il​​ibn​​Hajr​​and​​Abu​​Hurayra​​(Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​them)​​can​​also​​be​​found​​in​​the​ ​English​ ​translation​ ​of​ ​Mishkat-ulMasabih​ ​(see​ ​vol.​ ​2,​ ​no’s​ ​898-899,​ ​pg.​ ​172)​ ​where​ ​it​ ​says:​ ​“​Abu​ ​Sulayman​​al-Khattabi​​(d.​​388/998;​​Rahimahullah)​​said​​that​​the​​tradition​​of​​Wa’il​​ibn​​Hajr​​is​​more​​sound​ ​than​​this​​(i.e​​the​​Hadith​​of​​Abu​​Hurayra)​​and​​it​​is​​also​​said​​that​​it​​is​​an​​abrogated​​one​​(i.e​​the​​Hadith​​of​ ​Abu​​Hurayra).​​Also​​the​​author​​of​​Awnal-Ma’bood​​(vol​​1,​​311-312),​​Shams​​al-Haqq​​Azimabadi​​said​​in​ ​his​​commentary​​to​​Abu​​Dawood;​​after​​quoting​​the​​opinions​​held​​by​​some​​scholars​​that​​the​​hands​​should​ ​be​​placed​​before​​the​​knees:​​“But​​al-Khattabi​​is​​of​​the​​opinion​​that​​the​​tradition​​of​​Wa’il​​ibn​​Hajr​​is​​better​ ​established​ ​because​ ​it​ ​is​ ​supported​ ​by​ ​several​ ​other​ ​sound​ ​traditions​ ​(which​ ​have​ ​not​ ​been​ ​quoted​​by​ ​al-Albani).​ ​Ibn​ ​Khuzaimah​ ​(a​ ​Shafi’i​ ​scholar​ ​of​ ​Hadith,​ ​d.​ ​311/924;​ ​Rahimahullah)​ ​observes​ ​that​ ​the​ ​tradition​​of​​Abu​​Hurayra​​(Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​him)​​has​​been​​abrogated.​​He​​reports​​a​​tradition​​on​​the​ ​authority​​of​​Sa’ad​​ibn​​Abi​​Waqqas​​(Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​him):​​“We​​used​​to​​place​​our​​hands​​(on​​the​ ​ground)​​before​​our​​knees,​​but​​later​​on​​we​​were​​commanded​​to​​place​​our​​knees​​before​​our​​hands!”​ ​The​​Hadith​​of​​Wa’il​​ibn​​Hajr​​is​​also​​found​​in​​Imam​​Tirmidhi​’s​​Sunan,​​where​​Imam​​Tirmidhi​​said​​that​​the​ ​Hadith​​was​​Hasan​​Gharib​​(see​​Sunan​​al-Tirmidhi​​2/268,​​edited​​by​​Ahmad​​Shakir).​​The​​author​​of​​Awn​ ​al-Ma’bood​​also​​said:​​“​Abu​​Hanifah​,​​al-Shafi’i​​and​​Ahmad​​(according​​to​​his​​second​​view)​​maintain​​that​ ​one​ ​should​ ​place​ ​his​ ​knees​ ​before​ ​his​ ​hands.​ ​And​ ​this​ ​seems​ ​more​ ​convenient​ ​(see​ ​Sunan​ ​of​ ​Abu​ ​Dawood​, vol. 2, fn. 383-384, pg. 215 English ed’n).”​ ​29​ ​INTERPRETING THE HOLY QUR’AN WITHOUT SOUND KNOWLEDGE​ ​AHADITH ON INTERPRETING THE HOLY QUR’AN​ ​WITHOUT SOUND KNOWLEDGE​ ​There​ ​are​ ​a​ ​number​ ​of​ ​Hadith​ ​related​ ​to​ ​the​ ​issue​ ​of​ ​interpreting​ ​the​ ​Holy​ ​Qur’an​ ​without​ ​sound​ ​knowledge.​​Two​​of​​them​​are​​found​​in​​the​​collection​​of​​Ahadith​​known​​as​​Mishkatul​​Masabih​​by​​Imam​ ​al-Tabrizi (ash-Shafi’i)​, one from​​Ibn Abbas​​and the​​other from​​Jundub​​(Allah be pleased with them):-​ ​(A)​​Ibn​​Abbas​​(Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​him)​​reported​​that​​the​​Prophet​​(Peace​​be​​upon​​him)​​as​​saying:​​“He​ ​who​​speaks​​about​​the​​Qur’an​​on​​the​​basis​​of​​his​​personal​​opinion​​(only)​​would​​find​​his​​abode​​in​​Hell​ ​fire.”​​In​​another​​version:​​“He​​who​​speaks​​about​​the​​Qur’an​​without​​sound​​knowledge​​of​​it​​would​​find​ ​his abode in Hellfire.”​​(​Tirmidhi​).​ ​(B)​​Jundub​​(Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​him)​​reported​​the​​Prophet​​(Peace​​be​​upon​​him)​​as​​saying:​​“He​​who​ ​speaks​​about​​the​​Qur’an​​on​​the​​basis​​of​​his​​personal​​opinion​​(by​​any​​accord)​​he​​commits​​an​​error,​ ​even if he is right.”​​(​Tirmidhi and Abu Dawood​). (See​​Mishkatul-Masabih​, 1/234-235, English ed’n)​ ​The​​above​​two​​Hadiths​​have​​also​​been​​quoted​​by​​Ahmad​​Ibn​​Taymiyya​​in​​his​​Muqaddima​​fi​​usool​ ​al-Tafseer​ ​(English​ ​trans’n​ ​by​ ​M.A.H.​ ​Ansari​ ​under​ ​the​ ​title:​ ​‘An​ ​Introduction​ ​to​ ​the​ ​Principles​ ​of​ ​Tafseer’​,​​pg.​​60)​​where​​he​​said​​after​​quoting​​Jundub’s​​(Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​him)​​version:​​“Al-Tirmidhi​ ​thinks​​that​​this​​Hadith​​is​​rare​​(gharib).​​Other​​scholars​​of​​Hadith​​are​​not​​sure​​about​​the​​voraciousness​​of​ ​Suhayl​​ibn​​Abi​​Hizaam,​​who​​is​​one​​of​​its​​transmitters​​(in​​the​​Sanad).​​However​​a​​number​​of​​scholars​ ​from​​the​​companions​​and​​others​​have​​been​​reported​​to​​have​​condemned​​in​​the​​same​​vein​​the​​effort​ ​to​​explain​​the​​Qur’an​​without​​knowledge​.”​​But​​in​​the​​footnotes​​on​​the​​same​​page​​of​​the​​above​​book​ ​(no’s​​158​​and​​159)​​it​​was​​stated​​that​​al-Albani​​had​​declared​​both​​Hadiths​​(A)​​and​​(B)​​above​​to​​be​​DAEEF​ ​in​​his​​checking​​of​​Mishkatul-Masabih.​​I​​say:​​this​​is​​only​​one​​opinion​​out​​of​​many​​on​​the​​status​​of​​the​ ​above​​Ahadith.​​It​​seems​​that​​even​​Ibn​​Taymiyya​​after​​quoting​​the​​Hadith​​from​​Ibn​​Abbas​​(Allah​​be​​pleased​ ​with​​him)​​accepted​​it,​​(although​​he​​had​​reservations​​about​​the​​Hadith​​from​​Jundub)​​since​​he​​kept​​quiet​ ​about declaring it inauthentic; but Allah knows best.​ ​In​​fact​​Imam​​al-Tirmidhi​​classified​​the​​Hadith​​reported​​from​​Ibn​​Abbas​​(Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​him)​ ​to​​be​​Hasan​​Sahih​​(see​​Ulum​​al-Qur’an​,​​pg.​​132,​​fn.​​20,​​by​​Ahmad​​Von​​Denffer)​​and​​the​​Hadith​​related​ ​from​​Jundub​​(Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​him)​​was​​classified​​to​​be​​Hasan​,​​by​​the​​great​​scholar​​of​​Hadith,​​Imam​ ​al-Suyuti​​(d.​​911/1505;​​Rahimahullah)​​in​​his​​al-Jami​​al-Saghir​.​​This​​classification​​was​​also​​said​​to​​be​ ​Hasan​,​ ​by​ ​al-Imam​​Munawi​​(d.​​1031/1622;​​Rahimahullah)​​in​​his​​checking​​and​​commentary​​of​​Imam​ ​Suyuti’s​​above-named​​book;​​due​​to​​the​​existence​​of​​other​​variant​​narrations​​that​​strengthen​​it.​​(vide:​​Fayd​ ​al-Qadir​ ​Sharh​ ​al-Jami​ ​al-Saghir​,​ ​vol.​ ​6​ ​pg.​ ​191-92,​ ​by​ ​Imam​ ​al-Munawi).​​Other​​narrations​​on​​this​ ​issue are as follows:-​ ​Abu​​Hurayra​​(Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​him)​​reported​​the​​Prophet​​(Peace​​be​​upon​​him)​​as​​saying​​three​ ​times:​​“Opinion​​based​​arguments​​(controverting)​​about​​the​​Qur’an​​are​​Kufr.”​​Then​​he​​said:​​“What​ ​you​​know​​of​​it,​​act​​upon​​it;​​and​​what​​you​​are​​ignorant​​of,​​refer​​to​​one​​who​​knows​​(e.g.​​a​​qualified​ ​Mufassir).”​ ​(related​ ​by​ ​Imams​​Ahmad​​and​​Abu​​Ya’la​,​​see​​also​​Sunan​​Abu​​Dawood​,​​3/4586;​​English​ ​ed’n for half of the narration)​ ​Anas​​ibn​​Malik​​(Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​him)​​said:​​“I​​will​​give​​an​​exemplary​​punishment​​to​​any​​man​ ​brought​​to​​me​​who​​is​​not​​knowledgeable​​in​​Arabic​​yet​​interprets​​(tafsir)​​Allah’s​​Book.”​​(related​​by​ ​Imam al-Bayhaqi​, see Hafiz al-Dhahabi’s​​at-Tafsir​​wa’l Mufasiroon​, vol. 1, pg. 274)​ ​Imam​​Mujahid​​(Rahimahullah)​​the​​disciple​​of​​the​​great​​Companion​​Ibn​​Abbas​​(Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​ ​him)​​said:​​“It​​is​​not​​permissible​​for​​anyone​​who​​believes​​in​​Allah​​and​​the​​last​​day​​to​​interpret​​Allah’s​ ​Book​​if​​he​​is​​not​​knowledgeable​​in​​the​​Arabic​​language.”​​(vide:​​Mabahith​​fi​​Uloom​​al-Qur’an​,​​pg.​ ​331, by M. al-Qattan)​ ​30​ ​INTERPRETING THE HOLY QUR’AN WITHOUT SOUND KNOWLEDGE​ ​I​​leave​​it​​to​​the​​noble​​reader​​to​​decide​​whose​​classification​​you​​would​​prefer!​​May​​be​​those​​ignorant​ ​people​​who​​go​​around​​interpreting​​the​​Holy​​Qur’an​​without​​the​​requisite​​qualifications​​(as​​amongst​​the​ ​generality​ ​of​ ​the​ ​“Salafiyya”)​ ​in​ ​their​ ​‘study’​ ​circles,​ ​may​ ​take​ ​heed​ ​of​ ​the​ ​above​ ​Hadiths​ ​and​ ​their​ ​classifications by the great scholars of Hadith.​ ​31​ ​TARAWEEH PRAYER: 8 OR 20 RAK’AHS?​ ​TARAWEEH PRAYER: 8 OR 20 RAK’AHS?​ ​In​​a​​handout​​by​​al-Albani’s​​followers​​in​​England,​​by​​the​​title​​“Some​​common​​questions​​answered”​ ​(dated October 1990), there appeared the following question and answer (No. 22):​ ​(a)​​Aisha​​(Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​her)​​reports​​that​​the​​Prophet​​(Peace​​be​​upon​​him)​​never​​prayed​​more​​than​ ​8 rak’aats in Taraweeh, so how come nobody disapproves of 20?​ ​(b) Is it true that Umar (Allah be pleased with him) introduced it?​ ​Ans.22​ ​(a)​​As​​regards​​the​​Taraweeh​​prayer​​-​​people​​agree​​that​​the​​Sunnah​​of​​the​​Prophet​​(Peace​​be​​upon​​him)​​and​ ​the​​best​​way​​is​​11​​rak’aats.​​As​​regards​​any​​addition​​-​​then​​this​​is​​DISAPPROVED​​of​​and​​DECLARED​​AS​ ​A​​BID’AH​​(A​​bad​​innovation)​​by​​Shaykh​​al-Albani​​and​​by​​a​​few​​earlier​​scholars​​-​​that​​being​​reported​ ​from Imam Malik, Ibn ul-Arabee and as-San’aanee (see​​Salat-ut-Taraweeh​​of Shaykh al-Albani).​ ​(b)​​It​​is​​not​​true​​that​​Umar​​(Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​him)​​either​​prayed​​or​​ordered​​20​​rak’aats.​​Rather​​he​ ​ordered​​Ubayy ibn Ka’b​​to lead the people with 11​​rak’aats (al-Muwatta 1/137, with a Sahih Isnad).​ ​I​​do​​not​​wish​​to​​go​​into​​much​​detail​​on​​this​​issue,​​but​​Insha’Allah​​a​​separate​​publication​​is​​what​​is​​really​ ​required,​ ​to​ ​show​ ​which​ ​opinion​ ​is​ ​the​ ​most​ ​correct.​ ​But​ ​any​ ​way​ ​it​ ​should​ ​be​ ​said​ ​that​ ​the​ ​vast​ ​MAJORITY​​of​​the​​scholars​​of​​Hadith,​​Fiqh,​​and​​even​​the​​four​​Mujtahid​​Imams​​are​​in​​agreement​​that​​20​ ​rak’ahs​​are​​the​​most​​appropriate,​​followed​​by​​3​​rak’ahs​​of​​Witr,​​and​​this​​is​​also​​the​​opinion​​of​​the​​Imam​​of​ ​the “Salafiyya”,​​Ahmad ibn Taymiyya​!​ ​First,​​it​​should​​be​​said​​that​​the​​Hadith​​reported​​from​​Aisha​​(Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​her)​​about​​11​​rak’ahs​ ​is​​not​​at​​all​​to​​do​​with​​Taraweeh,​​according​​to​​the​​majority​​of​​scholars,​​but​​in​​fact​​concerns​​the​​number​​of​ ​rak’ahs of​​TAHAJJUD​​prayer! The Hadith in question​​is as follows:-​ ​Narrated​​Abu​​Salama​​ibn​​Abdur​​Rahman​​that​​he​​asked​​Aisha​​(Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​her).​​“How​​was​​the​ ​prayer​​of​​Allah’s​​Apostle​​(Peace​​be​​upon​​him)​​in​​Ramadan?”​​She​​replied,​​“He​​did​​not​​pray​​more​​than​ ​eleven​ ​raka’at​ ​in​ ​Ramadan​ ​or​ ​in​ ​any​ ​other​ ​month.​ ​He​ ​used​​to​​pray​​four​​raka’at​​-​​let​​alone​​their​ ​beauty​​and​​length​​-​​and​​then​​he​​would​​pray​​four​​-​​let​​alone​​their​​beauty​​and​​length​​-​​and​​then​​he​ ​would​​pray​​three​​rak’aat​​(witr).”​​She​​added,​​“I​​asked,​​‘OAllah’s​​Apostle!​​Do​​you​​sleep​​before​​praying​ ​the​ ​Witr?’​ ​He​ ​replied,​ ​‘O​ ​Aisha,​ ​My​ ​eyes​ ​sleep​ ​but​ ​my​ ​heart​ ​does​ ​not​ ​sleep.’”​ ​(​Bukhari​,​ ​3/230,​ ​English ed’n)​ ​According​​to​​the​​author​​of​​“Fatawa​​Rahimiyyah”​,​​Mufti​​Abdur​​Rahim​​Lajpuri​​(vol.​​1,​​pg.​​275);​​in​ ​his​ ​defence​ ​of​ ​20​ ​rak’ahs​ ​of​ ​Taraweeh:​ ​“The​ ​commentator​ ​of​ ​al-Sahih​ ​al-Bukhari​ ​and​ ​the​ ​erudite​ ​traditionist,​​Shaykh​​Shamsud-Din​​al-Kermani​​(d.​​786​​AH;​​Rahimahullah)​​said:​​‘In​​the​​Hadith​​(above),​ ​the​ ​Tahajjud​ ​prayer​ ​is​ ​meant.​ ​Abu​ ​Salama’s​ ​question​ ​and​ ​Hadrat​ ​Aisha’s​ ​answer​ ​concerned​ ​the​ ​Tahajjud.’​​He​​adds​​further:​​‘If​​the​​Tahajjud​​prayer​​is​​not​​meant,​​then​​this​​tradition​​will​​be​​at​​variance​ ​with​​the​​tradition​​that​​states​​that​​the​​Holy​​Prophet​​(Peace​​be​​upon​​him)​​led​​twenty​​rak’ahs​​each​​for​ ​two​​nights,​​and​​in​​the​​case​​of​​such​​clash​​the​​tradition​​of​​twenty​​rak’ahs​​which​​is​​affirmative​​(muthbit)​ ​shall​ ​have​ ​precedence​ ​because​ ​according​ ​to​ ​the​ ​principles​ ​of​ ​Hadith,​ ​the​ ​affirmative​ ​takes​ ​precedence​​over​​the​​negative​​(naaf)’​​(vide:​​Al-Kawakib​​ud-Durari​​Sharh​​Sahih​​al-Bukhari​,​​vol.​​9,​​pg​ ​155-156).​ ​I​ ​say,​ ​does​ ​this​ ​not​ ​mean​ ​that​ ​people​ ​who​ ​perform​ ​8​ ​rak’ahs​ ​of​ ​Taraweeh,​ ​should​ ​pray​ ​20​ ​rak’ahs​​instead?​​Since​​according​​to​​the​​principles​​of​​Hadith​​(as​​affirmed​​by​​al-Albani),​​“The​​affirmative​ ​takes precedence over the negative in certain cases.”​ ​32​ ​TARAWEEH PRAYER: 8 OR 20 RAK’AHS?​ ​A​​great​​fact​​that​​should​​also​​be​​noted​​by​​the​​reader​​is​​that​​the​​Imams​​of​​Hadith​​have​​placed​​the​​Hadith​ ​from​​Aisha​​(Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​her)​​under​​the​​section​​of​​Tahajjud​​prayers,​​which​​indicates​​their​​belief​ ​that​ ​the​ ​Hadith​ ​applies​ ​to​ ​Tahajjud​ ​only.​ ​The​ ​Imam​ ​al-Muhaddithin​ ​al-Bukhari​ ​(Rahimahullah)​ ​has​ ​placed​​the​​Hadith​​from​​Aisha​​under​​at​​least​​two​​sections​​of​​his​​Sahih,​​first​​under​​the​​section​​of​​‘21:The​ ​Tahajjud​ ​Prayer​ ​at​ ​Night’​ ​(see​ ​Sahih​ ​al-Bukhari​,​ ​vol.​ ​2,​ ​chapter​​1,​​no.​​248,​​English​​ed’n)​​and​​then​ ​under​​the​​section​​of​​‘32:​​The​​Book​​of​​Taraweeh​​Prayers’​​(see​​Sahih​​al-Bukhari​​3/230,​​pg.​​128​​English​ ​ed’n).​ ​This​ ​means​ ​that​ ​Imam​​Bukhari​​believed​​that​​the​​prayer​​mentioned​​by​​Aisha​​was​​that​​of​​Tahajjud​ ​only,​​and​​since​​the​​Tahajjud​​prayer​​is​​performed​​also​​in​​Ramadan,​​then​​Imam​​Bukhari​​also​​quoted​​the​​same​ ​Hadith​​under​​‘The​​book​​of​​Taraweeh​​prayers’​,​​but​​Allah​​knows​​best.​​Imam​​Muslim​​(Rahimahullah)​​has​ ​also​ ​placed​ ​the​ ​Hadith​​from​​Aisha​​under​​the​​Tahajjud​​prayer​​section​​(see​​Sahih​​Muslim​​1/1607,​​pg.​ ​356,​ ​English​ ​ed’n).​ ​Also​ ​Imam​ ​Malik​ ​(Rahimahullah)​ ​has​ ​placed​ ​Aisha’s​ ​Hadith​ ​under​ ​the​ ​‘Book​ ​of​ ​Tahajjud’​​(see​​Al-Muwatta​,​​Book​​7,​​section​​7.2,​​no.​​9,​​pg.​​5,​​English​​ed’n).​​The​​Imam​​Abu​​Dawood​ ​(Rahimahullah)​​has​​also​​placed​​the​​same​​Hadith​​under​​the​​chapter​​‘On​​the​​number​​of​​Rak’ahs​​of​​prayer​ ​at​ ​night​ ​(Tahajjud)’​ ​(see​ ​Abu​​Dawood​​1/1336,​​pg.​​351,​​English​​version).​​Even​​Imams​​Tirmidhi​​and​ ​Nisai​​(Allah’s​​mercy​​be​​upon​​them)​​placed​​Aisha’s​​Hadith​​under​​the​​Tahajjud​​section​​(see​​Tirmidhi​,​​vol.​ ​1,​ ​pg.​ ​58​ ​and​ ​Nisai​,​ ​vol.​ ​1,​ ​pg.​ ​154).​ ​Even​ ​one​ ​of​ ​the​ ​most​ ​prominent​ ​Imams​​of​​the​​‘Salafiyya’,​​Ibn​ ​Qayyim​ ​al-Jawziyya​ ​placed​ ​the​​aforementioned​​Hadith​​in​​the​​section​​of​​Tahajjud​​prayers​​in​​his​​book​ ​Zaad al Ma’ad​​(vol. 1, pg. 86)!​ ​Mufti​​Abdur​​Rahim​​said​​about​​Aisha’s​​Hadith:​​“And​​if​​this​​tradition​​may​​have​​been​​quoted​​in​​some​ ​book​​under​​the​​devotions​​of​​Ramadan​​along​​with​​the​​Taraweeh.​​Like​​the​​taraweeh,​​the​​Tahajjud,​​too,​​is​ ​a​​prayer​​of​​Ramadan​,​​and​​because​​of​​this​​affinity,​​it​​can​​be​​mentioned​​along​​with​​the​​Taraweeh​​(as​​Imam​ ​Bukhari​​did).​​Hence,​​supposing​​it​​may​​have​​been​​mentioned​​in​​some​​book,​​it​​cannot​​be​​made​​thereby​​a​ ​categorical​​argument.​​‘When​​uncertainty​​creeps​​in,​​the​​argument​​is​​falsified.’​​Moreover,​​Hafiz​​al-Hadith​ ​Imam​​Qurtubi’s​​(d.​​671/1273;​​Rahimahullah)​​statement​​regarding​​this​​Hadith​​(of​​Aisha)​​should​​not​​be​ ​overlooked​ ​that,​ ​‘many​ ​a​ ​man​ ​of​ ​knowledge​ ​considers​ ​the​ ​aforesaid​ ​Hadith​ ​mudtarib​ ​(i.e.​ ​confounded).’” (vide:​​Imam Ayni in his Sharh Sahih​​al Bukhari​, vol. 2, pg. 187).​ ​In​​short,​​the​​aforesaid​​report​​is​​in​​no​​way​​a​​proof​​for​​eight​​rak’ahs​​of​​Taraweeh.​​In​​contradistinction​​to​ ​this,​ ​as​​regards​​the​​twenty​​rak’ahs​​the​​Companions​​Consensus​​(Ijma-as-Sahaba)​​has​​taken​​place​ ​over​​the​​approval​​of​​Ibn​​Abbas’​​Hadith​​(about​​20​​Rak’ahs​​being​​performed​​by​​the​​Holy​​Prophet,​ ​peace​​be​​upon​​him)​​and​​practically​​the​​majority​​of​​Ulama​​have​​accepted​​it.”​​(​Fatawa​​Rahimmiyah​,​ ​vol. 1, pg 276-277).​ ​Although​​Aisha​​(Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​her)​​had​​said:​​“He​​did​​not​​pray​​more​​than​​11​​Raka’at,”​​we​​also​ ​have​​reports​​from​​her​​that​​the​​Holy​​Prophet​​(Peace​​be​​upon​​him)​​also​​prayed​​more​​than​​11​​Raka’ats!​​The​ ​proof​ ​for​ ​this​ ​was​ ​given​ ​by​ ​her​ ​in​ ​another​ ​narration​ ​involving​ ​Abu​ ​Salama​ ​ibn​ ​Abdal​ ​Rahman​ ​(Rahimahullah).​​Abu​​Salama​​asked​​Aisha​​about​​the​​prayer​​of​​the​​Messenger​​of​​Allah​​(Peace​​be​​upon​​him),​ ​she​​said,​​“He​​observed​​13​​Raka’ahs​​(in​​the​​night​​prayer).​​He​​observed​​8​​raka’ahs​​and​​would​​then​ ​observe​ ​(three​ ​rak’ahs​ ​of)​ ​witr​ ​and​ ​then​ ​observe​ ​two​ ​raka’ahs​ ​sitting​ ​(nafl​ ​prayer),​​and​​when​​he​ ​wanted​​to​​bow​​he​​stood​​up​​and​​then​​bowed​​down,and​​then​​he​​observed​​two​​raka’ahs​​in​​between​​the​ ​Azan​​and​​Iqama​​of​​the​​dawn​​prayer​​(i.e.​​fajr).”​​(See​​Sahih​​Muslim​​1/1603,​​pg.​​357​​and​​also​​al-Albani’s​ ​Sifah​ ​Salah​ ​an-Nabee​,​ ​appendix​ ​7,​ ​pg.​ ​110).​ ​So​ ​does​ ​this​ ​not​ ​mean​ ​that​ ​the​ ​‘Salafiyya’​ ​should​ ​perform 13 Raka’ats of Taraweeh in Ramadan?​ ​Now,​​the​​statement​​‘the​​best​​way​​is​​11​​rak’aats’​​is​​only​​the​​opinion​​of​​a​​small​​group​​of​​the​​ulama,​​in​ ​fact​​there​​are​​more​​than​​50​​opinions​​to​​say​​that​​the​​best​​way​​is​​20​​rak’ahs​​according​​to​​the​​Prophet​​(Peace​ ​be​​upon​​him)​​and​​his​​Companions​​(Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​them​​all)​​practise!​​What​​is​​more​​interesting​​to​ ​note​ ​is​ ​that​ ​the​ ​four​ ​great​ ​Mujtahids,​ ​Abu​ ​Hanifah,​ ​Malik,​ ​Shafi’i​ ​and​​Ahmad​​ibn​​Hanbal​​(Allah’s​ ​mercy​​be​​upon​​them)​​are​​in​​agreement​​that​​the​​Taraweeh​​consists​​of​​twenty​​Rak’ahs.​​The​​statement​​that​ ​Imam​​Malik​​approved​​of​​eight​​Rak’ahs​​needs​​to​​be​​proved,​​most​​likely​​this​​ascription​​was​​made​​to​​him​ ​because​​he​​quoted​​the​​Hadith​​which​​is​​used​​to​​prove​​eight​​Rak’ahs​​of​​Taraweeh​​in​​his​​al-Muwatta​​(see​ ​33​ ​TARAWEEH PRAYER: 8 OR 20 RAK’AHS?​ ​Muwatta,​​6.2,​​no.​​4,​​pg.​​48)​​by​​a​​small​​group​​of​​scholars.​​Although​​Imam​​Malik​​(Rahimahullah)​​quoted​ ​this​​Hadith​​in​​his​​book,​​it​​has​​no​​bearing​​on​​what​​his​​actual​​opinion​​and​​practise​​was,​​on​​the​​contrary​​Imam​ ​Malik​​believed​​in​​thirty-six​​rak’ahs​​of​​Taraweeh​​(i.e.​​20​​Rak’ahs​​and​​16​​rak’ahs​​of​​extra​​nafl​​prayers,​​see​ ​later​​for​​the​​official​​verdict​​of​​the​​Maliki​​Madhhab)!​​Also​​the​​Hadith​​which​​seems​​to​​prove​​11​​Rak’ahs​​of​ ​Taraweeh​​(including​​three​​rak’ahs​​of​​Witr)​​in​​Imam​​Malik’s​​Muwatta​​has​​been​​explained​​away​​by​​many​ ​other convincing arguments.​ ​Recently​​I​​came​​across​​a​​booklet​​by​​the​​title,​​“Is​​Taraweeh​​20​​Rakaats?”​​(Published​​by​​Madrasah​ ​Arabia​ ​Islamia,​ ​Azaadville,​ ​SouthAfrica,​ ​author​ ​unknown).​ ​In​ ​this​ ​booklet​ ​the​ ​Hadith​ ​quoted​ ​from​ ​the​ ​Muwatta​​of​​Imam​​Malik​​(Rahimahullah),​​about​​11​​rak’ahs​​of​​Taraweeh​​(including​​three​​Witr)​​was​​quite​ ​eloquently analysed.​ ​The​​actual​​Hadith​​in​​question​​was​​related​​by​​Yahya​​ibn​​Yahya​​al-Laythi​,​​who​​related​​from​​his​​teacher​ ​Imam​​Malik​,​​who​​related​​from​​Muhammad​​ibn​​Yusuf​,​​who​​said​​that​​as-Saaib​​ibn​​Yazid​​said,​​“​Umar​ ​ibn​ ​Khattab​ ​(Allah​ ​be​ ​pleased​ ​with​ ​him)​ ​ordered​ ​Ubayy​ ​ibn​ ​Ka’b​ ​and​ ​Tamim​ ​ad-Dari​ ​(Allah​ ​be​ ​pleased​​with​​them)​​to​​watch​​the​​night​​in​​prayer​​with​​the​​people​​for​​eleven​​rak’ahs.​​The​​reciter​​of​​the​ ​Qur’an​​would​​recite​​the​​Mi’in​​(a​​group​​of​​medium​​sized​​surahs)​​until​​we​​would​​be​​leaning​​on​​our​ ​staffs​​from​​having​​stood​​so​​long​​in​​prayer.​​And​​we​​would​​not​​leave​​until​​the​​approach​​of​​dawn.”​​(see​ ​above reference in al-Muwatta).​ ​It​​was​​stated​​in​​the​​aforementioned​​booklet​​(chapter​​7,​​pg.​​20),​​after​​quoting​​the​​above​​narration,​​“If​​we​ ​analyse​ ​the​ ​chain​ ​(Isnad)​ ​of​ ​this​ ​Hadith,​ ​we​ ​notice​ ​that​ ​Muhammad​ ​ibn​​Yusuf​​narrates​​from​​Saaib​​ibn​ ​Yazid.​​Muhammad​​(ibn​​Yusuf)​​has​​5​​students​​and​​the​​narration​​of​​each​​student​​differs​​from​​the​​next​​(i.e.​ ​the text of the Hadith is different from each student). The five students are:​ ​(1) Imam Malik​ ​(2) Yahya ibn Qattan​ ​(3) Abdul Aziz ibn Muhammad​ ​(4)Ibn Ishaq and​ ​(5) Abdur Razzaq​ ​Their narrations are as follows :​ ​(1)​​Imam​​Malik​​says​​that​​Umar​​ordered​​Ubayy​​ibn​​Ka’b​​and​​Tamim​​Dari​​to​​perform​​11​​rakaats.​​(What​ ​practise occurred thereafter is not mentioned, nor is Ramadaan mentioned).​ ​(2)​​Yahya​​ibn​​Qattan​​says​​that​​Umar​​made​​the​​people​​gather​​with​​Ubayy​​ibn​​Ka’b​​and​​Tamim​​Dari​​and​ ​both​ ​of​​them​​began​​performing​​11​​rakaats.​​(Hadrat​​Umar’s​​command​​is​​not​​mentioned,​​nor​​is​​any​ ​mention of Ramadaan made)​.​ ​(3)​​Abdul​​Aziz​​(ibn​​Muhammad)​​says​​that​​we​​used​​to​​perform​​11​​rakaats​​in​​the​​era​​of​​Umar.​​(Neither​​is​ ​the command mentioned, nor is Ubayy ibn Ka’b or Ramadaan mentioned).​ ​(4)​​Ibn​​Ishaq​​says​​that​​we​​used​​to​​perform​​13​​rakaats​​in​​Ramadaan​​during​​the​​era​​of​​Umar.​​(Neither​​is​ ​the command of Umar mentioned. Instead of 11 rakaats, 13 are mentioned)​.​ ​(5)​​Abdur​​Razzaq​​says​​that​​Umar​​gave​​the​​command​​of​​21​​rakaats.​​(In​​this​​narration​​21​​rakaats​​are​ ​mentioned instead of 11).​ ​Besides​​the​​narration​​of​​Imam​​Malik​​(Rahimahullah),​​11​​rakaats​​cannot​​be​​established​​from​​the​​other​ ​narrations.​​Due​​to​​this​​difference,​​the​​narrator​​Ibn​​Ishaq​​gave​​preference​​to​​13​​while​​Ibn​​Abdal​​Barr​ ​al-Maliki​​preferred​​21​​(from​​the​​narration​​of​​Abdur​​Razzaq).​​Therefore​​this​​narration​​is​​Mudtarib​​(A​ ​34​ ​TARAWEEH PRAYER: 8 OR 20 RAK’AHS?​ ​Hadith​​that​​is​​transmitted​​in​​different​​manners,​​so​​that​​the​​contents​​of​​each​​transmission​​differ,​​and​​it​​is​ ​not​​possible​​to​​give​​preference​​to​​any​​particular​​transmission)​​with​​regard​​to​​the​​number​​(of​​rak’ahs)​ ​and​​hence unacceptable​.​ ​The​​above​​was​​an​​analysis​​of​​Muhammad​​ibn​​Yusuf’s​​narration​​via​​Saaib​​ibn​​Yazid.​​Now​​let​​us​​examine​ ​the​​narration​​of​​Yazid​​ibn​​Khaseefah​​via​​Saaib​​(ibn​​Yazid)​,​​which​​is​​mentioned​​in​​the​​Sunan​​al-Kubra​​of​ ​al-Bayhaqi​​(vol.​​2,​​pg.​​496):​​Abu​​Zi’b​​narrates​​from​​Yazid​​ibn​​Khaseefah​,​​who​​reports​​from​​Saaib​​ibn​ ​Yazid​​that​​the people used to perform 20 rakaats in​​the month of Ramadaan during the era of Umar​.​ ​Imam​ ​Nawawi,​ ​Iraqi​ ​and​ ​Suyuti​ ​(all​ ​three​ ​were​​great​​scholars​​of​​Hadith)​​amongst​​others​​have​ ​accepted​​the​​authenticity​​of​​this​​Hadith​​(see​​Tuhfatul​​Akhyaar​,​​pg.​​192​​and​​Irshaadus​​Saari​​pg.​​74,​​(​by​ ​Imam al-Qastallani]).​ ​Muhammad​ ​ibn​ ​Jafar​ ​(another​ ​narrator​ ​in​ ​the​ ​chain)​ ​has​ ​quoted​ ​the​ ​statement​​from​​Yazid​​(ibn​ ​Khaseefah)​​as​​Abu​​Zi’b​​(had).​​This​​narrative​​is​​mentioned​​in​​Marifatus​​Sunan​​of​​al-Bayhaqi​.​​Allamah​ ​Subki​​and​​Mullah​​Ali​​al-Qari​​have​​stated​​in​​Sharh​​Minhaaj​​and​​Sharh​​Muwatta​​respectively​​that​​the​ ​chain of narrators of this Hadith are correct. (​Tuhfatul​​Ahwazee​, vol. 2, pg. 75).​ ​From​ ​the​ ​above​ ​narration​ ​we​ ​can​ ​clearly​ ​see​ ​that​ ​both​ ​the​ ​students​ ​of​ ​Yazid​ ​(ibn​ ​Khaseefah),​ ​unanimously​ ​narrate​ ​the​ ​fact​ ​that​ ​during​ ​Umar’s​ ​(Allah​ ​be​ ​pleased​ ​with​ ​him)​ ​era​ ​20​ ​rakaats​ ​was​ ​the​ ​standard​ ​practise.​ ​On​ ​the​ ​contrary,​ ​the​ ​5​ ​students​ ​of​ ​Muhammad​ ​ibn​ ​Yusuf​ ​quote​ ​Saaib​ ​(ibn​ ​Yazid)​ ​differently.​ ​In​​such​​a​​situation​​the​​correct​​approach​​would​​be​​to​​rely​​on​​the​​narration​​of​​Yazid​​ibn​​Khaseefah​.​ ​However​​the​​Ahl​​al-Hadith​​(another​​name​​for​​the​​“Salafiyya”)​​have​​unjustly​​discarded​​this​​narrative​​and​ ​adopted​ ​the​ ​doubtful​ ​one​ ​of​ ​Muhammad​​ibn​​Yusuf,​​which​​has​​differing​​versions.​​This​​goes​​against​​the​ ​principles of Hadith.” Here ends the quote.​ ​Another​​Hadith​​that​​is​​used​​by​​the​​protagonists​​of​​eight​​rak’ahs​​of​​Taraweeh​​has​​been​​related​​by​​Jabir​ ​ibn​​Abdullah​​(Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​him):​​“The​​Prophet​​(Peace​​be​​upon​​him)​​led​​the​​people​​in​​prayer​ ​during​​Ramadan​​with​​8​​rak’ahs​​and​​the​​Witr.​​We​​gathered​​in​​the​​Mosque​​the​​following​​night​​hoping​ ​that​ ​he​ ​would​ ​come​ ​again.​ ​We​ ​remained​ ​waiting​ ​till​ ​the​ ​next​ ​morning​ ​(until​ ​he​ ​came​ ​out).​ ​The​ ​Prophet​​(Peace​​be​​upon​​him)​​said,​​I​​feared​​that​​the​​Witr​​may​​become​​incumbent​​on​​you.’”​​(related​​by​ ​Ibn​​Nasr​​al-Marwazi​​in​​Qiyamul​​Layl​,​​pg.​​90,​​al-Tabarani​​and​​Ibn​​Hibban​​-​​see​​below​​for​​the​​actual​ ​Hadith​)​ ​The​​above​​Hadith​​has​​been​​analysed​​by​​Shaykh​​Abdur​​Rahim​​in​​his​​“Fatawa”​​(vol.​​1,​​pg.​​278-9)​​with​ ​the​​conclusion​​that​​the​​Hadith​​is​​Daeef​.​​The​​Shaykh​​said:​​“The​​strange​​thing​​about​​this​​Hadith​​is​​that​​its​ ​chain​​of​​authorities​​(Isnad)​​is​​not​​trustworthy.​​Please​​examine​​the​​statements​​of​​the​​Imams​​of​​this​​science​ ​concerning​​the​​narrators​​of​​this​​chain.​​In​​this​​chain​​one​​narrator​​is​​Ibn​​Hameed​​Razi​,​​about​​whom​​the​ ​opinions of the great and august critics of Hadith are as under:​ ​(1) ‘He is weak.’ -​​Hafiz al-Dhahabi​​(see his Mizanul​​I’tidal, vol. 3, pp. 49-50)​ ​(2) ‘He narrates many disowned (munkar) Hadiths.’ -​​Ya’qub ibn Shaybah​ ​(3) ‘He is objectionable.’ -​​Imam Bukhari​ ​(4) ‘He is a liar.’ -​​Abu Zur’ah​ ​(5) ‘I testify that he is a liar.’ -​​Ishaq Kausaj​ ​(6)​​‘He​​narrates​​Hadiths​​about​​everything;​​I​​have​​not​​seen​​a​​man​​bolder​​than​​him​​vis-a-vis​​God.’​​-​​Sauleh​ ​Jazrah​ ​(7) ‘By God! He is a liar.’ -​​Ibn Kharash​ ​(8) ‘He is not reliable.’ -​​Imam Nisai​ ​Now, about the second narrator,​​Ya’qub ibn Abdullah​​Ash’ari al-Qummi​:-​ ​(1) ‘He is not strong.’ -​​Daraqutni​​(see​​Mizanul I’tidal​,​​vol. 3, pg. 324).​ ​35​ ​TARAWEEH PRAYER: 8 OR 20 RAK’AHS?​ ​About the third narrator,​​Isa ibn Jariyah​:-​ ​(1) ‘He has had disowned (munkar) Hadiths.’ -​​Ibn Ma’een​ ​(2) ‘His Hadiths are disavowed.’ -​​Nisai​ ​(3) ‘His Hadiths are rejected (matruk).’ -​​Nisai​ ​(4) ‘His Hadiths are disavowed.’ -​​Abu Dawood​​- synopsis​ ​(5)​​‘He​​is​​counted​​among​​the​​weak.’​​-​​(see​​Mizanul-I’tidal​,​​vol.​​2,​​pg.​​311,​​by​​Hafiz​​al-Dhahabi).”​​Here​ ​ends the quote.​ ​Hafiz​​Ibn​​Hajar​​al-Asqalani​​(Rahimahullah)​​has​​reported​​a​​similar​​narration​​to​​the​​above​​Hadith​​in​​his​ ​Bulugh​ ​al-Maram​ ​min​ ​Adillat​ ​al-Ahkam​ ​(no.​ ​396,​ ​pg.​ ​159),​ ​on​ ​the​ ​authority​ ​of​ ​Hafiz​​Ibn​​Hibban​ ​(Rahimahullah):​ ​“Narrated​ ​Jabir​ ​ibn​ ​Abdullah​ ​(Allah​ ​be​ ​pleased​ ​with​ ​him):​​Allah’s​​Apostle​​(Peace​​be​ ​upon​​him)​​prayed​​during​​the​​night​​in​​Ramadan;​​the​​people​​waited​​for​​him​​on​​the​​next​​day,​​but​​he​​did​ ​not​​come​​out;​​and​​he​​said,​​‘I​​feared​​that​​the​​Witr​​might​​be​​enjoined​​on​​you.’”​​Note​​the​​above​​narration​ ​does​​not​​even​​state​​how​​many​​rak’ahs​​were​​performed​​by​​the​​Prophet​​(Peace​​be​​upon​​him)!!​​The​​above​ ​two Hadiths can not be used as justifiable proof in favour of 8 rak’ahs of Taraweeh on their own.​ ​Al-Imam​ ​Malik​ ​(Rahimahullah)​​has​​in​​fact​​quoted​​a​​Hadith​​which​​proves​​the​​performance​​of​​20​ ​rak’ahs of Taraweeh in Ramadan; and that is as follows:-​ ​Yahya​​related​​to​​me​​from​​Malik​​that​​Yazid​​ibn​​Ruman​​said,​​“The​​people​​used​​to​​watch​​the​​night​​in​ ​prayer​​during​​Ramadaan​​for​​23​​rak’ahs​​(i.e.​​20​​rak’ahs​​of​​Taraweeh,​​followed​​by​​3​​rak’ahs​​of​​witr)​​in​ ​the time of Umar ibn al-Khattab.”​​(vide:​​al-Muwatta​,​​6.2, No. 5, pg. 48, English ed’n)​ ​Although​​the​​above​​Hadith​​is​​Munqati​​(a​​link​​is​​missing​​in​​the​​chain)​​and​​has​​thus​​been​​declared​​to​​be​ ​Daeef​​by​​some​​scholars​​(including​​al-Albani),​​it​​nevertheless​​has​​been​​used​​as​​proof.​​Besides,​​the​​Hadith​ ​has​ ​been​ ​given​ ​a​ ​full​ ​Isnad​ ​(chain)​ ​by​ ​either​ ​Imam​ ​Ibn​ ​Abdal​ ​Barr​ ​al-Maliki​ ​(d.​ ​463/1071;​ ​Rahimahullah)​ ​or​​Shaykh​​Muhammad​​Habibullah​​ibn​​Mayabi​​ash-Shanqiti​​(Rahimahullah),​​in​​their​ ​thorough​​research​​to​​complete​​all​​the​​chains​​of​​transmission​​(Isnad)​​which​​have​​an​​incomplete​​chain;​​as​ ​found in the Muwatta of Imam Malik!​ ​In​​fact​​the​​latest​​edition​​of​​the​​English​​version​​of​​al-Muwatta​​(translated​​by​​A.​​A.​​at-Tarjumana​​and​ ​Yaqub​​Johnson)​​says​​(pg.​​xxxiv):​​“​Ibn​​Hajar​​(al-Asqalani)​​said,​​‘The​​book​​of​​Malik​​is​​sound​​by​​all​​the​ ​criteria​ ​that​ ​are​ ​demanded​ ​as​ ​proofs​ ​in​ ​the​ ​mursal,​ ​munqati​ ​(two​ ​types​ ​of​ ​Hadith​ ​which​ ​have​ ​a​ ​missing​​link)​​and​​other​​types​​of​​transmission​.’​​Then​​as-Suyuti​​followed​​what​​Ibn​​Hajar​​said​​here;​​and​ ​said,​​‘The​​mursal​​Hadith​​in​​it​​are​​a​​proof​​with​​him​​(i.e.​​ash-Shafi’i)​​as​​well​​because​​the​​mursal​​is​​a​​proof​ ​with​​us​​when​​it​​is​​properly​​supported.​​Every​​mursal​​in​​the​​Muwatta​​has​​one​​or​​more​​supports​​as​​will​​be​ ​made​​clear​​in​​this​​commentary​​(i.e.​​Suyuti’s​​commentary​​on​​al-Muwatta​​called​​Tanwir​​al-Hawalik​).​​It​​is​ ​absolutely correct to say that the Muwatta is sound without exception.’​ ​Ibn​​Abdal-Barr​​collected​​together​​all​​the​​mursal,​​munqati​​and​​mu’addil​​Hadiths​​in​​the​​Muwatta​​and​ ​said​​that​​the​​total​​number​​of​​Hadiths​​in​​the​​Muwatta​​which​​do​​not​​have​​an​​Isnad​​are​​sixty​​one.​​He​​stated​ ​that​​he​​found​​the​​isnads​​of​​all​​of​​them​​in​​other​​sources​​with​​the​​exception​​of​​four​​Hadiths.​​The​​erudite​ ​scholar​​of​​Hadith,​​Shaykh​​Muhammad​​Habibullah​​ibn​​Mayabi​​ash-Shanqiti​​says​​in​​Ida’a​​al-Halik​ ​that​​he​​had​​found​​witnesses​​for​​these​​four​​Hadith​​and​​he​​then​​mentioned​​these​​witnesses.​​He​​said,​​‘Some​ ​of​​the​​people​​of​​knowledge​​made​​these​​Isnads​​complete.’​​He​​mentioned​​from​​Ibn​​Abdal-Barr​​that​​there​ ​was​​no munkar​​(rejected)​​Hadith in the Muwatta, nor​​anything fundamentally refuted.”​ ​In​​the​​light​​of​​what​​the​​erudite​​scholars​​of​​Hadith​​have​​said​​above,we​​may​​emphatically​​state​​that​​the​ ​apparently​​‘munqati’​​Hadith​​from​​Yazid​​ibn​​Ruman​​has​​a​​complete​​Isnad;​​hence​​it​​may​​be​​used​​as​​a​​proof,​ ​since​ ​Imam​ ​Ibn​ ​Abdal-Barr​ ​has​ ​said​ ​that​ ​there​ ​is,​ ​“No​ ​munkar​ ​Hadith​ ​in​ ​the​ ​Muwatta​ ​nor​ ​anything​ ​fundamentally​​rejected.”​​Hence,​​many​​scholars​​of​​Hadith​​and​​Fiqh​​have​​used​​the​​above​​Hadith​​as​​a​​proof​ ​in favour of 20 rak’ahs of Taraweeh.​ ​36​ ​TARAWEEH PRAYER: 8 OR 20 RAK’AHS?​ ​The​​quote​​from​​“Some​​common​​questions​​answered,”​​also​​claimed​​that,​​“Rather​​he​​(Umar)​​ordered​ ​Ubayy​​ibn​​Ka’b​​to​​lead​​the​​people​​with​​11​​rakaats.”​​I​​say,​​this​​is​​half​​of​​the​​truth,​​since​​it​​is​​clearly​ ​stated​ ​in​ ​al-Muwatta​ ​:​ ​“Umar​ ​ibn​ ​Khattab​ ​ordered​ ​Ubayy​ ​ibn​ ​Ka’b​ ​AND​ ​Tamim​ ​ad-Dari​....​ ​(see​ ​Muwatta​, 6.2, no. 4, pg. 48)!!​ ​Al-Albani​​has​​said​​that​​if​​anyone​​performs​​more​​than​​11​​rak’ahs​​of​​Taraweeh,​​then​​he​​or​​she​​is​​basically​ ​committing​​a​​Bid’ah​​(a​​very​​bad​​innovation)!​​We​​seek​​refuge​​in​​Allah​​from​​such​​a​​disgusting​​statement!​ ​Since​​this​​tantamountally​​means​​that​​the​​foremost​​Imams​​of​​the​​saved​​sect​​(​al-Firqat​​an-Najiyyah​)​​of​ ​Ahl-al-Sunnah​​wal​​Jama’ah​​have​​been​​committing​​a​​gross​​innovation​​(Allah​​forbid).​​Al-Albani​​seems​​to​ ​be​​implying​​that​​the​​venerable​​Companions​​(mayAllah​​be​​pleased​​with​​them​​and​​increase​​their​​rank),​​the​ ​four​​great​​Mujtahid​​Imams​​(Allah’s​​mercy​​be​​upon​​them),​​as​​well​​as​​the​​foremost​​scholars​​of​​Hadith​​and​ ​Fiqh​​of​​the​​last​​1400​​years​​have​​‘innovated’​​the​​practise​​of​​20​​rak’ahs​​of​​Taraweeh,​​if​​considered​​in​​the​ ​light​​of​​penetrative​​elaboration,​​implicitly​​and​​covertly!​​What​​alternative​​conclusion​​can​​one​​derive,​​if​​the​ ​“Albani​​Madhhab”​​says,​​“As​​regards​​any​​addition​​(to​​11​​rak’ahs)​​-​​then​​this​​is​​disapproved​​of​​and​​declared​ ​as a bid’ah by ‘Shaykh’ al-Albani?”​ ​I​​ask​​you,​​are​​the​​so​​called​​“Salafiyya”​​in​​the​​true​​path​​of​​the​​original​​and​​true​​Salaf-as-Salihin​ ​(the​ ​pious​ ​predecessors​ ​of​ ​the​ ​first​ ​three​ ​generations​ ​of​ ​Islam),​ ​when​ ​they​ ​have​ ​declared​ ​the​ ​practise​​of​​20​​rak’ahs​​to​​be​​a​​bid’ah,​​even​​though​​the​​Salaf​​have​​been​​reported​​to​​have​​practised​​20​ ​rak’ahs?​ ​The​​actual​​Hadith​​which​​states​​that​​the​​Holy​​Prophet​​(Peace​​and​​blessings​​be​​upon​​him)​​performed​​20​ ​rak’ahs​​of​​taraweeh​​has​​been​​reported​​by​​Ibn​​Abbas​​(Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​him).​​He​​said,​​“Verily,​​the​ ​Holy​​Prophet​​(Peace​​be​​upon​​him)​​in​​the​​month​​of​​Ramadaan,​​used​​to​​perform​​20​​rak’ahs​​and​​the​ ​witr​​prayer​​(afterwards)​​without​​congregation.”​​(Reported​​in​​al-Sunan​​al-Bayhaqi,​​vol.​​2,​​pg.​​496,​ ​Musannaf​ ​Ibn​ ​Abi​ ​Shaybah,​ ​Kabiri​ ​of​ ​Imam​ ​al-Tabarani,​ ​Ibn​ ​Aadi​ ​in​ ​his​ ​Musnad,​ ​and​ ​by​​Imam​ ​Baghawi in his Majmua-as-Sahabah​)​ ​Although​​some​​scholars​​have​​declared​​this​​Hadith​​to​​be​​Daeef​​on​​its​​own,​​it​​does​​not​​mean​​that​​it​ ​should​​be​​whole​​heartedly​​rejected;​​since​​Daeef​​does​​not​​mean​​Maudu​​(fabricated).​​Please​​refer​​to​​the​ ​next​ ​section​ ​on​ ​Daeef​ ​Hadiths,​ ​and​ ​when​ ​they​ ​are​ ​acceptable​ ​to​ ​scholars​ ​for​​further​​elaboration.​​The​ ​Hadith​​related​​from​​Ibn​​Abbas​​(Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​him)​​is​​supported​​by​​many​​other​​narrations​​coming​ ​from​ ​great​​Companions​​like​​Uthman,​​Ali,​​Ibn​​Masood​…​​(Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​them​​all),​​as​​well​​as​ ​their​​successors​​(Tabi’in).​​Besides,​​some​​of​​the​​scholars​​of​​Hadith​​have​​even​​declared​​some​​weak​​Ahadith​ ​to​​be​​Sahih,​​if​​it​​has​​a​​firm​​basis​.​​It​​was​​stated​​in​​the​​book​​“Criticism​​of​​Hadith​​among​​Muslims​​with​ ​reference​ ​to​ ​Sunan​ ​Ibn​ ​Maja,”​ ​(pg.​ ​131,​ ​by​ ​one​ ​of​ ​the​ ​leading​ ​“Salafi”​ ​Shaykhs​ ​in​ ​Britain,​ ​Suhaib​ ​Hasan):​​“Shafi’i​​also​​recognises​​a​​weak​​Hadith​​as​​authentic​​(sahih)​​if​​it​​is​​found​​to​​be​​accepted​​by​​the​ ​whole​​Ummah​​(see​​al-Sakhawi:​​Fath​​al-Mugith).​​But​​he​​does​​not​​accept​​Malik’s​​view​​of​​restricting​​the​ ​practise​ ​to​ ​the​ ​people​ ​of​ ​Madinah.​ ​According​ ​to​ ​the​ ​later​ ​scholars​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Hanafi​ ​school​ ​like​ ​Ibn​ ​al-Humam​,​​a​​Hadith​​will​​be​​declared​​Sahih,​​if​​it​​is​​supported​​by​​the​​practise​​of​​the​​Ummah​​(see​​Abdal​ ​Rashid​​Nu’mani​​:​​Ma​​tamassu​​ilay​​he​​al-Haja,​​pg.​​18).​​Among​​traditionalists,​​Tirmidhi​​often​​remarks,​​after​ ​quoting​ ​a​ ​less​ ​authentic​ ​Hadith:​ ​‘It​ ​is​ ​being​ ​practised​ ​by​ ​the​ ​people​ ​of​ ​learning​ ​(Ahl​ ​al-Ilm).’​​Suyuti​ ​deduces:​​‘It​​indicates​​that​​the​​Hadith​​is​​supported​​by​​the​​sayings​​of​​the​​people​​of​​learning.​​More​​than​​one​ ​scholar​ ​has​ ​said​ ​that​ ​a​ ​Hadith​ ​is​ ​declared​ ​Sahih​ ​if​ ​supported​ ​by​ ​the​ ​sayings​ ​of​ ​the​ ​people​ ​of​ ​learning, even if it lacks a proper Isnad​​(see Suyuti:​​al-Ta’aqubat, folio 20).”​ ​As​​stated​​above,​​the​​great​​research​​scholar​​(Muhaqqiq)​​Hafiz​​Kamal​​ibn​​al-Humam​​(d.​​861/1457;​ ​Rahimahullah)​​had​​actually​​said:​​“One​​of​​the​​factors​​from​​which​​the​​authenticity​​of​​a​​Hadith​​is​​known​​is​ ​that​​the​​learned​​(Ulama)​​may​​conform​​to​​it,​​which​​is​​a​​proof​​of​​its​​being​​sound​​(vide:​​Fath​​al-Qadir​,​​vol.​ ​3, pg. 349).​ ​There​​are​​many​​quotes​​from​​scholars​​which​​prove​​a​​near​​universal​​juridical​​acceptance​​of​​20​​rak’ahs​​of​ ​Taraweeh,​ ​but​ ​I​ ​content​ ​myself​ ​by​ ​quoting​ ​a​ ​select​ ​few​ ​from​ ​some​ ​of​ ​the​ ​foremost​ ​scholars​ ​of​ ​the​ ​37​ ​TARAWEEH PRAYER: 8 OR 20 RAK’AHS?​ ​Ahl-as-Sunnah,​​as​​well​​as​​the​​Imam​​of​​the​​“Salafiyya”​​(when​​it​​suits​​their​​whims​​and​​desires),​​Ahmad​​ibn​ ​Taymiyya.​ ​(1)Shaykh al-Islam Ahmad ibn Hajar al-Asqalani​​(d.​​852/1449; R.A.)​ ​The​​Hafiz​​of​​Hadith,​​Ibn​​Hajar​​al-Asqalani​​has​​reproduced​​from​​Imam​​Rafi’i​​(Allah’s​​mercy​​be​​on​ ​him):​​“For​​two​​nights​​the​​Holy​​Prophet​​(Peace​​be​​upon​​him)​​led​​twenty​​rak’ahs​​of​​prayer​​each​ ​night;​​on​​the​​third​​night​​the​​people​​gathered​​but​​the​​Holy​​Prophet​​(Peace​​be​​upon​​him)​​did​​not​ ​come​​out.​​Then​​the​​next​​morning,​​he​​told​​the​​people,​​‘It​​so​​occurred​​to​​me​​that​​it​​would​​be​​made​ ​obligatory​​for​​you,​​and​​you​​would​​not​​be​​able​​to​​discharge​​this​​obligation.’”​​After​​reproducing​​this​ ​tradition,​ ​Hafiz​ ​Ibn​ ​Hajar​ ​said:​ ​“All​ ​the​ ​traditionalists​ ​(Muhaddithin)​ ​are​ ​unanimous​ ​about​ ​the​ ​soundness​​of​​this​​report.”​​(see​​Talkhis​​al-habir​​fi​​takhrij​​ahadith​​al-Rafi’i​​al-Kabir​,​​vol.​​1,​​pg.​​119,​ ​by Hafiz ibn Hajar).​ ​(2) Imam al-Azam Abu Hanifah​​(d. 150 AH; Rahimahullah)​ ​It​​was​​stated​​in​​Fayd​​ul-Bari​​Sharh​​Sahih​​al-Bukhari​​(by​​Shaykh​​Anwar​​Shah​​Kashmiri):​​“​Imam​​Abu​ ​Yusuf​ ​(Rahimahullah)​ ​asked​ ​Imam​ ​Abu​ ​Hanifah​ ​(Rahimahullah),​ ​‘Did​ ​Hadrat​​Umar​​(Allah​​be​​pleased​ ​with​​him)​​have​​any​​compact​​from​​the​​Holy​​Prophet​​(Peace​​be​​upon​​him)​​for​​20​​rak’ahs​​of​​Taraweeh?’​​The​ ​Imam​​replied,​​‘Hadrat​​Umar​​was​​not​​one​​to​​invent​​on​​his​​own;​​certainly​​he​​had​​some​​proof​​with​​him​​for​ ​this!’”​​(also​​found​​in​​Maraqi​​ul-Falah​,​​pg.​​81,​​by​​Imam​​al-Shurunbulali​​and​​Bahr​​ur​​Ra’iq​,​​vol.2,​​pg.​ ​66, by​​Imam ibn Nujaimal-Misri​).​ ​(3) Imam al-Tirmidhi​​(d. 279/892; Rahimahullah)​ ​Imam​​Tirmidhi​​said:​​“​Umar,​​Ali​​as​​well​​as​​other​​Companions​​(Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​them​​all)​​and​ ​Sufyan​​al-Thauri,​​Ibn​​al-Mubarak​​and​​Imam​​al-Shafi’i​​(Allah’s​​mercy​​be​​upon​​them),​​all​​believed​​in​ ​20​ ​rak’ahs​ ​of​ ​Taraweeh,​ ​and​ ​Imam​​Shafi’i​​has​​stated​​that​​he​​had​​seen​​the​​people​​of​​Makkah​​saying​​20​ ​rak’ahs (see​​Sunan al-Tirmidhi​, vol. 1,pg. 99).​ ​(4) Imam Malik ibn Anas​​(d. 179 AH; Rahimahullah)​ ​It​​was​​written​​in​​the​​most​​authentic​​book​​on​​Maliki​​Fiqh,​​al-Mudawwanah​​(vo.​​1,​​pg.​​193-94),​​by​ ​Qadi​ ​Sahnoon​ ​(Rahimahullah):​ ​“​Ibn​ ​al-Qasim​ ​said,​ ​‘The​​rak’ahs​​(of​​Taraweeh)​​with​​witr​​are​​39.’​ ​Imam​​Malik​​said,​​‘This​​is​​what​​the​​people​​have​​agreed​​upon​​from​​amongst​​the​​predecessors,​​and​ ​the​ ​people​ ​have​ ​not​ ​stopped​ ​doing​ ​it.’​”​ ​(For​​an​​explanation​​of​​why​​it​​was​​36​​rak’ahs​​see​​the​​quote​ ​below from Allamah Anwar Shah Kashmiri).​ ​(5) Hafiz Ibn Humam​​(d. 861/1457; Rahimahullah)​ ​Allamah​​Ibn​​Humam​​asserts​​that​​it​​has​​been​​established​​from​​genuine​​authority​​that​​the​​Companions​ ​and​​their​​Successors​​(tabi’in)​​used​​to​​say​​twenty​​rak’ahs​​of​​Taraweeh​​during​​the​​auspicious​​time​​of​​Umar​ ​(Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​him);​​this​​authority​​of​​Yazid​​ibn​​Ruman​​has​​been​​reported​​from​​Sa’ib​​ibn​​Yazid​​that,​ ​‘during​​Umar’s​​auspicious​​time​​we​​used​​to​​say​​twenty​​rak’ahs.’​​The​​genuineness​​of​​this​​authority​​has​​been​ ​verified​​by​​Imam​​Nawawi​​in​​the​​synopsis​​(see​​Fath​​al-Qadir​,​​vol.​​1,​​pg.​​407​​and​​Nasb-ur-Rayah​,​​vol.​ ​1,​​pg.​​294,​​by​​Hafiz​​al-Zaylai​).​​Hafiz​​Ibn​​Humam​​also​​said​​in​​Fath​​al-Qadir​​(vol.​​1,​​pg.​​470):​​“At​​last​ ​unanimity​​was​​formed​​on​​20​​rak’ahs​​of​​prayer​​and​​this​​alone​​is​​in​​succession.”​​This​​last​​statement​ ​has also been said in similar words by​​Ibn Taymiyya​​in his​​Minhaj us-Sunnah​​(vol. 2, pg. 224).​ ​38​ ​TARAWEEH PRAYER: 8 OR 20 RAK’AHS?​ ​(6) Imam Ata ibn Abi Rabah​​(Rahimahullah)​ ​The​​august​​successor​​(Tabi’in)​​and​​Mufti​​of​​Makkah​​in​​his​​time​​said:​​“I​​have​​seen​​the​​Companions,​​and​ ​other​ ​people​ ​in​ ​Makkah​ ​saying​ ​23​ ​rak’ahs,​ ​including​ ​the​ ​witr.”​ ​This​ ​report​ ​is​ ​Hasan​ ​(good).​ ​(see​ ​Musannaf​ ​Ibn​ ​Abi​ ​Shaybah​,​ ​pg.​ ​406,​ ​Fath​ ​al-Bari​,​ ​vol.​ ​4,​ ​pg.​ ​219,​ ​of​ ​Hafiz​ ​Ibn​ ​Hajar​ ​al-Asqalani,​ ​Qiyam ul-Layl​, pg. 91, by Imam Ibn Nasr al-Marwazi).​ ​(7) Imam Muwaffaq al-Din Ibn Qudama al-Maqdisi​​(d.​​620/1223; R.A)​ ​The​​Imam​​of​​the​​Hanbalis​​in​​his​​time,​​Ibn​​Qudama​​al-Maqdisi,​​said​​in​​his​​book​​al-Mughni​​(vol.​​1,​​pg.​ ​803):​​“There has been the Companion’s consensus (Ijma-as-Sahaba)​​on 20 rak’ahs of Taraweeh.”​ ​(8) Allamah Anwar Shah Kashmiri​​(d. 1352 AH; Rahimahullah)​ ​It​​was​​stated​​in​​his​​published​​lecture,​​Tirmidhi​​al-ma’ruf​​ba-Arfa’sh-Shazzi​​(vol.​​1​​pg.​​329):​​“​Not​ ​even​​one​​of​​the​​the​​four​​Imams​​believed​​in​​less​​than​​20​​rak’ahs​​of​​Taraweeh​;​​the​​practise​​and​​belief​ ​of​​the​​majority​​of​​the​​Companions​​was​​also​​this.​​Imam​​Malik​​(Allah’s​​mercy​​be​​upon​​him)​​believes​​in​ ​more​​than​​20​​rak’ahs;​​he​​is​​positive​​that​​they​​are​​36.​​According​​to​​Imam​​Malik’s​​practise​​only​​20​​rak’ahs​ ​of​​Taraweeh​​will​​be​​said​​in​​congregation,​​but​​the​​general​​practise​​and​​method​​of​​the​​citizens​​of​​Madinah​ ​was​​that​​during​​the​​brief​​rest​​interval​​(after​​every​​4​​rak’ahs),​​when​​the​​Imam​​sat​​down​​after​​4​​rak’ahs,​​they​ ​used​​to​​perform​​4​​more​​rak’ahs.​​The​​men​​who​​said​​the​​Taraweeh​​in​​the​​sacred​​mosque​​at​​Makkah,​​used​​to​ ​circumambulate​​(Tawaf)​​the​​Ka’ba​​during​​this​​brief​​recess.​​The​​people​​of​​Madinah,​​naturally,​​could​​not​ ​circumambulate​​the​​Ka’ba​​and​​hence,​​instead,​​they​​used​​to​​perform​​16​​rak’ahs​​more​​(in​​total)​​during​​these​ ​brief recesses.”​ ​(9) Imam al-Ayni​​(d. 855/1451; Rahimahullah)​ ​Allamah​​Ayni​​wrote​​in​​his​​Sharh​​al-Bukhari:​​“The​​number​​of​​rak’ahs​​in​​the​​Taraweeh​​is​​twenty.​​Imam​ ​Shafi’i​​and​​Imam​​Ahmed​​(Allah’s​​mercy​​be​​upon​​them)​​assert​​the​​same​​thing.​​Their​​proof​​is​​the​​report​ ​which​​Bayhaqi​​has,​​with​​genuine​​authority,​​narrated​​from​​Sa’ib​​ibn​​Yazid.​​The​​great​​Companions,​​including​ ​Umar,​​Uthman​​and​​Ali​​(may​​Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​them),​​as​​also​​the​​revered​​Successors​​(Tabi’in),​​used​​to​ ​perform​​twenty​​rak’ahs.”​​Then​​he​​said:​​“The​​most​​excellent​​and​​the​​most​​advisable​​course​​to​​conform​​to​ ​is​​that​​of​​the​​Holy​​Prophet’s​​and​​his​​(Peace​​and​​blessings​​be​​upon​​him)​​Companions​​(practise).”​​(​Umdat​ ​ul-Qari Sharh-al-Bukhari​, vol. 7, pg. 178).​ ​(10) Hafiz Taqi-ad-Din Ahmad Ibn Taymiyya al-Hanbali​​(d. 728/1328)​ ​He​​has​​said​​in​​his​​Fatawa​​Ibn​​Taymiyya​​(vol.​​1,​​pg.​​191):​​“​It​​has​​been​​proven​​without​​doubt​​that​ ​Ubayy​​ibn​​Ka’b​​(Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​him)​​used​​to​​lead​​the​​Companions,​​during​​Ramadan,​​for​​20​ ​rak’ahs​​and​​3​​rak’ahs​​of​​witr.​​Hence​​it​​is​​the​​principle​​(maslak)​​of​​most​​of​​the​​Ulama​​that​​this​​is​ ​the​​Sunnah,​​because​​Ubayy​​ibn​​Ka’b​​led​​20​​rak’ahs​​of​​prayer​​in​​the​​presence​​of​​the​​Muhajirin​​(the​ ​emigrants) and the Ansars (the helpers) and not a single Companion repudiated it!​”​ ​So​​please​​ask​​yourselves:​​“Who​​are​​the​​‘Salafiyya’;​​are​​they​​the​​people​​who​​conform​​to​​the​​way​​of​​the​ ​Holy​ ​Prophet​ ​(Peace​ ​be​ ​upon​ ​him),​ ​his​ ​Companions​ ​(may​ ​Allah​ ​be​ ​pleased​ ​with​ ​them​ ​all),​ ​and​ ​their​ ​successors​​(this​​includes​​the​​four​​Mujtahid​​Imams,​​Allah’s​​mercy​​be​​upon​​them)​​consensus​​on​​20​​rak’ahs,​ ​or is it the likes of al-Albari and his followers?” May Allah guide them.​ ​39​ ​DA’EEF AHADITH AND THEIR APPLICABILITY TO ISLAMIC DECREES (FATAWA)​ ​DA’EEF AHADITH AND THEIR APPLICABILITY​ ​TO ISLAMIC DECREES (FATAWA)​ ​I​​now​​wish​​to​​convey​​to​​you​​the​​honourable​​reader,​​a​​short​​but​​detailed​​explanation​​of​​what​​is​​a​​Daeef​ ​(weak)​​Hadith,​​and​​when​​they​​can​​be​​applied​​and​​practised​​by​​the​​dictates​​of​​Islamic​​Jurisprudence.​​The​ ​reason​​for​​writing​​this​​account​​is​​simply​​due​​to​​a​​very​​common​​misunderstanding​​amongst​​many​​of​​the​​so​ ​called​​“Salafiyya”​​and​​other​​ignorant​​people,​​who​​have​​not​​even​​scratched​​the​​surface​​of​​the​​Science​​of​ ​Hadith,​​and​​the​​way​​scholars​​rate​​Hadith​​(tasheeh),​​as​​well​​as​​differences​​of​​opinion​​(Ikhtilaf)​​in​​the​​final​ ​classification​​of​​Hadith;​​hence​​they​​are​​generally​​incapable​​of​​knowing​​when​​a​​Daeef​​Hadith​​can​​be​​used​ ​in​​Islamic​​rulings,​​even​​though​​many​​of​​the​​prominent​​Mujtahid​​Imams​​themselves​​used​​to​​do​​so​​in​​the​ ​absence of an authentic narration.​ ​Instead​​many​​ignorant​​people​​have​​been​​causing​​an​​unjustifiable​​fitna​​(mischief),​​by​​accusing​​usually​ ​the​ ​ignorant​ ​believers​​of​​following​​“Daeef​​Ahadith”,​​and​​I​​say,​​this​​is​​due​​to​​their​​ignorance​​of​​all​​the​ ​available​​channels​​of​​transmission​​(Asanid)​​for​​a​​particular​​Hadith.​​Since​​many​​a​​time​​a​​Hadith​​may​​be​ ​classified​ ​as​ ​being​ ​Daeef​ ​through​ ​one​ ​particular​ ​Isnad,​ ​and​ ​just​ ​because​ ​of​​this,​​many​​of​​the​​ignorant​ ​members​ ​of​ ​the​ ​“Salafiyya”​ ​become​ ​absolutely​ ​convinced​ ​that​ ​whoever​ ​follows,​ ​and​ ​practises​ ​this​ ​particular​​“Daeef”​​Hadith​​is​​an​​innovator​​(Mubtadi)!​​This​​I​​believe​​is​​the​​“wrong”​​approach​​to​​classifying​ ​Ahadith,​​because​​other​​chains​​of​​transmission​​(Sanad)​​must​​be​​considered,​​and​​if​​this​​is​​done,​​a​​singular​ ​Daeef​​Hadith​​through​​one​​Isnad​​could​​even​​eventually​​reach​​the​​level​​of​​Hasan​​li​​ghairihi​​(a​​good​​Hadith​ ​due​​to​​other​​narrations​​supporting​​and​​strengthening​​it).​​This​​is​​also​​the​​chief​​reason​​why​​the​​‘Salafiyya’​ ​and​​their​​“scholars​​of​​Hadith​​and​​Fiqh”,​​are​​trying​​to​​demolish​​the​​Taqleed​​of​​the​​Mujtahids.​​They​​claim​ ​that​​the​​followers​​of​​the​​four​​schools​​of​​Fiqh​​are​​“contradicting”​​the​​authentic​​Sunnah​​by​​following​​many​ ​Daeef​ ​Ahadith​ ​based​​rulings!​​Usually,​​what​​is​​found​​amongst​​such​​people​​who​​claim​​to​​be​​scholars​​of​ ​Hadith,​ ​is​ ​that​ ​they​ ​don’t​ ​always​ ​try​ ​their​ ​utmost​ ​to​ ​find​ ​other​ ​supporting​ ​narrations​ ​to​ ​give​ ​a​ ​more​ ​realistic,​​and​​acceptable​​classification.​​For​​example,​​when​​I​​compared​​the​​list​​of​​Ahadith​​declared​​to​​be​ ​Daeef​ ​in​ ​the​ ​Riyadh​ ​us-Salihin​ ​(by​ ​Imam​ ​Nawawi​),​ ​as​ ​checked​ ​by​ ​al-Albani​ ​and​ ​Shaykh​ ​Shu’ayb​ ​al-Arnaoot​ ​(from​ ​Amman,​ ​Jordan)​ ​separately;​ ​I​ ​noticed​ ​that​ ​Shaykh​ ​al-Arnaoot​ ​took​ ​greater​ ​pains​​to​ ​declare​​many​​Daeef​​Hadith​​to​​be​​Hasan​​Li​​Ghairihi,​​whereas​​al-Albani​​hardly​​bothered​​to​​raise​​the​​rank​​of​ ​a​ ​singular​ ​Daeef​ ​Hadith​ ​to​ ​Hasan​ ​Li​ ​Ghairihi​ ​by​ ​investigating​ ​other​ ​supporting​ ​routes​ ​of​ ​narration!​ ​Insha’Allah​​we​​should​​all​​follow​​the​​authentic​​Sunnah​​when​​it​​is​​definitely​​proven​​and​​cannot​​be​​explained​ ​away by other authentic interpretations and evidences.​ ​The​​following​​discussion​​has​​been​​derived​​from​​the​​English​​translation​​of​​Umdat​​al-Salik​​wa​​Uddat​ ​al-Nasik​​(​The​​Reliance​​of​​the​​Traveller​​and​​Tools​​of​​the​​Worshipper​,​​by​​Shaykh​​Ahmad​​ibn​​Naqib​ ​al-Misri​​[d.​​769/1368;​​Rahimahullah],​​trans.​​by​​Noah​​Ha​​Mim​​Keller​,​​W48.0,​​pg.​​954-957).​​NB-​​the​ ​abbreviations for the following quote are:-​ ​A=Shaykh Abdal Wakil Durubi, N=Shaykh Nuh Ali Salman, n=translators remark​ ​“(A:)​​Weak​​(daeef)​​is​​a​​term​​for​​any​​Hadith​​with​​a​​chain​​of​​transmission​​containing​​a​​narrator​​whose​ ​memory​​was​​poor,​​one​​who​​was​​not​​trustworthy,​​not​​identified​​by​​name,​​or​​for​​other​​reasons.​​But​​weak​ ​cannot​​simply​​be​​equated​​with​​false.​​Were​​this​​the​​case,​​mere​​analysis​​of​​the​​transmitters​​would​​be​​the​ ​universal​​criterion​​for​​the​​acceptance​​or​​rejection​​of​​particular​​rulings​​based​​on​​hadiths.​​While​​scholars​ ​do​ ​use​​this​​measure​​in​​upgrading​​the​​work​​of​​preceding​​generations​​of​​legal​​authorities,​​they​​have​​not​ ​employed​​it​​as​​a​​simplistic​​expedient​​to​​eliminate​​every​​piece​​of​​legal​​information​​that​​is​​connected​​with​ ​a​ ​weak​ ​hadith,​ ​because​ ​of​ ​various​ ​considerations.​ ​One​​of​​these​​is​​that​​when​​a​​piece​​of​​information​​is​ ​received​​through​​a​​means​​of​​transmission​​that​​may​​or​​may​​not​​be​​trustworthy,​​we​​generally​​have​​doubts​ ​40​ ​DA’EEF AHADITH AND THEIR APPLICABILITY TO ISLAMIC DECREES (FATAWA)​ ​about​​it.​​But​​when​​one​​and​​the​​same​​piece​​of​​information​​reaches​​us​​through​​several​​completely​​different​ ​channels,​​even​​though​​each​​one​​may​​or​​may​​not​​be​​trustworthy,​​the​​logical​​probability​​of​​the​​information’s​ ​falsity​ ​is​ ​much​ ​reduced.​ ​And​ ​if​ ​we​ ​receive​ ​the​ ​very​ ​same​ ​information​ ​from​ ​ten​ ​such​ ​channels,​ ​the​ ​possibility​​of​​its​​falsity​​does​​not​​usually​​even​​come​​to​​mind.​​This​​verificatory​​principle​​has​​two​​important​ ​implications,​​one​​being​​the​​obligatory​​nature​​of​​belief​​in​​Hadiths​​that​​are​​mutawatir​,​​and​​the​​second​​being​ ​the​​weight​​that​​Hadith​​scholars​​give​​to​​multiple​​means​​of​​transmission,​​which​​can​​raise​​a​​Hadith​​from​​well​ ​authenticated​​(hasan)​​to​​rigorously​​authenticated​​(sahih),​​or​​from​​weak​​(daeef)​​to​​well​​authenticated,​​as​ ​described in the following account of a Hadith’s reclassification by a major specialist in Hadith forgeries.​ ​(‘​Ali​​Qari​:)​​The​​Hadith​​“​I​​am​​the​​city​​of​​knowledge​​and​​‘Ali​​is​​its​​gate​,”​​was​​mentioned​​by​​Tirmidhi​ ​in​​his​​Jami’​,​​where​​he​​said​​it​​was​​unacknowledgeable.​​Bukhari​​also​​said​​this,​​and​​said​​that​​it​​was​​without​ ​legitimate​​claim​​to​​authenticity.​​Ibn​​Ma’in​​said​​that​​it​​was​​a​​baseless​​lie,​​as​​did​​Abu​​Hatim​​and​​Yahya​ ​ibn​​Sa’id​.​​Ibn​​Jawzi​​recorded​​it​​in​​his​​book​​of​​Hadith​​forgeries,​​and​​was​​confirmed​​by​​Dhahabi​,​​and​ ​others​​in​​this.​​Ibn​​Daqiq​​al-‘Eid​​said,​​“This​​Hadith​​is​​not​​confirmed​​by​​scholars,​​and​​is​​held​​by​​some​​to​ ​be​​spurious.”​​Daraqutni​​stated​​that​​it​​was​​uncorroborated.​​Ibn​​Hajar​​‘Asqalani​​was​​asked​​about​​it​​and​ ​answered​​that​​it​​was​​well​​authenticated​​(hasan),​​not​​rigorously​​authenticated​​(sahih),​​as​​Hakim​​had​​said,​ ​but​ ​not​ ​a​ ​forgery​ ​(mawdu’),​ ​as​ ​Ibn​ ​Jawzi​ ​had​ ​said.​ ​This​ ​was​ ​mentioned​ ​by​ ​Suyuti​.​​The​​Hadith​​master​ ​(hafiz)​​Abu​​Sa’id​​‘Ala’i​​said,​​“​The​​truth​​is​​that​​the​​Hadith​​is​​well​​authenticated​​(hasan),​​in​​view​​of​ ​its​ ​multiple​ ​means​ ​of​ ​transmission,​ ​being​ ​neither​ ​rigorously​ ​authenticated​ ​(sahih)​ ​nor​ ​weak​ ​(da’if), much less a forgery​.” (​Risala al-mawdu’at,​​26​).​ ​(A:)​​Thus,​​when​​the​​person​​who​​has​​related​​a​​Hadith​​is​​an​​Islamic​​scholar​​of​​the​​first​​rank,​​it​​is​​not​ ​enough​​for​​a​​student​​or​​popular​​writer​​to​​find​​one​​chain​​of​​transmission​​for​​the​​Hadith​​that​​is​​weak.​​There​ ​are​ ​a​​great​​many​​Hadiths​​with​​several​​chains​​of​​transmission,​​and​​adequate​​scholarly​​treatment​​of​​how​ ​these​ ​affect​ ​a​ ​Hadith’s​ ​authenticity​ ​has​ ​been​ ​traditionally​ ​held​ ​to​ ​require​ ​a​ ​master​ ​(hafiz),​ ​those​ ​like​ ​Bukhari,​​Muslim,​​Dhahabi,​​Ibn​​Kathir,​​or​​Suyuti​​who​​have​​memorized​​at​​least​​100,000​​Hadiths​​-​​their​ ​texts,​​chains​​of​​transmission,​​and​​significance​​-​​to​​undertake​​the​​comparative​​study​​of​​the​​Hadith’s​​various​ ​chains​​of​​transmission​​that​​cannot​​be​​accurately​​assessed​​without​​such​​knowledge.​​Today,​​when​​not​​one​ ​Hadith​​master​​(hafiz)​​remains​​in​​the​​Muslim​​Community,​​we​​do​​not​​accept​​the​​judgement​​of​​any​​would-be​ ​reclassifiers​​of​​Hadith,​​no​​matter​​how​​large​​their​​popular​​following,​​unless​​it​​is​​corroborated​​by​​the​​work​ ​of previous Hadith masters.​ ​Another​​reason​​why​​weak​​cannot​​simply​​be​​equated​​with​​false​​is​​the​​fact​​that​​weak​​is​​an​​attribute​​of​ ​the​​Hadith’s​​chain​​of​​transmission,​​while​​false​​is​​an​​attribute​​of​​the​​Hadith’s​​text.​​These​​are​​two​​different​ ​things,​​and​​the​​relationship​​between​​their​​respective​​reliabilities​​is​​a​​probabilistic​​expectation​​(istinbat)​ ​that​ ​is​ ​neither​ ​strictly​ ​casual,​ ​nor​ ​yet​​a​​necessary​​logical​​implication​​(lazim),​​there​​being​​four​​logical​ ​possibilities for any Hadith:​ ​(1)​ ​A​ ​sound​ ​text​ ​and​ ​sound​ ​chain​ ​of​ ​transmission,​ ​as​ ​with​ ​well-authenticated​ ​(hasan)​ ​and​ ​rigorously​ ​authenticated (sahih) Hadiths;​ ​(2)​​A​​sound​​text​​and​​an​​unsound​​chain​​of​​transmitters,​​reflecting​​the​​possibility​​that​​a​​transmitter​​with​ ​poor​​memory,​​or​​unknown​​to​​the​​person​​who​​recorded​​the​​Hadith,​​or​​one​​not​​trustworthy,​​is​​in​​principle​ ​capable of relating the Hadith correctly;​ ​(3) An unsound text and unsound chain of transmitters, as with Hadiths that are forged (mawdu’);​ ​(4)​​or​​an​​unsound​​text​​and​​a​​sound​​chain​​of​​transmitters,​​reflecting​​the​​possibility​​that​​one​​of​​those​​who​ ​classify​​the​​personalities​​and​​reliability​​of​​various​​Hadith​​transmitters​​could​​in​​principle​​make​​an​​error​​in​ ​their ijtihad regarding a particular person.​ ​41​ ​DA’EEF AHADITH AND THEIR APPLICABILITY TO ISLAMIC DECREES (FATAWA)​ ​Because​​of​​the​​distinction​​between​​text​​and​​transmission,​​forms​​of​​evidence​​other​​than​​the​ ​authenticity​ ​rating​ ​of​ ​the​ ​chain​ ​of​ ​narrators​ ​are​ ​sometimes​ ​admissible,​ ​as​ ​when​ ​there​ ​is​ ​a​ ​consensus​ ​of​ ​legal​ ​scholars​ ​who​ ​have​ ​received​ ​the​ ​Hadith​ ​with​ ​acceptance,​ ​which​ ​is​ ​an​ ​acknowledged form of corroboration for Hadith of the second type mentioned above.​ ​(​Isma’il​​Ansari​:)​​Ibn​​Hajar​​‘Asqalani​​says:​​“Among​​the​​characteristics​​that​​necessitate​​acceptance​ ​is​​for​​scholars​​of​​Sacred​​Law​​to​​have​​concurred​​on​​applying​​implications​​of​​a​​Hadith.​​Such​​a​​Hadith​​is​ ​acceptable,​ ​even​ ​obligatory​ ​to​ ​apply,​ ​as​ ​a​ ​number​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Imams​ ​of​ ​fundamentals​ ​of​ ​Islam​​(usul)​​have​ ​explicitly​ ​stated.​ ​Shafi’i​,​ ​for​ ​example,​ ​says,​ ​‘What​ ​I​ ​have​ ​said​ ​about​ ​water​ ​when​ ​its​ ​taste,​ ​odour,​ ​and​ ​colour​​change,​​has​​been​​related​​from​​the​​Prophet​​(Allah​​bless​​him​​and​​give​​him​​peace)​​through​​a​​channel​ ​of​ ​transmission​ ​that​ ​Hadith​ ​scholars​ ​do​ ​not​ ​confirm​ ​the​ ​like​ ​of,​ ​but​ ​it​ ​is​ ​the​​position​​of​​all​​scholars​ ​without​​a​​single​​dissenting​​voice​​I​​know​​of.’​​And​​he​​said​​of​​the​​Hadith,​​‘There​​is​​no​​bequest​​to​​an​​estate​ ​division​​heir’​​-​​‘Scholars​​of​​Hadith​​do​​not​​corroborate​​it,​​but​​all​​scholars​​receive​​it​​with​​acceptance​​and​ ​apply it.’”​ ​Ibn​​al-Qayyim​,​​in​​his​​I’lam​​al-muwaqqi’in​,​​when​​discussing​​the​​Hadith​​of​​Mu’adh​​about​​judgements​ ​(​A​:​​in​​which​​the​​Prophet​​(Allah​​bless​​him​​and​​give​​him​​peace)​​asked​​Mu’adh​​ibn​​Jabal​​when​​dispatching​ ​him​​to​​Yemen​​how​​he​​would​​judge,​​to​​which​​Mu’adh​​replied​​that​​he​​would​​judge​​first​​by​​the​​Koran,​​then​ ​the​ ​Sunna,​ ​and​ ​then​ ​by​ ​his​ ​own​ ​reasoning​ ​(ijtihad)),​ ​says,​ ​“Legal​ ​scholars​ ​accept​ ​it​ ​and​ ​employ​ ​it​ ​as​ ​evidence,​​from​​which​​we​​learn​​that​​they​​hold​​it​​to​​be​​rigorously​​authenticated​​(sahih),​​just​​as​​we​​learn​​of​ ​the Prophet’s saying (Allah bless him and give him peace):​ ​(1) “‘There is no bequest to an estate division heir.’​ ​(2) “‘[The Hadith about the sea,] Its water is purifying.’​ ​(3)​​“‘When​​buyer​​and​​seller​​differ​​about​​the​​price​​they​​have​​agreed​​upon​​and​​the​​merchandise​​still​​exists,​ ​each swears [​N​: that his side of the story is correct]​​and [​N​: they cannot agree] they cancel the sale.’​ ​(4) “‘The killer’s extended family is responsible for the indemnity.’​ ​“Even​​if​​these​​Hadiths​​are​​unauthenticated​​in​​their​​chains​​of​​transmission,​​since​​virtually​​all​ ​scholars​​have​​related​​them,​​the​​Hadiths’​​authenticity,​​which​​they​​accept,​​eliminates​​their​​need​​to​ ​verify​​the​​channels​​of​​transmission,​​and​​so​​it​​is​​too​​with​​the​​Hadith​​of​​Mu’adh:​​the​​fact​​that​​all​ ​scholars​ ​have​ ​adduced​ ​it​ ​as​ ​evidence​ ​eliminates​ ​the​ ​need​ ​for​ ​their​ ​checking​ ​its​ ​means​ ​of​ ​transmission.”​ ​And​​Ibn​​‘Abd​​al-Barr​​says​​in​​al-Istidhkar​,​​concerning​​Tirmidhi’s​​having​​related​​that​​Bukhari​​said​​of​ ​the​​Hadith​​of​​the​​sea​​“Its​​water​​is​​purifying”​​that​​it​​was​​rigorously​​authenticated​​(sahih)-​​“Hadith​​scholars​ ​do​​not​​consider​​Hadiths​​with​​the​​like​​of​​its​​chain​​of​​transmission​​to​​be​​rigorously​​authenticated​​(sahih),​ ​though​ ​I​ ​hold​ ​it​ ​to​ ​be​ ​so,​ ​because​ ​scholars​ ​have​ ​received​ ​it​ ​with​ ​acceptance.”​ ​(​al-Isaba​ ​fi​ ​nusra​ ​al-Khulafa’ al-Rashidin wa al-Sahaba, 11. 8-9​).​ ​(​A​:)​​Among​​the​​primary​​textual​​evidence​​for​​the​​admissibility​​of​​such​​Hadiths​​is​​the​​word​​of​​the​​Prophet​ ​(Allah​ ​bless​ ​him​ ​and​ ​give​ ​him​ ​peace):​ ​“Allah​ ​will​ ​never​ ​make​ ​my​ ​Community​ ​concur​ ​upon​ ​misguidance,​ ​and​ ​Allah’s​ ​hand​ ​is​ ​over​ ​the​ ​group.”​ ​(This​ ​is​ ​a​ ​Sahih​ ​Hadith​ ​related​ ​by​ ​Imam​ ​al-Hakim).​ ​So​​it​​is​​inadequate​​for​​someone​​who​​proposes​​to​​annul​​a​​ruling​​of​​Sacred​​Law​​to​​adduce​​that​ ​the​​Hadith​​supporting​​it​​has​​a​​weak​​chain​​of​​transmission,​​unless​​he​​can​​establish​​both​​that​​there​ ​are​ ​not​ ​a​ ​number​ ​of​ ​similar​ ​variants​ ​or​ ​alternate​ ​channels​ ​of​ ​transmission​ ​that​​strengthen​​it,​ ​42​ ​DA’EEF AHADITH AND THEIR APPLICABILITY TO ISLAMIC DECREES (FATAWA)​ ​confirming​​this​​by​​means​​of​​a​​text​​by​​a​​Hadith​​master​​(hafiz);​​and​​that​​the​​meaning​​of​​the​​Hadith​ ​has not been received with acceptance by the scholars of the Muslim Community.”​ ​Let​​me​​now​​quote​​the​​opinion​​of​​one​​the​​foremost​​Shaykh's​​of​​the​​“Salafiyya”,​​Taqi​​ad-Deen​​Ahmad​ ​ibn​ ​Taymiyya​.​ ​He​ ​said​ ​in​ ​his​ ​recently​ ​translated​ ​book​ ​“​Muqqaddima​ ​fi​ ​Usool​ ​al-Tafseer​”​ ​(​‘An​ ​Introduction​​to​​The​​Principles​​of​​Tafseer’​,​​trans.​​by​​Muhammad​​Abdul​​Haq​​Ansari,​​pg.​​38):​​“​The​​point​ ​we​ ​are​ ​making​ ​is​ ​that​ ​multiple​ ​means​​of​​transmission,​​without​​prior​​discussion​​or​​agreement​ ​between​ ​the​ ​reporters​ ​usually​ ​guarantee​ ​the​ ​validity​ ​of​ ​the​ ​content​ ​of​​the​​Hadith​​transmitted​.​ ​However,​​those​​who​​are​​acquainted​​with​​the​​lives​​of​​transmitters​​can​​make​​better​​use​​of​​the​​Hadith.​​They​ ​can​​also​​use​​the​​Ahadith​​which​​are​​reported​​by​​transmitters​​who​​are​​not​​well​​known​​or​​who​​are​​quite​​weak​ ​in​​their​​memory,​​as​​well​​as​​the​​Ahadith​​which​​are​​mursal​​(a​​Hadith​​where​​the​​name​​of​​the​​Companion​​is​ ​missing,​ ​but​ ​attributed​ ​to​ ​the​ ​Prophet​ ​by​​a​​disciple​​of​​a​​Companion).​​Many​​scholars​​have​​noted​​down​ ​Ahadith​​of​​this​​type.​​They​​think​​that​​even​​though​​by​​themselves​​these​​Ahadith​​do​​not​​prove​​anything,​​they​ ​can​​nonetheless​​be​​used​​to​​strengthen​​other​​Ahadith​.”​​Then​​Ibn​​Taymiyya​​said​​later​​on​​the​​same​​page:​ ​“​The​ ​scholars​ ​of​ ​Hadith​ ​often​ ​use​ ​a​ ​Hadith​ ​which​ ​suffers​ ​from​ ​error​ ​caused​ ​by​ ​weakness​ ​of​ ​memory​​as​​supporting​​evidence​.​​They​​have​​even​​considered​​some​​Ahadith​​reported​​by​​reliable​​(thiqah),​ ​true​​(siddeeq)​​and​​correct​​narrators​​(al-dhabt)​​to​​be​​weak​​in​​which​​they​​are​​able​​to​​find​​out​​some​​defects.​ ​The​​science​​that​​discusses​​these​​reasons​​is​​called​​‘ilm​​‘ilal​​al-Hadith,​​the​​science​​of​​the​​hidden​​defects​​of​ ​Hadith, which is one of their noblest disciplines....”​ ​Insha’Allah​ ​the​ ​above​ ​discussion​ ​may​ ​help​ ​to​ ​alleviate​ ​the​ ​great​ ​misunderstanding​ ​amongst​ ​the​ ​non-specialists​​of​​the​​Science​​of​​Hadith.​​Is​​it​​not​​true​​that:​​“Only​​a​​fool​​speaks​​about​​a​​subject​​without​ ​knowledge;​ ​leading​​himself​​astray,​​and​​those​​who​​listen​​to​​his​​false​​decrees​​even​​further​​astray?”​​May​ ​Allah keep us on the Straight Path!​ ​43​ ​IJTIHAD, TAQLEED AND THE “SALAFIYYA” SECT​ ​IJTIHAD, TAQLEED AND THE “SALAFIYYA” SECT​ ​I​​would​​now​​like​​to​​briefly​​explain​​some​​grave​​misconceptions​​surrounding​​the​​important​​Islamic​ ​concepts​ ​of​ ​Ijtihad​ ​and​ ​Taqleed,​ ​and​ ​the​​people​​who​​are​​in​​opposition​​to​​the​​very​​concept​​of​​Taqleed,​ ​namely​ ​this​ ​new​ ​movement​ ​called​​the​​“Salafiyya”.​​They​​are​​also​​known​​by​​the​​names,​​‘Wahhabi’,​​(one​ ​group​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Wahhabis​ ​also​ ​claim​ ​to​ ​follow​ ​the​ ​Hanbali​ ​Madhhab;​ ​see​ ​later)​ ​‘La-Madhhabiyya’,​ ​‘Ghayr-Muqallidin’​​or​​‘Ahl​​al-Hadith’​​(this​​name​​has​​been​​adopted​​by​​them​​from​​the​​original​​and​​authentic​ ​group​​of​​the​​pious​​predecessors​​of​​Islam)​​by​​the​​opposition​​as​​well​​as​​themselves​​occasionally.​​Let​​it​​be​ ​known​​that​​the​​above​​names​​are​​all​​usually​​representative​​of​​the​​same​​thing​​in​​beliefs​​(with​​some​​minor​ ​discrepancies​​and​​different​​interpretations​​within​​their​​fold),​​concepts,​​and​​usually​​the​​practise​​as​​well,​ ​although​​they​​have​​no​​coherent​​jurisprudence;​​all​​this​​has​​led​​to​​divisions​​and​​subdivisions​​within​​them.​ ​This​ ​is​ ​usually​ ​derived​ ​from​ ​the​ ​works​ ​and​ ​beliefs​ ​of​ ​Ibn​ ​Taymiyya​ ​and​ ​his​ ​disciple​ ​Ibn​ ​al-Qayyim​ ​al-Jawziyyah​​when​​it​​suits​​their​​mode!​​Before​​I​​delve​​into​​the​​actual​​subject​​matter,​​I​​feel​​it​​is​​wise​​to​ ​define what is Ijtihad and Taqleed respectively, and who do they apply to in principle and practise.​ ​According​​to​​the​​divine​​law​​of​​Islam,​​Taqleed​​is​​the​​acceptance​​of​​a​​statement​​or​​juristic​​ruling​​of​​an​ ​Imam​​(​Mujtahid​)​​of​​the​​highest​​calibre,​​intelligence,​​learning,​​as​​well​​as​​piety,​​on​​the​​conviction​​that​​the​ ​accepted​ ​statement​ ​has​ ​been​ ​derived​ ​in​ ​accordance​ ​with​ ​hard​ ​facts,​ ​and​ ​proofs​ ​from​ ​the​ ​fundamental​ ​sources​​(Usool)​​of​​Islam;​​namely​​the​​Holy​​Qur’an,​​Sunnah,​​Ijma​​(consensus;​​of​​which​​there​​are​​various​ ​types)​ ​or​ ​even​ ​Qiyas​ ​(analogical​ ​deduction).​ ​In​ ​short​ ​it​ ​is​ ​the​ ​following​ ​of​ ​qualified​ ​and​ ​verified​ ​scholarship​​of​​an​​absolute​​(Mutlaq)​​Mujtahid,​​as​​well​​as​​the​​opinions​​derived​​by​​the​​scholars​​within​​the​ ​Madhhab​​(school​​of​​Islamic​​jurisprudence)​​of​​the​​Mujtahid​​Mutlaq.​​Hence​​one​​who​​follows​​the​​opinions​ ​of a particular Madhhab and its scholars is known as a​​Muqallid​.​ ​The​​scholars​​have​​said​​that​​it​​is​​not​​necessary​​for​​the​​common​​(ammi)​​Muslim​​to​​have​​to​​ask​​or​​know​ ​the​​proofs​​of​​things​​that​​are​​prescribed​​by​​the​​Shari’ah​​in​​terms​​of​​practise​​(Amal),​​but​​no​​scholar​​has​​said​ ​that​​it​​is​​forbidden​​to​​know​​the​​proofs​​(dalil)​​of​​a​​qualified​​scholar​​or​​authoritative​​books​​if​​one​​wishes​​to​ ​do​​so.​​What​​I​​have​​just​​described​​applies​​to​​one​​category​​of​​Muqallids,​​and​​that​​is​​the​​lot​​of​​the​​common​ ​Muslim​​who​​has​​not​​gained​​the​​requisite​​qualifications​​to​​follow​​an​​independent​​method​​of​​deriving​​laws​ ​from​​the​​sources​​of​​the​​Shari’ah​​(see​​the​​quotes​​from​​scholars​​later).​​The​​other​​type​​of​​Muqallid​​is​​one​ ​who​​is​​still​​a​​follower​​of​​a​​particular​​school​​of​​jurisprudence,​​but​​he​​acquaints​​himself​​with​​the​​evidence​ ​used​​by​​the​​Mujtahids​​of​​his​​Madhhab​​as​​far​​as​​possible;​​hence​​he​​is​​known​​as​​a​​Muqallid​​Muttabi’a​.​ ​The​​Muqallid​​Muttabi’a​​is​​usually​​a​​man​​of​​knowledge​​(‘Alim)​​who​​is​​qualified​​in​​his​​own​​right​​to​​convey​ ​the​​rules​​and​​laws​​of​​Islam,​​but​​he​​is​​not​​yet​​qualified​​to​​derive​​new​​laws​​from​​the​​sources​​of​​the​​Shari’ah​ ​independently, i.e. he is not a Mujtahid.​ ​The​ ​scholars​ ​have​ ​said​ ​that​ ​Taqleed​ ​is​ ​only​ ​permissible​ ​in​ ​things​ ​that​​are​​to​​be​​practised​​(Amal)​ ​according​​to​​the​​divine​​Shari’ah,​​but​​it​​is​​impermissible​​(haram)​​in​​the​​facts​​that​​need​​to​​be​​believed​​in,​ ​thus​​one​​must​​know​​the​​fundamental​​beliefs​​of​​Islam​​(Aqeedah,​​I’tiqad​​or​​Iman).​​For​​example,​​Shaykh​ ​Ahmad​​al-Sirhindi​​(d.​​1034/1624;​​Rahimahullah)​​said​​in​​his​​Maktubat​​(vol.​​2,​​67th​​letter):​​“​Among​​the​ ​73​​sects,​​only​​the​​Madhhab​​of​​the​​Ahl-as-Sunnah​​wal​​Jama’ah​​will​​be​​saved​​from​​Hell.​​Each​​Muslim​ ​has​ ​to​ ​learn​ ​the​ ​belief​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Ahl​ ​as-Sunnah​ ​and​ ​correct​ ​his​ ​Iman​ ​accordingly.​ ​The​ ​majority​ ​of​ ​Muslims​​who​​have​​spread​​over​​the​​world​​for​​centuries​​have​​been​​in​​the​​Ahlas-Sunnah​​Madhhab.​”​​It​​is​ ​the​​Taqleed​​of​​wrong​​beliefs​​(Aqa’eed)​​which​​has​​been​​condemned​​by​​the​​Qur’an​​and​​the​​Sunnah;​​and​​this​ ​may​​lead​​one​​to​​the​​fire​​of​​hell,​​even​​if​​one​​claims​​to​​be​​a​​believer.​​Let​​it​​be​​known​​that​​the​​vast​​majority​ ​of​​believers​​amongst​​the​​pious​​predecessors​​(Salaf​​as-Saliheen),​​scholars​​after​​them​​and​​even​​ordinary​ ​folk,​​have​​had​​the​​correct​​beliefs​​held​​by​​what​​is​​regarded​​as​​the​​saved​​sect​​from​​Qur’anic​​and​​Hadith​ ​based​​evidence;​​and​​that​​is​​only​​the​​sect​​of​​the​​Ahl​​al-Sunnah​​wal​​Jama’ah.​​The​​question​​that​​may​​be​​asked​ ​by​​an​​inquisitive​​reader​​is,​​“Who​​are​​the​​Ahl​​al-Sunnah​​wal​​Jama’ah​​(Sunni​​Muslims)?”​​For​​the​​answer​​and​ ​the characteristics of the saved sect (​Firqat an-Najiyyah​)​​please see later for the scholarly opinions.​ ​44​ ​IJTIHAD, TAQLEED AND THE “SALAFIYYA” SECT​ ​Now,​​the​​opposite​​of​​a​​Muqallid​​is​​one​​who​​is​​known​​as​​a​​Mujtahid​.​​A​​Mujtahid​​is​​a​​scholar​​of​​the​ ​highest​​rank,​​piety​​and​​learning,​​who​​has​​gained​​the​​requisite​​qualifications​​to​​independently​​strive,​​derive,​ ​and​​extract​​the​​laws​​of​​Islam​​from​​the​​fundamental​​bases​​(namely​​the​​Qur’an,​​Sunnah,​​Ijma​​and​​Qiyas);​​and​ ​this​ ​process​ ​is​ ​known​ ​as​ ​Ijtihad​​(independent​​reasoning).​​In​​doing​​so,​​the​​absolute​​Mujtahid​​does​​not​ ​usually​​follow​​the​​opinions​​of​​others​​without​​knowing​​their​​evidences,​​as​​well​​as​​their​​justifications.​​In​ ​fact​ ​some​ ​scholars​ ​have​ ​said​ ​that​ ​it​ ​is​ ​forbidden​ ​(haram)​​for​​a​​qualified​​Mujtahid​​to​​make​​Taqleed​​of​ ​others (see below).​ ​Let​ ​me​ ​now​ ​give​ ​you​ ​just​​four​​quotes​​from​​some​​well​​known​​scholars,​​and​​their​​declarations​​on​ ​Taqleed and Ijtihad:​ ​(A)​​It​​was​​stated​​in​​the​​book:​​“​Imam​​Abu​​Hanifah:​​Life​​and​​Work​”,​​by​​the​​well​​known​​Historian​​of​​India,​ ​Allamah​ ​Shibli​ ​Numani​ ​(pg.​ ​117):​ ​“The​ ​word​ ​Mujtahid​ ​has​ ​been​ ​defined​ ​as​ ​follows​ ​by​​scholars​​of​ ​Hadith​​like​​Baghawi​​(d.​​510/1117),​​Rafi’i​​(d.​​623/1226),​​Nawawi​​(d.​​676/1277)​​and​​others;​​thus:​​“​A​ ​Mujtahid​​is​​one​​well​​versed​​in​​the​​Qur’an,​​Hadith,​​the​​early​​schools​​of​​law​​(Madhhabs),​​lexicology​ ​and​ ​analogical​ ​reasoning​ ​(Qiyas),​ ​that​ ​is​ ​to​ ​say,​ ​one​ ​who​ ​knows​ ​all​ ​or​ ​practically​ ​all​ ​Qur’anic​ ​passages,​​established​​Traditions​​(Ahadith)​​from​​the​​Prophet​​(peace​​be​​upon​​him)​​and​​sayings​​of​​the​ ​early​​generations​​pertaining​​to​​legal​​problems,​​has​​the​​necessary​​lexical​​learning​​and​​is​​acquainted​ ​with​​all​​the​​methods​​of​​analogical​​reasoning​​(this​​is​​only​​a​​summary​​of​​the​​actual​​requirements).​​If​​a​ ​man​​is​​deficient​​in​​any​​of​​these​​things,​​he​​cannot​​be​​called​​a​​Mujtahid​​and​​should​​conform​​to​​one​​or​ ​other of the recognised schools of law (i.e; only the Hanafi, Malik, Shafi’i or Hanbali schools today).​”​ ​(B)​​Imam​​Abdal​​Ghani​​an-Nablusi​​(d.​​1143/1733,​​he​​was​​an​​author​​of​​nearly​​500​​works;​​Rahimahullah)​ ​said​​in​​his​​well​​known​​book,​​Khulasat-ut-Tahqiq​:​​“​A​​Muslim​​has​​either​​become​​a​​Mujtahid​​or​​has​​not​ ​reached​​the​​grade​​of​​Ijtihad.​​A​​Mujtahid​​is​​either​​Mutlaq​​(absolute)​​or​​Muqayyad​​(belonging​​to​​a​ ​Madhhab).​​It​​is​​not​​permissible​​for​​a​​Mutlaq​​Mujtahid​​to​​follow​​another​​Mujtahid​​(i.e;​​he​​does​​not​ ​make​ ​Taqleed);​ ​he​ ​has​ ​to​ ​follow​ ​his​ ​own​ ​Ijtihad.​ ​However,​ ​a​ ​Muqayyad​​Mujtahid​​follows​​his​​own​ ​Ijtihad​​which​​he​​employs​​in​​accordance​​with​​the​​methods​​of​​the​​Madhhab​​of​​the​​Mutlaq​​Mujtahid.​​The​ ​one​​who​​is​​not​​a​​Mujtahid​​should​​follow​​whichever​​he​​likes​​of​​the​​four​​Madhhabs​;​​and​​when​​doing​​an​ ​Ibada​​(worship)​​in​​accordance​​with​​a​​certain​​Madhhab,​​he​​has​​to​​fulfil​​all​​the​​conditions​​required​​by​ ​that​​Madhhab​​for​​it​​to​​be​​Sahih​​(correct).​​If​​he​​does​​not​​fulfil​​one​​of​​these​​conditions,​​his​​Ibada​​will​ ​not​​be​​Sahih.​​It​​has​​been​​informed​​unanimously​​by​​the​​Ulama​​(Ijma-al-Ulama)​​that​​such​​an​​Ibada​​will​ ​be​​in​​vain​​(batil).​​Though​​it​​is​​not​​a​​must​​for​​him​​to​​believe​​that​​his​​Madhhab​​is​​superior​​(rather​​they​ ​are​ ​all​ ​equal),​ ​it​ ​will​ ​be​ ​good​ ​if​ ​he​ ​believes​ ​so.​ ​Talfiq,​ ​that​ ​is,​ ​to​ ​do​ ​any​ ​Ibada​ ​or​ ​any​ ​deed​ ​in​ ​accordance​​with​​those​​words​​of​​the​​four​​Madhhabs​​that​​disagree​​with​​one​​another​​means​​to​​go​​out​​of​ ​the​​four​​Madhhabs​​and​​to​​make​​up​​a​​fifth​​Madhhab.​​This​​Ibada​​of​​his​​will​​be​​in​​vain,​​and​​he​​will​​have​ ​made​ ​a​ ​game​ ​out​ ​of​ ​Islam,​ ​because​ ​this​ ​Ibada​ ​will​ ​not​ ​be​ ​Sahih​ ​according​ ​to​ ​any​ ​of​ ​the​ ​four​ ​Madhhabs.”​ ​(C)​ ​Imam​ ​Abdal​ ​Wahhab​ ​ash-Sha’rani​ ​(d.​ ​973/1565;​ ​Rahimahullah)​ ​said​ ​in​ ​his​ ​book,​ ​al-Mizan​ ​al-Kubra​:​​“​An​​‘alim​​in​​the​​grade​​of​​Ijtihad,​​that​​is,​​a​​scholar​​who​​can​​infer​​rules​​from​​the​​sources​​(of​ ​the​​Shari’ah),​​is​​not​​permitted​​to​​follow​​somebody​​else.​​However,​​according​​to​​the​​Ulama,​​it​​is​​Wajib​ ​(incumbent)​​for​​the​​ordinary​​Muslim​​to​​follow​​a​​Mujtahid.​​They​​said​​that​​if​​a​​non-Mujtahid​​Muslim​ ​did​​not​​follow​​a​​Mujtahid,​​he​​would​​deviate​​from​​the​​right​​path.​​All​​Mujtahids​​inferred​​rules​​from​​the​ ​documentary​​evidences​​they​​found​​in​​Islam.​​No​​Mujtahid​​has​​ever​​talked​​out​​of​​his​​own​​opinion​​on​ ​the​​religion​​of​​Allahu​​ta’ala.​​Each​​Madhhab​​is​​like​​a​​tissue​​woven​​with​​the​​threads​​of​​the​​Book​​(of​ ​Allah)​​and​​the​​Sunnah.​​Anybody​​who​​is​​not​​in​​the​​grade​​enabling​​him​​to​​employ​​Ijtihad​​has​​to​​choose​ ​and​​follow​​any​​one​​he​​likes​​of​​the​​four​​Madhhabs,​​because​​they​​all​​show​​the​​way​​leading​​to​​Paradise.​ ​45​ ​IJTIHAD, TAQLEED AND THE “SALAFIYYA” SECT​ ​A​​person​​who​​speaks​​ill​​of​​any​​of​​the​​A’immat​​al-Madhahib​​(founders​​of​​the​​Madhhabs)​​shows​​his​ ​ignorance​​(and this is common amongst the ignorant​​members of the La-Madhhabi groups today).”​ ​(D)​ ​Shaykh​​Sulayman​​ibn​​Abdal​​Wahhab​,​​rahimahullah​​(he​​was​​the​​brother​​of​​Muhammad​​ibn​​Abdal​ ​Wahhab,​ ​the​ ​founder​ ​of​ ​the​ ​“Wahhabi”​ ​sect)​ ​said​ ​in​ ​his​ ​book,​ ​As-Sawa’iq​ ​al-Mahiyya​ ​fir​ ​raddi​ ​‘alal-Wahhabiyya​,​​after​​mentioning​​the​​qualifications​​of​​a​​Mujtahid:​​“​Only​​such​​a​​personage​​who​​has​ ​all​ ​these​ ​excellences​ ​can​ ​be​ ​followed​ ​(Taqleed)​ ​and​ ​can​ ​issue​ ​Fatwas.​ ​If​ ​he​ ​lacks​ ​one​ ​of​ ​these​ ​qualities,​​he​​cannot​​be​​a​​Mujtahid​​and​​may​​not​​be​​followed.​​He​​himself​​should​​follow​​a​​Mujtahid.​ ​Hence,​ ​a​ ​Muslim​ ​is​ ​either​ ​a​ ​Mujtahid​ ​or​ ​a​ ​Muqallid.​ ​There​ ​is​ ​not​ ​a​​third​​one.​​It​​is​​necessary​​for​ ​Muqallids​​to​​follow​​a​​Mujtahid​.​​This​​has​​been​​said​​unanimously.​​Even​​Ibn​​al-Qayyim​​al-Jawziyya​​(d.​ ​751/1350)​​whom​​the​​Wahhabis​​praise​​as​​an​​allamah​​(very​​knowledgeable​​scholar),​​whose​​every​​word​ ​is​ ​document,​ ​said​ ​in​ ​his​ ​I’lam​ ​al-Muwaqqi’in​,​ ​‘​A​ ​person​ ​who​ ​does​ ​not​ ​fulfil​ ​the​ ​requirements​ ​of​ ​Ijtihad​​is​​not​​permitted​​to​​draw​​any​​conclusion​​from​​the​​Qur’an​​al-Karim​​or​​the​​Hadith​​ash-Sharif​.’​ ​(If​​this​​statement​​is​​authentic;​​then​​it​​clearly​​demolishes​​the​​way​​of​​the​​modern​​day​​“Salafiyya”,​​who​ ​are​​experimenting​​with​​their​​own​​Ijtihads​​without​​being​​qualified​​to​​do​​so!).​​The​​men​​of​​the​​present​ ​age​​regard​​as​​scholars​​those​​who​​recite​​Ayats​​and​​Hadiths,​​and​​who​​give​​meanings​​to​​them​​in​​accord​ ​with​ ​their​ ​points​ ​of​ ​view.​ ​They​ ​do​ ​not​ ​listen​ ​to​ ​those​ ​who​ ​quote​ ​Ahl​ ​as-Sunnah​ ​scholars​ ​in​ ​their​ ​speeches​ ​and​ ​books.​ ​Ignorant​ ​and​ ​heretical​ ​people​ ​who​​do​​not​​fulfil​​even​​a​​single​​requirement​​of​ ​Ijtihad​​are​​taken​​to​​be​​men​​of​​religious​​authority​​today.​​May​​Allahu​​ta’ala​​protect​​Muslims​​against​ ​their calamity! Amin!​”​ ​Al-Shaykh​ ​Abdal​ ​Rahman​ ​Ba’alawi​ ​(d.​ ​1251/1835;​ ​Rahimahullah)​ ​said​ ​in​ ​his​ ​Bughyat​ ​al-mustarshidin​ ​fi​ ​talkhis​ ​fatawa​ ​ba’d​ ​al-a’imma​ ​min​ ​al-muta’akhkhirin​ ​(The​ ​goal​ ​of​ ​guidance-seekers:​​a​​summary​​of​​the​​formal​​legal​​opinions​​of​​certain​​later​​Imams),​​pg.​​8:​​“​Ibn​​Salah​​(d.​ ​643/1245;​​a​​scholar​​of​​Hadith;​​Rahimahullah)​​reports​​that​​there​​is​​scholarly​​consensus​​(Ijma)​​on​​its​ ​being​​unlawful​​to​​follow​​rulings​​from​​schools​​other​​than​​those​​of​​the​​four​​Imams​,​​meaning​​in​​one’s​ ​personal​ ​works,​ ​let​ ​alone​ ​give​ ​court​ ​verdicts​​or​​formal​​opinions​​to​​people​​from​​them,​​because​​of​​the​ ​untrustworthiness​​of​​the​​ascription​​of​​such​​rulings​​to​​the​​scholars​​who​​reportedly​​gave​​them,​​there​​being​ ​no​ ​channels​ ​of​ ​transmission​ ​(asanid)​ ​which​ ​obviate​ ​the​ ​possibility​ ​of​ ​textual​ ​corruption​ ​and​ ​spurious​ ​substitutions.​​The​​Zaydis,​​for​​example,​​who​​trace​​themselves​​to​​Zayd​​ibn​​Ali​​ibn​​Hussain​​(son​​of​​Ali​ ​and​​Fatima),​​the​​beatitude​​of​​Allah​​be​​upon​​them,​​despite​​the​​fact​​that​​Zayd​​was​​one​​of​​the​​Imams​​of​​the​ ​religion​​and​​a​​renowned​​figure​​well​​qualified​​to​​give​​guidance​​to​​those​​seeking​​it,​​his​​followers​​identify​ ​him​​with​​extreme​​permissiveness​​on​​many​​questions,​​ascriptions​​based​​on​​failure​​to​​check​​as​​to​​what​​his​ ​positions​​actually​​were​​(by​​naming​​the​​intermediate​​transmitters​​and​​establishing​​their​​reliability).​​It​​is​ ​quite​ ​otherwise​ ​with​ ​the​ ​four​ ​schools,​ ​whose​ ​Imams​ ​(Allah​ ​reward​ ​them)​ ​have​ ​spent​ ​themselves​ ​in​ ​checking​​the​​positions​​of​​their​​schools,​​explaining​​what​​could​​be​​rigorously​​authenticated​​(Sahih)​​as​​the​ ​position​​of​​the​​person​​it​​was​​attributed​​to,​​and​​what​​could​​not​​be.​​Their​​scholars​​have​​thus​​achieved​​safety​ ​from​​textual​​corruption​​and​​have​​been​​able​​to​​discern​​the​​genuine​​from​​the​​poorly​​authenticated​​(and​​this​ ​is​ ​in​ ​complete​ ​contradistinction​ ​to​ ​today’s​ ​“Salafis”).​ ​[Translation​ ​taken​ ​from​ ​The​ ​Reliance​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Traveller​, pg. 25-6, by N.H.M. Keller].​ ​Today​​we​​live​​in​​an​​age​​where​​the​​very​​concept​​of​​Taqleed​​has​​been​​made​​“haram”​​by​​the​​ignorant​ ​non-scholars​​of​​Islam,​​as​​well​​as​​some​​people​​who​​are​​regarded​​as​​scholars.​​It​​has​​become​​a​​source​​of​ ​heated​​debate​​and​​repudiation​​by​​many​​a​​“man​​of​​knowledge”,​​as​​well​​as​​like​​minded​​non-scholars​​who​​act​ ​and​ ​behave​ ​as​ ​absolute​ ​Mujtahids,​ ​even​ ​though​ ​they​ ​have​ ​not​ ​acquired​ ​an​ ​iota’s​ ​worth​ ​of​ ​Islamic​ ​knowledge.​​It​​is​​these​​very​​people​​who​​are​​calling​​for​​the​​abandonment​​of​​Taqleed​​of​​the​​four​​existing​ ​schools​​of​​Islamic​​jurisprudence​​(The​​Hanafi,​​Maliki,​​Shafi’i​​and​​Hanbali),​​and​​in​​return​​are​​calling​​for​ ​everyone​​to​​derive​​one’s​​own​​rulings​​from​​the​​divine​​sources​​of​​Islam​​(viz.​​Qur’an​​and​​Sunnah).​​Thus​​they​ ​have​​embarked​​upon​​the​​path​​of​​performing​​Ijtihad​​without​​the​​requisite​​qualifications​​set​​down​​by​​the​ ​46​ ​IJTIHAD, TAQLEED AND THE “SALAFIYYA” SECT​ ​well​​known​​scholars​​of​​Islam;​​hence​​many​​of​​them​​behave​​as​​though​​they​​are​​absolute​​Mujtahids​​(may​ ​Allah protect us from their fallacious interpretations)!​ ​It​ ​is​ ​these​ ​very​ ​people​ ​who​ ​claim​ ​to​ ​be​ ​on​ ​the​ ​path​ ​of​ ​the​​pious​​predecessors​​of​​the​​first​​three​ ​generations​​of​​Islam​​(Salaf​​as-Salihin)​​in​​terms​​of​​Aqeedah,​​methodology​​and​​practise.​​But​​in​​reality​​they​ ​are​​clinging​​on​​to​​the​​Aqeedah​​and​​Fatawa​​of​​Ibn​​Taymiyya,​​Ibn​​al-Qayyim,​​Ibn​​Hazm​​al-Zahiri,​​Ibn​​Abdal​ ​Wahhab,​ ​ash-Shawkani,​ ​Ibn​ ​Baz,​ ​al-Albani​ ​and​ ​the​ ​like​ ​minded​ ​people​ ​when​ ​it​ ​suits​ ​their​ ​whims​ ​and​ ​desires.​​Hence,​​they​​claim​​to​​be​​the​​followers​​of​​the​​pious​​predecessors,​​but​​in​​reality​​they​​have​​formed​ ​an​ ​incoherent​ ​Fiqh​ ​called​ ​the​ ​“Salafiyya​ ​Madhhab”,​ ​even​ ​though​ ​this​ ​very​ ​name​ ​was​ ​unknown​ ​to​ ​the​ ​original Salaf as-Salihin!​ ​The​​President​​of​​the​​International​​Institute​​of​​Islamic​​Thought,​​Taha​​Jabir​​al-Alwani,​​said​​with​​regards​ ​to​ ​the​ ​“Salafiyya”​​in​​his​​recently​​published​​book,​​The​​Ethics​​of​​Disagreement​​in​​Islam​,​​(pg.​​119):​​“​In​ ​retrospect,​​we​​can​​see​​that​​the​​leading​​scholars​​of​​the​​schools​​of​​Islamic​​jurisprudence​​had​​reasons​​to​ ​justify​​their​​differences​​of​​opinion​​and​​lessen​​their​​impact.​​The​​master​​perpetrators​​of​​disagreement​ ​in​​our​​own​​times,​​however,​​do​​not​​have​​a​​single​​plausible​​basis​​for​​justifying​​their​​differences.​​They​ ​are​ ​not​ ​Mujtahidun​ ​or​ ​persons​ ​capable​​of​​independent​​reasoning​​or​​analytical​​thought.​​They​​are,​ ​rather,​​unthinking​​followers​​(muqallidun)​​of​​those​​among​​them​​who​​raise​​their​​voices​​to​​proclaim​​that​ ​they​​are​​not​​in​​fact​​‘followers’​​nor​​do​​they​​believe​​in​​the​​‘duty​​to​​follow.’​​They​​claim​​that​​they​​derive​ ​their​​rulings​​and​​opinions​​directly​​from​​the​​Qur’an​​and​​the​​Sunnah​​of​​the​​Prophet,​​peace​​be​​on​​him.​ ​In​​reality,​​they​​cling​​to​​some​​books​​of​​Hadith​​and​​follow​​in​​the​​footsteps​​of​​their​​authors​​in​​all​​matters​ ​pertaining​​to​​the​​authenticity​​of​​a​​Hadith​​and​​the​​trustworthiness​​and​​reliability​​of​​its​​narrators​​(I​ ​say:​​this​​is​​exactly​​what​​is​​done​​by​​the​​followers​​of​​al-Albani,​​and​​other​​like​​minded​​people;​​and​​this​​is​ ​also​​Taqleed,​​no​​matter​​how​​much​​one​​may​​deny​​it).​​Some​​of​​them​​claim​​knowledge​​of​​the​​science​​which​ ​studies​​the​​biographies​​of​​Hadith​​reporters​​and​​the​​extent​​of​​their​​reliability.​​On​​the​​basis​​of​​studying​ ​a​ ​single​ ​book​ ​on​ ​this​ ​vast​ ​subject,​ ​a​​person​​cannot​​justifiably​​elevate​​himself​​to​​the​​position​​of​​a​ ​Mujtahid​​(as​​is​​usually​​found​​amongst​​the​​members​​of​​the​​“Salafiyya”​​who​​derive​​rulings​​from​​the​​Qur’an​ ​and Sunnah without sound scholarship).”​ ​The​​South​​African​​based​​Majlis​​al-Ulama​,​​said​​with​​regards​​to​​the​​Islamic​​concept​​of​​Taqleed​​(​The​ ​Majlis,​​vol.​​7​​No.​​10,​​pg.​​7​):​​“Taqleed,​​the​​Islamic​​concept​​of​​following​​the​​Aimmah-e-Mujtahideen​​(the​ ​highest​ ​class​ ​of​ ​Fuqaha-Islamic​ ​Jurists)​ ​is​ ​being​ ​subjected​ ​to​ ​much​ ​scorn,​ ​ridicule​ ​and​ ​rejection​ ​by​ ​modernist​​Muslims​​schooled​​in​​the​​liberal​​culture​​of​​the​​West​​while​​being​​largely​​uneducated​​in​​terms​​of​ ​the​​Shari’ah.​​There​​exists​​also​​another​​group​​apart​​from​​the​​modernists,​​which​​has​​likewise​​considered​​it​ ​fashionable​​to​​argue​​away​​the​​vital​​Shar’i​​requirement​​of​​Taqleed.​​This​​group​​comes​​in​​the​​group​​of​​Ulama​ ​of​ ​Islam.​ ​They​ ​have​ ​adopted​ ​a​ ​similar​ ​attitude​ ​of​ ​rejecting​ ​Taqleed​ ​by​ ​virtue​ ​of​ ​external​ ​un-Islamic​ ​influences​​which​​they​​have​​acquired​​as​​a​​result​​of​​them​​deviating​​from​​the​​Path​​of​​the​​Sunnah.​​Western​ ​liberalism​ ​has​ ​undoubtedly​ ​captured​ ​their​ ​minds,​ ​hence​ ​they​ ​labour​ ​to​ ​create​ ​some​ ​kind​ ​of​ ​harmony​ ​between​​the​​rigid​​demands​​of​​Islam​​and​​the​​so-called​​rational​​dictates​​of​​modern​​reason.​​Such​​modern​ ​learned​ ​men​ ​operating​ ​under​ ​the​ ​designation​ ​of​ ​Ulama​ ​and​ ​occasionally​ ​donning​ ​even​ ​the​ ​external​ ​garments​​of​​Ulama​​to​​create​​a​​deceptive​​appearance​​of​​piety,​​pose​​the​​greatest​​danger​​to​​the​​Imaan​​of​ ​untainted​ ​laymen.​ ​Most​ ​of​ ​the​ ​“Islamic”​ ​colleges​ ​in​ ​the​ ​Middle​ ​Eastern​ ​countries​ ​and​ ​some​ ​of​ ​such​ ​Madrasahs​ ​in​ ​other​ ​parts​ ​of​ ​the​ ​world​ ​pour​ ​out​ ​members​ ​of​ ​this​ ​hybrid​ ​class​​of​​“Ulama”​​who​​find​​it​ ​difficult​​to​​distinguish​​between​​right​​and​​left.​​They​​are​​saddled​​with​​the​​problem​​of​​harmonizing​​Islam​ ​with​ ​modernism​ ​and​ ​in​ ​the​ ​process​ ​of​ ​their​ ​evil​ ​pursuit​ ​they​ ​are​ ​constrained​ ​to​ ​abandon​ ​any​ ​Islamic​ ​demand​ ​which​ ​thwarts​ ​or​ ​impedes​ ​their​ ​ungodly​ ​mission.​ ​One​ ​of​ ​the​ ​greatest​ ​impediments​ ​in​ ​the​ ​endeavour​​to​​modernise​​Islam​​to​​conform​​to​​western​​standards​​of​​reason​​is​​the​​Shar’i​​demand​​of​​Taqleed​.​ ​Taqleed is a thorn in their flesh and it has to be eliminated for the attainment of their pernicious goal.​ ​Self-conceit​​and​​self​​opinion​​are​​the​​products​​of​​western​​liberalism​​and​​materialism.​​These​​diseases,​ ​gripping​​many​​Muslims​​in​​this​​age,​​have​​lamentably​​disturbed​​the​​equilibrium​​of​​Muslim​​intelligence.​​The​ ​ailing​​Muslim​​intelligence​​of​​these​​times​​has​​been​​so​​drastically​​jarred,​​that​​it​​is​​incapable​​of​​discerning​ ​47​ ​IJTIHAD, TAQLEED AND THE “SALAFIYYA” SECT​ ​the​​dangerous​​abyss​​it​​is​​slipping​​into​​by​​shunning​​the​​vital​​and​​compulsory​​injunction​​of​​Taqleed​.​​It​​fails​ ​to​​understand​​that​​the​​ultimate​​consequence​​of​​admut-Taqleed​​(abandonment​​of​​Taqleed)​​is​​the​​abdication​ ​of​ ​Imaan.​ ​Those​ ​who​ ​shun​ ​Taqleed​ ​hover​ ​on​ ​the​ ​brink​​of​​kufr​​(then​​some​​evidences​​were​​provided​​in​ ​favour​​of​​Taqleed​​from​​the​​Qur’an,but​​I​​have​​decided​​not​​to​​give​​the​​documentary​​proofs​​and​​arguments​​at​ ​the​​moment​​since​​it​​is​​not​​really​​part​​of​​the​​aims​​of​​this​​work;​​what​​is​​really​​required​​is​​a​​comprehensive​ ​book of its own to explain the reality of Taqleed and its proofs).​ ​Those​ ​who​ ​seek​ ​to​​abandon​​Taqleed​​are​​dwelling​​in​​self-deception.​​They​​deceive​​themselves​​into​ ​believing​​that​​they​​possess​​adequate​​ability​​and​​qualification​​to​​embark​​on​​the​​process​​of​​deducting​​Shar’i​ ​Masaa’il​​(legal​​problems​​of​​the​​Shari’ah).​​But,​​they​​grope​​lamentably​​in​​darkness.​​There​​is​​not​​a​​single​ ​rule​​which​​they​​are​​capable​​of​​deducting​​without​​resorting​​to​​the​​works​​of​​this​​or​​that​​Imam.​​If​​it​​is​​a​ ​matter​​of​​Fiqh,​​they​​are​​constrained​​to​​refer​​to​​the​​works​​of​​Fuqaha​​(scholars​​of​​Islamic​​Jurisprudence).​​If​ ​it​​is​​about​​Tafseer,​​they​​have​​to​​refer​​to​​some​​work​​of​​the​​Mufassireen​​(commentators​​of​​the​​Qur’an).​​If​​it​ ​is​​a​​question​​pertaining​​to​​Hadith,​​they​​have​​no​​option​​other​​than​​making​​Taqleed​​of​​the​​Hadith​​Kitaabs​ ​(books)​​of​​such​​Ulama​​who​​themselves​​were​​Muqallideen​​(followers​​of​​Imams).​​In​​order​​to​​ascertain​​the​ ​authenticity​​of​​a​​Hadith,​​there​​is​​no​​alternative​​other​​than​​making​​Taqleed​​of​​the​​Aimmah-e-Hadith​​(Imams​ ​of​​Hadith).​​At​​no​​stage​​can​​anyone​​be​​independent​​of​​Taqleed​​(unless​​one​​is​​a​​Mujtahid).​​But,​​the​​negators​ ​of​​Taqleed​​dupe​​themselves​​by​​seeking​​to​​satisfy​​their​​desires​​in​​flitting​​from​​Madhhab​​to​​Madhhab,​​in​ ​picking and choosing rules and opinions which conform to their whimsical desires and fancies.​ ​The​​votaries​​of​​admut​​Taqleed​​(abandonment​​of​​Taqleed)​​consider​​it​​below​​their​​dignity​​to​​be​​hitched​ ​to​​any​​specific​​Madhhab​​of​​the​​Shari’ah;​​they​​advocate​​a​​policy​​of​​picking​​and​​choosing​​from​​the​​various​ ​Madhhabs,​​when​​it​​suits​​them​​they​​accept​​a​​mas’alah​​from​​the​​Hanafi​​Madhhab;​​when​​a​​mas’alah​​in​​the​ ​Shafi’i​ ​Madhhab​​appears​​more​​in​​consonance​​with​​laxity​​and​​desire,​​they​​switch​​over​​to​​that​​Madhhab,​ ​when​ ​something​ ​more​ ​appeasing​ ​is​ ​discerned​ ​in​ ​the​​Maliki​​Madhhab,​​they​​opt​​for​​that​​mas’alah.​​They​ ​wonder​ ​aimlessly​ ​in​ ​this​ ​deception,​ ​deluding​ ​themselves.​ ​They​ ​fail​ ​to​ ​understand​ ​that​ ​even​ ​in​ ​their​ ​unlawful​​policy​​of​​talfeeq​​(this​​is​​the​​taking​​of​​the​​easy​​rulings​​of​​all​​the​​Madhhabs),​​they​​have​​to​​follow​ ​the​ ​Aimmah-e-Mujtahideen.​​Indispensability​​of​​the​​Fuqaha​​is​​accepted​​by​​the​​opponents​​of​​the​​Imams,​ ​albeit​​in​​an​​implied​​and​​subtle​​way.​​They​​are​​totally​​incapable​​of​​formulating​​a​​single​​mas’alah​​without​ ​resorting​ ​to​ ​aid​ ​from​ ​the​ ​illustrious​ ​authorities​​among​​the​​Fuqaha,​​Muhaddithin​​and​​Mufassireen.​​But,​ ​they​ ​childishly​ ​trumpet​ ​the​​bugle​​of​​the​​validity​​of​​talfeeq,​​a​​concept​​which​​is​​unanimously​​unlawful.”​ ​Here ends the quote.​ ​In​​his​​“refutation”​​against​​the​​Taqleed​​of​​the​​four​​schools​​of​​Fiqh,​​al-Albani​​quoted​​some​​sayings​​from​ ​the​​four​​main​​Mujtahid​​Imams​​apparently​​“forbidding”​​Taqleed;​​and​​this​​at​​first​​seems​​to​​be​​strong​​proof​ ​in​​defence​​of​​his​​case​​(see​​Sifah​​Salah​​an-Nabee​,​​pp.​​viii-xiv).​​But​​the​​learned​​reader​​should​​know​​that​ ​these​​quotations​​are​​out​​of​​context​​and​​garbled!​​The​​greatest​​proof​​in​​favour​​of​​my​​statement,​​is​​that​ ​nearly​ ​every​ ​scholar​ ​who​ ​was​ ​supposed​ ​to​ ​have​ ​quoted​ ​these​ ​apparently​ ​Taqleed​ ​“forbidding”​ ​statements​​as​​given​​in​​the​​footnotes​​of​​al-Albani’s​​above​​mentioned​​book,​​was​​himself​​affiliated​ ​and​ ​in​ ​the​ ​process​ ​of​ ​promulgating​ ​one​ ​of​ ​the​ ​four​ ​Madhhabs​ ​themselves!​ ​Is​ ​this​ ​not​ ​a​ ​great​ ​deception​​on​​al-Albani’s​​part?​​This​​is​​a​​great​​shame​​on​​those​​who​​fight​​against​​Taqleed,​​but​​on​​the​​other​ ​hand​ ​“blindly”​ ​accepted​ ​al-Albani’s​ ​suppositions​ ​and​ ​claims​ ​without​ ​research;​ ​as​ ​well​​as​​the​​so-called​ ​independent methodology they claim to be clinging on to!​ ​Recently,​​I​​came​​across​​a​​book​​entitled:​​“​Blind​​Following​​of​​Madhhabs​,”​​by​​one​​of​​the​​late​​Shaykhs​ ​of​ ​the​ ​“Salafiyya”,​ ​Muhammad​ ​Sultaan​ ​al-Ma’soomee​ ​al-Khajnadee​;​ ​edited​ ​by​ ​one​ ​of​ ​al-Albani’s​ ​foremost​​students​​(Saleem​​al-Hilaalee).​​In​​the​​above​​named​​book,​​al-Khajnadee​​tried​​his​​best​​to​​refute​ ​Taqleed,​​but​​in​​reality​​he​​failed​​quite​​miserably​​in​​his​​refutation​​of​​what​​he​​calls​​“Blind​​Following!”​​After​ ​reading​ ​this​ ​book​ ​of​ ​garbled​ ​interpretations,​ ​slanders,​ ​and​ ​even​ ​lies,​ ​I​ ​came​ ​to​ ​the​ ​conclusion​ ​that​ ​al-Khajnadee​​seemed​​to​​have​​been​​a​​confused​​and​​contradicting​​personality!​​Now,​​let​​me​​elaborate​​my​ ​claim by quoting and commenting on just a few selected pages from the actual book.​ ​48​ ​IJTIHAD, TAQLEED AND THE “SALAFIYYA” SECT​ ​It​ ​seems​ ​that​ ​the​ ​translation​ ​of​ ​the​ ​whole​ ​book​ ​was​ ​incomplete,​ ​since​​the​​editor,​​Abu​​Usaamah​ ​Saleem​ ​al-Hilaalee​ ​said​ ​on​ ​pg.​ ​iii,​ ​“​I​ ​also​ ​noticed​ ​some​ ​places​ ​containing​ ​that​ ​which​ ​was​ ​superfluous, so I left it out.​” I wonder what these​​‘superfluous’ statements were?​ ​On​ ​page​ ​ix​ ​of​ ​the​ ​above​ ​named​​book,​​it​​was​​written​​that​​al-Khajnadee​​met​​“​Shaykh​​Muhammad​ ​Rasheed​ ​Ridaa​.​ ​He​ ​helped​ ​with​ ​al-Manaar​ ​magazine​​(this​​was​​edited​​by​​the​​last​​named​​person),​​and​ ​bought​​all​​of​​its​​back​​issues​​and​​the​​works​​of​​Shaykh​​Muhammad​​Abdah​​and​​likewise​​what​​had​​been​ ​printed​ ​from​ ​the​ ​works​ ​of​ ​Shaykh​ ​ul-Islaam​ ​Ibn​ ​Taymiyyah​ ​and​ ​his​ ​student​ ​Ibn​ ​ul-Qayyim​ ​al-Jawziyyah​.”​​From​​this​​last​​quote,​​those​​of​​us​​who​​have​​heard​​and​​read​​what​​the​​people​​of​​knowledge​ ​have​ ​said​ ​about​ ​the​ ​above​ ​named​ ​Shaykhs,​ ​will​ ​realize​ ​straight​ ​away​ ​that​ ​all​​four​​of​​them​​had​​corrupt​ ​beliefs​​(Aqeedah)​​on​​certain​​controversial​​points,​​like​​the​​attributes​​of​​Allah​​Subhana​​wa​​Ta’ala,​​as​​well​​as​ ​being famous for erring on many legal points of the Shari’ah!​ ​It​​is​​a​​well​​known​​fact​​that​​Muhammad​​Rashid​​Rida​​(d.​​1935)​​and​​his​​teacher​​Muhammad​​Abdah​​(he​ ​was​​the​​Mufti​​of​​Egypt​​in​​his​​day,​​d.​​1905)​​were​​both​​Freemasons,​​who​​strove​​to​​reinterpret​​the​​Shari’ah​ ​with​​their​​own​​whims​​and​​desires​​by​​claiming​​to​​“reform”​​Islam​​from​​“impurities”,​​and​​this​​led​​to​​their​ ​call​ ​for​ ​the​ ​abandonment​ ​of​ ​Taqleed;​ ​hence​​the​​need​​for​​the​​abolishment​​of​​the​​four​​schools​​of​​Fiqh.​ ​These​​two​​enemies​​of​​Islam​​strove​​hard​​in​​their​​Freemasonic​​plot​​to​​“reform”​​Islam,​​but​​in​​reality​​they​ ​fought​​against​​Islam​​from​​within;​​this​​was​​realized​​by​​many​​scholars​​within​​their​​day​​as​​well​​as​​after​​them​ ​by​ ​examining​ ​their​ ​“Fatwas”​ ​and​ ​speeches.​ ​Hence,​​many​​a​​man​​of​​knowledge​​(e.g.​​Shaykh​​Muhammad​ ​Bakhit​ ​al-Muti’i​ ​-​ ​the​ ​grand​ ​Mufti​ ​of​ ​Egypt​ ​and​ ​one​ ​of​ ​the​ ​leading​ ​Hanafi​ ​scholars​ ​of​ ​his​ ​time,​ ​d.​ ​1354/1935;​​Rahimahullah)​​exposed​​them​​for​​what​​they​​were,​​as​​well​​as​​warning​​the​​sincere​​believers​​to​ ​be​ ​on​ ​their​ ​guard​ ​from​ ​their​ ​“sweet​ ​poison”​ ​(refer​ ​to​ ​The​ ​Evolution​ ​of​ ​Fiqh​,​ ​pg.​ ​114,​ ​by​ ​A.A.​​Bilal​ ​Philips).​​Thus,​​it​​is​​not​​hard​​to​​realise​​that​​al-Khajnadee​​himself​​may​​have​​been​​strongly​​influenced​​by​​the​ ​above​ ​named​ ​Freemasons,​ ​after​ ​imbibing​ ​‘knowledge’​ ​from​ ​their​ ​sweet​ ​poisoned​ ​chalice!​ ​As​ ​for​ ​Ibn​ ​Taymiyya​​and​​his​​loyal​​disciple​​Ibn​​al-Qayyim,​​please​​see​​later​​for​​the​​scholarly​​judgments​​on​​their​​views​ ​and ideas.​ ​Saleem​​al-Hilaalee​​said​​on​​page​​13,​​“For​​example,​​the​​Maalikees​​leave​​their​​arms​​at​​their​​side,​​during​ ​the​ ​Salaah​ ​and​ ​read​ ​Qunoot​ ​in​ ​Fajr,​ ​whereas​ ​we​ ​find​ ​Maalik-​rahimahullah​-quotes​ ​in​ ​al-Muwatta;​ ​“Chapter:​ ​placing​ ​the​ ​two​ ​hands;​ ​one​ ​upon​ ​the​ ​other​ ​in​ ​Prayer…​ ​But​ ​the​ ​later​ ​Maalikees​ ​use​ ​as​ ​evidence​ ​that​ ​Maalik​ ​used​ ​to​ ​pray​ ​with​ ​his​ ​hands​ ​hanging​ ​at​ ​his​ ​side,​ ​this​ ​is​ ​ignorance​ ​with​ ​regards​​to​​the​​madhhab​​which​​they​​follow.​​Since​​Ja’far​​ibn​​Sulaymaan,​​the​​governor​​of​​al-Madeenah​ ​lashed​​the​​Imam​​in​​the​​year​​146H​​and​​stretched​​out​​his​​arms​​until​​his​​hands​​became​​dislocated​​and​​so​​he​ ​was not able to place his hands one over the other in Prayer....”​ ​The​​above​​statement​​by​​al-Hilaalee​​claimed​​that​​those​​who​​follow​​the​​Maliki​​Madhhab​​only​​left​​their​ ​hands​ ​unfolded​ ​in​ ​Salah,​ ​since​ ​Imam​ ​Malik​ ​(Rahimahullah)​​had​​to​​leave​​his​​arms​​unfolded​​after​​being​ ​lashed!!​ ​He​ ​also​ ​claims​ ​that​ ​this​ ​is​ ​“ignorance​ ​with​ ​regard​ ​to​​the​​madhhab​​which​​they​​follow.”​​But​​in​ ​reality,​​it​​is​​he​​who​​has​​fallen​​into​​the​​abyss​​of​​ignorance​​on​​this​​issue​​by​​‘blind’​​supposition!​​Although​ ​Imam​ ​Malik​ ​(Rahimahullah)​​related​​two​​Hadiths​​supporting​​the​​folding​​of​​the​​right​​hand​​on​​the​​left​​in​ ​Salah​​in​​his​​al-Muwatta,​​this​​does​​not​​mean​​that​​Imam​​Malik​​(Rahimahullah)​​himself​​always​​folded​​his​ ​hands​​in​​Salah.​​As​​you​​may​​have​​read​​in​​the​​section​​on​​“​The​​Placing​​of​​Hands​​in​​Prayer​”,​​I​​quoted​​the​ ​most​​authoritative​​position​​of​​the​​Maliki​​madhhab,​​as​​well​​as​​what​​Imam​​Malik​​himself​​said​​about​​placing​ ​the​​hands​​in​​Salah.​​Here​​is​​the​​quote​​again​​for​​good​​measure;​​and​​for​​the​​displacement​​of​​ignorant​​claims:​ ​“In​​al-Mudawwanah​​(vol.​​1,​​pg.​​75-76),​​Imam​​Malik​​has​​been​​recorded​​to​​have​​said,​​‘Putting​​the​​right​ ​hand​​on​​the​​left​​in​​salah,​​I​​have​​no​​knowledge​​of​​it​​in​​the​​compulsory​​(Fard)​​prayer,​​it​​is​​thus​​disliked​ ​(Makrooh).​​But​​in​​the​​supererogatory​​(Nafl)​​prayer​​there​​is​​no​​harm​​(in​​folding​​the​​hands),​​it​​is​​left​​to​ ​the individual to decide.’​​Please ask yourselves who​​is ignorant, al-Hilaalee or the Maliki scholars?!​ ​Al-Khajnadee​​claimed​​on​​page​​47,​​that​​the​​book​​al-Mudawwanah​​was​​by​​Imam​​Malik!​​In​​fact,​​as​​I​​have​ ​said​​on​​more​​than​​one​​occasion​​previously,​​al-Mudawwanah​​is​​the​​compilation​​of​​Qadi​​Sahnoon​!​​It​​is​ ​49​ ​IJTIHAD, TAQLEED AND THE “SALAFIYYA” SECT​ ​strange​​how​​al-Hilaalee​​did​​not​​correct​​al-Khajnadee​​in​​his​​editorial​​footnotes;​​do​​they​​want​​us​​to​​accept​ ​their claims ‘blindly’?​ ​On​​page​​22,​​al-Khajnadee​​quoted​​the​​well​​known​​Hadith​​from​​Irbaad​​ibn​​Saariyah​​(Allah​​be​​pleased​ ​with​ ​him)​ ​where​ ​the​ ​Holy​ ​Prophet​ ​(Peace​ ​be​ ​upon​​him)​​ordered​​us​​to,​​“​Keep​​to​​my​​Sunnah​​and​​the​ ​Sunnah​​of​​the​​Rightly-Guided​​Khulafaa,​​cling​​to​​that​​with​​your​​teeth​.”​​Thus​​it​​is​​incumbent​​to​​cling​​to​ ​the​​rightly​​guided​​Khulafaa;​​and​​they​​are​​Abu​​Bakr,​​Umar,​​Uthman​​and​​Ali​​(may​​Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​them​ ​all).​​But,​​as​​is​​the​​habit​​of​​men​​of​​his​​ilk,​​he​​contradicts​​himself​​by​​saying​​on​​the​​very​​next​​page:​​“Neither,​ ​Imaam​​Abu​​Haneefah​​or​​Maalik​​said,​​‘Keep​​to​​my​​saying’​​or​​‘Follow​​my​​madhhab’,​​not​​even​​Abu​​Bakr​​or​ ​‘Umar-radiallaahu​​‘anhum-rather​​they​​all​​forbade​​that.”​​Thus,​​is​​he​​saying​​that​​we​​should​​not​​keep​​to​​the​ ​sayings​​of​​Abu​​Bakr​​or​​Umar​​(Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​them)​​even​​though​​it​​is​​a​​command​​of​​the​​Prophet​ ​(Peace be upon him)?​ ​In​​fact​​al-Albani​​himself​​quoted​​two​​statements​​in​​“​Sifah​​Salah-an-Nabee​”,​​from​​Imams​​Abu​​Hanifah​ ​and​​Malik​​(Allah’s​​mercy​​be​​upon​​them)​​which​​permitted​​Taqleed​​of​​their​​views,​​so​​long​​as​​they​​agreed​ ​with​​the​​Qur’an​​and​​Sunnah!​​On​​page​​ix​​Imam​​Abu​​Hanifah​​(Rahimahullah)​​has​​been​​quoted​​as​​saying,​ ​“​When​ ​I​ ​say​ ​something​ ​contradicting​ ​the​ ​Book​ ​of​ ​Allah​ ​the​ ​Exalted​ ​or​ ​what​ ​is​ ​narrated​ ​from​ ​the​ ​Messenger​​(peace​​be​​upon​​him),​​then​​ignore​​my​​saying​.”​​Does​​this​​not​​mean​​that​​if​​any​​of​​Imam​​Ahu​ ​Hanifah’s​​Fatwas​​does​​not​​contradict​​the​​Qur’an​​and​​the​​Sunnah,​​may​​be​​taken​​by​​way​​of​​Taqleed;​​after​​the​ ​research scholars within the Hanafi school had shown that it had a basis?​ ​Similarly,​​Imam​​Malik​​(Rahimahullah)​​was​​quoted​​by​​al-Albani​​to​​have​​said​​(see​​‘Sifah’,​​pg.​​x):​​“​Truly​ ​I​​am​​only​​a​​mortal:​​I​​make​​mistakes​​(sometimes)​​and​​I​​am​​correct​​(sometimes).​​Therefore,​​look​​into​​my​ ​opinions:​​all​​that​​agrees​​with​​the​​Sunnah,​​accept​​it​;​​and​​all​​that​​does​​not​​agree​​with​​the​​Book​​and​​the​ ​Sunnah,​​ignore​​it.​”​​Again,​​Imam​​Malik​​has​​given​​us​​the​​right​​to​​take​​his​​opinions,​​so​​long​​as​​they​​agree​ ​with​​the​​Qur’an​​and​​Sunnah;​​Is​​this​​not​​in​​favour​​of​​Taqleed​​after​​the​​verifying​​scholars​​of​​the​​Maliki​ ​Madhhab​​proved which verdicts of Imam Malik were in​​harmony with the Shari’ah?​ ​Also,​ ​al-Albani​ ​quoted​ ​Imam​ ​al-Shafi’i​​(see​​‘Sifah’,​​pg.​​xi)​​as​​saying;​​“​If​​you​​find​​in​​my​​writings​ ​something​​different​​to​​the​​Sunnah​​of​​the​​Messenger​​of​​Allah​​(peace​​and​​blessings​​be​​upon​​him),​​then​ ​speak​​on​​the​​basis​​of​​the​​Sunnah​​of​​the​​Messenger​​of​​Allah​​(peace​​be​​upon​​him),​​and​​leave​​what​​I​ ​have​​said​.”​​Hence,​​whatever​​contradicts​​the​​authentic​​Sunnah​​in​​Imam​​al-Shafi’i’s​​writings​​was​​carefully​ ​examined​​by​​the​​research​​scholars​​within​​the​​Shafi’i​​Madhhab.​​This​​means​​that​​whatever​​did​​not​​contradict​ ​the Sunnah in Shafi’i’s writings may be taken by way of Taqleed; does it not?​ ​On​​page​​33,​​al-Khajnadee​​said,​​“​Taqleed​​in​​the​​Sharee’ah​​is​​referring​​back​​to​​someone’s​​saying​​for​ ​which​​there​​is​​no​​proof​​and​​that​​is​​prohibited​​in​​the​​Sharee’ah​.​​Ittibaa​​is​​that​​for​​which​​the​​proof​​is​ ​established.​ ​Taqleed​ ​in​ ​Allah’s​ ​deen​ ​is​ ​not​ ​correct​ ​and​ ​ittiba​ ​is​ ​binding.”​ ​This​ ​statement​ ​shows​ ​that​ ​al-Khajnadee​​did​​not​​even​​know​​what​​the​​correct​​definition​​of​​Taqleed​​was!​​He​​has​​definitely​​confused​​the​ ​meanings​​of​​the​​two​​words​​Taqleed​​and​​Ittiba.​​As​​I​​had​​said​​at​​the​​beginning​​of​​this​​section,​​Taqleed​​is​​the​ ​acceptance​​of​​a​​Mujtahid’s​​fatwa​​for​​which​​the​​proof​​has​​been​​established!​​How​​could​​it​​ever​​be​​said​​that​ ​Taqleed​​is​​the​​referring​​back​​to​​a​​“saying​​for​​which​​there​​is​​no​​proof?”​​Surely,​​this​​is​​not​​Taqleed​​but​​the​ ​following​​of​​mere​​opinion.​​What​​al-Khajnadee​​said​​about​​Ittiba​​is​​in​​reality​​the​​true​​extent​​of​​Taqleed!​​So,​ ​please beware of this cunning deception my dear brothers and sisters.​ ​On​​page​​37,​​al-Khajnadee​​made,​​a​​blatantly​​false​​statement​​by​​saying​​nonsensically,​​“​If​​you​​look​​into​ ​the​​matter​​carefully​​it​​will​​be​​clear​​to​​you​​that​​these​​madhhabs​​were​​spread,​​promoted​​and​​made​ ​attractive​​by​​the​​enemies​​of​​Islam​​in​​order​​to​​split​​the​​Muslims​​and​​cause​​discord​​amongst​​them.​ ​Or​​they​​were​​started​​by​​the​​ignorant​​in​​conformity​​with​​the​​Jews​​and​​Christians​​and​​in​​imitation​ ​of​ ​them,​ ​as​ ​they​ ​do​ ​in​ ​many​ ​matters​.”​ ​By​ ​Allah,​ ​this​ ​is​ ​a​ ​grave​ ​calumniation,​ ​a​ ​highly​ ​nefarious​ ​aspersion​ ​and​ ​a​​blatant​​misrepresentation​​of​​historical​​facts!​​Only​​one​​who​​lacks​​a​​speck​​of​​analytical​ ​deduction​​and​​investigation​​into​​historical​​facts​​could​​say​​such​​a​​crass​​thing!​​In​​reality,​​these​​madhhabs​ ​were​​spread​​by​​the​​founders​​of​​these​​very​​schools,​​and​​especially​​by​​those​​amongst​​their​​disciples,​​and​ ​then​​those​​who​​succeeded​​them...​​So​​that​​eventually​​a​​full​​chain​​of​​transmission​​(Isnad)​​was​​built​​up​​and​ ​50​ ​IJTIHAD, TAQLEED AND THE “SALAFIYYA” SECT​ ​recorded​​by​​the​​succeeding​​scholars​​in​​their​​works,​​just​​as​​in​​the​​science​​of​​Hadith.​​Even​​today,​​some​ ​scholars​​have​​an​​unbroken​​chain​​going​​back​​to​​the​​scholars​​of​​Hadith​​and​​Fiqh​​of​​the​​first​​generations​​of​ ​Islam!​ ​The​​great​​scholar​​of​​Islam,​​Qadi​​Iyad​​(d.​​544/1149​​Rahimahullah),​​has​​quite​​beautifully​​and​​eloquently​ ​explained​​how​​the​​Madhhabs​​arose,​​and​​why​​one​​should​​make​​Taqleed​​of​​them.​​He​​said:​​“This​​Ijtihad​​and​ ​the​​handing​​down​​of​​rules​​and​​Shari’ah,​​on​​the​​basis​​of​​it-​there​​are​​very​​few,​​very​​few​​who​​have​​the​ ​capacity.​ ​Indeed​​they​​are​​fewer​​than​​the​​few​​after​​the​​first​​generation​​(of​​Muslims),the​​upright​ ​Salihun,​​and​​the​​first​​three​​praiseworthy​​generations​.​​Now​​since​​this​​is​​the​​nature​​of​​the​​matter,​​any​ ​human​​being​​burdened​​with​​the​​moral​​responsibility​​to​​obey​​Allah,​​but​​not​​having​​attained​​the​​status​​of​ ​being​​able​​to​​know​​the​​Shari’ah,​​on​​his​​own,​​is​​necessarily​​required​​to​​get​​that​​knowledge​​from​​someone​ ​else.​ ​He​​must​​take​​the​​knowledge​​of​​every​​act​​of​​worship​​he​​has​​been​​commanded​​to​​do-every​​application​​of​ ​the​​Shari’ah​​that​​has​​been​​made​​responsible​​for​​him​​to​​perform​​directly,​​from​​that​​man​​who​​can​​give​​it​​to​ ​him​​straight​​from​​the​​source​​and​​who​​will​​make​​him​​know​​exactly​​what​​to​​do.​​That​​man​​must​​be​​the​​staff​ ​by​​which​​he​​stands​​in​​his​​own​​transmission​​to​​others,​​in​​the​​knowledge​​he​​acquires,​​and​​in​​the​​Shari’ah​ ​parameters​​by​​which​​he​​lives.​​This​​is​​Taqleed​.​​And​​this​​is​​precisely​​the​​position​​of​​the​​ordinary​​people,​ ​indeed​​the​​vast​​majority​​of​​all​​people.​​Since​​this​​is​​the​​case,​​what​​is​​required​​of​​you​​is​​that​​in​​all​​such​ ​matters,​ ​you​ ​do​ ​Taqleed​ ​of​ ​the​ ​‘alim​ ​in​ ​whom​ ​you​​have​​complete​​trust.​​If​​such​​Ulama​​are​​many,​​then​ ​follow​ ​that​ ​one​​who​​is​​most​​knowledgeable.​​This​​is​​the​​portion​​of​​Ijtihad​​which​​falls​​to​​the​​lot​​of​​the​ ​Muqallid​ ​with​ ​regard​ ​to​ ​his​ ​deen.​ ​And​ ​it​ ​is​ ​not​ ​fitting​ ​that​ ​the​ ​Muqallid​ ​should​ ​abandon​ ​the​ ​most​ ​knowledgeable​​(Mujtahidun)​​in​​favour​​of​​someone​​else,​​even​​though​​that​​other​​person​​is​​also​​busy​​with​ ​knowledge.​​The​​Muqallid​​must​​therefore​​ask​​at​​that​​time​​about​​those​​things​​which​​he​​does​​not​​know​​until​ ​he​ ​has​ ​knowledge​ ​of​ ​them,​ ​just​ ​as​ ​Allah,​ ​Glory​ ​be​ ​to​ ​Him,​ ​has​ ​said,​ ​‘Then​ ​ask​ ​the​ ​people​ ​of​ ​Remembrance if you do not know​.’ (​Qur’an 16:43 and​​21:7​)​ ​And​​the​​one​​upon​​whom​​we​​ask​​Allah’s​​blessings​​and​​peace​​commanded​​the​​Khalifs​​after​​him​​and​​his​ ​Companions​​be​​emulated.​​The​​one​​upon​​whom​​we​​ask​​blessings​​and​​peace​​also​​sent​​his​​Companions​​out​ ​among​​the​​people​​to​​give​​them​​understanding​​in​​the​​deen,​​to​​teach​​them​​what​​had​​been​​made​​incumbent​​on​ ​them,​​and​​Allah​​urged​​on​​the​​entirety​​of​​them​​to​​go​​out,​​‘From​​every​​group​​among​​you​​let​​there​​be​​a​​group​ ​who​​will​​develop​​understanding​​of​​the​​deen​​and​​who​​will​​give​​warning​​to​​their​​people​​when​​they​​return​​to​ ​them.​ ​Now​​since​​this​​matter​​is​​something​​necessary,​​and​​there​​is​​no​​way​​around​​it,​​and​​since​​they​​who​​most​ ​deserve​ ​to​ ​be​ ​followed​ ​by​ ​the​ ​uniformed​ ​ordinary​ ​man,​ ​the​ ​beginner,​ ​who​ ​has​ ​taken​ ​it​ ​on​ ​himself​​to​ ​worship,​​or​​the​​student​​seeking​​right​​guidance​​and​​knowledge​​of​​Fiqh​​in​​the​​deen​​of​​Allah,​​and​​those​​who​ ​have​​the​​greatest​​right​​to​​be​​followed​​are​​the​​Fuqaha​​of​​the​​Sahaba​​of​​Rasulullah​​(Peace​​be​​upon​​him),​ ​they​ ​are​ ​those​ ​who​ ​took​ ​their​ ​knowledge​ ​directly​ ​from​ ​him,​ ​who​ ​knew​ ​the​ ​circumstances​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Revelation​ ​of​ ​the​ ​commands​ ​and​ ​prohibitions,​ ​the​ ​various​ ​prophecies​ ​of​ ​the​ ​different​ ​aspects​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Shari’ah,​​the​​exact​​pronunciation​​of​​the​​Prophet’s​​words,​​may​​Allah​​bless​​him​​and​​give​​him​​peace,​​who​ ​themselves​ ​witnessed​ ​the​ ​accompanying​ ​circumstances​ ​of​​these​​ayats,​​who​​spoke​​to​​the​​Prophet,​​may​ ​Allah​ ​bless​ ​him​ ​and​ ​give​ ​him​ ​peace,​ ​directly,​ ​about​ ​most​ ​of​ ​it,​ ​who​ ​asked​ ​him​ ​about​ ​it​ ​despite​ ​the​ ​extensive​​knowledge​​from​​the​​Prophet​​(Peace​​be​​upon​​him)​​which​​they​​themselves​​already​​had,​​and​​their​ ​knowledge​ ​of​ ​the​ ​meanings​ ​of​ ​Arabic​ ​speech,​ ​the​ ​illumination​ ​of​ ​their​ ​hearts,​ ​and​ ​the​ ​openness​ ​and​ ​receptivity​​of​​their​​hearts,​​such​​that​​they​​were,​​without​​the​​least​​contention,​​the​​most​​knowledgeable​​of​ ​Imams, and they were those of the Imams most worthy of being followed by Taqleed.​ ​Nevertheless,​​they​​only​​spoke​​about​​a​​few​​of​​the​​problematic​​events​​that​​happened​​among​​them,​​and​ ​large​​numbers​​of​​answers​​to​​Shari’ah​​questions​​did​​not​​branch​​out​​from​​them​​in​​detail.​​They​​did​​not​​speak​ ​about​ ​the​ ​Shari’ah,​​except​​with​​regard​​to​​the​​basic​​teachings,​​and​​certain​​things​​that​​actually​​happened.​ ​Most​​of​​their​​pre-occupation​​was​​with​​the​​putting​​into​​practise​​of​​what​​they​​knew​​and​​the​​active​​defence​ ​of​ ​the​ ​entire​ ​deen,​ ​the​ ​laying​ ​down​ ​of​ ​the​​firm​​foundation​​of​​the​​Shari’ah​​of​​the​​Muslims.​​There​​was​ ​51​ ​IJTIHAD, TAQLEED AND THE “SALAFIYYA” SECT​ ​among​​them​​a​​degree​​of​​difference​​of​​opinion​​in​​some​​of​​the​​things​​which​​they​​discussed​​which​​could​ ​keep​​the​​Muqallid​​in​​a​​perpetual​​state​​of​​confusion,​​and​​require​​of​​him​​the​​kind​​of​​reflection​​and​​review​ ​for​​which​​he​​is​​not​​yet​​prepared.​​And​​indeed​​the​​full​​elaboration​​of​​questions,​​resolving​​of​​problems,​​and​ ​setting​​out​​the​​discussions,​​only​​came​​about​​in​​response​​to​​those​​matters,​​the​​appearance​​of​​which​​had​ ​been anticipated after the Sahaba were gone.​ ​Consequently,​​the​​Tabi’in,​​the​​Followers​​(like​​Imams​​Abu​​Hanifah,​​an-Nakhai,​​Hammad,​​al-Zuhri,​ ​Hasan​​al-Basri,​​Sha’bi​...),​​came​​and​​reflected​​on​​the​​differences​​of​​opinions​​of​​the​​Companions,​​and​ ​built​ ​on​ ​the​ ​foundations​ ​which​ ​they​ ​had​ ​laid​ ​down.​ ​Then​ ​after​ ​them​ ​came​​the​​Ulama​​from​​among​​the​ ​Followers​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Followers​ ​(like​ ​Imams​ ​Malik,​ ​Shafi’i,​ ​Ibn​ ​Hanbal,​ ​Dawood​ ​al-Zahiri​...).​​By​​that​ ​time,​​the​​occurrences​​which​​had​​happened​​already​​became​​many​​and​​the​​problematic​​events​​had​​already​ ​occurred,​​while​​Fatwas​​regarding​​all​​of​​this​​had​​branched​​out​​into​​many​​details.​​Therefore​​they​​gathered​ ​together the opinion of them all, and they committed their Fiqh to memory.​ ​They​​sought​​out​​differences​​of​​opinion​​of​​the​​earlier​​generations​​as​​well​​as​​their​​areas​​of​​agreement,​ ​but​​they​​were​​cautious​​about​​the​​matter​​of​​this​​disagreement​​spreading​​and​​of​​its​​getting​​out​​of​​control.​ ​Therefore​ ​they​ ​did​ ​Ijtihad​ ​regarding​ ​all​ ​these​ ​parts​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Sunnah,​ ​and​ ​of​ ​the​ ​precise​ ​articulation​ ​of​ ​fundamental​​principles.​​They​​asked​​questions​​and​​they​​got​​answers.​​They​​built​​up​​the​​foundations​​of​​the​ ​basic​​precepts​​and​​they​​made​​accessible​​the​​basic​​principles.​​Upon​​them​​were​​delineated​​the​​solutions​​to​ ​problems​ ​and​ ​events​ ​and​ ​they​ ​were​ ​put​ ​down​ ​in​ ​writing​ ​for​ ​the​ ​people,​ ​and​ ​organised.​ ​Each​ ​of​ ​them​ ​worked​​on​​the​​basis​​of​​the​​inspiration​​he​​was​​given​​and​​the​​accomplishment​​to​​which​​Allah​​had​​guided​ ​them.​​So​​they​​became​​the​​ultimate​​in​​the​​science​​of​​Usool​​and​​of​​the​​specific​​details​​of​​the​​Shari’ah​​in​ ​the​​matters​​of​​agreement​​and​​disagreement.​​And​​on​​the​​basis​​of​​this​​knowledge​​which​​had​​come​​to​​them,​ ​they​​made​​Qiyas,​​analogy,​​according​​to​​the​​indications,​​and​​the​​similarities​​that​​they​​had​​got.​​May​​Allah​​be​ ​pleased with all of them and may He give them the full extent of the reward of their Ijtihad.​ ​Therefore​​it​​is​​an​​individual​​obligation​​that​​falls​​on​​the​​ordinary​​Muqallid​​and​​the​​student​​of​ ​knowledge​ ​in​ ​his​ ​beginning​ ​stages,​ ​to​ ​take​ ​recourse​ ​in​ ​his​ ​Taqleed​ ​to​ ​these​ ​great​​men,​​or​​the​ ​explicit​ ​texts​ ​regarding​ ​the​ ​problems​ ​and​ ​events​ ​that​ ​befall​ ​him.​ ​Recourse​​must​​be​​had​​to​​them​ ​regarding​ ​all​ ​of​ ​these​ ​matters​ ​which​ ​are​ ​problematic​ ​because​ ​of​ ​the​ ​fact​ ​that​ ​they​ ​were​​immersed​​in​ ​knowledge​​of​​the​​Shari’ah​​and​​it​​literally​​revolved​​around​​them.​​They​​alone​​have​​precise​​understanding​​of​ ​the​​schools,​​of​​who​​had​​gone​​before,​​and​​the​​earlier​​generations,​​and​​that​​knowledge​​is​​enough​​for​​all​​who​ ​have​ ​come​ ​after​ ​them​​in​​later​​generations.​​Nevertheless,​​it​​is​​simply​​not​​possible​​that​​all​​of​​these​ ​earlier​​Fuqaha​​can​​be​​simultaneous​​objects​​of​​Taqleed​​regarding​​the​​most​​difficult​​problems​​and​ ​the​ ​majority​ ​of​ ​questions,​ ​because​ ​of​ ​their​ ​differences​​among​​themselves​​caused​​by​​conflicting​ ​opinions​​about​​the​​fundamental​​principles​​upon​​which​​they​​built.​​Moreover,​​it​​is​​not​​valid​​for​​the​ ​Muqallid​​to​​do​​Taqleed​​of​​any​​among​​them​​merely​​on​​the​​basis​​of​​personal​​whim,​​or​​chance​​that​ ​he​ ​has​ ​come​ ​upon​ ​a​ ​decision​​on​​the​​basis​​of​​what​​he​​happened​​to​​find​​the​​people​​of​​his​​region​ ​doing, or his family doing (and this is quite common today; is it not?)​ ​Again​​therefore,​​the​​portion​​of​​Ijtihad​​that​​falls​​to​​his​​lot​​in​​this​​case,​​is​​that​​he​​seek​​to​​discover​​by​ ​reflection​​which​​of​​them​​was​​the​​most​​knowledgeable,​​and​​come​​to​​know​​which​​of​​them​​is​​most​​worthy​ ​of​​being​​an​​object​​of​​Taqleed​​from​​among​​all​​of​​them,​​so​​that​​in​​his​​practise​​and​​his​​Fatwas,​​the​​ordinary​ ​man​​can​​trust​​him​​and​​rely​​on​​him​​and​​trust​​that​​in​​his​​acts​​of​​worship,​​he​​had​​taken​​on​​himself​​only​​what​ ​the​ ​Mujtahid​ ​had​ ​and​ ​discerned​ ​as​ ​correct.​ ​The​ ​ordinary​ ​man​ ​therefore​ ​must​ ​give​ ​to​ ​the​ ​most​ ​knowledgeable​​(scholars)​​among​​the​​adherents​​to​​the​​schools​​of​​these​​earlier​​Fuqaha,​​the​​status​ ​which​ ​by​ ​right,​ ​he​ ​deserves.​ ​It​ ​is​​not​​permissible​​for​​him​​that​​he​​go​​beyond​​them​​in​​his​​seeking​​of​ ​Fatwas​​to​​one​​who​​does​​not​​follow​​the​​opinion​​of​​his​​school​​(NB-There​​are​​certain​​conditions​​which​​need​ ​to​​be​​fulfilled​​before​​one​​can​​take​​opinions​​from​​other​​schools,​​these​​principles​​have​​been​​explained​​by​ ​scholars​​like​​Shaykh​​al-Islam​​Ibn​​Hajar​​al-Haytami​).​​For​​as​​some​​of​​the​​Shaykhs​​have​​said,​​‘The​​Imam​ ​is​​with​​regard​​to​​one​​who​​adheres​​to​​his​​school,​​to​​his​​way,​​like​​the​​Prophet,​​may​​Allah​​bless​​him​​and​​give​ ​him​​peace,​​is​​with​​regard​​to​​his​​Ummah.’​​It​​is​​not​​permissible​​for​​him​​to​​go​​against​​his​​Imam​​(unless​​one​ ​52​ ​IJTIHAD, TAQLEED AND THE “SALAFIYYA” SECT​ ​has​​become​​a​​Mujtahid​​within​​the​​school​​or​​in​​specific​​issues).​​This​​has​​been​​expressed​​quite​​correctly,​ ​and​​the​​correct​​way​​will​​become​​clear​​to​​those​​who​​have​​insight,​​and​​eyes​​with​​which​​to​​see,​​on​​the​​basis​ ​of​ ​what​ ​we​ ​have​ ​elaborated​ ​and​ ​the​ ​stipulations​ ​we​ ​have​ ​laid​ ​down.”​ ​(quoted​ ​from​ ​Root​ ​Islamic​ ​Education​, pp. 82-7, by​​Shaykh Abdal qadir al-Murabit​).​ ​So​​please​​ask​​yourselves,​​“Were​​these​​great​​scholars​​the​​enemies​​of​​Islam​​(Allah​​forbid),​​who​​imitated​ ​the​​ways​​of​​corrupt​​Christians​​and​​jews?”​​I​​say,​​never​​could​​these​​madhhabs​​have​​ever​​existed​​if​​the​​well​ ​known scholars did not spread them; is this not the basic and fundamental truth?​ ​One​​of​​the​​most​​well​​known​​scholars​​of​​Hadith​​in​​our​​time,​​Shaykh​​Shu’ayb​​al-Arnaoot​​(b.​​1928​​in​ ​Albania,​ ​presently​ ​residing​ ​in​ ​Amman,​ ​Jordan),​ ​said​ ​with​ ​regard​ ​to​ ​Taqleed​ ​and​ ​the​ ​founders​ ​of​ ​the​ ​madhhabs,​​“​They​​are​​explainers,​​not​​popes;​​but​​in​​each​​of​​their​​schools​​there​​afterwards​​followed​​a​ ​hundred​ ​or​ ​more​ ​scholars​ ​who​ ​refined​ ​and​ ​added​ ​to​ ​their​ ​work,​ ​men​ ​whose​ ​stature​ ​in​ ​Islamic​ ​knowledge​​was​​like​​mountains,​​any​​one​​of​​whom​​could​​put​​fifteen​​of​​the​​scholars​​available​​today​​in​ ​his pocket.​”​ ​Another​​imbecilic​​statement​​was​​made​​by​​al-Khajnadee​​on​​page​​56,​​where​​he​​said,​​“They​​have​​taken​​a​ ​path​​opposite​​to​​that​​of​​the​​people​​of​​knowledge,​​their​​late-comers​​have​​inverted​​the​​way​​of​​the​​Salaf​​and​ ​turned​​the​​foundations​​of​​the​​Deen​​upside​​down.​​So​​they​​declare​​the​​Book​​of​​Allah,​​the​​Sunnah​​of​​His​ ​Messenger​ ​(Peace​ ​be​ ​upon​ ​him),​ ​the​ ​sayings​ ​of​ ​his​ ​Khulafaa​ ​and​ ​the​ ​rest​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Companions-radiallaahu​​‘anhum-to​​be​​false.​”​​Again,​​he​​made​​a​​wicked​​declaration​​by​​claiming​​that​​the​ ​followers​​of​​these​​madhhabs​​declared​​the,​​“Book​​of​​Allah,​​the​​Sunnah​​of​​His​​Messenger​​(peace​​be​​upon​ ​him),​​the​​sayings​​of​​his​​Khulafaa​​and​​the​​rest​​of​​the​​Companions-radiallahu​​‘anhum-​TO​​BE​​FALSE​.”​​I​​ask​ ​you​ ​which​ ​scholar​ ​within​ ​the​ ​four​ ​madhhabs,​ ​let​​alone​​the​​‘blind​​followers’​​declared​​it​​“To​​be​​false?”​ ​Would​​it​​not​​be​​true,​​that​​if​​one​​declared​​the​​above​​sources​​to​​be​​“false”​​he​​or​​she​​may​​automatically​​go​ ​out​​of​​the​​fold​​of​​Islam​​(especially​​the​​first​​two​​sources),​​let​​alone​​be​​a​​follower​​of​​a​​Madhhab​​(and​​only​ ​Allah​​knows​​best)?​​How​​could​​the​​‘blind​​followers’​​declare​​something​​to​​be​​false,​​when​​the​​great​​scholars​ ​have​​said​​that​​it​​is​​impermissible​​to​​take​​the​​“Ijtihad”​​of​​non-Mujtahids​​as​​documentary​​proof?​​May​​Allah​ ​guide the people who believe in what al-Khajnadee proclaimed!​ ​There​​are​​many​​other​​vile​​statements​​made​​by​​al-Khajnadee​​in​​his​​above​​named​​book,​​but​​this​​is​​not​​the​ ​time​​and​​place​​to​​outline​​them​​in​​detail;​​rather​​a​​well​​grounded​​scholar​​could​​easily​​refute​​his​​nonsensical​ ​slanders​​and​​lies​​by​​way​​of​​logical​​proofs​​from​​the​​sources​​of​​the​​Shari’ah.​​This​​book​​of​​his​​was​​meant​​to​ ​be​​“sound”​​advice​​for​​some​​prospective​​Japanese​​converts​​to​​Islam.​​It​​seems​​al-Khajinadee​​wanted​​his​ ​Japanese​​readers​​(not​​to​​mention​​the​​generality​​of​​the​​Muslim​​readership)​​to​​accept​​everything​​he​​said​ ​“blindly”​​and​​without​​research;​​thus​​he​​may​​not​​have​​been​​advising​​the​​Japanese​​questioners,but​​instead​ ​confusing​ ​them​ ​even​ ​more​​deeply​​by​​not​​explaining​​the​​meanings​​of​​many​​of​​the​​statements​​and​​their​ ​ramifications,​ ​let​ ​alone​ ​the​ ​Shari’ah​ ​terminology​ ​he​ ​had​ ​used!​ ​Besides​ ​that,​ ​he​ ​as​ ​well​ ​as​ ​his​ ​friend​ ​al-Albani​​(in​​his​​‘Sifah​​Salah​​an-Nabee’),​​failed​​to​​tell​​their​​readers​​that​​nearly​​every​​scholar​​they​​quoted​ ​from​ ​were​ ​the​ ​adherents​ ​of​ ​one​ ​of​ ​the​ ​four​ ​existing​ ​schools!​ ​This​ ​is​ ​a​ ​great​ ​trick​ ​of​ ​the​ ​most​ ​knowledgeable​ ​of​ ​“Salafi”​ ​scholars;​ ​they​ ​seem​ ​to​ ​deceive​ ​themselves​ ​as​ ​well​​as​​their​​readers​​when​​it​ ​comes to proclaiming this undeniable fact!​ ​Rather,​​al-Khajnadee​​and​​al-Albani​​should​​have​​tried​​to​​disprove​​the​​evidences​​used​​by​​the​​scholars​ ​within​​the​​Madhhabs​​(from​​the​​Qur’an,​​Sunnah​​and​​even​​the​​Ijma),​​which​​documents​​and​​allows​​Taqleed​​to​ ​all​​non-Mujtahids!​​The​​following​​is​​a​​list​​of​​some​​of​​the​​scholars​​quoted​​by​​al-Albani​​and​​al-Khajnadee​​in​ ​their books, and the Madhhab they were in:​ ​THE HANAFI SCHOLARS​ ​Imam​ ​Ibn​ ​Abidin​ ​(d.​ ​1252/1836;​ ​al-A’lam,​ ​6.42​ ​[viii,​ ​15,​ ​221]),​ ​Hafiz​ ​Ibn​ ​al-Humam​ ​(d.​ ​861/1457;​ ​al-A’lam,​​6.255​​[viii,​​22,​​32]),​​Imam​​Ibn​​al-Shahnah​​al-Kabeer​​[viii],​​Imam​​Zufar​​(d.​​158​​AH​​[viii]),​​Imam​ ​53​ ​IJTIHAD, TAQLEED AND THE “SALAFIYYA” SECT​ ​Abu​​Yusoof​​(d.​​182/798;​​al-A’lam,​​8.193​​[viii,​​14]),​​Imam​​Muhammad​​al-Shaybani​​(d.​​189/804;​​al-A’lam,​ ​6.80​ ​[ix,​ ​14]),​ ​Imam​ ​al-Tahawi​ ​(d.​​321​​AH,​​[5]),​​Imam​​ibn​​Abi​​al-Izz​​al-Hanafi​​[17],​​Imam​​ibn​​Nujaim​ ​al-Misri​​(d.​​970​​AH​​[34]),​​Shaykh​​Ali​​al-Qari​​(d.​​1014/1606;​​al-A’lam,​​5.12​​[35]),​​Shaykh​​Abd​​al-Haqq​ ​Dehlawi​​(d.​​1052​​AH​​[36]),​​Allamah​​Abdal​​Hayy​​al-Lucknawi​​(d.​​1304​​AH;​​also​​known​​as​​Abul​​Hasanat​ ​[ix]), Shaykh Abul Hasan as-Sindee al-Hanafi [5], Shaykh Aafiyyah ibn Yazeed [viii].​ ​THE MALIKI SCHOLARS​ ​Hafiz​ ​Ibn​ ​Abd​ ​al-Barr​ ​(d.​ ​463/1071;​ ​al-A’lam,​ ​8.240​ ​[x,​ ​5]),​ ​Imam​ ​Ibn​ ​Wahb​ ​(d.​ ​197/812​ ​[x]),​ ​Imam​ ​Abdullah ibn Abee Zaid al-Qairwanee al-Maliki (d. 389 AH [16]).​ ​THE SHAFI’I SCHOLARS​ ​Imam​​al-Bayhaqi​​(d.​​458/1066;​​al-A’lam,​​1.116​​[xi,​​6]),​​Shaykh​​Abu​​Yusoof​​al-Buweeti​​[xii],​​Shaykh​​Abul​ ​Qasim​ ​ad-Daariki​ ​[xii],​ ​Hafiz​ ​Ibn​ ​as-Salah​ ​(d.​ ​643/1245;​ ​Tabaqat​ ​al-Shafi’iya,​ ​8.326​ ​[xii]),​ ​Imam​ ​Taqi​ ​ad-Deen​​al-Subki​​(d.​​756/1355;​​al-Fatawa​​al-Hadithiyya,​​114​​[xii,​​14]),​​Imam​​Abu​​Nu’aym​​(d.​​430/1038;​ ​Tabaqat​ ​al-Shafi’iya,​ ​4.18​ ​[xii,​ ​52]),​ ​Imam​ ​al-Bukhari​ ​(d.​ ​256/870;​ ​Tabaqat​ ​al-Shafi’iya,​​2.212-14​​[6]),​ ​Imam​​Muslim​​(d.​​261/875;​​Siyar​​a’lam​​al-nubala,​​12:557-61​​[6]),​​Imam​​Abu​​Dawood​​(d.​​275/889;​​Tabaqat​ ​al-Shafi’iya,​​2.293​​[xiii,​​14]),​​Imam​​Nisai​​(d.​​309/915;​​Tabaqat​​al-Shafi’iya,​​3.14-16​​[6]),​​Imam​​Tirmidhi​ ​(d.​ ​279/892;​ ​Siyar​ ​a’lam,​ ​13.270-73​ ​[6]),​ ​Imam​ ​ibn​ ​Majah​ ​(d.​ ​209/824;​ ​al-A’lam,​ ​7.144​ ​[6]),​ ​Imam​ ​al-Suyuti​ ​(d.​ ​911/1505;​ ​al-A’lam,​ ​3.301-2​ ​[5]),​​Hafiz​​Ibn​​Khuzaymah​​(d.​​311/924;​​Tabaqat​​al-Shafi’iya,​ ​3.109​​[16]),​​Imam​​ash-Sha’rani​​(d.​​973/1565;​​al-A’lam,​​4.180-1​​[viii,​​35]),​​Imam​​Hakim​​(d.​​405/1014;​ ​Tabaqat​ ​al-Shafi’iya,​ ​4.155​ ​[xi,​ ​39]),​ ​Imam​ ​ibn​ ​Asakir​ ​(d.​​571​​AH​​[xi]),​​Hafiz​​Khateeb​​al-Baghdadi​​(d.​ ​463/1072;​​Tabaqat​​al-Shafi’iya,​​4.29​​[xi,​​52]),​​Hafiz​​al-Dhahabi​​(d.​​748/1348;​​Tabaqat​​al-Shafi’iya,​​9.100​ ​[18]),​ ​Hafiz​ ​al-Iraqi​ ​(d.​ ​806/1404;​ ​al-A’lam,​ ​3.344​ ​[18]),​ ​Imam​ ​al-Tabarani​ ​(d.​ ​360/971;​ ​Siyar​ ​a’lam,​ ​16.119-23​​[18]),​​Imam​​al-Izz​​ibn​​Abdas​​Salam​​(d.​​660/1262;​​al-A’lam,​​4.21​​[27]),​​Imam​​ibn​​Hibban​​(d.​ ​354/965;​ ​Tabaqat​ ​al-Shafi’iya,​ ​3.131​ ​[39]),​ ​Hafiz​ ​Ibn​ ​Hajar​ ​al-Asqalani​ ​(d.​ ​852/1449;​ ​al-A’lam,​ ​1.178​ ​[39]),​​Hafiz​​al-Haythami​​(d.​​807/1405;​​al-A’lam,​​4.266​​[40]),​​Imam​​al-Haramayn​​(d.​​478/1085;​​Tabaqat​ ​al-Shafi’iya,​​5.165​​[41]),​​Imam​​Abul​​Qasim​​al-Qushayri​​(d.​​465/1072;​​Tabaqat​​al-Shafi’iya,​​5.153​​[50]),​ ​Imam​​al-Razi​​(d.​​606/1210;​​Tabaqat​​al-Shafi’iya,​​8.81-89​​[59]),​​Imam​​al-Baghawi​​(d.​​510/1117;​​al-A’lam,​ ​2.259 [59]), Imam Abu Shamah (d. 665 AH [78]), Imam al-Nawawi (d. 676/1277; al-A’lam, 8.149 [xi, 15]).​ ​THE HANBALI SCHOLARS​ ​Hafiz​​ibn​​Taymiyya​​(d.​​728/1328;​​al-A’lam,​​1.144​​[30]),​​Hafiz​​ibn​​al-Qayyim​​al-Jawziyyah​​(d.​​751/1350;​ ​Siyar​​a’lam,​​7.202​​[xiii,​​42]),​​Hafiz​​ibn​​al-Jawzi​​(d.​​508/1114;​​al-A’lam,​​3.316​​[xii,​​53]),​​Hafiz​​ibn​​Rajab​ ​al-Hanbali (d. 795/1393, [xiv]).​ ​NB-​ ​The​ ​contents​ ​in​ ​the​ ​brackets​ ​(after​ ​the​ ​names​ ​of​ ​the​ ​above​ ​scholars),​ ​stand​ ​for​ ​the​ ​following​ ​abbreviations:-​ ​(i)​​‘d.’​​the year of the scholar’s death, usually​​in Hijri and Christian dates.​ ​(ii)​ ​‘al-A’lam’​-​ ​This​ ​is​ ​a​ ​well​ ​known​ ​biographical​ ​dictionary​ ​by​ ​Khayral-Deen​ ​al-Zirikly​ ​(see​ ​bibliography for full details).​ ​(ii)​​‘Tabaqat​​al-Shafi’iya’​-​​This​​is​​a​​very​​well​​known​​dictionary​​listing​​all​​the​​famous​​Shafi’i​​scholars​​up​ ​till the death of its author-​Imam Tajal-Deen al-Subki​​(rahimahullal).​ ​(iv)​​‘Siyar​​a’lam​​al-nubala’​-​​This​​is​​a​​biographical​​dictionary​​by​​the​​famous​​scholar​​of​​Hadith-​al-Hafiz​ ​Muhammad ibn Ahmad al-Dhahabi​​(rahimahullah).​ ​54​ ​IJTIHAD, TAQLEED AND THE “SALAFIYYA” SECT​ ​(v)​ ​‘al-Fatawa​ ​al-Hadithiyya’​-​​This​​is​​a​​well​​known​​collection​​by​​the​​great​​scholar​​of​​Islam-​Shaykh​ ​al-Islam Ibn Hajar al-Haytami​(rahimahullah).​ ​(vi)​ ​Whatever​ ​appears​ ​in​ ​square​ ​brackets-​ ​[​ ​],​ ​refers​ ​to​ ​the​ ​page​ ​number​ ​in​ ​al-Albani’s​ ​‘Sifah​ ​Salah​ ​an-Nabee’ (only in roman numerals) and al-Khajnadee’s ‘Blind Following of Madhhabs.’​ ​So​ ​now​ ​my​ ​dear​ ​reader,​ ​you​ ​should​ ​be​ ​asking​ ​yourselves​ ​the​ ​simple​ ​question:​ ​“Why​ ​did​ ​the​ ​above-named​​scholars​​adhere​​to​​one​​of​​the​​four​​schools,​​but​​today​​people​​like​​al-Albani​​etc;​​are​​calling​ ​for​​the​​abandonment​​of​​the​​Taqleed​​of​​the​​four​​schools?”​​Even​​two​​of​​the​​most​​prominent​​Imams​​of​ ​the​​neo-”Salafiyya”,​​Ibn​​Taymiyya​​and​​Ibn​​al-Qayyim​​were​​Hanbali​​in​​Fiqh​​(but​​their​​Aqeedah​​has​ ​been​​questioned​​by​​many​​scholars).​​One​​may​​have​​also​​noticed​​that​​not​​one​​of​​the​​6​​main​​Imams​​of​ ​Hadith​​(al-Bukhari,​​Muslim,​​AbuDawood,​​Tirmidhi,​​an-Nisai​​and​​Ibn​​Majah)​​were​​out​​of​​the​​four​ ​schools​;​​and​​this​​fact​​may​​astonish​​the​​so​​called​​“Salafiyya”​​who​​claim​​to​​be​​on​​the​​path​​of​​the​​scholars​​of​ ​Hadith!​​If​​this​​fact​​seems​​unconvincing​​to​​the​​lay​​reader,​​then​​one​​should​​read​​their​​biographies​​in​​the​ ​above​​named​​dictionaries,​​or​​their​​actual​​books!​​Thus,​​without​​even​​writing​​a​​refutation​​against​​the​​likes​ ​of​ ​al-Albani​ ​and​ ​al-Khajnadee,​​the​​above​​named​​scholars​​(not​​to​​mention​​thousands​​of​​other​​scholars)​ ​stand​​as​​a​​witness​​against​​their​​false​​claims​​on​​the​​Islamic​​concept​​of​​Taqleed.​​The​​“Salafiyya”​​claim​​to​​be​ ​on​​the​​path​​of​​the​​scholars​​of​​Hadith;​​but​​I​​ask​​you,​​who​​were​​the​​scholars​​of​​Hadith?​​The​​answer​​to​​this​ ​question​​may​​be​​found​​in​​their​​biographies,​​but​​just​​for​​the​​record,​​one​​should​​never​​forget​​that​​the​​vast​ ​majority​ ​of​ ​the​ ​scholars​ ​of​ ​Hadith​ ​were​ ​usually​ ​in​ ​one​ ​of​ ​the​ ​four​ ​schools​ ​of​ ​Fiqh​​after​​their​ ​founding;​​and​​this​​may​​be​​called​​the​​way​​of​​the​​traditional​​and​​classical​​scholars,​​indifference​​to​ ​the​​modern​​day​​“Salafiyya”.​​I​​ask​​you​​now,​​what​​is​​there​​to​​stop​​one​​from​​adhering​​to​​one​​of​​the​​four​ ​schools, when so many great scholars did so?​ ​Al-Albani​ ​and​ ​many​ ​of​ ​the​ ​other​ ​“Salafiyya”​ ​Shaykhs​ ​try​​to​​refute​​Taqleed​​by​​quoting​​statements​ ​coming​​directly​​from​​the​​four​​Imams​​themselves,​​which​​apparently​​‘forbid’​​Taqleed​​of​​their​​Fatwas!​​In​ ​fact​ ​the​ ​scholars​ ​have​ ​explained​ ​each​ ​one​ ​of​ ​these​ ​apparently​ ​Taqleed​ ​forbidding​ ​statements​ ​quite​ ​explicitly.​ ​The​ ​bottom​ ​line​​of​​these​​statements​​has​​led​​the​​scholars​​to​​conclude,​​that​​these​​statements​ ​refer​ ​to​ ​the​ ​forbiddance​ ​of​ ​one​ ​Mujtahid​ ​taking​ ​the​ ​Ijtihad​ ​of​ ​another​ ​Mujtahid​ ​without​ ​knowing​ ​his​ ​documentary​ ​evidence​ ​(refer​ ​to​ ​the​ ​previous​ ​pages​ ​for​ ​some​ ​statements​ ​on​ ​this​ ​issue);​ ​but​ ​not​ ​the​ ​forbiddance​ ​of​ ​non-Mujtahids​ ​taking​ ​the​​Ijtihads​​of​​the​​Mujtahids,​​and​​this​​is​​precisely​​Taqleed​​of​​the​ ​allowable​​type.​​If​​Allah​​wills,​​the​​true​​meanings​​of​​these​​statements​​may​​be​​collated​​and​​annotated​​by​​way​ ​of​​reference​​to​​the​​classical​​scholars​​of​​Islam;​​instead​​of​​receiving​​garbled​​and​​incontextual​​quotations​ ​from the four Mujtahids (Allah’s mercy be upon them) by the likes of al-Albani.​ ​Now,​​I​​have​​explained​​briefly​​what​​is​​Taqleed,​​and​​who​​it​​applies​​to.​​The​​question​​now​​remains​​on​​who​ ​are​​the​​“Salafiyya”?​​To​​answer​​this​​question​​in​​brief,​​I​​feel​​that​​it​​is​​incumbent​​to​​give​​a​​biography​​of​​the​ ​Imams​​of​​the​​“Salafiyya”,​​what​​the​​scholars​​said​​about​​these​​persons,​​and​​most​​importantly​​the​​creed​​they​ ​are​​clinging​​onto​​(aqeedah).​​The​​last​​one​​of​​which​​is​​very​​important,​​since​​it​​is​​the​​creed​​of​​a​​believer​​(as​ ​well​​as​​the​​actions)​​which​​will​​lead​​one​​to​​the​​gardens​​of​​Paradise​​or​​to​​the​​pits​​of​​Hell​​in​​the​​hereafter!​ ​The​​modern​​day​​“Salafiyya”​​claim​​to​​take​​their​​name​​from​​the​​famous​​Hadith​​of​​the​​Holy​​Prophet​​(Peace​ ​be​ ​upon​ ​him);​​where​​he​​said:​​“​The​​best​​of​​people​​are​​my​​generation,​​thereafter​​those​​who​​follow​ ​them,​ ​thereafter​ ​those​ ​who​​will​​follow​​them.​​Then​​will​​come​​such​​people​​that​​one’s​​testimony​ ​will​​outrun​​his​​oath,​​and​​one’s​​oath,​​his​​testimony​.”​​(Vide:​​Sahih​​al-Bukhari​,​​pg.​​18-9,​​Trans.​​by​​M.​ ​Asad;​ ​also​ ​see​ ​Sahih​ ​Muslim​,​ ​vol.​ ​4,​ ​pg.​ ​1345-7,​ ​English​ ​ed’n).​ ​These​ ​three​ ​generations​ ​of​ ​the​ ​true​ ​believers​​are​​known​​as​​the​​Salaf-as-Salihin​​(the​​pious​​predecessors);​​hence​​they​​have​​derived​​an​​epithet​ ​from this Hadith to call themselves “Salafis” or the “Salafiyya”.​ ​Shaykh​​Ustad​​ibn​​Khalifa​​Alawi​,​​said​​in​​his​​book​​‘​Aqidat​​as-Salafi​​wal-Khalaf​’:​​“As​​Allamah​​Abu​ ​Zahra​​(d.​​1974;​​he​​was​​a​​famous​​scholar​​from​​al-Azhar​​University,​​Egypt;​​Rahimahullah)​​writes​​in​​his​ ​book​​‘​Tarikh​​al-Madhahibil​​Islamiyya​’,​​some​​people​​who​​dissented​​from​​the​​Hanbali​​Madhhab,​​named​ ​themselves​ ​‘Salafiyyin’.​ ​Abul​ ​Faraj​ ​ibn​ ​al-Jawzi​ ​(d.​ ​508/1114)​ ​and​ ​other​ ​scholars​ ​in​ ​the​ ​Hanbali​ ​Madhhab,​​too,​​by​​proclaiming​​that​​those​​“Salafi’s”​​were​​not​​the​​followers​​of​​the​​Salaf-as-Salihin​​but​ ​55​ ​IJTIHAD, TAQLEED AND THE “SALAFIYYA” SECT​ ​were​​the​​owners​​of​​bid’ah​​(heretical​​innovations),​​belonging​​to​​the​​group​​of​​Mujassima​​(a​​deviant​​sect​ ​who​ ​believed​ ​that​ ​Allah​ ​was​ ​a​ ​material​ ​body;​ ​we​ ​seek​ ​refuge​ ​in​ ​Allah),​ ​prevented​ ​this​ ​mischief​​from​ ​spreading.​​In​​the​​seventh​​century​​(after​​Hijri)​​Ibn​​Taymiyya​​waged​​this​​fitna​​(mischief)​​again.”​​Let​​me​ ​now​​give​​you​​a​​biography​​of​​Ibn​​al-Qayyim​​al-Jawziyya,​​and​​his​​teacher​​Ibn​​Taymiyya;​​as​​well​​as​​what​​the​ ​great scholars of Islam said about them and their Aqeedah.​ ​Hafiz Ibn al-Qayyim al-Jawziyya​ ​(may Allah have mercy on him and forgive him)​ ​Ibn​ ​al-Qayyim​ ​is​ ​Muhammad​ ​ibn​ ​Abu​ ​Bakr​ ​ibn​ ​Ayyub​ ​ibn​ ​Sa’d,​ ​Abu​ ​Abdullah​ ​al-Zura’i​ ​Ibn​ ​Qayyim​ ​al-Jawziyya,​ ​born​ ​in​ ​Damascus​ ​in​ ​691/1292.​​He​​was​​a​​Hanbali​​Hadith​​scholar​​and​​author​​who​​wrote​​a​ ​number​ ​of​ ​works,​ ​among​ ​them​ ​Zad​ ​al-ma’ad​ ​[The​ ​provision​ ​for​ ​the​ ​return]​ ​in​ ​Hadith,​ ​and​ ​I’lam​ ​al-mawaqqi’in​​[The​​instruction​​for​​those​​who​​sign​​formal​​legal​​opinions]​​in​​fundamentals​​of​​Islamic​​law.​ ​His​​most​​significant​​contribution​​however,​​was​​his​​editing​​and​​preparing​​for​​publication​​the​​writings​​of​ ​Ibn​​Taymiyya,​​whose​​devoted​​pupil​​he​​was.​​He​​went​​to​​prison​​with​​his​​Shaykh​​in​​the​​citadel​​of​​Damascus​ ​and​ ​suffered​ ​with​ ​him​ ​until​ ​Ibn​ ​Taymiyya’s​ ​death​ ​in​ ​728/1328,​ ​when​ ​he​ ​was​ ​released.​ ​He​ ​thereafter​ ​worked​​to​​spread​​and​​popularize​​the​​master’s​​ideas,​​as​​dedicated​​to​​him​​after​​his​​death​​as​​he​​had​​been​​in​ ​life,​​supporting​​him​​in​​what​​was​​right​​and​​what​​was​​wrong.​​A​​specimen​​of​​the​​latter​​is​​Ibn​​al-Qayyim’s​​al​ ​Qasida​​al-nuniyya​​(Ode​​rhyming​​in​​the​​letter​​n​),​​a​​lengthy​​poem​​on​​tenets​​of​​faith​​(aqeedah)​​that​​is​​filled​ ​with​​corrupt​​suggestions​​about​​the​​attributes​​of​​Allah,​​which​​Imam​​Taqi​​al-Din​​al-Subki​​(d.756/1355,​ ​Shaykh​ ​al-Islam​ ​Ibn​ ​Hajar​ ​al-Haytami​ ​described​ ​him​ ​as​ ​being​ ​‘the​ ​Mujtahid​ ​Imam​ ​whose​ ​Imamate,​ ​greatness,​​and​​having​​reached​​the​​level​​of​​Ijtihad​​are​​agreed​​upon’;​​Rahimahullah)​​analyses​​in​​detail​​in​​his​ ​al-Sayf​ ​al-saqil​ ​[The​ ​burnished​ ​sword],​ ​giving​ ​the​ ​verdict​ ​that​ ​the​ ​poem’s​ ​anthropomorphisms​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Divinity​ ​are​ ​beyond​ ​the​ ​pale​ ​of​ ​Islam.​ ​The​ ​poem​ ​could​ ​not​ ​be​ ​openly​ ​circulated​ ​in​ ​Ibn​ ​al-Qayyim’s​ ​lifetime​​but​​only​​secretly,​​and​​it​​seems​​that​​he​​never​​abandoned​​it​​(it​​is​​still​​used​​as​​a​​reference​​by​​the​ ​‘Salafi’​​scholars​​today),​​for​​the​​Hanbali​​historian​​and​​biographer​​Ibn​​Rajab​​heard​​it​​from​​its​​author​​in​​the​ ​year of his death.​ ​A​​second​​unfortunate​​peculiarity​​the​​poem​​shares​​with​​some​​of​​Ibn​​al-Qayyim’s​​other​​works​​on​​Islamic​ ​faith​​is​​that​​it​​presents​​the​​reader​​with​​a​​false​​dilemma​,​​namely​​that​​one​​must​​either​​believe​​that​​Allah​​has​ ​eyes,​ ​hands,​ ​a​ ​descending​ ​motion,​ ​and​ ​so​ ​forth,​ ​in​ ​a​ ​literal​ ​(haqiqi)​ ​sense,​ ​or​ ​else​ ​one​ ​has​ ​nullified​ ​(‘attala)​​or​​negated​​(nafa)​​these​​attributes.​​And​​this​​is​​erroneous,​​for​​the​​literal​​is​​that​​which​​corresponds​ ​to​​an​​expression’s​​primary​​lexical​​sense​​as​​ordinarily​​used​​in​​a​​language​​by​​the​​people​​who​​speak​​it,​​while​ ​the​​above​​words​​are​​clearly​​intended​​otherwise,​​in​​accordance​​with​​the​​Qur’anic​​verse,​​‘There​​is​​nothing​ ​whatsoever​​like​​unto​​him​’​​(Qur’an​​42:11),​​for​​if​​the​​above​​were​​intended​​literally,​​there​​would​​be​ ​innumerable​​things​​like​​unto​​Him​​(Allah)​​in​​such​​respects​​as​​having​​eyes,hands,​​motion,​​and​​so​ ​forth,​​in​​the​​literal​​meaning​​of​​these​​terms.​​The​​would-be​​dilemma​​is​​also​​far​​from​​the​​practise​​of​ ​the​​early​​Muslims,​​who​​used​​to​​only​​accept​​such​​Qur’anic​​verses​​and​​Hadiths​​as​​they​​have​​come,​ ​consigning​ ​the​ ​knowledge​ ​of​ ​what​ ​is​ ​meant​ ​by​ ​them-while​ ​affirming​ ​Allah’s​ ​absolute​ ​transcendence​​above​​any​​resemblance​​to​​created​​things-to​​Allah​​Most​​High​​alone,​​without​​trying​ ​to​​determinately​​specify​​how​​they​​are​​meant​​(bi​​la​​Kayf),​​let​​alone​​suggesting​​people​​understand​ ​them​​literally​​(haqiqatan) as Ibnal-Qayyim tried to​​do.​ ​While​​granting​​that​​his​​other​​scholarly​​achievements​​are​​not​​necessarily​​compromised​​by​​his​​extreme​ ​aberrances​​in​​tenets​​of​​faith​​(aqeedah),​​it​​should​​not​​be​​forgotten​​that​​depicting​​the​​latter​​as​​a​​‘reform’​​or​ ​‘return​​to​​early​​Islam’​​represents​​a​​blameworthy​​innovation​​(bid’ah)​​on​​his​​part​​that​​appeared​​more​​than​ ​seven​​centuries​​after​​the​​time​​of​​the​​Prophet​​(Allah​​bless​​him​​and​​give​​him​​peace)​​and​​his​​Companions​ ​(Sahaba).​ ​A​ ​particularly​ ​unsavoury​ ​aspect​ ​of​ ​it​ ​is​ ​that​ ​in​ ​his​ ​attempts​ ​to​ ​vindicate​ ​the​ ​doctrine,​ ​Ibn​ ​al-Qayyim​​casts​​aspersions​​upon​​the​​Islam​​of​​anyone​​who​​does​​not​​subscribe​​to​​it,​​at​​their​​forefront​​the​ ​56​ ​IJTIHAD, TAQLEED AND THE “SALAFIYYA” SECT​ ​Ash’ari​​school,​​whom​​his​​books​​castigate​​as​​‘Jahmiyya’​​or​​‘Mu’attila,’​​implying,​​by​​equating​​them​​with​​the​ ​most​ ​extreme​ ​factions​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Mu’tazilites,​ ​that​ ​they​ ​deny​ ​any​ ​significance​ ​to​ ​the​ ​divine​ ​attributes,​ ​a​ ​misrepresentation​​that​​has​​seen​​a​​lamentable​​recrudescence​​in​​parts​​of​​the​​Muslim​​world​​today.​​Whether​ ​such​ ​views​ ​are​ ​called​ ​‘fundamentalism’​ ​or​ ​some​ ​other​ ​name,​ ​the​ ​scholars​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Muslims​ ​remember​ ​history,​ ​and​ ​that​ ​it​ ​was​ ​Abu​ ​Hanifah​ ​(Rahimahullah)​ ​who​ ​first​ ​observed,​ ​‘Two​ ​depraved​ ​opinions​ ​have​ ​reached​​us​​from​​the​​East,​​those​​of​​Jahm,​​the​​nullifier​​of​​the​​divine​​attributes,​​and​​those​​of​​Muqatil​​(ibn​ ​Sulayman​​al-Balkhi,​​d.​​150​​AH),​​the​​likener​​of​​Allah​​to​​his​​creation.’​​To​​make​​of​​these​​two​​an​​either-or​ ​for​​Muslims,​​or​​depict​​the​​latter​​as​​‘Sunnah’​​when​​it​​has​​been​​counted​​among​​heresies​​and​​rejected​​by​​the​ ​Muslim​​Community​​for​​the​​first​​seven​​centuries​​of​​Islam​​that​​preceded​​Ibn​​al-Qayyim​​and​​his​​mentor​​Ibn​ ​Taymiyya,​​is​​to​​say​​the​​least​​difficult​​to​​accept,​​and​​it​​would​​seem​​fitter​​to​​simply​​acknowledge​​that​​Ibn​ ​al-Qayyim​ ​was​ ​a​ ​talented​ ​author​ ​in​ ​fundamentals​ ​of​ ​law,​ ​Hadith,​ ​and​ ​other​ ​fields,​ ​but​ ​unfortunately​ ​enamoured​ ​with​ ​his​ ​teacher​ ​to​ ​the​ ​extent​ ​of​ ​following​ ​him​ ​in​ ​innovations​ ​(bid’ah)​ ​in​ ​tenets​ ​of​ ​faith​ ​(aqeedah)​ ​and​ ​misrepresenting​ ​the​ ​positions​ ​of​ ​those​ ​who​ ​opposed​ ​them.​ ​He​ ​died​ ​in​ ​Damascus​ ​in​ ​751/1350.​ ​(vide:​ ​al-A’lam​,​​6.56,​​by​​al-Zirikly;​​al-Sayf​​al-saqil​,​​2-192,​​by​​Imam​​Taqi​​ad-Din​​al-Subki;​ ​Sharh​ ​al-Qasida​ ​al-nuniyya​,​ ​1.268-88,​ ​by​ ​H.M.​ ​Khalil;​ ​Siyar​ ​a’lam​ ​al-nubala​,​ ​7.202,​ ​by​ ​Hafiz​ ​al-Dhahabi, taken from​​The Reliance of the Traveller​,​​pp. 1058-9, Trans. by N.H.M. Keller).​ ​Hafiz Ahmad Ibn Taymiyya​ ​(may Allah have mercy on him and forgive him)​ ​Ibn​​Taymiyya​​is​​Ahmad​​ibn​​Abd​​al-Halim​​ibn​​Abd​​al-Salam​​ibn​​Abdullah,​​Abu​​al-Abbas​​Taqi​​al-Din​​Ibn​ ​Taymiyya​ ​al-Harrani,​ ​born​ ​in​ ​Harran,​ ​east​ ​of​ ​Damascus,​ ​in​ ​661/1263.​ ​A​ ​famous​ ​Hanbali​ ​scholar​ ​in​ ​Qur’anic​ ​exegesis,​ ​Hadith,​ ​and​​jurisprudence,​​Ibn​​Taymiyya​​was​​a​​voracious​​reader​​and​​author​​of​​great​ ​personal​​courage​​who​​was​​endowed​​with​​a​​compelling​​writing​​style​​and​​a​​keen​​memory.​​Dhahabi​​wrote​​of​ ​him,​​"I​​never​​saw​​anyone​​faster​​at​​recalling​​the​​Qur’anic​​verses​​dealing​​with​​subjects​​he​​was​​discussing,​​or​ ​anyone​ ​who​ ​could​ ​remember​ ​Hadith​ ​texts​ ​more​ ​vividly.”​ ​Dhahabi​ ​estimates​​that​​his​​legal​​opinions​​on​ ​various subjects amount to three-hundred or more volumes.​ ​He​ ​was​ ​imprisoned​ ​during​ ​much​ ​of​ ​his​ ​life​ ​in​ ​Cairo,​ ​Alexandria,​​and​​Damascus​​for​​his​​writings,​ ​scholars​​of​​his​​time​​accusing​​him​​of​​believing​​Allah​​to​​be​​a​​corporeal​​entity​​(a​​body)​​because​​of​​what​​he​ ​mentioned​​in​​his​​al-Aqeedah​​al-Hamawiyya​,​​and​​al-Wasitiyya​​and​​other​​works,​​such​​that​​Allah’s​​‘hand’,​ ​‘foot’,​​‘shin’,​​and​​‘face’,​​are​​literal​​(haqiqi)​​attributes,​​and​​that​​He​​is​​upon​​the​​Throne​​in​​person.​​The​ ​error​​in​​this,​​as​​mentioned​​above,​​is​​that​​suggesting​​such​​attributes​​are​​literal​​is​​an​​innovation​​and​ ​unjustifiable​​inference​​from​​the​​Qur’anic​​and​​Hadith​​texts​​that​​mention​​them,​​for​​the​​way​​of​​the​ ​early​ ​Muslims​ ​was​ ​mere​ ​acceptance​ ​of​ ​such​ ​expressions​ ​on​ ​faith​ ​without​ ​saying​​how​​they​​are​ ​meant,​​and​​without​​additions,​​subtractions,​​or​​substituting​​meanings​​imagined​​to​​be​​synonyms,​ ​while​​acknowledging​​Allah’s​​absolute​​transcendence​​beyond​​the​​characteristics​​of​​created​​things,​ ​in​​conformity​​with​​the​​Qur’anic​​verse,​​‘There​​is​​nothing​​whatsoever​​like​​unto​​Him’​​(Qur’an​​42:11;​ ​also​​Allah​​says:​​‘Walam​​yakul-la​​Huu​​kufu​​wan​​ahad’:​​‘And​​there​​is​​none​​comparable​​unto​​Him’​,​​Qur’an​ ​112:4).​​As​​for​​figurative​​interpretations​​that​​preserve​​the​​divine​​transcendence,​​scholars​​of​​tenets​​of​​faith​ ​have​​only​​had​​recourse​​to​​them​​in​​times​​when​​men​​of​​reprehensible​​innovations​​(bid’ah),​​quoting​​Hadiths​ ​and​​Qur’anic​​verses,​​have​​caused​​confusion​​in​​the​​minds​​of​​common​​Muslims​​as​​to​​whether​​Allah​​has​ ​attributes​​like​​those​​of​​His​​creation​​or​​whether​​He​​is​​transcendently​​beyond​​any​​image​​conceivable​​to​​the​ ​minds​​of​​men.​​Scholars’​​firmness​​in​​condemning​​those​​who​​have​​raised​​such​​confusions​​has​​traditionally​ ​been​ ​very​ ​uncompromising,​ ​and​ ​this​ ​is​ ​no​​doubt​​the​​reason​​that​​a​​number​​of​​the​​Imams​​of​​the​​Shafi’i​ ​school,​​among​​them​​Taqi​​al-Din​​Subki,​​Ibn​​Hajar​​Haytami,​​and​​al-’Izz​​Ibn​​Jama’a,​​gave​​formal​​legal​ ​opinions​​that​​Ibn​​Taymiyya​​was​​misguided​​and​​misguiding​​in​​tenets​​of​​faith,​​and​​warned​​people​ ​from​ ​accepting​ ​his​ ​theories.​ ​The​ ​Hanafi​ ​scholar​ ​Muhammad​ ​Zahid​ ​al-Kawthari​ ​has​ ​written,​ ​57​ ​IJTIHAD, TAQLEED AND THE “SALAFIYYA” SECT​ ​“​Whoever​​thinks​​that​​all​​the​​scholars​​of​​his​​time​​joined​​in​​a​​single​​conspiracy​​against​​him​​from​ ​personal​​envy​​should​​rather​​impugn​​their​​own​​intelligence​​and​​understanding,​​after​​studying​​the​ ​repugnance​​of​​his​​deviations​​in​​belief​​and​​works,​​for​​which​​he​​was​​asked​​to​​repent​​time​​after​​time​ ​and moved from prison to prison until he passed on to what he’d sent ahead​."​ ​While​​few​​deny​​that​​Ibn​​Taymiyya​​was​​a​​copious​​and​​eloquent​​writer​​and​​Hadith​​scholar,​​his​​career,​​like​ ​that​ ​of​ ​others,​ ​demonstrates​ ​that​ ​a​ ​man​ ​may​ ​be​ ​outstanding​ ​in​ ​one​ ​field​ ​and​ ​yet​ ​suffer​ ​from​ ​radical​ ​deficiencies​​in​​another,​​the​​most​​reliable​​index​​of​​which​​is​​how​​a​​field’s​​Imams​​regard​​his​​work​​in​​it.​​By​ ​this​ ​measure,​ ​indeed,​ ​by​ ​the​ ​standards​​of​​all​​previous​​Ahl​​al-Sunnah​​scholars,​​it​​is​​clear​​that​​despite​​a​ ​voluminous​​and​​influential​​written​​legacy,​​Ibn​​Taymiyya​​cannot​​be​​considered​​an​​authority​​on​​tenets​ ​of​​faith​​(aqeedah),​​a​​field​​in​​which​​he​​made​​mistakes​​profoundly​​incompatible​​with​​the​​beliefs​​of​ ​Islam,​ ​as​ ​also​ ​with​ ​a​ ​number​ ​of​ ​his​​legal​​views​​that​​violated​​the​​scholarly​​consensus​​(Ijma)​​of​ ​Sunni​​Muslims.​​It​​should​​be​​remembered​​that​​such​​matters​​are​​not​​the​​province​​of​​personal​​reasoning​ ​(Ijtihad),​ ​whether​ ​Ibn​ ​Taymiyya​ ​considered​ ​them​ ​to​ ​be​ ​out​ ​of​ ​sincere​ ​conviction,​ ​or​ ​whether​ ​simply​ ​because,​​as​​Imam​​Subki​​said,​​‘His​​learning​​exceeded​​his​​intelligence.’​​He​​died​​in​​728/1328.​​(vide:​ ​al-A’lam​,​​1.144,​​by​​al-Zirikly;​​al-Durar​​al-Kamina​,​​1.144-55,​​by​​Hafiz​​Ibn​​Hajar​​al-Asqalani;​​al-Rasa’il​ ​al-Subkiyya​,​​151-52,​​edited​​by​​K.Y.​​al-Hut;​​al-Sayf​​al-saqil​,​​6,​​by​​Imam​​al-Subki;​​Shaykh​​Hasan​​Saqqaf;​ ​taken from​​The Reliance of the Traveller​, pp. 1059-60,​​Trans. by N.H.M. Keller).​ ​There​​are​​many​​quotes​​available​​to​​us​​today​​coming​​from​​the​​works​​of​​many​​well​​known​​scholars,​​in​ ​their​ ​refutation​ ​of​ ​Ibn​ ​Taymiyya’s​ ​beliefs,​ ​legal​ ​opinions​ ​and​ ​his​​very​​personality!​​As​​I​​have​​indicated​ ​earlier,​​today’s​​“Salafi’s”​​and​​other​​like​​minded​​people​​have​​come​​to​​the​​conclusion​​that​​he​​is​​the​​Imam​​to​ ​be​​“followed”​​in​​terms​​of​​Aqeedah;​​since​​the​​Aqeedah​​that​​one​​clings​​to​​determines​​which​​sect​​of​​Islam​ ​one​​is​​adhering​​to,​​and​​the​​“Salafiyya”​​claim​​that​​the​​Aqeedah​​of​​Ibn​​Taymiyya,​​Ibn​​al-Qayyim​​etc.;​​is​​the​ ​Aqeedah​​of​​the​​‘Firqat​​an-Najiyyah’​​(The​​Saved​​Sect​​as​​described​​in​​the​​Ahadith),​​and​​that​​alone​​is​​the​ ​Aqeedah​​of​​the​​‘Ahl​​al-Sunnah​​wal​​Jama’ah’​​to​​them!​​I​​wish​​to​​convey​​to​​the​​honourable​​reader​​some​​of​ ​the​ ​opinions​ ​held​ ​by​ ​the​ ​great​ ​scholars​ ​on​ ​Ibn​ ​Taymiyya,​ ​and​ ​in​ ​particular​ ​what​ ​his​ ​disciple​ ​al-Hafiz​ ​al-Dhahabi​​said​​about​​him;​​since​​he​​had​​first​​hand​​contact​​with​​Ibn​​Taymiyya​​which​​can​​be​​relied​​upon​​very​ ​highly.​​The​​quote​​from​​Shaykh​​Ibn​​Battuta​​(see​​below)​​is​​quite​​significant,​​since​​it​​clearly​​demonstrates​ ​the anthropomorphic ideas that Ibn Taymiyya had with regards to Allah’s attributes!​ ​(1) Al-Imam Taqi ad-Din al-Subki​​(d. 756/1355; Rahimahullah)​ ​Imam​ ​al-Subki​ ​wrote​ ​tracts​ ​refuting​ ​Ibn​ ​Taymiyya’s​ ​Aqeedah​ ​and​ ​works,​ ​for​ ​example​ ​Al-Durra​ ​al-Mudiyya​​fi​​al-Radd​​‘ala​​Ibn​​Taymiyya​​(edited​​by​​Shaykh​​al-Kawthari)​​and​​al-Rasa’il​​al-Subkiyya​​fi​ ​al-Radd​ ​‘ala​ ​Ibn​ ​Taymiyya​ ​wa​ ​tilmidhihi​ ​Ibn​ ​Qayyim​​al-Jawziyya​​(edited​​by​​Shaykh​​Kamal​​al-Hut).​ ​Besides​​these​​refutations,​​he​​admitted​​that​​Ibn​​Taymiyya​​was​​a​​deeply​​knowledgeable​​scholar​​in​​his​​own​ ​right.​​Shaykh​​al-islam​​Ibn​​Hajar​​al-Asqalani​​(Rahimahullah)​​has​​recorded​​the​​following​​letter​​written​ ​by​​Imam​​al-Subki​​to​​Hafiz​​al-Dhahabi,​​the​​eminent​​disciple​​of​​Ibn​​Taymiyya,​​in​​his​​al-Durar​​al-kamina​​fi​ ​a’yanal-mi’a​ ​al-thamina​ ​(1,​ ​169):​ ​“As​ ​for​ ​what​ ​you​ ​say​ ​with​ ​regard​ ​to​ ​al-Shaykh​ ​Taqi​ ​al-Din​ ​(Ibn​ ​Taymiyya),​​I​​am​​convinced​​of​​the​​great​​scope,​​the​​ocean-like​​fullness​​and​​vastness​​of​​his​​knowledge​​of​​the​ ​transmitted​​and​​intellectual​​sciences,​​his​​extreme​​intelligence,​​his​​exertions​​and​​his​​attainments,​​all​​of​ ​which​​surpass​​description.​​I​​have​​always​​held​​this​​opinion.​​Personally,​​my​​admiration​​is​​even​​greater​​for​ ​the​​asceticism,​​piety,​​and​​religiosity​​with​​which​​Allah​​has​​endowed​​him,​​for​​his​​selfless​​championship​​of​ ​the​​truth,​​his​​adherence​​to​​the​​path​​of​​our​​forebears,​​his​​pursuit​​of​​perfection…”​​Some​​people​​may​​call​ ​this​​an​​over​​exaggeration​​on​​Imam​​Subki’s​​part,​​since​​he​​has​​been​​noted​​to​​have​​said​​that​​Ibn​​Taymiyya​​was​ ​‘​a​​Khawarij​​(the​​first​​extreme​​sect​​which​​seceded​​from​​Islam​​during​​the​​Sahaba’s​​time)​​from​​Islam​!’​​As​ ​well as saying that ‘his learning exceeded his intelligence’. But Allah knows best.​ ​(2) Al-Hafiz al-Dhahabi​​(d. 748/1348; Rahimahullah)​ ​58​ ​IJTIHAD, TAQLEED AND THE “SALAFIYYA” SECT​ ​Hafiz​​al-Dhahabi​​was​​a​​special​​case​​when​​it​​came​​to​​giving​​his​​opinions​​on​​his​​teacher​​Ibn​​Taymiyya.​ ​His​ ​praise​ ​of​ ​Ibn​ ​Taymiyya​ ​is​ ​routinely​ ​eulogistic​ ​in​ ​nature,​ ​but​ ​it​​is​​invariably​​filled​​with​​strong​​and​ ​somewhat​​harsh​​criticisms​​as​​well.​​Imam​​al-Subki​​had​​criticized​​al-Dhahabi​​for​​being​​influenced​​by​​Ibn​ ​Taymiyya,​ ​when​ ​he​ ​said:​ ​“The​ ​group​ ​comprised​ ​of​ ​al-Mizzi,​ ​al-Dhahabi,​ ​al-Birzali,​ ​and​ ​many​ ​of​ ​their​ ​followers​ ​were​ ​clearly​ ​harmed​ ​by​ ​Abu​​al-Abbas​​ibn​​Taymiyya,​​who​​led​​them​​to​​gross​​acts​​of​​no​​little​ ​consequence​ ​and​ ​drew​ ​them​ ​to​ ​things​ ​that​ ​they​ ​should​ ​have​ ​avoided…”​ ​(vide:​ ​Tabaqat​ ​al-Shafi’iyya​ ​al-Kubra​,​​6,​​254).​​Anyhow,​​al-Dhahabi​​himself​​seemed​​to​​have​​had​​mixed​​feelings​​for​​Ibn​​Taymiyya,​​as​ ​we​​shall​​see​​in​​the​​next​​few​​paragraphs.​​The​​most​​explicit​​criticism​​of​​Ibn​​Taymiyya​​as​​a​​scholarly​​figure​ ​may​​have​​come​​in​​an​​epistle​​entitled​​al-Nasiha​​al-Dhahabiyya​​li-Ibn​​Taymiyya​​(al-Dhahabi’s​​advice​​to​ ​Ibn​​Taymiyya);​​apparently​​from​​the​​pen​​of​​Hafiz​​al-Dhahabi.​​Some​​people​​have​​doubted​​the​​authenticity​​of​ ​this​​document​​in​​its​​ascription​​to​​Hafiz​​al-Dhahabi;​​but​​even​​if​​it​​was​​not​​by​​al-Dhahabi​​we​​may​​assume​ ​that​​it​​was​​a​​blistering​​attack​​by​​some​​‘unknown’​​scholar!​​The​​document​​has​​been​​preserved​​in​​the​​Bayan​ ​Zaghal al-’Ilm​​(edited by Shaykh Muhammad Zahid al-Kawthari,​​pp. 31-34).​ ​Here​​are​​a​​few​​excerpts​​from​​this​​document​​(pg​​32):​​“Blessed​​is​​he​​whose​​fault​​diverts​​him​​from​​the​ ​faults​​of​​others!​​Damned​​is​​he​​whom​​others​​divert​​from​​his​​own​​faults!​​How​​long​​will​​you​​look​​at​​the​ ​motes​​in​​the​​eye​​of​​your​​brother,​​forgetting​​the​​stumps​​in​​your​​own?​​How​​long​​will​​you​​praise​​yourself​ ​and​ ​your​ ​prattling​ ​phrases​ ​while​ ​disparaging​ ​the​ ​Ulama​ ​and​ ​pursuing​ ​other​ ​people’s​ ​weaknesses?​ ​(Pg.​ ​32-33):​​By​​Allah,​​you​​must​​leave​​us​​alone!​​You​​are​​contentious​​and​​are​​endowed​​with​​a​​learned​​tongue​ ​which​​does​​not​​pause​​or​​rest!​​Beware​​of​​captious​​questions​​in​​religions...​​Too​​much​​talk​​without​​proof​ ​hardens​​hearts....​​(pg.​​33)​​By​​Allah,​​we​​have​​become​​the​​laughing​​stock​​of​​creation!​​How​​long​​will​​you​​dig​ ​up​​intricate​​philosophical​​blasphemies​​for​​us​​to​​refute​​with​​our​​brains?​​You​​have​​repeatedly​​swallowed​​the​ ​poison​​of​​the​​philosophers​​and​​their​​works;​​the​​body​​becomes​​addicted​​to​​the​​frequent​​use​​of​​poison​​so​ ​that​​it​​is​​secreted,​​by​​Allah,​​in​​the​​very​​bones.​​Your​​followers​​help​​you​​and​​fight​​for​​you​​in​​word​​and​​deed​ ​but​​are​​your​​secret​​enemies​​in​​their​​hearts!​​Are​​not​​most​​of​​your​​disciples​​crippled​​and​​bound,​​of​​facile​ ​intelligence​​or​​blind,​​liars,​​stupid,​​strange,​​crafty,​​or​​dessicated,​​virtuous​​without​​understanding?​​If​​you​ ​don’t​​believe​​me,​​inspect​​them,​​weigh​​them​​with​​justice…​​(Pg.​​34):​​I​​do​​not​​expect​​you​​to​​accept​​my​ ​words​​or​​hearken​​to​​my​​admonition;​​instead​​you​​will​​strive​​to​​produce​​volumes​​in​​refutation​​of​​this​​one​ ​page.​​You​​will​​snip​​off​​the​​tails​​of​​my​​words​​relentlessly,​​until​​I​​retreat​​into​​absolute​​silence!​​If​​this​​is​ ​your​​attitude​​towards​​me​​-​​someone​​who​​regards​​you​​with​​love​​and​​affection​​-​​how​​will​​you​​treat​​your​ ​enemies,​​among​​whom,​​by​​Allah,​​are​​righteous​​men,​​intelligent​​and​​virtuous...?​​I​​will​​be​​content​​if​​you​ ​curse me in public as long as you heed my words in private.”​ ​The​​Muhaddith,​​Hafiz​​al-Sakhawi​​(d.​​902/1497;​​Rahimahullah),​​said​​that​​he​​had​​seen​​the​​above​​work​ ​attributed​​to​​al-Dhahabi.​​Nevertheless,​​al-Sakhawi​​quotes,​​without​​identifying,​​another​​treatise​​in​​which​ ​al-Dhahabi​​criticised​​Ibn​​Taymiyya​​in​​the​​following​​words:​​“Though​​I​​have​​spent​​long​​years​​considering​ ​and​ ​investigating​​Ibn​​Taymiyya,​​I​​have​​found​​that​​the​​only​​reasons​​why​​the​​Egyptians​​and​​Syrians​​hated​ ​him,​ ​scorned​ ​him,​ ​and​ ​called​ ​him​ ​a​ ​liar​ ​or​ ​even​ ​an​ ​unbeliever,​ ​were​ ​his​ ​pride,​ ​his​ ​vanity,​ ​and​ ​his​ ​pretensions,​​his​​passion​​to​​head​​his​​fellow​​Shaykhs,​​his​​contempt​​for​​the​​great,​​and​​his​​love​​of​​publicity.”​ ​(vide:​​Al-I’lan bi al-Tawbikh li-Man Dhamma al-Tarikh​,​​pg. 136).​ ​Shaykh​​al-Islam​​Ibn​​Hajar​​al-Asqalani​​(d.​​852/1449;​​Rahimahullah)​​recorded​​al-Dhahabi​​as​​saying​ ​in​​his​​al-Durar​​al-Kamina​​(1,161):​​“People​​who​​know​​him​​well​​sometimes​​accuse​​me​​of​​failing​​to​​do​ ​justice;​ ​his​ ​opponents​ ​sometimes​ ​charge​ ​me​ ​with​ ​puffery.​ ​I​ ​have​ ​been​ ​abused​ ​by​ ​both​ ​parties-his​ ​supporters​​and​​his​​adversaries.​​(His​​hair​​and​​beard​​were​​salt-and​​pepper​​coloured,​​containing​​little​​grey,​ ​his​ ​hair​ ​reaching​ ​his​ ​ear​​lobes.​​His​​eyes​​were​​like​​eloquent​​tongues.​​Of​​medium​​height,​​he​​was​​broad​ ​shouldered​​and​​had​​a​​loud,​​expressive​​voice​​and​​was​​quick​​of​​speech).​​Though​​anger​​would​​sometimes​ ​grip​​him,​​he​​would​​conquer​​it​​with​​forbearance.​​I​​have​​not​​seen​​his​​like​​for​​supplications​​and​​appeals​​and​ ​for​​his​​abundant​​concern​​for​​others.​​But​​I​​do​​not​​believe​​him​​to​​be​​infallible;​​indeed,​​I​​disagree​​with​​him​ ​on​​both​​basic​​and​​secondary​​issues.​​For,​​despite​​his​​vast​​learning,​​his​​extreme​​courage,​​his​​fluid​​mind,​​and​ ​59​ ​IJTIHAD, TAQLEED AND THE “SALAFIYYA” SECT​ ​his​ ​regard​ ​for​ ​the​ ​sanctities​ ​of​ ​religion,​ ​he​​was​​but​​a​​man.”​​Hafiz​​Ibn​​Hajar​​al-Asqalani​​also​​recorded​ ​al-Dhahabi​ ​as​ ​saying​ ​in​ ​al-Durar​ ​al-Kamina​ ​(1,​ ​161):​ ​“In​ ​discussion​​he​​would​​be​​possessed​​by​​rage,​ ​anger,​​and​​hostility​​against​​his​​adversaries,​​which​​implanted​​enmity​​in​​their​​spirits.​​If​​he​​had​​only​​treated​ ​his​ ​antagonists​ ​with​ ​civility,​ ​they​ ​would​ ​have​ ​been​ ​reconciled​ ​with​​him,​​for​​the​​most​​notable​​of​​them​ ​deferred to his learning, acknowledged his ardent zeal, and agreed that his lapses were few.”​ ​(3) Imam Jalal ad-Din as-Suyuti​​(d. 911/1505; Rahimahullah)​ ​Imam​ ​as-Suyuti​ ​wrote​ ​in​ ​his​ ​book​ ​Kam’​ ​al-mu’arid​:​ ​“Ibn​ ​Taymiyya​ ​was​ ​arrogant.​ ​He​ ​was​ ​self​ ​conceited.​​It​​was​​his​​habit​​to​​represent​​himself​​as​​superior​​to​​everybody,​​to​​slight​​the​​person​​whom​​he​ ​talked to and to make fun of great Muslims.”​ ​(4) Hafiz al- Sakhawi​​(d. 902/1497; Rahimahullah)​ ​Hafiz​​al-Sakhawi​​(a​​student​​of​​Hafiz​​Ibn​​Hajar​​al-Asqalani)​​stated​​in​​his​​al-I’lan​​(English​​translation​​in​​‘A​ ​History​ ​of​ ​Muslim​ ​Historiography’,​​pg.​​284,​​by​​F.​​Rosenthal):​​“There​​are​​also​​those​​scholars​​of​​great​ ​learning,​​austerity,​​and​​asceticism​​whom​​people​​avoided​​and​​whose​​knowledge​​they​​were​​careful​​not​​to​ ​utilize,​​because​​of​​their​​loose​​tongue​​and​​lack​​of​​tact,​​which​​caused​​them​​to​​talk​​and​​criticize​​excessively.​ ​Such men were Ibn Hazm and IbnTaymiyya.”​ ​(5) Shaykh Muhammad Ali Beg​​(Rahimahullah)​ ​Shaykh​​al-Beg​​from​​Damascus​​wrote​​in​​his​​book​​Hittat​​ash-Sham​:​​“Ibn​​Taymiyya​​and​​the​​(Christian)​ ​Priest​​Luther’s​​aims​​were​​alike.​​While​​the​​Christian​​reformer​​was​​successful,​​the​​reformer​​of​​Islam​​was​ ​unsuccessful.”​ ​(6) Shaykh Muhammad Ziyaullah​​(Rahimahullah)​ ​Shaykh​​Ziyaullah​​from​​Siyalkut,​​Pakistan,​​wrote​​in​​his​​work​​The​​Truth​​of​​Wahhabism​:​​“​Mawlana​​Abd​ ​al-Hayy​​Lucknawi​​(d.​​1304​​A.H;​​al-Albali​​has​​quoted​​from​​him​​in​​his​​‘Sifah​​Salah​​an-Nabee’),​​the​​great​ ​alim​​of​​India​​and​​the​​author​​of​​hundreds​​of​​invaluable​​books​​known​​to​​the​​world,​​said​​in​​his​​book​​Ghais​ ​al-ghamam​,​​‘Like​​the​​predecessor​​Ibn​​Taymiyya​​al-Harrani,​​the​​successor​​ash-Shawkani​​(d.​​1250/1834;​ ​see​ ​later​ ​for​ ​his​ ​views)​ ​was​ ​very​ ​learned​ ​but​ ​less​ ​intelligent.​ ​The​ ​latter​ ​was​ ​exactly​​alike,​​even​​more​ ​inferior than the former.’”​ ​(7) Imam al-Safadi​​(d. 764/1363; Rahimahullah)​ ​Imam​​al-Safadi​​has​​preserved​​an​​anecdote​​on​​Ibn​​Taymiyya’s​​childhood​​in​​his​​al-Wafi​​bi​​al-Wafayat​ ​(vol.​ ​7,​ ​pg.​ ​17-8).​ ​When​ ​he​ ​was​ ​studying​ ​with​ ​members​ ​of​ ​another​ ​prominent​ ​Hanbali​ ​family​ ​of​ ​Damascus,​​Ibn​​Taymiyya​​inadvertently​​shows​​us​​that​​the​​violent​​temper​​and​​the​​presumptuousness​​noticed​ ​by​​al-Dhahabi​​was​​evident​​at​​an​​early​​age:​​“When​​Ibn​​Taymiyya​​was​​a​​little​​boy,​​studying​​with​​the​​Banu​ ​Munajja,​​they​​supported​​something​​that​​he​​denied,​​where​​upon​​they​​produced​​the​​text.​​When​​he​​had​​read​ ​it,​​he​​threw​​it​​down​​in​​fury.​​They​​said,​​‘How​​bold​​you​​are​​to​​cast​​from​​your​​hand​​a​​volume​​that​​contains​ ​knowledge!’​​He​​quickly​​replied,​​‘Who​​is​​better,​​Moses​​or​​I?’​​‘Moses’,​​they​​said.​​And​​which​​is​​better-this​ ​book​ ​or​ ​the​ ​tablets​ ​on​ ​which​ ​the​ ​ten​ ​commandments​ ​were​ ​inscribed?'’​ ​‘The​ ​tablets’,​​they​​replied.​​Ibn​ ​Taymiyya​​said,​​in​​words​​to​​this​​effect,​​‘Well​​when​​Moses​​became​​angry,​​he​​threw​​down​​tablets.’”​​Another​ ​anecdote​​from​​al-Safadi​​serves​​to​​confirm​​al-Dhahabi’s​​observation​​that​​Ibn​​Taymiyya​​was​​oblivious​​to​​his​ ​60​ ​IJTIHAD, TAQLEED AND THE “SALAFIYYA” SECT​ ​worldly​​surroundings.​​This​​one​​tells​​how​​once​​Ibn​​Taymiyya​​consumed,​​without​​complaint,​​a​​squash​​which​ ​his mother had discarded because it was too bitter to eat!​ ​What​​seems​​to​​be​​more​​indicative​​of​​Ibn​​Taymiyya’s​​complete​​absorption​​in​​his​​religious​​cause,​​is​​his​ ​profession​​of​​indifference​​to​​the​​various​​forms​​of​​punishment​​which​​might​​be​​inflicted​​upon​​him;​​as​​has​ ​been​ ​recorded​ ​by​​the​​Hanbali​​historian​​Hafiz​​Ibn​​Rajab​​(d.​​795/1393;​​Rahimahullah),​​in​​his​​al-Dhayl​ ​‘ala​ ​Tabaqat​ ​al-Hanabila​ ​(2,​ ​402):​ ​“What​ ​can​ ​my​ ​enemies​ ​do​ ​to​ ​me?​ ​My​ ​Garden​ ​is​ ​in​ ​my​ ​heart;​ ​wherever I go, it goes with me. My prison is solitude! My death is martyrdom! Exile is a journey”!​ ​(8) Ibn Battuta​​(d. 779/1377; Rahimahullah)​ ​The​ ​well​ ​known​​travelling​​scholar​​of​​Islam,​​Ibn​​Battuta,​​has​​judged​​Ibn​​Taymiyya​​in​​the​​following​ ​words:​​“Among​​the​​chief​​Hanbali​​fuqaha​​in​​Damascus​​was​​Taqi​​al-Din​​ibn​​Taymiyya​​who,​​although​​he​ ​enjoyed​​great​​prestige​​and​​could​​discourse​​on​​the​​scholarly​​disciplines,​​had​​a​​screw​​loose​​(illa​​anna​​fi​ ​‘aqlihi​​shay’an).​​The​​people​​of​​Damascus​​held​​him​​in​​extreme​​respect.​​He​​used​​to​​preach​​to​​them​​from​ ​the​​minbar​​and​​once​​had​​discoursed​​in​​a​​manner​​which​​the​​fuqaha​​found​​reprehensible,​​so​​they​​reported​ ​him​​to​​Malik​​al-Nasir,​​who​​ordered​​him​​to​​be​​sent​​to​​Cairo.​​There​​the​​qadis​​and​​fuqaha​​were​​convoked​​in​ ​the​​sultan’s​​council​​chamber,​​where​​they​​were​​addressed​​by​​Sharaf​​al-Din​​al-Zuwawi,​​who​​said,​​‘This​​man​ ​said​​such-and-such’,​​spelling​​out​​the​​reprehensible​​statements​​of​​Ibn​​Taymiyya​​and​​producing​​depositions​ ​to​​that​​effect​​which​​were​​placed​​before​​the​​chief​​qadi​.​​When​​the​​latter​​asked​​for​​Ibn​​Taymiyya’s​​reply,​​he​ ​said,​ ​‘There​ ​is​ ​no​ ​Allah​ ​but​ ​Allah’,​ ​responding​ ​in​ ​a​ ​like​ ​manner​ ​when​​the​​qadi​​repeated​​the​​question.​ ​Al-Malik​​al-Nasir​​ordered​​him​​to​​be​​put​​into​​prison,​​where​​he​​remained​​for​​some​​years​​and​​wrote​​a​​book​ ​of​​Qur’anic​​commentary​​which​​he​​entitled​​al-Bahral-Muhit​​in​​almost​​forty​​volumes.​​Later,​​his​​mother​ ​complained​​before​​al-Malik​​al-Nasir,​​and​​he​​ordered​​his​​release.​​But​​then​​the​​same​​thing​​happened​​again​ ​while​ ​I​ ​was​ ​in​ ​Damascus.​ ​I​ ​was​ ​in​ ​attendance​ ​on​ ​a​ ​Friday​ ​when​ ​he​ ​was​ ​preaching​ ​to​ ​the​ ​people​ ​and​ ​exhorting​ ​them​ ​from​ ​the​ ​minbar​ ​of​ ​the​ ​cathedral​​mosque.​​In​​the​​course​​of​​his​​speech​​he​​said,​​‘Allah​ ​comes​​down​​to​​the​​sky​​of​​this​​world​​just​​as​​I​​came​​down​​now​’,​​and​​he​​descended​​one​​step​​of​​the​ ​minbar​.​​A​​Maliki​​faqih​​known​​as​​Ibn​​al-Zahra​​remonstrated​​with​​him​​and​​denounced​​what​​he​​had​​said,​ ​whereupon​ ​the​ ​congregation​ ​rose​ ​against​ ​this​ ​faqih​,​ ​striking​ ​him​ ​with​​their​​hands​​and​​shoes​​until;​​his​ ​turban​​fell​​off,​​exposing​​a​​silk​​skull​​cap​​on​​his​​head.​​They​​rebuked​​him​​for​​wearing​​this​​and​​bore​​him​​to​ ​the​​house​​of​​Izz​​al-Din​​ibn​​Musallam,​​the​​qadi​​of​​the​​Hanbalis,​​who​​ordered​​him​​to​​be​​imprisoned​​and​ ​then​​flogged.​​But​​the​​Maliki​​and​​the​​Shafi’i​​fuqaha​​denounced​​this​​punishment​​and​​carried​​the​​matter​​to​ ​Malik​​al-Umara​​Sayf​​al-Din​​Tankiz,​​one​​of​​the​​good​​and​​virtuous​​amirs​,​​who​​wrote​​to​​al-Malik​​al-Nasir​ ​about​​the​​matter​​and​​sent​​a​​legal​​deposition​​against​​Ibn​​Taymiyya​​on​​such​​reprehensible​​matters​​as​​the​ ​following:​ ​‘He​ ​who​ ​pronounces​ ​triple​ ​divorce​ ​with​ ​one​ ​phrase​ ​is​ ​bound​ ​only​ ​by​ ​one​ ​divorce’;​ ​‘The​ ​traveller​​who​​sets​​out​​to​​visit​​the​​Hallowed​​Tomb​​(may​​Allah​​increase​​its​​perfume)​​may​​not​​reduce​​his​ ​prayers’;​ ​and​ ​the​ ​like.​ ​He​ ​sent​ ​the​ ​deposition​ ​to​ ​al-Malik​ ​al-Nasir,​ ​who​ ​ordered​ ​Ibn​ ​Taymiyya​ ​to​ ​be​ ​imprisoned​ ​in​ ​the​ ​citadel.​ ​There​ ​he​ ​remained​ ​until​ ​he​ ​died.”​ ​(vide:​ ​Ibn​ ​Battuta​,​ ​Travels​ ​in​ ​Asia​ ​and​ ​Africa​,​​1325-1354​​C.E;​​pp.​​67-8,​​1929​​ed’n;​​The​​Travels​​of​​Ibn​​Battuta​,​​1325-1354​​C.E;​​1,135-36,​​by​ ​H.​ ​Gibb;​ ​Tuhfat​ ​an-nuzzar​,​ ​pg.​ ​9,​ ​by​ ​Ibn​ ​Jazi;​ ​also​ ​quoted​ ​in​ ​Jawahir​ ​al-bihar​,​ ​by​ ​Shaykh​ ​Yusuf​ ​an-Nabahani, d. 1350/1932).​ ​The​ ​above​ ​account​ ​given​ ​by​ ​Ibn​ ​Battuta​ ​has​ ​been​ ​discounted​ ​by​​certain​​people;​​especially​​by​​Ibn​ ​Taymiyya’s​ ​supporters,​ ​simply​ ​because​ ​they​ ​believe​ ​that​ ​Ibn​ ​Taymiyya​ ​would​ ​never​ ​have​ ​made​ ​the​ ​anthropomorphic​​statement,​​‘Allah​​comes​​down​​to​​the​​sky​​of​​this​​world​​just​​as​​I​​came​​down​​now’,​​and​ ​then​​he​​allegedly​​took​​a​​step​​down​​the​​pulpit​​to​​demonstrate​​how​​Allah​​descends​​(nuzul).​​Even​​if​​one​​was​ ​to​​denounce​​Ibn​​Battuta’s​​account​​as​​being​​a​​false​​and​​fabricated​​statement,​​one​​may​​wish​​to​​know​​that​​the​ ​greatest​ ​scholar​ ​of​ ​Hadith​ ​in​ ​his​ ​time,​ ​Shaykh​ ​al-Islam​ ​al-Hafiz​ ​Ahmad​ ​ibn​ ​Hajar​ ​al-Asqalani​ ​(Rahimahullah)​ ​has​ ​reported​ ​an​ ​incident​ ​in​ ​al-Durar​ ​al-kamina​ ​(1,​ ​164)​ ​where​ ​again​ ​Ibn​ ​Taymiyya​ ​descended​​the​​steps​​of​​the​​minbar​​in​​order​​to​​illustrate​​his​​understanding​​of​​how​​Allah​​descends​ ​61​ ​IJTIHAD, TAQLEED AND THE “SALAFIYYA” SECT​ ​(nuzul)​ ​as​ ​early​ ​as​ ​the​ ​year​ ​705/1305​ ​AH​ ​(some​ ​21​ ​years​ ​before​ ​Ibn​ ​Battuta’s​ ​account).​ ​Hafiz​​Ibn​ ​Hajar’s​​source​​for​​this​​incident​​was​​one​​of​​Ibn​​Taymiyya’s​​own​​disciples​​by​​the​​name​​Sulayman​​Najm​ ​al-Din​ ​al-Tufi​ ​al-Hanbali​ ​(d.​ ​716/1316).​ ​Besides​ ​these​ ​incidents​ ​involving​ ​Ibn​ ​Taymiyya’s​ ​views​ ​on​ ​Allah’s​​attributes,​​other​​statements​​regarding​​Ibn​​Taymiyya’s​​views​​on​​this​​topic​​have​​been​​recorded​​by​​Ibn​ ​Abdal-Hadi​​(d.​​744/1343-44)​​in​​his​​Uqud​​al-Durriyya​​min​​Manaqib​​Shaykh​​al-Islam​​Ibn​​Taymiyya​​(pp.​ ​198-232) and Hafiz Ibn Kathir (d. 774/1373) in his​​Bidaya​​(14, 38).​ ​(9) Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Hajar al-Haytami al-Makki​​(d. 974/1567; R. A.)​ ​The​​Shafi’i​​Imam​​of​​his​​time,​​al-Hafiz​​ibn​​Hajar​​al-Haytami​​gave​​an​​official​​Fatwa​​on​​the​​heresy​​of​​Ibn​ ​Taymiyya​​in​​his​​book​​al-Fatawa​​al-Hadithiyya​:​​“Allahu​​ta’ala​​made​​Ibn​​Taymiyya​​lapse​​into​​heresy​​and​ ​perdition.​​He​​made​​him​​deaf​​and​​blind.​​Many​​scholars​​have​​informed​​that​​his​​deeds​​were​​corrupt​​and​​his​ ​words​ ​were​ ​false,​ ​and​ ​they​ ​proved​ ​it​ ​with​ ​documents.​ ​Those​ ​who​ ​read​ ​the​​books​​of​​the​​great​​Islamic​ ​scholar​​Abul​​Hasan​​as-Subki​​and​​his​​son​​Taj​​ad-din​​as-Subki​​and​​the​​books​​of​​Imam​​al-Izz​​ibn​​Jama’a,​​and​ ​those​ ​who​ ​study​ ​the​ ​statements​ ​said​ ​and​ ​written​ ​in​ ​response​ ​to​ ​him​ ​by​​the​​Shafi’i,​​Maliki​​and​​Hanafi​ ​Ulama​​living​​in​​his​​time,​​will​​see​​that​​we​​are​​right..​​As​​well,​​Ibn​​Taymiyya​​slandered​​and​​cast​​nefarious​ ​aspersions​​upon​​the​​great​​scholars​​of​​the​​Sufi​​path.​​And​​further!​​He​​did​​not​​hesitate​​to​​attack​​Sayyidina​ ​Umar​​(Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​him)​​and​​Sayyidina​​Ali​​(Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​him),​​Islam’s​​archstones.​​His​ ​words​ ​overflowed​ ​the​​measure​​and​​the​​rules​​of​​decorum,​​and​​he​​threw​​arrows​​even​​at​​steep​​cliffs.​​He​ ​stigmatized the scholars of the right way as innovators, heretics and ignoramuses...​ ​A​​letter​​written​​to​​Ibn​​Taymiyya​​in​​705/1305​​C.E;​​says​​‘O​​my​​Muslim​​brother,​​who​​considers​​himself​ ​to​​be​​a​​great​​scholar​​and​​the​​Imam​​of​​his​​time!​​I​​loved​​you​​for​​Allah’s​​sake.​​I​​disapproved​​the​​scholars​​who​ ​were​​against​​you.​​But​​hearing​​your​​words​​unbecoming​​to​​love​​has​​puzzled​​me.​​Does​​a​​wise​​person​​doubt​ ​that​​the​​night​​begins​​when​​the​​sun​​sets?​​You​​said​​that​​you​​were​​in​​the​​right​​way​​and​​that​​you​​were​​enjoining​ ​the​​good​​and​​forbidding​​the​​evil.​​Allah​​ta’ala​​knows​​what​​your​​purposes​​and​​intentions​​are.​​But​​sincerity​ ​will​​be​​seen​​in​​a​​person’s​​deeds.​​Your​​deeds​​have​​torn​​off​​the​​cover​​from​​your​​words.​​In​​the​​wake​​of​​those​ ​who​​follow​​their​​inner​​desires​​and​​whose​​words​​are​​unreliable,​​you​​have​​not​​only​​defamed​​those​​living​​in​ ​your​​time​​but​​also​​stigmatized​​the​​deceased​​as​​disbelievers.​​In​​addition​​to​​attacking​​the​​successors​​of​​the​ ​Salaf​​as-salihin​​(the​​first​​three​​pious​​Muslim​​generations),​​you​​have​​slandered​​the​​Sahaba,​​especially​​the​ ​greatest​​ones.​​Can’t​​you​​imagine​​in​​what​​situation​​you​​will​​be​​in​​when​​those​​great​​people​​ask​​their​​rights​ ​on​​the​​day​​of​​Resurrection?​​On​​the​​pulpit​​of​​the​​Jami​​al-jabal​​in​​the​​Salihiyya​​city​​you​​said​​that​​Umar​​(ibn​ ​al-Khattab;​ ​Allah​ ​be​​pleased​​with​​him)​​had​​had​​some​​wrong​​statements​​and​​disasters.​​What​​were​​these​ ​disasters?​​Which​​of​​these​​disasters​​did​​the​​Salaf​​as-salihin​​tell​​you​​about?​​You​​say​​that​​Ali​​(ibn​​Abi​​Talib;​ ​Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​him)​​had​​more​​than​​300​​hundred​​errors!​​Supposing​​the​​case​​had​​been​​with​​Sayyidina​ ​Ali,​ ​could​ ​you​ ​have​​one​​right​​word​​then?​​Now​​I​​am​​beginning​​to​​act​​against​​you.​​I​​shall​​try​​to​​protect​ ​Muslims​​against​​your​​villainy.​​For,​​you​​have​​overflowed​​the​​measure.​​Your​​torture​​has​​reached​​the​​living​ ​and the dead. Believers must shun your evils.’​ ​Taj​​ad-Din​​as-Subki​​(Rahimahullah)​​states​​that​​Ibn​​Taymiyya​​disagrees​​with​​the​​Salaf​​as-salihin​​in​​the​ ​following matters:​ ​(1)​​He​​said,​​‘Talaq​​(divorce)​​does​​not​​become​​actual;​​(in​​case​​it​​happens)​​it​​is​​necessary​​to​​pay​​kaffara​ ​(equal​ ​to​​that​​which​​is​​paid)​​for​​an​​oath.’​​None​​of​​the​​Islamic​​scholars​​that​​came​​before​​him​​said​​that​ ​kaffarat must be paid.​ ​(2)​​He​​said,​​‘Talaq​​given​​to​​a​​menstruating​​woman​​does​​not​​become​​actual,​​nor​​does​​Talaq​​given​​during​​the​ ​time of her purity become actual.’​ ​(3)​​He​​said,​​‘It​​is​​not​​necessary​​to​​make​​up​​(qada)​​for​​a​​Salah​​omitted​​deliberately.’​​(This​​is​​definitely​ ​true; it was also the view of Ibn al-Qayyim and Ibn Hazm al-Zahiri).​ ​(4)​​He​​said,​​‘It​​is​​permissible​​(mubah)​​for​​a​​menstruating​​woman​​to​​go​​around​​the​​Ka’ba.​​(If​​she​​does​​so)​ ​she will not have to pay any kaffara.’​ ​62​ ​IJTIHAD, TAQLEED AND THE “SALAFIYYA” SECT​ ​(5)​​He​​said,​​‘One​​Talaq​​given​​in​​the​​name​​of​​three​​Talaqs​​is​​still​​one​​Talaq.’​​Whereas,​​before​​saying​​so,​​he​ ​repeatedly said for many years that the consensus of the Muslims was not so.​ ​(6) He said, ‘Taxes incompatible with Islam are halal to those who demand them.’​ ​(7)​​He​​said,​​‘When​​taxes​​are​​collected​​from​​tradesmen,​​they​​stand​​for​​Zakah​​(charity)​​even​​if​​they​​do​​not​ ​intend (for zakah).’​ ​(8) He said, ‘Water does not become impure when a mouse or the like dies in it.’​ ​(9)​ ​He​ ​said,​ ​‘It​ ​is​ ​permissible​ ​for​ ​a​ ​sexually​ ​defiled​ ​(junub)​ ​person​ ​to​ ​perform​ ​supererogatory​ ​Salah​ ​without making ghusl (bath) at night.’​ ​(10)​​He​​said,​​‘Conditions​​stipulated​​by​​the​​waqif​​(person​​who​​devotes​​property​​to​​a​​pious​​foundation)​​are​ ​not taken into consideration. Something devoted for Shafi’is is spent for Hanafis.’​ ​(11)​​He​​said,​​‘A​​person​​who​​disagrees​​with​​the​​Ijma​​al-Ummah​​(consensus​​of​​the​​Muslim​​community)​ ​does not become a disbeliever or a sinner.’​ ​(12) He said, ‘Allah ta’ala is mahall-i hawadith. He is made up of particles coming together.’​ ​(13) He said, ‘The Qur’an a-Karim was created in the Dhat (essence, person) of Allahu ta’ala.’​ ​(14) He said, ‘The ‘alam, that is, all creatures are eternal with their kinds.’​ ​(15) He said, ‘Allahu ta’ala has to create good things.’​ ​(16)​ ​He​ ​said,​ ​‘Allahu​ ​ta’ala​ ​has​ ​a​ ​body​ ​and​ ​directions;​​he​​changes​​His​​place​​and​​is​​as​​big​​as​​the​​Arsh​ ​(throne).’​ ​(17) He said, ‘Hell is not eternal; it will go out at last.’​ ​(18) He denied the fact that Prophets (Peace be upon them all) are impeccable.​ ​(19)​​He​​said,​​‘Rasulullah​​(Peace​​and​​blessings​​be​​upon​​him)​​is​​no​​different​​from​​other​​people.​​It​​is​​not​ ​permissible to pray through his intercession (tawassul).’​ ​(20)​​He​​said,​​‘It​​is​​sinful​​to​​go​​to​​Madinah​​with​​the​​intention​​of​​visiting​​(the​​grave​​of)​​Rasulullah​​(Peace​ ​be upon him).’​ ​(21) He also said, ‘It is haram to go there to ask for intercession (shafa’a).’​ ​(22)​ ​He​ ​said,​ ​‘The​ ​Tawra​ ​and​ ​the​ ​Injil​ ​(two​ ​former​ ​revelations)​ ​did​ ​not​ ​change​ ​in​ ​vocabulary​ ​but​ ​in​ ​meaning.’​ ​Some​​scholars​​said​​that​​most​​of​​the​​above​​quoted​​statements​​did​​not​​belong​​to​​Ibn​​Taymiyya,​ ​but​​none​​of​​them​​denied​​that​​he​​had​​said,​​‘Allah​​had​​directions​​and​​is​​a​​composition​​of​​particles​ ​coming​ ​together.’​ ​However,​ ​it​​was​​declared​​by​​consensus​​that​​he​​was​​rich​​in​​Ilm,​​jalala​​and​​in​ ​diyana.​​A​​person​​who​​has​​Fiqh,​​knowledge,​​justice​​and​​reason​​must​​first​​observe​​a​​matter​​and​​then​ ​decide​​about​​it​​with​​prudence.​​Especially,​​judging​​a​​Muslim’s​​disbelief,​​apostasy,​​heresy​​or​​that​ ​he must be killed requires very minute observations and utter circumspection.”​ ​It​​was​​written​​in​​the​​book​​Aqeedah​​wal​​Islam​​(pg.​​78,​​author​​unknown):​​“Before​​those​​two​​people​​(Ibn​ ​Taymiyya​​and​​Ibn​​al-Qayyim),​​there​​was​​not​​a​​Madhhab​​called​​‘Salafiyya’,​​nor​​even​​the​​word​​‘Salafiyya’;​ ​how​​could​​they​​have​​said​​to​​have​​tried​​to​​enrich​​the​​Madhhab​​of​​the​​Salaf​​as-salihin,​​which​​was​​named​​Ahl​ ​as-Sunnah​​wal​​Jama’ah?​​Ibn​​Taymiyya​​tried​​to​​distort​​this​​right​​Madhhab​​and​​invented​​many​​bid’ahs​​(bad​ ​innovations).​ ​The​ ​source​ ​of​ ​the​ ​books,​ ​words​ ​and​ ​heretical,​ ​corrupt​ ​thoughts​ ​of​ ​today’s​ ​la-Madhhabi​ ​(anti-Madhhabites)​​people​​and​​religion​​reformers​​is​​only​​the​​bid’ahs​​invented​​by​​Ibn​​Taymiyya.​​In​​order​​to​ ​deceive​ ​Muslims​ ​and​ ​to​ ​convince​ ​the​ ​youth​ ​that​ ​they​ ​are​ ​on​ ​the​ ​right​ ​path,​ ​these​ ​heretics​ ​devised​ ​a​ ​horrible​ ​stratagem;​ ​they​ ​forged​ ​the​ ​name​ ​‘Salafiyya’​ ​from​ ​the​​term​​‘Salaf​​as-salihin’​​so​​that​​they​​may​ ​justify​​Ibn​​Taymiyya’s​​bid’ahs,​​corrupt​​ideas​​and​​drift​​the​​youth​​into​​his​​wake.​​They​​attached​​the​​stigmas​​of​ ​philosophy​​and​​bid’ah​​to​​Islamic​​scholars,​​who​​are​​the​​successors​​of​​the​​Salaf​​as-salihin,​​and​​blamed​​them​ ​for​​dissenting​​from​​their​​invented​​name​​‘Salafiyya’.​​They​​put​​forward​​Ibn​​Taymiyya​​as​​a​​Mujtahid,​​as​​a​ ​hero​​that​​resuscitated​​the​​‘Salafiyya’.​​Actually,​​the​​Ulama​​of​​the​​Ahl​​al-Sunnah,​​who​​are​​the​​successors​​of​ ​the​​Salaf​​as-salihin,​​defended​​the​​teachings​​with​​respect​​to​​I’tiqad​​(belief)​​of​​the​​Ahl​​al-Sunnah,​​which​​was​ ​the​​Madhhab​​of​​the​​Salaf​​as-salihin;​​in​​the​​books​​which​​they​​have​​written​​up​​to​​our​​time​​and​​which​​they​​are​ ​63​ ​IJTIHAD, TAQLEED AND THE “SALAFIYYA” SECT​ ​still​​writing​​today,​​they​​inform​​that​​IbnTaymiyya,​​ash-Shawkani​​and​​the​​like​​have​​dissented​​from​​the​​way​​of​ ​the Salaf as-salihin and have been drifting Muslims towards perdition and Hell.”​ ​Many​​of​​us​​who​​are​​practising​​Muslims​​or​​otherwise,​​are​​familiar​​with​​the​​epithet​​‘Wahhabi’.​​The​ ​founder​​of​​this​​sect​​was​​Muhammad​​ibn​​Abdal​​Wahhab​​(d.​​1206​​AH),​​from​​the​​Najd​​area​​of​​‘Saudi’​ ​Arabia.​ ​He​​is​​also​​known​​as​​Shaykh​​an-Najdi​​by​​his​​opponents​​and​​his​​followers​​have​​been​​labelled​​as​ ​either​​‘Najdis’​​or​​‘Wahhabis’​​by​​the​​Ahl​​al-Sunnah.​​He​​claimed​​to​​be​​a​​Hanbali​​in​​Fiqh.​​It​​is​​well​​known​ ​that​​he​​fully​​digested​​the​​aqeedah​​and​​ideas​​of​​Ibn​​Taymiyya.​​The​​scholars​​of​​his​​time​​warned​​the​​Muslims​ ​to​ ​be​ ​on​ ​their​ ​guard​ ​from​ ​accepting​ ​his​ ​‘reformatory’​ ​ideas;​ ​and​​this​​work​​is​​still​​existent​​among​​the​ ​scholars​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Ahl​ ​al-Sunnah​ ​even​ ​today.​ ​The​ ​neo-’Salafis’​ ​of​ ​today​ ​respect​ ​Ibn​ ​Abdal​ ​Wahhab​ ​quite​ ​highly​​by​​bestowing​​upon​​him​​such​​great​​titles​​like​​‘Shaykh​​al-Islam’.​​I​​do​​not​​want​​to​​say​​much​​about​​his​ ​movement and activities, but a few quotes from the well known scholars should suffice for now.​ ​(1)​ ​The​ ​foremost​ ​Hanafi​ ​scholar​ ​of​ ​his​ ​time,​ ​Imam​ ​Muhammad​ ​Amin​ ​ibn​ ​Abidin​ ​(d.​ ​1252/1836​ ​Rahimahullah)​​said​​in​​his​​celebrated​​work​​Hashiyya​​radd​​al-Mukhtar​​(vol.​​3,​​pg.​​309):​​“In​​our​​time​​Ibn​ ​Abdal​ ​Wahhab​ ​(Najdi)​ ​appeared,​ ​and​ ​attacked​ ​the​ ​two​ ​noble​ ​sanctuaries​ ​(Makkah​ ​and​ ​Madinah).​ ​He​ ​claimed​​to​​be​​a​​Hanbali,​​but​​his​​thinking​​was​​such​​that​​only​​he​​alone​​was​​a​​Muslim,​​and​​everyone​​else​​was​ ​a​​polytheist!​​Under​​this​​guise,​​he​​said​​that​​killing​​the​​Ahl​​as-Sunnah​​was​​permissible,​​until​​Allah​​destroyed​ ​them (Wahhab's) in the year 1233 AH by way of the Muslim army.”​ ​(2)​​Shaykh​​Zayni​​Dahlan​​(Rahimahullah)​​said​​in​​his​​book​​Futuhat​​al-Islamiyya​​(vol.​​2,​​pg.​​268):​​“The​ ​sign​​of​​the​​Khawarij​​(the​​first​​deviant​​sect​​that​​appeared​​in​​the​​time​​of​​the​​Companions)​​concerning​​the​ ​shaving of the head, was not found in the Khawarij of the past, but only in the Najdis of our time!”​ ​(3)​​Shaykh​​al-Islam​​Hussain​​Ahmad​​al-Madani​​(Rahimahullah)​​said​​in​​his​​book​​ash-Shihab​​as-saqib​ ​(pg.​ ​42):​ ​“Ibn​ ​Abdal​ ​Wahhab​ ​arose​ ​in​ ​the​ ​beginning​ ​of​ ​the​​thirteenth​​Islamic​​century​​in​​the​​Najd.​​His​ ​thinking​​was​​false,​​and​​his​​beliefs​​were​​corruptional;​​on​​these​​grounds​​he​​opened​​the​​way​​for​​killing​​the​ ​Ahl as-Sunnah.”​ ​(4)​​Abdal-Hakim​​Murad​​(translator​​of​​Imam​​al-Bayhaqi’s​​Seventy​​seven​​Branches​​of​​Faith​)​​said​​in​​a​ ​recent​​contribution​​to​​the​​journal​​Islamica​​(pg.​​9):​​“Ibn​​Abdal​​Wahhab,​​however,​​went​​far​​beyond​​this​​(i.e;​ ​of​​Ibn​​Taymiyya).​​Raised​​in​​the​​wastelands​​of​​Najd​​in​​Central​​Arabia,​​he​​had​​little​​access​​to​​mainstream​ ​Muslim​​scholarship​​(I​​say:​​This​​may​​be​​disputed​​by​​his​​supporters).​​In​​fact,​​when​​his​​da’wah​​appeared​​and​ ​became​​notorious,​​the​​scholars​​and​​muftis​​of​​the​​day​​applied​​to​​it​​the​​famous​​hadith​​of​​Najd:​​Ibn​​Umar​ ​(Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​him)​​reported​​the​​Prophet​​(Peace​​be​​upon​​him)​​as​​saying:​​‘Oh​​God,​​bless​​us​​in​​our​ ​Syria;​​O​​God,​​bless​​us​​in​​our​​Yemen.’​​Those​​present​​said:​​“And​​in​​our​​Najd,​​O​​Messenger​​of​​God!”​ ​But​​he​​said,​​‘O​​God,​​bless​​us​​in​​our​​Syria;​​O​​God,​​bless​​us​​in​​our​​Yemen.’​​Those​​present​​said,​​“And​​in​ ​our​ ​Najd,​ ​O​​Messenger​​of​​God”​​IbnUmar​​said​​that​​he​​thought​​that​​he​​said​​on​​the​​third​​occasion:​ ​‘Earthquakes​​and​​dissensions​​(fitnah)​​are​​there,​​and​​there​​shall​​arise​​the​​horn​​of​​the​​devil.”​​(Sahih​ ​al-Bukhari).​​And​​it​​is​​significant​​that​​almost​​uniquely​​among​​the​​lands​​of​​Islam,​​Najd​​has​​never​​produced​ ​scholars of any repute.​ ​The​ ​Najd-based​ ​da’wah​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Wahhabis,​ ​however,​ ​began​ ​to​ ​be​ ​heard​ ​more​ ​loudly​ ​following​ ​the​ ​explosion​​of​​Saudi​​oil​​wealth.​​Many,​​even​​most,​​Islamic​​publishing​​houses​​in​​Cairo​​and​​Beirut​​are​​now​ ​subsidised​​by​​Wahhabi​​organisations,​​which​​prevent​​them​​from​​publishing​​traditional​​works​​on​​Sufism,​ ​and remove passages in other works considered unacceptable to Wahhabist doctrine.​ ​The​ ​neo-Kharijite​ ​nature​ ​of​ ​Wahhabism​ ​makes​ ​it​ ​intolerant​ ​of​ ​all​ ​other​ ​forms​ ​of​ ​Islamic​ ​expression.​​However,​​because​​it​​has​​no​​coherent​​fiqh​​of​​its​​own​​-​​it​​rejects​​the​​orthodox​​madhhabs​ ​-​​and​​has​​only​​the​​most​​basic​​and​​primitively​​anthropomorphic​​‘aqidah​,​​it​​has​​a​​fluid,​​amoebalike​ ​tendency​ ​to​ ​produce​ ​divisions​ ​and​ ​subdivisions​ ​among​​those​​who​​profess​​it.​​No​​longer​​are​​the​ ​64​ ​IJTIHAD, TAQLEED AND THE “SALAFIYYA” SECT​ ​Islamic​ ​groups​ ​essentially​ ​united​ ​by​ ​a​ ​consistent​ ​madhhab​ ​and​ ​the​​Ash’ari​​‘aqidah​​(see​​later).​ ​Instead,​​they​​are​​all​​trying​​to​​derive​​the​​Shari’ah​​and​​the​​‘aqidah​​from​​the​​Qur’an​​and​​the​​Sunnah​ ​by​ ​themselves.​ ​The​ ​result​ ​is​ ​the​ ​appalling​ ​state​ ​of​ ​division​ ​and​ ​conflict​ ​which​ ​disfigures​ ​the​ ​modern​​salafi​​condition.”​ ​Another​​person​​who​​is​​a​​reference​​for​​today’s​​neo-”Salaf's”,​​is​​Muhammad​​ibn​​Ali​​al-Sinawkani​​(d.​ ​1250/1834).​​He​​was​​a​​leading​​scholar​​of​​the​​Zaydi​​(Shi’ah)​​sect​​found​​mainly​​in​​Yemen.​​He​​claimed​​to​ ​have​​departed​​from​​his​​old​​Shi’ite​​ways​​and​​joined​​the​​Ahl​​al-Sunnah.​​He​​was​​attacked​​by​​the​​scholars​​of​ ​his​​day​​for​​saying​​Taqleed​​was​​completely​​haram,​​as​​well​​as​​other​​important​​issues.Some​​scholars​​had​ ​accused​ ​him​ ​of​ ​still​ ​holding​ ​on​ ​to​ ​his​ ​deviant​ ​Zaydiyyah-Mu’tazilite​ ​(rationalistic​ ​thinking​ ​that​ ​was​ ​propounded​​by​​one​​of​​the​​first​​deviant​​sects​​of​​Islam)​​thinking,​​while​​pretending​​to​​be​​within​​the​​fold​​of​ ​orthodox​​Sunni​​Islam;​​but​​Allah​​knows​​best!​​It​​is​​a​​well​​known​​fact​​that​​he​​denied​​the​​consensus​​of​​the​ ​Companions​ ​(Ijma​ ​as-Sahaba),​​as​​well​​as​​rejecting​​the​​validity​​of​​the​​Fatwa​​of​​a​​Companion!​​One​​may​ ​refer​​to​​Anwar​​Ahmad​​Qadri’s​​book​​Islamic​​Jurisprudence​​in​​the​​Modern​​World​​(pg.​​142)​​for​​a​​lengthier​ ​discussion.​ ​Many​​scholars​​have​​noticed​​the​​extreme​​tendencies​​within​​the​​“Salafiyya”​​sect​​around​​the​​world,​​for​​its​ ​lack​​of​​respect​​for​​the​​scholars​​of​​the​​four​​Madhhabs,​​its​​Aqeedah​​and​​some​​untenable​​juristic​​positions​​it​ ​has​​produced​​over​​a​​short​​period​​of​​Islam’s​​history.​​The​​scholars​​have​​not​​been​​afraid​​of​​declaring​​the​ ​neo-”Salafis”​​to​​be​​neo-Kharijites​​in​​their​​behaviour​​and​​attitude​​to​​other​​Muslims.​​Note,​​the​​scholars​​are​ ​not​​saying​​that​​the​​neo-”Salafis”​​are​​Kharijites,​​but​​rather​​they​​seem​​to​​have​​certain​​traits​​which​​were​​only​ ​found​​amongst​​the​​Kharijites​​of​​the​​past.​​One​​of​​the​​most​​striking​​things​​I​​have​​noticed​​amongst​​these​ ​‘neo-Kharijites’,​​is​​their​​direction​​of​​Qur’anic​​verses​​that​​were​​revealed​​specifically​​for​​the​​unbelievers,​ ​as​​referring​​to​​the​​believers​​who​​do​​not​​seem​​to​​have​​their​​way​​of​​thinking!​​This​​was​​a​​well​​known​​practise​ ​of the Kharijites of old; as we shall see below.​ ​A​​well​​known​​scholar​​of​​the​​“Salafiyya”,​​Dr.​​Yusuf​​al-Qardawi​​(who​​has​​himself​​been​​attacked​​by​ ​other​​members​​of​​the​​“Salafiyya”,​​especially​​for​​holding​​some​​untenable​​positions​​in​​his​​book​​al-Halal​ ​wal​​Haram​​fil​​Islam​)​​said​​in​​his​​book​​Islamic​​awakening​​between​​Rejection​​and​​Extremism​​(pg.​​41-3):​ ​“Imam​​al-Shatibi​​(Rahimahullah)​​wrote​​(in​​his​​book​​al-I’tisam​,​​2.​​182-4):​​‘Ibn​​Abbas​​(Allah​​be​​pleased​ ​with​​him)​​was​​right.​​When​​a​​person​​knows​​the​​reason​​behind​​a​​certain​​verse​​or​​surah,​​he​​knows​​how​​to​ ​interpret​​it​​and​​what​​its​​objectives​​are.​​However,​​ignorance​​of​​that​​leads​​people​​to​​misinterpret​​it​​and​​to​ ​have​​different​​opinions,​​without​​an​​insight​​and​​knowledge​​which​​could​​lead​​them​​to​​the​​truth,​​and​​prevent​ ​them​ ​from​ ​indulging​ ​ignorantly​ ​in​ ​such​ ​matters​ ​with​ ​no​ ​support​ ​providence​ ​from​ ​al​ ​Shari’ah​,​ ​and​ ​therefore​​go​​astray​​and​​lead​​people​​astray.​​This​​can​​be​​demonstrated​​by​​what​​is​​reported​​by​​Ibn​​Wahab​ ​from​​Bakir​​who​​asked​​Nafi’:​​What​​does​​Ibn​​Umar​​(Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​him)​​think​​of​​al-Haruriyyah​​(i.e;​ ​al-Khawarij​​who​​were​​also​​called​​al-Haruriyyah​​after​​the​​place​​-Harawra-​​where​​they​​gathered​​and​​were​ ​found​​by​​Ali​​ibn​​Abi​​Talib​​and​​the​​Companions​​of​​the​​Prophet​​[may​​Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​them​​all]​​who​ ​supported​​him)?​​Nafi’​​answered:​​He​​thinks​​they​​are​​the​​most​​evil​​of​​people.​​They​​applied​​the​​verses​​which​ ​pertain​​to​​the​​kuffar​​on​​the​​believers.’​​(NB-​​Imam​​al-Bukhari​​has​​recorded​​Ibn​​Umar​​as​​saying​​in​​his​ ​Sahih​​(vol.​​9,​​pg.​​50;​​English​​edn]​:​​These​​people​​(the​​Khawarij​​and​​heretics)​​took​​some​​verses​​that​ ​had been revealed concerning the disbelievers and interpreted them as describing the believers)​.​ ​Al-Qardawi​​also​​said​​(pg.​​42):​​One​​of​​the​​causes​​of​​such​​shallowness​​is​​that​​extremists​​never​​listen​​to​ ​people​​who​​hold​​different​​views​​(and​​I​​can​​personally​​testify​​to​​that),​​never​​accept​​any​​dialogue​​with​​them​ ​or​​imagine​​that​​their​​own​​views​​could​​be​​tested​​in​​the​​light​​of​​others,​​and​​may​​thereby​​be​​either​​accepted​ ​or​​rejected.​​Most​​of​​them​​have​​not​​been​​taught​​by​​reliable​​Muslim​​ulama​​who​​are​​specialised​​in​​the​​field.​ ​Rather,​​they​​have​​received​​semi-knowledge​​directly​​from​​books​​and​​newspapers​​without​​any​​opportunity​ ​for​ ​revision​ ​or​ ​discussion​ ​which​ ​could​ ​test​ ​the​ ​learner’s​ ​understanding​ ​and​ ​analyze​ ​the​ ​depth​ ​of​ ​his​ ​knowledge.​ ​They​ ​simply​ ​read,​ ​‘understand’,​ ​then​ ​deduce​ ​what​ ​they​ ​wish.​ ​However,​ ​their​ ​reading,​ ​understanding,​​and​​deduction​​may​​well​​be​​wrong​​or​​deficient.​​There​​might​​be​​someone​​somewhere​​who​ ​opposes​​their​​opinions​​on​​stronger​​and​​more​​valid​​bases,​​but​​they​​are​​not​​aware​​of​​that​​because​​nobody​ ​65​ ​IJTIHAD, TAQLEED AND THE “SALAFIYYA” SECT​ ​has​​drawn​​their​​attention​​to​​such​​a​​possibility.​​These​​devout​​young​​people​​have​​ignored​​the​​facts​​that​​if​ ​they​​want​​to​​study​​al​​Shari’ah​,​​they​​must​​seek​​the​​help​​of​​reliable​​Muslim​​scholars.​​They​​cannot​​venture​ ​into​ ​this​ ​extensive​ ​and​ ​entangled​ ​discipline​​without​​the​​guidance​​of​​reliable​​Muslim​​scholars​​who​​can​ ​interpret​​and​​explain​​obscurities,​​define​​terms,​​and​​point​​out​​the​​relationships​​between​​the​​parts​​and​​the​ ​whole​​and​​also​​equate​​similarities.​​Those​​who​​venture​​into​​it​​alone​​will​​meet​​with​​the​​same​​catastrophic​ ​results​​which​​could​​certainly​​befall​​the​​unskilled​​swimmer​​who​​ventures​​into​​dangerous​​waters.​​Proper​ ​knowledge​ ​of​ ​al​ ​Shari’ah​ ​cannot​ ​be​ ​perfected​ ​without​ ​practice​ ​and​ ​close​ ​contact​ ​with​ ​the​ ​experts,​ ​especially​ ​in​ ​those​​areas​​where​​opinions​​diverge,​​evidences​​seem​​to​​contradict​​each​​other,​​and​​certain​ ​matters​ ​seem​ ​to​​be​​under​​suspicion.​​This​​is​​why​​our​​venerable​​‘ulama’​​have​​warned​​us​​not​​to​​seek​​to​ ​study​ ​and​ ​understand​ ​al​ ​Qur’an​ ​al​ ​Karim​ ​through​ ​a​ ​person​ ​who​ ​has​ ​only​ ​memorized​ ​it​ ​without​ ​any​ ​knowledge​​of​​its​​contents,​​nor​​to​​seek​​knowledge​​through​​a​​person​​who​​has​​acquired​​his​​own​​“knowledge”​ ​from​​reading​​newspapers​​and​​journals​​only,​​without​​being​​properly​​instructed​​by​​reputable​​and​​qualified​ ​scholars.”​ ​This​​topic​​began​​with​​a​​brief​​discussion​​on​​Taqleed​​and​​I​​would​​like​​to​​finish​​with​​the​​following​​two​ ​questions​​for​​you​​to​​ponder​​over.​​(A)​​Would​​it​​not​​be​​classified​​as​​being​​Taqleed​​if​​one​​were​​to​​accept​​the​ ​classifications​​of​​Hadiths,​​exegesis​​of​​the​​Qur’an​​etc;​​by​​a​​renowned​​Islamic​​scholar,​​if​​one​​was​​not​​to​​go​ ​back​ ​to​ ​the​ ​original​ ​sources​ ​which​ ​are​ ​used​ ​to​ ​authenticate​ ​the​ ​Hadith​ ​and​ ​so​ ​on?​​(For​​example,​​if​​a​ ​scholar​​claimed​​that​​a​​Hadith​​found​​in​​the​​Sunan​​of​​Imam​​Abu​​Dawood​​was​​Sahih​​and​​you​​accepted​​it​​as​ ​being​​Sahih​​-​​since​​you​​trust​​him,​​then​​are​​you​​not​​practising​​Taqleed;​​if​​you,​​yourself​​do​​not​​go​​back​​to​ ​the​​original​​sources​​used​​to​​classify​​the​​Hadith​​in​​question,​​since​​sometimes​​a​​Hadith​​classified​​to​​be​ ​Sahih​​by​​one​​scholar​​can​​be​​classified​​as​​being​​Da’eef​​by​​another!).​​(B)​​Is​​it​​not​​true​​that​​those​​who​​are​ ​calling​ ​for​ ​the​ ​abandonment​ ​of​ ​Taqleed,​ ​are​ ​calling​ ​for​ ​the​ ​Taqleed​​of​​their​​own​​books​​and​​speeches;​ ​hence creating their own little ‘Madhhabs’?​ ​66​ ​WHO ARE THE AHL AS-SUNNAH WAL JAMA’AH?​ ​WHO ARE THE AHL AS-SUNNAH WAL JAMA’AH?​ ​Many​​people​​today​​like​​to​​classify​​themselves​​as​​belonging​​to​​the​​Saved​​Sect​​(Firgatun-Najiyyah)​​-​ ​Ahl​​as-Sunnah​​Wal​​Jama’ah​;​​but​​do​​these​​people​​really​​know​​which​​is​​the​​Saved​​Sect,​​from​​the​​many​ ​sects​ ​we​​have​​today?​​The​​following​​is​​an​​attempt​​to​​clarify​​some​​misconceptions​​by​​way​​of​​definitive​ ​proofs​​from​​the​​Qur’an​​and​​Sunnah,​​as​​well​​as​​quotes​​from​​the​​profoundly​​learned​​Classical​​Scholars​​of​ ​Islam.​​Know​​that​​there​​is​​only​​one​​Saved​​Sect​​in​​Islam,​​and​​this​​is​​the​​original​​pristine​​form​​of​​Islam​​that​ ​has​​been​​transmitted​​to​​us​​by​​Allah​​Subhana​​Wa​​Ta’ala​​in​​his​​Qur’an,​​his​​Rasul​​(Peace​​and​​blessings​​be​ ​upon​​him),​​the​​blessed​​Companions​​(may​​Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​them​​all)​​and​​the​​great​​scholars​​of​​Islam​ ​(Allah’s​​mercy​​be​​upon​​them​​all)​​who​​have​​been​​following​​their​​Straight​​Path​​for​​more​​than​​one​​thousand​ ​years of Islam’s history.​ ​The​​first​​question​​that​​should​​be​​raised​​is:​​“What​​differentiates​​one​​sect​​from​​another​​sect?”​​The​ ​answer​​to​​this​​is​​simple​​and​​definitive!​​Know​​that​​the​​chief​​characteristic​​that​​distinguishes​​one​​sect​​from​ ​another,​​lies​​not​​in​​the​​differences​​of​​opinion​​that​​its​​scholars​​have​​attained​​by​​making​​Ijtihad​​from​​the​ ​sources​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Shari’ah​ ​(this​ ​leads​ ​to​ ​the​ ​formation​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Madhhabs),​ ​but​ ​rather​ ​the​ ​actual​ ​belief​ ​(Aqeedah​​or​​I’tiqad​​in​​Arabic)​​that​​the​​scholars​​and​​laity​​of​​the​​sect​​in​​question​​are​​clinging​​onto​​-​​since​ ​the founding of their respective sects.​ ​According​​to​​the​​unknown​​author​​of​​the​​book​​Belief​​and​​Islam​​(pp.​​78-9),​​the​​faith​​of​​the​​People​​of​ ​the​ ​Sunnah​ ​and​ ​Jama’ah​ ​was​ ​spread​ ​as​ ​follows:​ ​“Nowadays,​ ​some​ ​mouths​ ​frequently​ ​use​ ​the​​name​​of​ ​“Salafiyya”.​ ​Every​ ​Muslim​ ​should​ ​know​ ​very​ ​well​ ​that​ ​in​ ​Islam​ ​there​ ​is​ ​nothing​ ​in​ ​the​ ​name​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Madhhab​​of​​Salafiyya​​but​​there​​is​​the​​Madhhab​​of​​the​​Salaf​​as-salihin​​who​​were​​the​​Muslims​​of​​the​​first​ ​two​​Islamic​​centuries​​(i.e;​​the​​Companions,​​their​​successors​​and​​the​​followers​​of​​the​​successors)​​which​ ​were​​lauded​​in​​a​​Hadith​​sharif.​​The​​ulama​​of​​Islam​​who​​came​​in​​the​​third​​and​​fourth​​centuries​​are​​called​ ​Khalaf​ ​as-sadiqin​.​ ​The​ ​i’tiqad​ ​(belief)​ ​of​ ​these​ ​honourable​ ​people​ ​is​ ​called​ ​the​ ​Madhhab​ ​of​ ​Ahl​ ​as-Sunnah​​wal​​Jama’ah.​​This​​is​​the​​Madhhab​​of​​Iman,​​tenets​​of​​faith.​​The​​Iman​​held​​by​​the​​Sahaba​​al-Kiram​ ​(may​​Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​them​​all)​​and​​by​​the​​Tabi’un​​(Allah’s​​mercy​​be​​upon​​them​​all)​​was​​the​​same.​ ​There​​was​​no​​difference​​between​​their​​beliefs.​​Today​​most​​Muslims​​in​​the​​world​​are​​in​​the​​Madhhab​​of​ ​Ahl​​as-Sunnah​​(i.e;​​most​​Muslims​​claim​​to​​be​​Sunnis).​​All​​the​​seventy-two​​heretical​​groups​​(see​​later​​for​ ​the​ ​actual​ ​Hadith​ ​and​ ​its​ ​commentary)​ ​of​ ​bid’ah​ ​appeared​ ​(mainly)​ ​after​ ​the​​second​​century​​of​​Islam.​ ​Founders​​of​​some​​of​​them​​lived​​earlier,​​but​​it​​was​​after​​the​​Tabi’un​​that​​their​​books​​were​​written,​​and​​that​ ​they appeared in groups and defied the Ahl as-Sunnah.​ ​Rasulullah​​(Peace​​and​​blessings​​be​​upon​​him)​​brought​​the​​beliefs​​of​​Ahl​​as-Sunnah.​​The​​Sahaba​ ​al-kiram​​(may​​Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​them​​all)​​derived​​these​​teachings​​of​​Iman​​from​​the​​source​ ​(the​​Qur’an​​and​​Sunnah).​​And​​the​​Tabi’un​​(successors),​​in​​their​​turn,​​learned​​these​​teachings​​from​ ​the​​Sahaba​​al-kiram.​​And​​from​​them​​their​​successors​​learned,​​thus​​the​​teachings​​of​​Ahl​​as-Sunnah​ ​reached​ ​us​ ​by​ ​way​ ​of​ ​transmission​ ​and​​tawatur​​(through​​many​​undeniable​​chains​​of​​transmission).​ ​These​​teachings​​cannot​​be​​explored​​by​​way​​of​​reasoning.​​Intellect​​cannot​​change​​them​​and​​will​​only​​help​ ​understand​​them.​​That​​is,​​intellect​​is​​necessary​​for​​understanding​​them,​​for​​realizing​​that​​they​​are​​right​​and​ ​for​​knowing​​their​​value.​​All​​the​​scholars​​of​​Hadith​​held​​the​​beliefs​​of​​the​​Ahl​​as-Sunnah.​​The​​Imams​ ​of​ ​the​ ​four​ ​Madhhabs​ ​in​ ​deeds,​ ​too,​ ​were​ ​in​ ​this​ ​Madhhab.​ ​Also,​ ​al-Maturidi​ ​and​ ​al-Ashari​ ​(Allah’s​​mercy​​be​​upon​​them),​​the​​two​​Imams​​of​​our​​Madhhab​​in​​beliefs,​​were​​in​​the​​Madhhab​​of​ ​the​ ​Ahl​ ​as-Sunnah.​ ​Both​ ​of​ ​these​ ​Imams​ ​promulgated​ ​this​ ​Madhhab.​ ​They​ ​always​ ​defended​ ​this​ ​Madhhab​​against​​heretics​​and​​materialists,​​who​​had​​been​​stuck​​in​​the​​bogs​​of​​ancient​​Greek​​philosophy.​ ​Though​​they​​were​​contemporaries,​​they​​lived​​in​​different​​places​​and​​the​​ways​​of​​thinking​​and​​behaving​​of​ ​the​​offenders​​they​​had​​met​​were​​different,​​so​​the​​methods​​of​​defence​​used​​and​​the​​answers​​given​​by​​these​ ​two​​great​​scholars​​of​​Ahl​​as-Sunnah​​were​​different.​​But​​this​​does​​not​​mean​​that​​they​​belonged​​to​​different​ ​Madhhabs​​(rather​​they​​were​​both​​from​​the​​Ahl​​as-Sunnah).​​Hundreds​​of​​thousands​​of​​profoundly​​learned​ ​67​ ​WHO ARE THE AHL AS-SUNNAH WAL JAMA’AH?​ ​ulama​​and​​awliya​​(friends​​of​​Allah)​​coming​​after​​these​​two​​exalted​​Imams​​studied​​their​​books​​and​​stated​ ​in​ ​consensus​ ​that​ ​they​ ​both​ ​belonged​ ​to​ ​the​ ​Madhhab​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Ahl​ ​as-Sunnah.​ ​The​ ​scholars​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Ahl​ ​as-Sunnah​​took​​the​​nass​​(Qur’an​​and​​Sunnah)​​with​​their​​outward​​meanings.​​That​​is,​​they​​gave​​the​​ayats​​and​ ​Hadiths​ ​their​ ​outward​ ​meanings,​ ​and​ ​did​ ​not​ ​explain​ ​away​ ​(ta’wil)​ ​the​ ​nass​ ​or​ ​change​ ​these​​meanings​ ​unless​ ​there​ ​was​ ​a​ ​darura​ ​(necessity)​ ​to​ ​do​ ​so.​ ​And​ ​they​ ​never​ ​made​ ​any​ ​changes​​with​​their​​personal​ ​knowledge​​or​​opinions.​​But​​those​​who​​belonged​​to​​heretical​​groups​​and​​the​​la-Madhhabi​​(those​​who​​do​ ​not​ ​belong​ ​to​ ​one​ ​of​ ​the​ ​four​ ​Madhhabs)​ ​did​ ​not​ ​hesitate​ ​to​ ​change​ ​the​​teachings​​of​​Iman​​and​​Ibadat​ ​(worship)​ ​as​ ​they​ ​had​ ​learned​ ​from​ ​(the​​books​​of)​​Greek​​philosophers​​and​​from​​sham​​scientists,​​who​ ​were Islam’s adversaries.”​ ​Let​ ​us​ ​now​ ​see​ ​what​ ​the​ ​definition​ ​of​ ​Ahl​ ​as-Sunnah​ ​wal​ ​Jama’ah​​was​​according​​to​​the​​classical​ ​scholars of this aided, Victorious sect (Tai’fatul-Mansoorah) of Islam.​ ​(1) Shaykh al-Islam Ahmad ibn Hajar al-Haytami​​(d.​​974/1567; R.A.)​ ​Hafiz​ ​Ibn​ ​Hajar​​al-Haytami​​defined​​the​​Sunni​​Muslims​​as​​follows​​in​​his​​book​​Fath​​al-jawad:​​“A​ ​Mubtadi​​(innovator)​​is​​the​​person​​who​​does​​not​​have​​the​​faith​​(Aqeedah)​​conveyed​​unanimously​​by​​the​​Ahl​ ​as-Sunnah.​ ​This​ ​unanimity​ ​was​ ​transmitted​ ​by​ ​the​ ​two​ ​great​ ​Imams​​Abul​​Hasan​​al-Ashari​​(d.​​324/936;​ ​Rahimahullah)​ ​and​ ​Abu​ ​Mansur​​al-Maturidi​​(d.​​333/944;​​Rahimahullah)​​and​​the​​scholars​​who​​followed​ ​their​​path.”​​Hafiz​​Ibn​​Hajar​​al-Haytami​​also​​said​​in​​his​​book​​al-​​Fatawa​​al-Hadithiyya​​(pg.​​205):​​“​Man​​of​ ​bid’ah​​means​​one​​whose​​beliefs​​are​​different​​from​​the​​Ahl​​as-Sunnah​​faith.​​The​​Ahl​​as-Sunnah​​faith​ ​is​​the​​faith​​of​​Abul​​Hasan​​al-Ashari,​​Abu​​Mansur​​al-Maturidi​​and​​those​​who​​followed​​them.​​One​ ​who brings forth something which is not approved by Islam becomes a man of bid’ah.”​ ​(2) Imam Ahmad Shihab ad-Din al Qalyubi​​(d. 1069/1659;​​R.A.)​ ​Imam​​al-Qalyubi​​wrote​​on​​the​​fourth​​volume​​of​​his​​marginalia​​to​​the​​book​​Kanz​​ar-raghibin:​​“​One​ ​who​​departs​​from​​what​​Abul​​Hasan​​al-Ashari​​and​​Abu​​Mansur​​al-Maturidi​​(Allah’s​​mercy​​be​​upon​ ​them)​​reported​​is​​not​​a​​Sunni.​​These​​two​​Imams​​followed​​the​​footprints​​of​​Rasulullah​​(Peace​​be​​upon​ ​him) and his Sahaba (may Allah be pleased with them all).”​ ​(3) Imam Abdullah ibn Alawi al-Haddad​​(d. 1132 AH;​​Rahimahullah)​ ​Imam​​al-Haddad​​stated​​in​​The​​Book​​of​​Assistance​​(pg.​​40):​​“You​​must​​correct​​and​​protect​​your​​beliefs​ ​and​​conform​​to​​the​​pattern​​of​​the​​party​​of​​salvation,​​who​​are​​those​​known​​from​​among​​the​​other​​Islamic​ ​factions​ ​as​ ​the​ ​“People​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Sunnah​ ​and​ ​Jama’ah”​​(Ahl​​as-Sunnah​​wal​​Jama’ah).​​They​​are​​those​​who​ ​firmly​ ​adhere​ ​to​ ​the​ ​way​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Messenger​ ​of​ ​Allah​ ​(peace​ ​and​ ​blessings​ ​be​ ​upon​ ​him),​ ​and​ ​of​ ​his​ ​Companions (may Allah be pleased with them all).​ ​If​​you​​look​​with​​a​​sound​​understanding​​into​​those​​passages​​relating​​to​​the​​sciences​​of​​faith​​in​​the​​Book​ ​(Qur’an),​ ​the​ ​Sunnah,​ ​and​ ​the​ ​saying​ ​of​ ​the​ ​virtuous​ ​predecessors,​ ​whether​ ​they​ ​be​ ​Companions​ ​or​ ​followers,​​you​​will​​know​​for​​certain​​that​​the​​truth​​is​​with​​the​​party​​called​​the​​Ashari​​(NB-the​​Maturidis​ ​are​​also​​upon​​the​​truth),​​named​​after​​the​​Shaykh​​Abul​​Hasan​​al-Ashari,​​may​​Allah​​have​​mercy​​on​​him,​​who​ ​systematized​​the​​foundations​​of​​the​​creed​​of​​the​​people​​of​​the​​truth,​​and​​recorded​​its​​earliest​​versions,​ ​these being the beliefs with the Companions and the best among the followers agreed upon.”​ ​(4) Imam Abdal Ghani an-Nablusi​​(d. 1143/1733; Rahimahullah)​ ​Imam​​an-Nablusi​​stated​​in​​his​​book​​al-Hadiqat​​an-Nadiyya​​(vol.2,​​pg.​​103):​​“Jama’ah​​is​​rahma,​​that​​is,​ ​the​​union​​of​​Muslims​​on​​truth​​brings​​Allahu​​ta’ala’s​​Compassion.​​Tafriqa​​is​​adhab,​​that​​is,​​separation​​from​ ​68​ ​WHO ARE THE AHL AS-SUNNAH WAL JAMA’AH?​ ​the​​Community​​of​​Muslims​​brings​​about​​punishment​​from​​Allahu​​ta’ala.​​Hence,​​it​​is​​necessary​​for​​every​ ​Muslim​​to​​unite​​with​​those​​who​​are​​on​​the​​right​​path.​​He​​must​​join​​and​​believe​​like​​them​​even​​if​​they​​are​ ​only​​a​​small​​group.​​The​​right​​path​​is​​the​​path​​of​​as-Sahaba​​al-Kiram.​​Those​​who​​follow​​this​​path​​are​​called​ ​Ahl​​as-Sunnah​​Wal​​Jama’ah.​​It​​should​​not​​confuse​​us​​that​​many​​heretical​​groups​​appeared​​after​​the​​time​​of​ ​as-Sahaba​​al-Kiram.​​Al-Imam​​al-Bayhaqi​​(d.​​458/1066;​​Rahimahullah)​​said,​​‘​When​​Muslims​​go​​astray,​ ​you​​should​​follow​​the​​right​​path​​of​​those​​who​​came​​before​​them!​​You​​should​​not​​give​​up​​that​​path​ ​even​​if​​you​​are​​left​​alone​​on​​the​​path!​’​​Najm​​ad-Din​​al-Ghazzi​​(d.​​1061/1651;​​Rahimahullah)​​wrote:​ ​‘Ahl​ ​as-Sunnah​ ​Wal​ ​Jama’ah​ ​are​ ​those​ ​ulama​ ​who​ ​keep​ ​on​ ​the​ ​right​ ​path​ ​of​ ​Rasullullah​ ​(Peace​ ​and​ ​blessings​ ​be​ ​upon​ ​him)​ ​and​ ​as-Sahaba​ ​al-Kiram.​ ​As-Sawad​​al-Azam​,​​that​​is,​​the​​majority​​of​​Islamic​ ​scholars,​​have​​followed​​this​​right​​path.​​The​​Firqatun-Naajiyyah​​which​​was​​defined​​to​​be​​the​​group​​of​ ​salvation​ ​among​ ​the​ ​seventy​​three​​groups​​is​​this​​true​​Jama’ah.’​​The​​Qur’an​​al-Karim​​declares,​​‘Do​​not​ ​disunite!’​ ​This​ ​ayat​ ​means​ ​‘Do​ ​not​ ​disunite​ ​in​ ​I’tiqad,​ ​in​ ​the​ ​teachings​ ​of​ ​beliefs!’​ ​Most​ ​ulama,​ ​for​ ​example,​​Abdullah​​ibn​​Masood​​(may​​Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​him),​​interpreted​​this​​ayat​​as​​above​​and​​said​ ​that​​it​​meant,​​‘Do​​not​​deviate​​from​​the​​right​​path​​by​​following​​your​​desires​​and​​corrupt​​ideas.’​​This​​ayat​ ​does​ ​not​ ​mean​ ​that​ ​there​ ​should​ ​be​ ​no​ ​disagreement​ ​in​ ​the​ ​knowledge​ ​of​ ​Fiqh.​ ​It​ ​forbids​ ​separation​​which​​causes​​discord​​and​​dissension​​in​​the​​knowledge​​of​​I’tiqad​​(see​​Imam​​al-Qurtubi’s​ ​opinion​ ​later).​ ​The​ ​disagreement​ ​in​ ​the​ ​knowledge​ ​(of​ ​Fiqh)​ ​derived​ ​through​ ​Ijtihad​ ​in​ ​the​ ​field​ ​of​ ​practices​​(Amal)​​is​​not​​a​​discord,​​because​​such​​disagreement​​has​​brought​​to​​sight​​the​​rights,​​the​​fards​​and​ ​the​​subtle​​teachings​​in​​Amal​​and​​Ibadah​​(worship).​​As-Sahaba​​al-kiram​​(Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​them​​all),​ ​too,​​differed​​from​​one​​another​​in​​those​​teachings​​that​​explained​​daily​​life,​​but​​there​​was​​no​​disagreement​ ​among them in the knowledge of I’tiqad.”​ ​(5) Allamah Sayyid Ahmad at-Tahtawi​​(d. 1231/1816;​​Rahimahullah)​ ​Allamah​ ​Sayyid​ ​Ahmad​ ​at-Tahtawi;​ ​a​ ​great​ ​Hanafi​ ​Fiqh​ ​scholar​ ​of​​Egypt,​​wrote​​on​​the​​subject​​of​ ​‘Zabayih’​​in​​his​​Hashiya​​al-Durr​​al-Mukhtar​.​​“According​​to​​the​​majority​​of​​scholars​​of​​Tafsir,​​the​​ayat,​ ​‘They​​parted​​into​​groups​​in​​the​​religion,’​​referred​​to​​the​​people​​of​​Bid’ah​​who​​would​​arise​​in​​this​​Ummah.​ ​In​​a​​Hadith​​reported​​by​​Umar​​(may​​Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​him),​​Rasulullah​​(Peace​​and​​blessings​​be​​upon​ ​him)​ ​said​ ​to​ ​Aisha​ ​(may​ ​Allah​ ​be​ ​pleased​ ​with​ ​her),​ ​‘The​ ​ayat​ ​about​ ​the​ ​partitions​ ​into​ ​groups​​in​​the​ ​religion​​refers​​to​​the​​people​​of​​Bid’ah​​and​​to​​the​​followers​​of​​their​​nafs​​who​​would​​arise​​in​​this​​Ummah.’​ ​Allah​​declared​​in​​the​​153rd​​ayat​​of​​Surah​​Al-An’am,​​‘​This​​is​​My​​Straight​​path,​​so​​follow​​it!​​Follow​ ​not​​other​​ways,​​lest​​you​​be​​parted​​from​​His​​way!​’​​(that​​is,​​Jews,​​Christians,​​and​​other​​heretics​​departed​ ​from​​the​​right​​path;​​you​​should​​not​​part​​like​​them!).​​In​​the​​103rd​​ayat​​of​​Surah​​Ali​​‘Imran,​​Allah​​declares,​ ​‘And​​hold​​fast,​​all​​of​​you​​together,​​to​​the​​rope​​of​​Allah,​​and​​do​​not​​separate!​’​​(see​​later​​for​​a​​brief​ ​commentary).​​Some​​scholars​​of​​Tafsir​​said​​that​​Allah’s​​rope​​meant​​Jama’ah,​​unity.​​The​​command,​​‘Do​​not​ ​separate’,​​shows​​that​​it​​is​​so​​and​​the​​Jama’ah​​are​​the​​possessors​​of​​Fiqh​​and​​Ilm​​(knowledge).​​One​​who​ ​descents​​from​​Fuqaha​​(scholars​​of​​Fiqh)​​as​​much​​as​​a​​span​​falls​​into​​heresy,​​becomes​​deprived​​of​​Allah’s​ ​help​​and​​deserves​​Hell,​​because​​the​​Fuqaha​​have​​been​​on​​the​​right​​path​​and​​have​​held​​on​​to​​the​​Sunnah​​of​ ​Rasulullah​ ​(Peace​ ​and​ ​blessings​ ​be​​upon​​him)​​and​​on​​to​​the​​path​​of​​al-Khulafa​​ar-Rashideen,​​the​​Four​ ​Khaliphs​​(may​​Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​them).​​As-Sawad​​al-Azam,​​that​​is,​​the​​majority​​of​​the​​Muslims,​ ​are​​on​​the​​path​​of​​Fuqaha​.​​Those​​who​​depart​​from​​their​​path​​will​​burn​​in​​the​​fire​​of​​Hell.​​O​​believers!​ ​Follow​ ​the​ ​unique​ ​group​ ​which​ ​is​ ​protected​ ​against​ ​Hell!​ ​And​​this​​group​​is​​the​​one​​that​​is​​called​​Ahl​ ​as-Sunnah​​Wal​​Jama’ah.​​For,​​Allah’s​​help,​​protection​​and​​guidance​​are​​for​​the​​followers​​of​​this​​group,​​and​ ​His​ ​wrath​ ​and​ ​punishment​ ​are​ ​for​ ​those​ ​who​​dissent​​from​​this​​group.​​Today,​​this​​group​​of​​salvation​ ​comes together in the Four Madhhabs, namely the Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi’i,and Hanbali​.”​ ​It​​is​​very​​important​​to​​have​​unity​​in​​the​​Ummah,​​and​​to​​achieve​​this​​goal​​of​​unity​​it​​is​​incumbent​​that​​the​ ​whole​​Ummah​​has​​the​​correct​​and​​preserved​​Aqeedah​​of​​the​​Salaf​​as-salihin​​(may​​Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​ ​them​​all);​​since​​Allah​​will​​no​​doubt​​ask​​us​​about​​our​​Aqeedah​​if​​it​​is​​not​​in​​conformity​​with​​the​​divine​ ​69​ ​WHO ARE THE AHL AS-SUNNAH WAL JAMA’AH?​ ​revelation​​and​​what​​his​​Messenger​​(Peace​​and​​blessings​​be​​upon​​him)​​transmitted​​to​​us.​​The​​way​​of​​the​ ​Salaf​​as-salihin​​is​​the​​way​​of​​the​​saved​​sect​​of​​the​​Ahlas-Sunnah​​wal​​Jama’ah.​​And​​we​​should​​all​​know​​that​ ​the​​Jama’ah​​is​​the​​sect​​which​​has​​the​​most​​correct​​and​​united​​Aqeedah​​out​​of​​all​​other​​Jama’ahs.​​To​​know​ ​what​​is​​the​​real​​Jama’ah,​​one​​must​​look​​into​​the​​Qur’an​​and​​Hadith​​for​​evidence.​​If​​one​​was​​to​​look​​deeply​ ​into​​this​​matter​​with​​an​​open​​and​​scholarly​​mind,​​one​​will​​come​​to​​the​​conclusion​​that​​this​​great​​Jama’ah​ ​is​​the​​one​​which​​is​​composed​​of​​the​​foremost​​scholars​​of​​Qur’anic​​commentary,​​Hadith,​​Fiqh​​and​​other​ ​Islamic​ ​sciences;​ ​it​ ​is​ ​no​ ​doubt​ ​the​ ​Jama’ah​ ​which​ ​has​ ​had​ ​the​ ​greatest​ ​following​ ​throughout​ ​Islamic​ ​history​​in​​terms​​of​​scholars​​and​​laity,​​and​​this​​alone​​is​​the​​main​​body​​of​​Islam​​which​​represents​​the​​views​ ​of​​the​​great​​mass​​of​​believers​​(as-Sawad​​al-Azam)​​as​​we​​shall​​see​​from​​the​​Hadith​​evidence​​below.​​Let​​us​ ​now see what Allah ta’ala has said about unity and schism in the Holy Qur’an.​ ​QUR’ANIC EVIDENCE​ ​(1) Surah al-Imran (3:103):​ ​“​And hold fast, all of you together, to the rope of​​Allah and be not divided​.”​ ​Imam​​Sayf​​ad-Din​​al-Amidi​​(d.​​631/1233;​​Rahimahullah)​​said​​in​​his​​al-Ihkam​​fi​​usul​​al-ahkam​​(The​ ​proficiency:​ ​on​ ​the​ ​fundamentals​ ​of​ ​legal​ ​rulings,​ ​pg.​ ​295)​ ​with​ ​regard​ ​to​ ​the​ ​above​ ​Qur’anic​ ​verse:​ ​“​Allah​​has​​forbidden​​separation,​​and​​disagreement​​with​​consensus​​(Ijma)​​is​​separation​.”​​Hence,​​if​ ​Allah​​has​​forbidden​​separation​​then​​surely​​we​​must​​all​​unite​​on​​the​​unanimously​​accepted​​Aqeedah​​of​​our​ ​pious​​predecessors.​​And​​I​​have​​already​​quoted​​Hafiz​​Ibn​​Hajar​​al-Haytami​​(Rahimahullah)​​as​​saying:​​“This​ ​unanimity​ ​(in​ ​aqeedah)​ ​was​ ​transmitted​ ​by​​the​​two​​great​​Imams​​Abul​​Hasan​​al-Ashari​​and​​Abu​​Mansur​ ​al-Maturidi (Allah’s mercy be upon them) and the scholars who followed their path.”​ ​Mahmoud​​Ayoub​​wrote​​in​​The​​Qur’an​​and​​Its​​Interpreters​​(vol.​​II,​​275-6):​​“​Ibn​​Kathir​​(d.​​774/1373;​ ​Rahimahullah)​​interprets​​the​​‘rope​​of​​God’​​in​​verse​​103​​as​​‘The​​covenant​​of​​God,’​​citing​​in​​support​​of​​this​ ​interpretation​​verse​​112​​below​​(in​​Surah​​Ali​​Imran).​​Another​​view,​​he​​adds,​​is​​that​​‘The​​rope​​of​​God’​​here​ ​refers​​to​​the​​Qur’an,​​as​​reported​​on​​the​​authority​​of​​Ali​​(Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​him)​​who​​said​​that​​‘​The​ ​Qur’an​​is​​God’s​​strong​​rope​​and​​the​​straight​​way.​’​​He​​cites​​another​​Hadith,​​on​​the​​authority​​of​​Abu​ ​Sa’id​​al-Khudri​​(Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​him),​​where​​the​​Prophet​​(Peace​​be​​upon​​him)​​declared,​​‘​The​​book​ ​of​​God​​is​​God’s​​rope​​stretched​​from​​heaven​​to​​earth.​’​​Abd​​Allah​​ibn​​Mas’ud​​(Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​ ​him)​ ​reported​ ​-that​ ​the​ ​Messenger​ ​of​ ​God​ ​(Peace​ ​be​ ​upon​ ​him)​ ​said,​ ​‘​Surely​ ​this​​Qur’an​​is​​God’s​ ​strong​​rope,​​manifest​​light,​​and​​beneficial​​source​​of​​healing.​​It​​is​​protection​​for​​those​​who​​hold​ ​fast to it, and a means of salvation for those who abide by it.​’​ ​Ibn​​Kathir​​interprets​​the​​injunction,​​‘and​​do​​not​​be​​divided’​​to​​mean​​strict​​adherence​​to​​unity​​among​ ​Muslims.​ ​He​ ​reports​ ​on​ ​the​ ​authority​ ​of​ ​Abu​ ​Hurayrah​ ​(Allah​ ​be​ ​pleased​ ​with​ ​him)​ ​that​ ​the​ ​Prophet​ ​(Peace​​be​​upon​​him)​​said,​​‘​God​​will​​be​​pleased​​with​​three​​acts​​from​​you,​​and​​wrathful​​with​​three​ ​others.​​He​​wishes​​that​​you​​worship​​Him​​alone​​without​​associating​​anything​​with​​Him;​​that​​you​ ​hold​​fast​​all​​together​​to​​the​​rope​​of​​God​​and​​be​​not​​divided;​​and​​that​​you​​show​​loyalty​​to​​those​ ​whom God has set in authority.’ (Tafsir Ibn Kathir, II, pp. 83-4)​ ​Qurtubi​​(d.​​671/1273;​​Rahimahullah)​​agrees​​with​​Tabari​​(d.​​923​​CE;​​Rahimahullah)​​and​​Ibn​​Kathir​ ​regarding​​the​​meaning​​of​​‘the​​rope​​of​​God’​​in​​verse​​103.​​He​​cites​​with​​approval​​the​​famous​​traditionalist​ ​Ibn​ ​al-Mubarak​ ​(d.​ ​181/797;​​Rahimahullah)​​who​​said,​​‘​Surely​​unity​​is​​God’s​​rope;​​therefore​​hold​ ​fast​​all​​together​​to​​‘its​​firm​​handle​’​​(see​​Qur’an​​2:256).’​​Qurtubi​​adds​​that​​‘God​​enjoins​​concord​​and​ ​forbids dissension, for in disunity is perdition, and in unity salvation.’​ ​Qurtubi​​offers​​two​​possible​​interpretations​​of​​the​​phrase​​‘And​​be​​not​​divided’:​​‘Be​​not​​divided​​in​​your​ ​religion​ ​as​ ​were​ ​the​ ​Jews​ ​and​ ​Christians​ ​divided​ ​in​ ​their​ ​religions’​ ​and​ ​‘Be​ ​not​ ​divided​ ​in​ ​following​ ​70​ ​WHO ARE THE AHL AS-SUNNAH WAL JAMA’AH?​ ​different​​false​​opinions​​and​​purposes.​​Rather,​​be​​brothers​​in​​God’s​​religion.’​​As​​a​​jurist,​​Qurtubi​​observes​ ​that,​​‘There​​is​​no​​indication​​in​​this​​verse​​of​​the​​prohibition​​of​​disagreement​​in​​the​​branches​​(​furu’​)​​[of​ ​fiqh​]​​as​​this​​in​​reality​​is​​not​​dissension.​​This​​is​​because​​true​​dissention​​is​​one​​wherein​​concord​​and​​unity​ ​become​​virtually​​impossible.​​As​​for​​disagreement​​in​​judgements​​based​​on​​personal​​effort​​(​ijtihad​),​​it​​is​ ​due​​to​​differences​​in​​deducing​​obligations​​(​fara’id​)​​and​​the​​minutiae​​of​​law.’​​On​​page​​279,​​Imam​​al-Razi​ ​(d.​​606/1210;​​Rahimahullah)​​was​​quoted​​as​​saying​​in​​conclusion​​to​​his​​commentary​​on​​the​​above​​ayat:​​‘If​ ​a​​person​​going​​down​​into​​a​​well​​must​​hold​​fast​​to​​a​​rope​​in​​order​​that​​he​​may​​not​​fall​​in,​​so​​also​​the​​Book​ ​of​​God,​​His​​covenant,​​religion​​and​​obedience​​to​​Him,​​as​​well​​as​​unity​​and​​harmony​​among​​the​​people​​of​ ​faith are means of security for anyone who holds fast to them from falling into the bottom of Hell.’”​ ​(2) Surah Ali Imran (3:105):​ ​“And be not like those who separated and disputed after the clear proofs had come unto them: For​ ​such there is an awful doom.”​ ​(3) Surah Ali Imran (3:110):​ ​“Ye are the best community that has been raised up for mankind. Ye enjoin the good and forbid the​ ​evil; and ye believe in Allah”​ ​(4) Surah Al-An’am (6:159):​ ​“As for those who divide their religion and break up into sects, thou have no part in them in the least:​ ​Their affair is with Allah. He will in the end tell them the truth of all that they did.”​ ​(5) Surah Al-Mu’minun (23:52-53):​ ​“And verily this Ummah of yours is a single Ummah and I am your Lord, so keep your duty unto Me.​ ​But they have broken their religion among them into sects, each sect rejoicing in its tenets.”​ ​(6) Surah Al-Rum (30:32):​ ​“Those who split up their Religion, and become Sects, each sect exulting in its tenets.”​ ​(7) Surah Al-Nisa (4:115):​ ​“He that disobeys the Apostle (Muhammad) after guidance has been made clear to him and follows a​ ​way other than that of the believers, We appoint for him that unto which he himself hath turned, and​ ​expose him unto Hell - a hapless journey’s end!”​ ​(8) Surah Al-An’am (6:153):​ ​“This is My Straight path, so follow it. Follow not other ways, lest ye be parted from His way. This has​ ​he ordained for you, that ye may ward off (evil).”​ ​71​ ​WHO ARE THE AHL AS-SUNNAH WAL JAMA’AH?​ ​HADITH EVIDENCE​ ​(1)​​Imam​​Abu​​Dawood​​(Rahimahullah)​​has​​quoted​​the​​well​​known​​Hadith​​concerning​​the​​division​​of​​the​ ​Muslim​ ​Ummah​ ​into​ ​seventy-three​ ​sects​ ​in​ ​his​ ​Sunan​​(3/4580,​​English​​ed’n):​​Abu​​Amir​​al-Hawdhani​ ​said,​​“Mu-awiyah​​ibn​​Abi​​Sufyan​​(may​​Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​him)​​stood​​among​​us​​and​​said,​​‘Beware!​​The​ ​Apostle​​of​​Allah​​(may​​peace​​be​​upon​​him)​​stood​​among​​us​​and​​said’:​​‘Beware!​​The​​People​​of​​the​​Book​ ​before​​(you)​​were​​split​​up​​into​​72​​sects,​​and​​this​​community​​will​​be​​split​​up​​into​​73,​​seventy-two​​of​ ​them​ ​will​ ​go​ ​to​​Hell​​and​​one​​of​​them​​will​​go​​to​​Paradise,​​and​​it​​is​​the​​majority​​group​​(Jama’ah).’​ ​Another​​version​​of​​the​​above​​Hadith​​has​​been​​reported​​by​​Hafiz​​Ibn​​Kathir​​(Rahimahullah)​​in​​The​​signs​ ​before​​the​​day​​of​​Judgement​​(pg.​​14):​​“Awf​​ibn​​Malik​​reported​​that​​the​​Prophet​​(Peace​​be​​upon​​him)​ ​said,​​‘The​​Jews​​split​​into​​71​​sects:​​one​​will​​enter​​Paradise​​and​​70​​will​​enter​​Hell.​​The​​Christians​​split​ ​into​​72​​sects:​​71​​will​​enter​​Hell​​and​​one​​will​​enter​​Paradise.​​By​​Him​​in​​Whose​​hand​​is​​my​​soul,​​my​ ​Ummah​​will​​split​​into​​73​​sects:​​one​​will​​enter​​Paradise​​and​​72​​will​​enter​​Hell.’​​Someone​​asked,​​‘O​ ​Messenger​ ​of​ ​Allah​ ​(Peace​ ​be​ ​upon​ ​him),​ ​who​ ​will​ ​they​ ​be?’​ ​He​ ​replied,​ ​‘The​ ​main​ ​body​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Muslims​ ​(al-Jama’ah).’​ ​Awf​ ​ibn​ ​Malik​ ​is​ ​the​ ​only​ ​one​ ​who​ ​reported​ ​this​ ​Hadith,​ ​and​ ​its​ ​isnad​ ​is​ ​acceptable.”​​And​​in​​another​​version​​of​​this​​Hadith​​the​​Prophet​​(Peace​​be​​upon​​him)​​goes​​on​​to​​say​​that​​the​ ​saved sect, “​...Are those who follow my and my Sahaba’s​​path​” (Tirmidhi, vol. 2, pg. 89)​ ​Shaykh​​al-Islam​​Ahmad​​al-Sirhindi​​(d.​​1034/1624;​​Rahimahullah)​​who​​is​​regarded​​by​​many​​people​ ​in​​the​​Indian​​sub-continent​​as​​a​​great​​renovator​​of​​the​​Tenth​​Islamic​​Century​​(Mujaddid​​alf​​Thani)​​wrote​​in​ ​his​​Maktubat​​(Vol.​​3,​​Letter​​38):​​“It​​was​​declared​​in​​a​​Hadith​​that​​this​​Ummah​​would​​part​​into​​73​​groups,​ ​72​​of​​which​​would​​go​​to​​Hell.​​This​​Hadith​​informs​​us​​that​​the​​72​​groups​​will​​be​​tormented​​in​​the​​Fire​​of​ ​Hell.​​It​​does​​not​​inform​​us​​that​​they​​will​​remain​​in​​torment​​eternally.​​Remaining​​in​​the​​torment​​of​​Hell​ ​Fire​​eternally​​is​​for​​those​​who​​do​​not​​have​​Iman.​​That​​is,​​it​​is​​for​​disbelievers.​​The​​72​​groups,​​on​​account​ ​of​​their​​corrupt​​beliefs,​​will​​go​​to​​Hell​​and​​will​​burn​​as​​much​​as​​the​​corruptness​​of​​their​​beliefs.​​One​ ​group,​​the​​73rd,​​will​​be​​saved​​from​​Hell​​Fire​​because​​their​​belief​​is​​not​​corrupt.​​If​​among​​the​​members​​of​ ​this​​one​​group​​there​​are​​those​​who​​committed​​evil​​deeds​​and​​if​​these​​evil​​deeds​​of​​theirs​​have​​not​​been​ ​forgiven​​through​​repentance​​or​​intercession,​​it​​is​​possible​​that​​these,​​too,​​will​​burn​​in​​Hell​​as​​much​​as​ ​their​​sins.​​All​​of​​those​​who​​are​​in​​the​​72​​groups​​will​​go​​to​​Hell.​​But​​none​​of​​them​​will​​remain​​in​​Hell​ ​eternally.​ ​Not​ ​all​ ​of​ ​those​ ​who​ ​are​ ​in​ ​this​ ​one​ ​group​ ​will​ ​go​ ​to​ ​Hell.​ ​Of​ ​these​ ​only​ ​those​ ​who​ ​have​ ​committed​​evil​​deeds​​will​​go​​to​​Hell.​​The​​72​​reported​​groups​​of​​Bid’ah,​​which​​will​​go​​to​​Hell,​​should​​not​ ​be​​called​​disbelievers,​​because​​they​​are​​Ahl​​al-Qibla​​(people​​of​​the​​Qibla​​in​​prayer).​​But,​​of​​these,​​the​ ​ones​ ​who​ ​disbelieve​ ​those​ ​facts​ ​in​ ​the​​Deen​​that​​are​​indispensably​​required​​to​​be​​believed,​​as​​well​​as​ ​those​​who​​deny​​the​​rules​​of​​the​​Shari’ah​​which​​every​​Muslim​​has​​heard​​and​​knows,​​become​​disbelievers.”​ ​In​ ​another​ ​letter​ ​(vol.​​1,​​letter​​80)​​he​​said:​​“​There​​is​​no​​doubt​​whatsoever​​that​​the​​sect​​that​​made​ ​conforming​ ​to​ ​the​ ​conduct​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Prophet’s​ ​Companions​ ​(may​​Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​them​​all)​ ​necessary, that alone is the Ahl as Sunnah wal Jama’ah​.”​ ​Shaykh​​Abdal​​Qadir​​al-Jilani​​(d.​​561/1166;​​Rahimahullah)​​stated​​in​​his​​commentary​​to​​the​​above​ ​Hadith​ ​in​ ​Ghunyat​ ​at-Talibin​ ​(pg.​ ​90),​ ​“The​ ​Believer​ ​should​ ​adapt​ ​himself​ ​to​ ​the​ ​Sunnah​ ​and​ ​to​ ​the​ ​Jama’ah.​​The​​Sunnah​​is​​the​​way​​shown​​by​​Rasulullah​​(Peace​​be​​upon​​him).​​The​​Jama’ah​​is​​composed​​of​ ​the​ ​things​ ​done​ ​unanimously​ ​by​ ​the​ ​Sahaba​ ​al-Kiram​ ​who​ ​lived​ ​in​ ​the​ ​time​ ​of​​the​​four​​caliphs​​called​ ​Khulafa’​​ar-Rashidin​​(and​​others​​in​​their​​path).​​A​​Muslim​​must​​prevent​​the​​multiplication​​of​​the​​men​​of​ ​bid’ah​​and​​keep​​away​​from​​them,​​and​​should​​not​​greet​​them​​(as​​given​​in​​many​​Hadith​​on​​this​​issue).​​Ahmad​ ​ibn​​Hanbal​​(rahimahullah),​​the​​Imam​​of​​our​​Madhhab,​​said​​that​​greeting​​a​​man​​of​​bid’ah​​meant​​loving​​him​ ​since​​it​​had​​been​​declared​​in​​a​​Hadith,​​“Disseminate​​(your)​​greeting​​(salaam)!​​Love​​one​​another​​in​​this​ ​way!”​ ​He​ ​also​ ​said​ ​(pg.​ ​143):​ ​“​The​​title,​​Ahl​​as-Sunnah,​​which​​the​​innovators​​have​​expressed​​for​ ​themselves is not appropriate for them​.”​ ​72​ ​WHO ARE THE AHL AS-SUNNAH WAL JAMA’AH?​ ​Although​​Ibn​​Taymiyya​​was​​accused​​of​​holding​​certain​​corrupt​​points​​in​​his​​Aqeedah,​​which​​led​​so​ ​many​​scholars​​to​​denounce​​him​​for​​his​​heresy,​​he​​nevertheless​​hit​​the​​right​​point​​when​​he​​described​​those​ ​who​ ​are​ ​the​ ​real​ ​Sunnis​ ​in​ ​his​ ​Aqeedat-il-Wasitiyyah​ ​(pg.​ ​154):​ ​“Their​​creed​​is​​the​​religion​​of​​Islam​ ​which​​was​​sent​​to​​the​​world​​by​​Allah​​through​​the​​Prophet​​(Peace​​be​​upon​​him).​​But​​the​​Prophet​​(Peace​​be​ ​upon​​him)​​said,​​‘My​​Ummah​​will​​get​​divided​​into​​73​​sects​​and​​each​​one​​will​​go​​to​​Hell​​save​​one​​and​​that​ ​one​​is​​the​​Jama’at.’​​Also​​in​​one​​Hadith​​he​​said,​​‘They​​are​​those​​people​​who​​will​​follow​​this​​path​​which​​I​ ​and​​my​​Sahaba​​follow​​today.’​​Therefore​​they​​have​​caught​​hold​​of​​Islam​​unalloyed​​from​​every​​adulteration​ ​and​​these​​are​​the​​people​​of​​Ahl​​as-Sunnah​​Wal​​Jama’ah.​​This​​group​​includes​​the​​truthful,​​the​​martyrs​ ​and​​the​​virtuous;​​it​​includes​​the​​minarets​​of​​guidance,​​lamps​​in​​the​​darkness​​and​​owners​​of​​such​ ​superiorities​​and​​virtues​​who​​have​​been​​already​​mentioned.​​It​​includes​​the​​saints​​and​​also​​those​ ​Imams​ ​on​ ​whose​ ​guidance​ ​Muslims​ ​are​ ​unanimous.​ ​It​ ​is​ ​this​ ​successful​ ​group​ ​about​ ​which​ ​the​ ​Prophet​​(Peace​​be​​upon​​him)​​has​​said:​​‘One​​group​​from​​my​​Ummah​​will​​always​​remain​​dominant​​with​ ​truth; the opponents will never be able to harm its members or afflict them up to the Doomsday.’”​ ​(2)​ ​Imam​​Muslim​​(Rahimahullah)​​has​​collected​​a​​number​​of​​variant​​Hadith​​on​​the​​saved​​sect.​​He​​has​ ​related​​a​​longer​​version​​of​​the​​last​​Hadith​​quoted​​above:​​“Abdal​​Rahman​​ibn​​Shamasa​​al-Mahri​​said:​​‘I​​was​ ​in​​the​​company​​of​​Maslama​​bin​​Mukhallad​​and​​Abdullah​​ibn​​Amr​​ibn​​al-Aas​​(may​​Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​ ​them).’​​Abdullah​​said,​​‘The​​Hour​​shall​​come​​only​​when​​the​​worst​​type​​of​​people​​are​​left​​on​​the​​earth.​ ​They​ ​will​ ​be​ ​worse​ ​than​​the​​people​​of​​pre-Islamic​​days.​​They​​will​​get​​whatever​​they​​ask​​of​​Allah.’​ ​While​​we​​were​​sitting,​​Uqba​​ibn​​Amir​​came,​​and​​Maslama​​said​​to​​him,​​‘Uqba,​​listen​​to​​what​​Abdullah​ ​says.’​​Uqba​​said,​​‘He​​knows,​​so​​far​​as​​I​​am​​concerned,​​I​​heard​​the​​Prophet​​(Peace​​be​​upon​​him)​​say:​​A​ ​group​ ​of​ ​people​ ​from​ ​my​ ​Ummah​ ​will​ ​continue​ ​to​ ​fight​ ​in​ ​obedience​ ​to​ ​the​ ​Command​ ​of​ ​Allah,​ ​remaining​ ​dominant​ ​over​ ​their​ ​enemies.​ ​Those​ ​who​ ​will​​oppose​​them​​shall​​not​​do​​them​​any​​harm.​ ​They​​will​​remain​​in​​this​​condition​​until​​the​​Hour​​overtakes​​them.​’​​(At​​this)​​Abdullah​​said,​​‘Yes.​​Then​ ​Allah​​will​​raise​​a​​wind​​which​​will​​be​​fragrant​​like​​musk​​and​​whose​​touch​​will​​be​​like​​the​​touch​​of​​silk;​ ​(but)​​it​​will​​cause​​the​​death​​of​​all​​(faithful)​​persons,​​not​​leaving​​behind​​a​​single​​person​​with​​an​​iota​​of​ ​faith​​in​​his​​heart.​​Then​​only​​the​​worst​​of​​men​​will​​remain​​to​​be​​overwhelmed​​by​​the​​Hour.’”​​(​Sahih​ ​Muslim​, 3/4721, English ed’n, see also​​Sahih al-Bukhari​,​​9/414, English ed’n)​ ​Imam​​Nawawi​​(d.​​676/1277,​​Rahimahullah)​​said​​in​​his​​Sharh​​Muslim​​(vol.​​2,​​pg.​​143):​​“​The​​group​ ​of​ ​people​ ​(mentioned​ ​in​ ​the​ ​above​ ​Hadith)​ ​consists​ ​of​ ​scholars,​ ​jurisprudents,​ ​authorities​ ​on​ ​Hadith,​​those​​who​​enjoin​​Good​​(Maroof)​​and​​forbid​​Evil​​(Munkar)​​and​​all​​such​​persons​​who​​do​ ​good deeds. Such righteous persons may be found spread all over the world.​”​ ​Imam​​al-Tirmidhi​​(Rahimahullah)​​said:​​“The​​explanation​​of​​al-Jama’ah​​according​​to​​the​​people​​of​ ​knowledge:​​They​​are​​the​​people​​of​​Fiqh,​​knowledge​​and​​Hadith​.”​​(​Sunan​​al-Tirmidhi​,​​4/2167;​​Ahmad​ ​Shakir ed’n)​ ​Imam​​Bukhari​​(Rahimahullah)​​stated​​in​​his​​Sahih​​(vol.​​9,​​chapter.​​10,​​English​​ed’n),​​“The​​statement​ ​of​​the​​Prophet​​(Peace​​be​​upon​​him):​​‘A​​group​​of​​my​​followers​​will​​remain​​victorious​​in​​their​​struggle​​in​ ​the cause of the Truth.’​​Those are the religious(ly)​​learned men (Ahl ul-Ilm)​.”​ ​Imam​​Ahmad​​ibn​​Hanbal​​(Rahimahullah)​​said​​about​​this​​group:​​“​If​​it​​is​​not​​the​​people​​of​​Hadith,​ ​then​​I​​do​​not​​know​​who​​they​​may​​be​.”​​(​Sahih​​Muslim​​Sharif-Mukhtasar​​Sharh​​Nawawi,​​vol.​​5,​​pg.​ ​183, W. Zaman​)​ ​Qadi​ ​Iyad​ ​(Rahimahullah)​ ​said​ ​in​ ​ash-Shifa​ ​(pg.​ ​188):​ ​“In​ ​a​​Hadith​​from​​Abu​​Umama​​(Allah​​be​ ​pleased​ ​with​ ​him),​ ​the​ ​Prophet​ ​(Peace​ ​be​ ​upon​ ​him)​ ​said,​ ​‘A​ ​group​ ​of​ ​my​ ​community​ ​will​ ​remain​ ​constant​​to​​the​​truth,​​conquering​​their​​enemy​​until​​the​​command​​of​​Allah​​comes​​to​​them​​while​​they​​are​ ​still​​in​​that​​condition.’​​He​​was​​asked,​​Messenger​​of​​Allah​​(Peace​​be​​upon​​him),​​where​​are​​they?’​​He​ ​replied, ‘In Jerusalem.’”​ ​73​ ​WHO ARE THE AHL AS-SUNNAH WAL JAMA’AH?​ ​(3)​ ​Imam​ ​Muslim​ ​(Rahimahullah)​ ​has​ ​related​ ​in​ ​his​ ​Sahih​ ​(3/4553)​ ​under​ ​the​ ​chapter​ ​heading​ ​‘Instruction​​to​​stick​​to​​the​​main​​body​​of​​the​​Muslims​​in​​the​​time​​of​​the​​trials​​and​​warning​​against​ ​those​​inviting​​people​​to​​disbelief​’,​​a​​Hadith​​on​​the​​authority​​of​​Hudhaifa​​ibn​​al-Yaman​​(Allah​​be​​pleased​ ​with​​him),​​who​​said:​​“‘People​​used​​to​​ask​​the​​Messenger​​of​​Allah​​(may​​peace​​be​​upon​​him)​​about​​the​ ​good​ ​times,​ ​but​ ​I​ ​used​ ​to​ ​ask​ ​him​ ​about​ ​(the)​ ​bad​ ​times​ ​fearing​ ​lest​ ​they​ ​overtake​ ​me.​ ​I​ ​said,​ ​Messenger​​of​​Allah,​​we​​were​​in​​the​​midst​​of​​ignorance​​and​​evil,​​and​​then​​God​​brought​​us​​this​​good​ ​(time​​through​​Islam).​​Is​​there​​any​​bad​​time​​after​​this​​good​​one?”​​He​​said,​​‘Yes’.​​I​​asked,​​‘Will​​there​​be​ ​a​​good​​time​​again​​after​​that​​bad​​time?’​​He​​said,​​‘Yes,​​but​​therein​​will​​be​​a​​hidden​​evil.’​​I​​asked,​​‘What​ ​will​​be​​the​​evil​​hidden​​therein?’​​He​​said,​​(That​​time​​will​​witness​​the​​rise​​of)​​people​​who​​will​​adopt​ ​ways​​other​​than​​mine​​and​​seek​​guidance​​other​​than​​mine.​​You​​will​​know​​good​​points​​as​​well​​as​​bad​ ​points.’​​I​​asked,​​‘Will​​there​​be​​a​​bad​​time​​after​​this​​good​​one?’​​He​​said,​​‘Yes.​​(A​​time​​will​​come)​​when​ ​there​​will​​be​​people​​standing​​and​​inviting​​at​​the​​gates​​of​​Hell.​​Who​​so​​responds​​to​​their​​call,​​they​​will​ ​throw​​them​​into​​the​​fire.’​​I​​said,​​‘Messenger​​of​​Allah​​(Peace​​be​​upon​​him),​​describe​​them​​for​​us.’​​He​ ​said,​ ​‘All​ ​right.​ ​They​ ​will​ ​be​ ​a​ ​people​ ​having​ ​the​ ​same​ ​complexion​ ​as​ ​ours​ ​and​ ​speaking​ ​our​ ​language.’​​I​​said,​​‘Messenger​​of​​Allah​​(Peace​​be​​upon​​him),​​what​​do​​you​​suggest​​if​​I​​happen​​to​​live​​in​ ​their​​time?'​​He​​said,​​‘You​​should​​stick​​to​​the​​main​​body​​of​​the​​Muslims​​and​​their​​leader.’​​I​​said,​​‘If​ ​they​​have​​no​​(such​​thing​​as​​the)​​main​​body​​of​​the​​Muslims​​and​​have​​no​​leader?’​​He​​said,​​‘Separate​ ​yourself​​from​​all​​these​​factions,​​though​​you​​may​​have​​to​​eat​​the​​roots​​of​​trees​​until​​death​​comes​​to​​you​ ​and​​you​​are​​in​​this​​state.’”​​(NB-​​It​​is​​not​​likely​​that​​there​​will​​be​​an​​absence​​of​​a​​Jama’ah,​​since​​I​​have​ ​already​ ​quoted​ ​the​ ​Prophet,​ ​peace​ ​be​ ​upon​ ​him,​ ​as​ ​saying:​ ​‘A​ ​group​ ​of​ ​people​ ​from​​my​​Ummah​​will​ ​continue​​to​​fight​​in​​obedience​​to​​the​​command​​of​​Allah,​​remaining​​dominant​​over​​their​​enemies.​​Those​ ​who​ ​will​ ​oppose​ ​them​ ​shall​ ​not​ ​do​ ​them​ ​any​ ​harm.​ ​They​ ​will​ ​remain​ ​in​​this​​condition​​until​​the​​Hour​ ​overtakes them.’)​ ​(4)​​Abu​​Hurayra​​(Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​him)​​reported​​the​​Messenger​​of​​Allah​​(Peace​​be​​upon​​him)​​as​ ​saying:​​“​Who​​(ever)​​defected​​from​​the​​obedience​​(to​​the​​Amir)​​and​​separated​​from​​the​​main​​body​​of​ ​the​​Muslims​​-​​then​​he​​died​​in​​that​​state​​-​​would​​die​​the​​death​​of​​one​​belonging​​to​​the​​days​​of​​Jahiliyya​ ​(pre-Islamic​​ignorance).​​And​​he​​who​​is​​killed​​under​​the​​banner​​of​​a​​man​​who​​is​​blind​​(to​​the​​cause​​for​ ​which​ ​he​ ​is​ ​fighting),​ ​who​ ​gets​ ​flared​ ​up​ ​with​ ​family​ ​pride​ ​and​ ​fights​ ​for​ ​his​ ​tribe​ ​-​ ​is​ ​not​ ​from​​my​ ​Ummah,​​and​​who​​so​​from​​my​​followers​​attacks​​my​​followers​​(indiscriminately)​​killing​​the​​righteous​​and​ ​the​​wicked​​of​​them,​​sparing​​not​​(even)​​those​​staunch​​in​​faith​​and​​fulfilling​​not​​his​​obligation​​towards​​them​ ​who​​have​​been​​given​​a​​pledge​​(of​​security),​​is​​not​​from​​me.”​​(​Sahih​​Muslim​,​​3/4557​​&​​4555;​​English​ ​ed’n)​ ​Imam​​al-Bayhaqi​​(d.​​458/1066;​​Rahimahullah)​​stated​​in​​his:​​The​​Seventy-Seven​​Branches​​of​​Faith​ ​(pg.​ ​42-3),​​under​​the​​fiftieth​​branch​​of​​faith​​(50​​-​​Holding​​firmly​​to​​the​​position​​of​​the​​majority):​ ​“God​​Most​​High​​has​​said:​​Hold​​fast,​​all​​together,​​to​​the​​rope​​of​​God,​​and​​do​​not​​be​​disunited.​​[3:103].​ ​Muslim​ ​(Rahimahullah)​ ​relates​ ​on​ ​the​ ​authority​ ​of​ ​Abu​ ​Hurayra​ ​(Allah​ ​be​ ​pleased​​with​​him)​​that​​the​ ​Prophet​​(Peace​​be​​upon​​him)​​said,​​‘Whoever​​is​​disobedient,​​and​​departs​​from​​the​​majority,​​and​​then​ ​dies,​ ​has​ ​died​ ​in​ ​a​ ​state​ ​of​ ​Jahiliyya.’​ ​He​ ​also​ ​relates​ ​the​ ​following​ ​Hadith​ ​on​ ​the​ ​authority​ ​of​​Ibn​ ​Shurayh​​(Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​him):​​‘After​​I​​am​​gone,​​there​​will​​come​​days​​of​​corruption​​and​​turmoil.​ ​When​​you​​see​​people​​damaging​​the​​unity​​of​​the​​Community​​of​​Muhammad​​(Peace​​be​​upon​​him),​​you​ ​must​​fight​​them,​​whoever​​they​​may​​happen​​to​​be.’​​Abdal​​Hakim​​Murad​​(the​​translator​​of​​the​​above​​book)​ ​said​​in​​the​​footnote​​to​​the​​fiftieth​​branch​​of​​faith:​​‘Orthodoxy​​in​​Islam​​is​​defined​​as​​the​​doctrine​​of​ ​ahl​​al-sunna​​wal​​jama’a​,​​the​​People​​of​​the​​Sunna​​and​​the​​Community.​​To​​know​​whether​​a​​doctrine​ ​or​​practise​​is​​orthodox​​or​​heretical,​​the​​Muslim​​is​​required​​to​​find​​out​​whether​​it​​is​​recognised​ ​by​​the​​majority​​of​​Muslim​​scholars​​(see​​later​​for​​Imam​​al-Munawi’s​​commentary).​​Thus​​even​​without​ ​looking​​into​​their​​theology,​​he​​will​​know​​that​​sects​​such​​as​​the​​Isma’ilis,​​the​​Kharijis,​​the​​Wahhabis,​​the​ ​74​ ​WHO ARE THE AHL AS-SUNNAH WAL JAMA’AH?​ ​Twelver​​Shi’a​​and​​others​​(not​​to​​mention​​anti-Islamic​​groupings​​such​​as​​the​​Ahmadiya​​and​​the​​Bahais)​​are​ ​to be repudiated.’”​ ​(5)​​Ibn​​Abbas​​(Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​him)​​reported​​the​​Prophet​​(Peace​​be​​upon​​him)​​as​​saying:​​“One​​who​ ​found​​in​​his​​Amir​​(the​​ruler​​of​​the​​true​​Islamic​​state;​​which​​is​​absent​​today)​​something​​which​​he​​disliked​ ​should​​hold​​his​​patience,​​for​​one​​who​​separated​​from​​the​​main​​body​​of​​the​​Muslims​​even​​to​​the​​extent​ ​of​​a​​handspan​​and​​then​​he​​died,​​would​​die​​the​​death​​of​​one​​belonging​​to​​the​​days​​of​​Jahiliyya.​”​​(​Sahih​ ​Muslim​, 3/4559; English ed’n &​​Sahih al-Bukhari​, 9/257;​​English ed’n)​ ​(6)​​Imams​​Ahmad​​and​​Abu​​Dawood​​(Allah’s​​mercy​​be​​upon​​them)​​said​​that​​Abu​​Dharr​​(Allah​​be​​pleased​ ​with​​him)​​reported​​the​​Prophet​​(Peace​​be​​upon​​him)​​as​​saying:​​“He​​who​​separates​​from​​the​​main​​body​ ​(of​​the​​Ummah)​​by​​even​​a​​hand’s​​breadth​​from​​the​​Community​​he​​throws​​off​​Islam​​from​​his​​neck.”​ ​(​Mishkat-ul-Masabih​, 1/185 &​​Sunan Abu Dawood​, 3/4740)​ ​NB​-The​ ​following​ ​five​ ​Hadith​ ​have​ ​been​ ​mentioned​ ​by​ ​the​ ​great​ ​scholars​ ​of​ ​Hadith,​ ​Hafiz​ ​Abd​ ​al-Rahman​​ibn​​al-Jawzi​​(d.​​597/1201;​​Rahimahullah)​​in​​his​​Talbis​​Iblis​​(section​​entitled:​​Adherence​​to​ ​the​​Sunnah​​and​​Jama’ah).​​A​​section​​of​​the​​above​​work​​has​​been​​translated​​by​​Abu​​Ameenah​​Bilal​​Philips​ ​into​ ​English,​ ​under​ ​the​ ​title:​ ​The​ ​Devil’s​ ​Deception​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Shee’ah​ ​(pp.​ ​4-5).​ ​Bilal​ ​Philips​ ​has​ ​put​ ​footnotes​​to​​the​​five​​Hadith​​that​​I​​will​​be​​quoting​​below​​(to​​declare​​some​​of​​the​​Hadith​​to​​be​​Da’eef),​​but​ ​one​ ​thing​ ​that​ ​should​ ​be​ ​mentioned​ ​is​ ​that​ ​he​ ​has​ ​mainly​ ​relied​ ​upon​​al-Albani’s​​classification​​of​​the​ ​Hadiths​​in​​question;​​hence​​these​​‘classifications’​​of​​al-Albani​​need​​re-verifying!​​I​​say​​this​​because​​it​​is​​a​ ​well​​known​​fact​​that​​Hafiz​​Ibn​​al-Jawzi​​was​​noted​​for​​his​​exceptional​​stringency​​in​​accepting​​Hadith,​​and​ ​he​ ​has​ ​been​ ​known​ ​to​ ​have​ ​declared​ ​some​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Hadith​ ​in​ ​Bukhari/Muslim​ ​to​ ​be​ ​Da’eef,​ ​as​ ​well​​as​ ​declaring​​some​​sound​​Hadith​​to​​be​​fabricated!​​Nevertheless,​​I​​would​​like​​to​​make​​it​​clear​​to​​those​​readers​ ​who​ ​are​ ​unaware​ ​of​ ​the​ ​status​ ​of​ ​Bilal​ ​Philips,​ ​that​ ​he​ ​has​ ​heavily​​depended​​on​​the​​classifications​​of​ ​al-Albani​​in​​most​​of​​his​​books!​​If​​the​​esteemed​​reader​​is​​convinced​​that​​the​​errors​​of​​al-Albani​​are​​most​ ​apparent,​​then​​one​​should​​beware​​of​​the​​status​​of​​those​​Hadiths​​that​​have​​been​​used​​by​​Bilal​​Philips​​(on​ ​account​​of​​his​​accepting​​al-Albani’s​​classifications).​​Bilal​​Philips​​seems​​to​​be​​a​​leading​​critic​​of​​Taqleed​ ​who​ ​has​ ​been​ ​swept​ ​away​ ​by​ ​the​ ​tide​ ​of​ ​modern​ ​day​ ​“Salafiyyism”;​ ​and​​it​​seems​​that​​he​​has​​‘blindly’​ ​accepted​​the​​classifications​​of​​al-Albani​​without​​himself​​reverifying​​al-Albani’s​​classifications!​​I​​ask​​you,​ ​is​ ​this​ ​not​ ​a​ ​clear​ ​cut​ ​example​ ​of​ ​Taqleed?​ ​If​ ​it​ ​has​ ​been​ ​proven​ ​that​ ​al-Albani’s​ ​classifications​ ​are​ ​unreliable,​​would​​it​​not​​be​​just​​for​​Bilal​​Philips​​to​​re-verify​​all​​the​​Hadiths​​that​​have​​been​​authenticated​​by​ ​al-Albani and correct any misclassifications in his books? Allah knows best.​ ​(7)​ ​'Umar​ ​(Allah​ ​be​ ​pleased​ ​with​ ​him)​ ​reported​ ​that​ ​on​ ​one​ ​occasion​ ​Allah’s​ ​Messenger​ ​(Peace​​and​ ​blessings​ ​be​ ​upon​ ​him)​ ​stood​ ​up​ ​among​ ​them​ ​and​ ​said,​ ​“Whoever​ ​among​ ​you​ ​desires​ ​the​ ​centre​ ​of​ ​paradise​​should​​keep​​close​​to​​the​​Jama’ah​​for​​the​​Devil​​closely​​accompanies​​the​​solitary​​individual​ ​and is more distant from two.”​​(Collected by​​Imam​​Tirmidhi​)​ ​(8)​​And​​‘Arfajah​​(Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​him)​​reported​​(Allah’s​​Messenger,​​peace​​be​​upon​​him,​​as​​saying):​ ​“that​ ​Allah’s​ ​hand​ ​is​ ​over​ ​the​​Jama’ah​​and​​the​​Devil​​is​​with​​whoever​​deviates​​from​​the​​Jama’ah​.”​ ​(Collected by​​Imam al-Tabarani​)​ ​(9)​​‘Abdullah​​(ibn​​Masood;​​Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​him)​​reported​​that​​once​​Allah’s​​Messenger​​(Peace​​be​ ​upon​​him)​​drew​​a​​line​​in​​the​​dust​​with​​his​​hand​​and​​said,​​“​This​​is​​the​​straight​​path​​of​​Allah.​”​​Then​​he​​drew​ ​a​​series​​of​​lines​​to​​the​​right​​of​​it​​and​​to​​the​​left​​and​​said,​​“​Each​​of​​these​​paths​​has​​a​​devil​​at​​its​​head​ ​inviting​​people​​to​​it.​”​​He​​then​​recited​​(Qur’an​​6:153),​​“Verily​​this​​is​​my​​straight​​path​​so​​follow​​it​​and​​do​ ​75​ ​WHO ARE THE AHL AS-SUNNAH WAL JAMA’AH?​ ​not​ ​follow​ ​the​ ​(twisted)​ ​paths.”​ ​(Collected​ ​by​ ​Ahmad​,​ ​Nisai​ ​and​ ​Darimi​,​ ​see​ ​Mishkat​ ​u-Masabih​,​ ​1/166)​ ​(10)​​Mu’adh​​ibn​​Jabal​​(Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​him)​​reported​​that​​Allah’s​​Messenger​​(Peace​​be​​upon​​him)​ ​said,​​“The​​Devil​​is​​like​​a​​wolf​​among​​humans​​as​​a​​wolf​​is​​among​​sheep;​​it​​snatches​​the​​stray​​sheep.​​So​ ​beware​ ​of​ ​the​ ​paths​ ​which​ ​branch​ ​off​ ​and​ ​adhere​ ​to​ ​the​ ​Jama’ah,​ ​the​ ​masses​ ​and​ ​the​ ​masjid.”​ ​(Collected​​by​​Imam​​Ahmad​;​​NB-​​The​​version​​given​​in​​Mishkat​,​​1/184,​​also​​on​​the​​authority​​of​​Imam​ ​Ahmad does not have the addition ‘the masses and the masjid.’)​ ​(11)​​And​​Abu​​Dharr​​(Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​him)​​reported​​from​​the​​Prophet​​(Peace​​be​​upon​​him)​​that,​ ​“Two​​are​​better​​than​​one,​​and​​three​​better​​than​​two;​​so​​stick​​to​​the​​Jama’ah​​for​​verily​​Allah,​​Most​ ​Great and Glorious, will only unite my nation on guidance.”​​(Collected by​​Ahmad​)​ ​(12)​​Al-Harith​​al-Ashari​​(Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​him)​​reported​​that​​the​​Messenger​​of​​Allah​​(Peace​​be​ ​upon​​him)​​said:​​“I​​bid​​you​​to​​do​​five​​things:​​to​​remain​​attached​​to​​the​​main​​body​​Jama’ah​​of​​Muslims),​ ​listen​​to​​your​​ruler​​(the​​Khalif​​of​​the​​Islamic​​state)​​and​​obey​​him,​​and​​migrate,​​and​​fight​​in​​the​​way​​of​ ​Allah.​​And​​he​​who​​detaches​​himself​​from​​the​​main​​body​​of​​the​​Muslims​​(Jama’ah)​​to​​the​​extent​​of​​one​ ​span​​of​​hand,​​he​​in​​fact,​​throws​​off​​the​​yoke​​of​​Islam​​from​​his​​neck,​​and​​he​​who​​calls​​with​​the​​call​​of​ ​ignorance,​​he​​is​​one​​from​​the​​denizens​​of​​Hell​​beyond​​doubt,​​even​​if​​he​​observes​​fast​​and​​says​​prayers​ ​and​​considers​​himself​​as​​a​​Muslim.”​​(​Musnad​​Ahmad​,​​vide:​​Selection​​from​​Hadith​,​​no.​​288;​​by​​A.H.​ ​Siddique)​ ​(13)​​Ibn​​Umar​​(Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​him)​​reported​​Allah’s​​Messenger​​(Peace​​be​​upon​​him)​​as​​saying:​ ​“Follow​​the​​great​​mass​​(as-Sawad​​al-Azam)​​for​​he​​who​​kept​​himself​​away​​from​​it,​​in​​fact​​would​​be​ ​thrown​ ​in​ ​Hell​ ​Fire.”​ ​(​Ibn​ ​Majah​,​ ​vide:​ ​Mishkat​,​ ​1/174,​ ​by​ ​A.H.​ ​Siddiqui).​ ​The​ ​translator​ ​of​ ​Mishkat-ul-Masabih​​(A.H.​​Siddiqui,​​pg.​​113)​​said​​in​​the​​footnote​​to​​the​​last​​Hadith:​​“There​​is​​a​​good​​deal​ ​of​​difference​​of​​opinion​​as​​to​​what​​the​​term​​Sawad​​al-Azam​​implies.​​The​​overwhelming​​majority​​of​​the​ ​scholars​​are​​of​​the​​view​​that​​As-Sawad​​al-Azam​​means​​the​​largest​​group​​of​​the​​learned​​scholars​ ​and pious persons whose opinions are held in high esteem in Islam.”​ ​(14)​​Imam​​al-Shafi’i​​(Rahimahullah)​​said​​in​​his​​Risala​​(pg.​​252-3):​​“Sufyan​​(ibn​​Uyayna)​​told​​us​​from​ ​Abd​​al-Malik​​ibn​​Umayr​​from​​Abdal-Rahman​​ibn​​Abd​​Allah​​ibn​​Masood​​from​​his​​father,​​that​​the​​Prophet​ ​(Peace​​be​​upon​​him)​​said,​​‘God​​will​​grant​​prosperity​​to​​His​​servant​​who​​hears​​my​​words,​​remembers​ ​them,​​guards​​them,​​and​​hands​​them​​on.​​Many​​a​​transmitter​​of​​law​​is​​no​​lawyer​​(faqih)​​himself,​​and​ ​many​​may​​transmit​​law​​to​​others​​who​​are​​more​​versed​​in​​the​​law​​than​​they.​​The​​heart​​of​​a​​Mushim​ ​shall​ ​never​ ​harbour​​vindictive​​feelings​​against​​three:​​sincerity​​in​​working​​for​​God;​​faithfulness​​to​ ​Muslims;​ ​and​ ​conformity​ ​to​ ​the​ ​community​ ​of​ ​believers​ ​(Jama’ah)​ ​-​ ​their​ ​call​ ​shall​ ​protect​ ​(the​ ​believers)​​and​​guard​​them​​from​​(the​​Devil’s)​​delusion.’​”​​(vide:​​Sunan​​al-Darimi​,​​vol.​​1,​​pp.​​74-6;​​Ibn​ ​Hanbal​,​​vol.​​6,​​pg.96;​​Musnad​​al-Shafi’i​,​​vol.​​1,​​pg.​​16;​​Mishkat-ul-Masabih​,​​1/228;​​and​​al-Bayhaqi​​in​ ​his​​al-Madkhal​).​​Imam​​al-Shafi’i​​said​​(pg.​​253):​​“The​​Apostle’s​​(Peace​​be​​upon​​him)​​order​​that​​men​ ​should​ ​follow​ ​the​ ​Muslim​ ​community​ ​is​ ​proof​ ​that​ ​the​ ​Ijma​ ​(consensus)​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Muslims​ ​is​ ​binding.”​ ​(15)​​Imam​​al-Shafi’i​​(Rahimahullah)​​stated​​in​​al-Risala​​(pg.​​286-7):​​“And​​Sufyan​​(also)​​told​​us​​from​ ​‘Abd​​Allah​​ibn​​Abi​​Labid​​from​​‘Abd​​Allah​​ibn​​Sulayman​​ibn​​Yasar​​from​​his​​father,​​who​​said:​​‘Umar​​ibn​ ​al-Khattab​​(Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​him)​​made​​a​​speech​​at​​al-Jabiya​​in​​which​​he​​said:​​The​​Apostle​​of​​God​ ​(Peace​​be​​upon​​him)​​stood​​among​​us​​by​​an​​order​​from​​God,​​as​​I​​am​​now​​standing​​among​​you,​​and​​said:​ ​‘Believe​ ​my​ ​Companions,​ ​then​ ​those​ ​who​ ​succeed​ ​them​​(the​​Successors),​​and​​after​​that​​those​​who​ ​76​ ​WHO ARE THE AHL AS-SUNNAH WAL JAMA’AH?​ ​succeed​​the​​Successors;​​but​​after​​them​​untruthfulness​​will​​prevail​​when​​people​​will​​swear​​(in​​support​ ​of​ ​their​ ​saying)​ ​without​ ​having​ ​been​​asked​​to​​swear,​​and​​will​​testify​​without​​having​​been​​asked​​to​ ​testify.​ ​Only​ ​those​ ​who​ ​seek​ ​the​ ​pleasure​ ​of​ ​Paradise​ ​will​ ​follow​ ​the​ ​community,​​for​​the​​devil​​can​ ​pursue​​one​​person,​​but​​stands​​far​​away​​from​​two.​​Let​​no​​man​​be​​alone​​with​​a​​woman,​​for​​the​​devil​​will​ ​be​ ​third​ ​among​ ​them.​ ​He​ ​who​ ​is​ ​happy​ ​with​ ​his​ ​right​ ​(behaviour),​ ​or​ ​unhappy​ ​with​ ​his​ ​wrong​ ​behaviour,​​is​​a​​(true)​​believer.’​”​​(see​​also​​Musnad​​al​​Shafi’i​​vol.​​2,​​pg.​​187;​​and​​Ibn​​Hanbal​​vol.​​1,​​pg.​ ​112-13,​​176-81).​​Imam​​al-Shafi’i​​said​​in​​conclusion​​to​​this​​Hadith:​​“He​​who​​holds​​what​​the​​Muslim​ ​community​ ​(Jama’ah)​ ​holds​ ​shall​ ​be​ ​regarded​ ​as​ ​following​ ​the​ ​community,​ ​and​ ​he​ ​who​ ​holds​ ​differently​​shall​​be​​regarded​​as​​opposing​​the​​community​​he​​was​​ordered​​to​​follow.​​So​​the​​error​​comes​ ​from​​separation;​​but​​in​​the​​community​​as​​a​​whole​​there​​is​​no​​error​​concerning​​the​​meaning​​of​​the​ ​Qur’an, the Sunnah, and analogy (qiyas).”​ ​(16)​ ​Imam​ ​Hakim​ ​(1/116)​ ​has​ ​related​ ​a​ ​Sahih​ ​Hadith​ ​from​ ​the​ ​Prophet​ ​(Peace​ ​be​ ​upon​ ​him)​​in​​the​ ​following words:​​“My Ummah shall not agree upon error.”​ ​(17)​ ​Imam​ ​al-Tirmidhi​ ​(4/2167)​ ​reported​ ​on​ ​the​ ​authority​​of​​Ibn​​Umar​​(Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​him)​ ​from​​the​​Prophet​​(Allah​​bless​​him​​and​​give​​him​​peace),​​who​​said:​​“Verily​​my​​Ummah​​would​​not​​agree​ ​(or​ ​he​ ​said​ ​the​ ​Ummah​ ​of​ ​Muhammad)​ ​would​ ​not​ ​agree​ ​upon​ ​error​​and​​Allah’s​​hand​​is​​over​​the​ ​group and whoever dissents from them departs to Hell.”​​(see also​​Mishkat​, 1/173)​ ​Imam​​al-Azizi​​(d.​​1070/1660;​​Rahimahullah)​​quoted​​Imam​​al-Munawi’s​​(d.​​1031/1622;​​Rahimahullah)​ ​commentary to the last Hadith in his​​al-Siraj al-munir​​sharh al-jami al-saghir​​(3.449), as follows:-​ ​Allah’s hand is over the group​ ​(al-Azizi:)​ ​Munawi​ ​says,​ ​“​Meaning​ ​his​ ​protection​ ​and​ ​preservation​ ​of​ ​them,​ ​signifying​ ​that​ ​the​ ​collectivity​​of​​the​​people​​of​​Islam​​are​​in​​Allah’s​​fold,​​so​​be​​also​​in​​Allah’s​​shelter,​​in​​the​​midst​​of​ ​them,​​and​​do​​not​​separate​​yourselves​​from​​them.​”​​The​​rest​​of​​the​​Hadith,​​according​​to​​the​​one​​who​ ​first recorded it (Tirmidhi), is:-​ ​and whoever descents from them departs to hell.​ ​Meaning​​that​​whoever​​diverges​​from​​the​​overwhelming​​majority​​concerning​​what​​is​​lawful​​or​ ​unlawful​​and​​on​​which​​the​​Community​​does​​not​​differ​​has​​slipped​​off​​the​​path​​of​​guidance​​and​​this​ ​will lead him to hell.​” (vide:​​The Reliance of the​​Traveller​, pg. 25)​ ​Some Anthropomorphic points from the neo - “Salafi”​ ​Aqeedah​ ​I​​had​​promised​​earlier​​to​​show​​you​​some​​examples​​of​​the​​anthropomorphic​​nature​​of​​the​​neo-‘Salafite’​ ​Aqeedah,​​and​​how​​it​​varies​​from​​the​​actual​​Aqeedah​​transmitted​​to​​us​​by​​the​​earliest​​generations​​of​​the​ ​Muslim​ ​Ummah.​ ​I​ ​have​ ​indicated​ ​earlier​ ​that​ ​the​ ​“Salafiyya”​ ​of​ ​today​ ​claim​ ​to​ ​have​ ​the​ ​original​ ​and​ ​pristine​​Aqeedah​​of​​the​​first​​three​​pious​​generations​​of​​Islam;​​but​​in​​reality​​it​​is​​the​​Aqeedah​​of​​the​​likes​ ​of​ ​Ibn​ ​Taymiyya​ ​and​ ​his​ ​disciple​ ​Ibn​ ​al-Qayyim​ ​al-Jawziyyah​ ​when​ ​it​ ​comes​ ​to​ ​describing​ ​Allah’s​ ​attributes​​and​​soon.​​The​​following​​four​​points​​have​​been​​derived​​directly​​from​​the​​works​​of​​the​​“Salafi”​ ​scholars​​(al-Harras​​and​​al-Uthaimin)​​themselves.​​In​​comparison​​to​​these​​points​​I​​have​​also​​quoted​​from​ ​the​​Aqeedah​​of​​Imam​​Abu​​Ja’far​​al-Tahawi​​(d.​​321​​AH;​​Rahimahullah)​​and​​others​​for​​you​​to​​compare​​and​ ​77​ ​WHO ARE THE AHL AS-SUNNAH WAL JAMA’AH?​ ​contrast.​​Imam​​Tahawi’s​​Aqeedah​​represents​​the​​Aqeedah​​as​​transmitted​​by​​the​​scholars​​of​​his​​Madhhab​ ​(which​​represents​​in​​the​​main​​the​​Aqeedah​​of​​the​​Salaf​​as-Salihin)​​-​​Imam​​al-Azam​​Abu​​Hanifah,​​Imam​ ​Abu​ ​Yusoof​ ​and​​Imam​​al-Shaybani​​(Allah’s​​mercy​​be​​upon​​them)​​-​​three​​of​​the​​greatest​​Ahl​​as-Sunnah​ ​scholars.​ ​(1) The vision of Allah in the Hereafter​ ​Imam​​al-Tahawi​​(Rahimahullah)​​said​​with​​regard​​to​​this​​issue​​in​​al-Aqeedah​​at-Tahaweeah​​(English​ ​trans.​​by​​I.A.​​A’zami,​​under​​the​​title​​‘Islamic​​Belief’​),​​[no.​​37]:​​“​Belief​​of​​a​​man​​in​​the​​‘seeing​​of​​Allah​ ​by​ ​the​ ​people​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Garden’​ ​is​ ​not​ ​correct​ ​if​ ​he​ ​imagines​ ​what​ ​it​ ​is​ ​like,​ ​or​ ​interprets​ ​it​ ​according​​to​​his​​own​​understanding​,​​since​​the​​interpretation​​of​​this​​‘seeing’​​or​​indeed,​​the​​meaning​​of​ ​any​​subtle​​phenomena​​which​​are​​in​​the​​realm​​of​​Lordship,​​is​​by​​avoiding​​its​​interpretation​​and​​strictly​ ​adhering​​to​​the​​submission.​​This​​is​​the​​din​​of​​Muslims,​​Anyone​​who​​does​​not​​guard​​himself​​against​ ​negating​ ​the​ ​attributes​ ​of​ ​Allah,​ ​or​ ​likening​ ​Allah​​to​​something​​else​​(anthropomorphism),​​has​ ​gone​ ​astray​ ​and​ ​has​ ​failed​ ​to​ ​understand​ ​Allah’s​ ​glory​,​ ​because​ ​our​ ​Lord,​ ​the​ ​Glorified​ ​and​ ​the​ ​Exalted,​​can​​only​​possibly​​be​​described​​in​​terms​​of​​Oneness​​and​​Absolute​​Singularity​​and​​no​​creation​​is​​in​ ​any way like Him.”​ ​In​ ​contrast,​ ​Muhammad​ ​Khalil​ ​Harras​ ​(a​ ​‘Salafi’​ ​scholar)​ ​said​ ​in​ ​his​ ​Sharh-ul-Aqeedat-il-Wasiliyyah​​(of​​Ibn​​Taymiyya,​​pg.​​73)​​:​​“The​​Mutazila​​deny​​the​​vision.​​This​​denial​​is​ ​based​​on​​refusing​​to​​accept​​Allah​​in​​any​​direction​​for​​it​​is​​necessary​​for​​a​​thing​​being​​seen​​to​​be​​in​​the​ ​direction​​of​​the​​seer..​”​​Thus,​​al-Harras​​claims​​that​​for​​Allah​​to​​be​​seen​​in​​the​​Hereafter,​​He​​(Allah)​​must​ ​have​ ​a​ ​direction!!​ ​In​ ​comparison,​ ​Imam​ ​al-Shahrastani​​(d.​​1153​​CE;​​Rahimahullah)​​said​​in​​his​​Kitab​ ​al-Milal​​wal​​Nihal​​(​Muslim​​Sects​​and​​Divisions​,​​trans.​​by​​A.K.​​Kazi​​and​​J.G.​​Flynn,​​pg.​​85):​​“Ash’ari​ ​(Rahimahullah)​​says,​​however,​​that​​the​​vision​​of​​God​​does​​not​​entail​​direction,​​place,​​form,​​or​​face​​to​​face​ ​encounter either by impingement of rays or by impression, all of which are impossible.”​ ​(2) The speech of Allah​ ​Imam​​al-Tahawi​​(Rahimahullah)​​said:​​“The​​Qur’an​​is​​the​​word​​of​​Allah.​​It​​came​​from​​him​​as​​speech​ ​without​​it​​being​​possible​​to​​say​​how...​​(next​​paragraph):​​It​​is​​not​​created,​​as​​is​​the​​speech​​of​​human​ ​beings,​​and​​anyone​​who​​hears​​it​​and​​claims​​that​​it​​is​​human​​speech​​has​​become​​an​​unbeliever.​​Allah​​warns​ ​him​​and​​censures​​him​​and​​threatens​​him​​with​​Fire​​when​​He​​says,​​Exalted​​is​​He:​​‘I​​will​​Burn​​him​​in​​the​ ​Fire.’​ ​(​al-Muddaththir​ ​74:26)​ ​When​ ​Allah​ ​threatens​ ​with​ ​the​ ​Fire​ ​those​ ​who​ ​say​ ​‘This​​is​​just​​human​ ​speech’​​(​al-Muddaththir​​74:25)​​we​​know​​for​​certain​​that​​it​​is​​the​​speech​​of​​the​​Creator​​of​​mankind​ ​and that it is totally unlike the speech of mankind​.”​ ​In​ ​contrast​ ​al-Harras​ ​stated​ ​in​ ​Sharh-ul-aqeedat-il-wasitiyyah​ ​of​ ​Ibn​ ​Taymiyya​ ​(pg.​ ​87):​ ​“​His​ ​statement,​​voice​​and​​speech​​take​​place​​with​​letters​​and​​sounds​.​​One​​to​​whom​​He​​(i.e.​​Allah)​​speaks​ ​he​ ​hears.​ ​This​ ​includes​ ​the​ ​refutation​ ​of​ ​the​ ​stand​ ​taken​ ​by​ ​the​ ​Asharia​ ​(e.g.​ ​Imam​ ​al-Ghazali,​ ​Rahimahullah,​ ​in​ ​his​ ​Ihya​ ​‘ulum​ ​al-din​)​ ​that​ ​the​ ​speech​ ​of​ ​Allah​ ​is​ ​primeval​ ​and​ ​is​ ​without​​letter​​or​ ​sound.”​​NB-​​Imam​​ibn​​Tahir​​al-Baghdadi​​(d.​​429/1037;​​Rahimahullah)​​said​​with​​regards​​to​​this​​issue:​ ​“Another​​group​​(of​​anthropomorphists)​​is​​represented​​by​​those​​who​​draw​​a​​resemblance​​between​​God’s​ ​Word​​and​​the​​word​​of​​his​​creatures.​​They​​hold​​that​​God’s​​speech​​consists​​of​​sounds​​and​​letters​​belonging​ ​to​ ​the​ ​same​ ​species​ ​as​ ​the​ ​sounds​ ​and​ ​letters​ ​which​ ​are​ ​ascribed​ ​to​ ​mankind.”​ ​(vide:​ ​al-Farq​ ​bayn​ ​al-firaq​, English trans. by A. Halkin: as​​Moslem Schisms​​and Sects​, vol. 2, pg. 35)​ ​(3) Allah’s hands​ ​78​ ​WHO ARE THE AHL AS-SUNNAH WAL JAMA’AH?​ ​Al-Harras​​stated​​without​​any​​definite​​proof​​(pg.​​44,​​above​​reference):​​“How​​can​​‘hand’​​be​​interpreted​ ​to​​mean​​power​​when​​the​​text​​proves​​mentioning​​of​​palm,​​fingers,​​right​​and​​left,​​closing,​​opening​,​​etc.​ ​which can happen only in the case of a real hand.”​ ​Imam​​al-Tahawi​​said​​(no.​​34):​​“Anyone​​who​​describes​​Allah​​as​​being​​in​​any​​way​​the​​same​​as​​a​​human​ ​being​​has​​become​​an​​unbeliever.​​All​​those​​who​​grasp​​this​​will​​take​​heed​​and​​refrain​​from​​saying​​things​ ​such as the unbelievers say, and they will know that He, in His attributes, is not like human beings.”​ ​(4) Allah’s establishment on the Throne​ ​Imam​ ​Malik​ ​(Rahimahullah)​ ​was​ ​asked​ ​about​ ​Allah’s​ ​establishment​ ​on​ ​the​ ​Throne;​ ​he​ ​said:​ ​“​Establishment​ ​(Istiwa)​ ​is​ ​known,​ ​the​ ​how​ ​of​ ​it​ ​is​ ​unknown,​ ​belief​ ​in​ ​it​ ​is​ ​obligatory,​ ​and​ ​questions​​about​​it​​are​​a​​reprehensible​​innovation​​(bid’ah)​.”​​(see​​The​​Reliance​​of​​the​​Traveller​,​​pg.​ ​854).​​In​​contrast,​​Muhammad​​as-Saleh​​al-‘Uthaimin​​(a​​leading​​‘Saudi’​​scholar)​​said​​in​​The​​Muslim’s​ ​Belief​ ​(pg.​​11,​​this​​work​​was​​heard​​and​​approved​​by​​the​​foremost​​‘Saudi’​​Mufti​​-​​Abdal​​Aziz​​ibn​​Ba’z,​ ​trans.​​M.H.​​al-Johani):​​“‘His​​(Allah’s)​​settling​​on​​the​​Throne’​​means​​that​​He​​is​​sitting​​in​​person​​on​​his​ ​Throne​​in​​a​​way​​that​​is​​becoming​​His​​Majesty​​and​​greatness.​​Nobody​​except​​He​​knows​​exactly​​how​​He​​is​ ​sitting.”​ ​Imam​ ​al-Shahrastani​ ​(Rahimahullah)​ ​stated​ ​that​ ​the​ ​leader​ ​of​ ​the​ ​heretical​ ​sect​ ​called​ ​the​ ​Karramites​​-​​Abu​​Abdullah​​Muhammad​​ibn​​Karram​​declared:​​“God​​is​​firmly​​seated​​on​​the​​throne​​and​​that​ ​he​ ​is​ ​in​ ​person​ ​on​ ​the​ ​upper​ ​side​ ​of​ ​it…”​​(​Muslim​​Sects​​and​​Divisions​,​​pg.​​92,​​trans.​​A.​​Kazi​​and​​J.​ ​Flynn).​ ​Certain​​“Salafis”​​claim​​that​​the​​followers​​of​​Imam​​al-Ash’ari​​(Rahimahullah)​​deny​​Allah’s​​attributes.​ ​For​​example​​it​​was​​stated​​in​​the​​booklet​​A​​Brief​​Introduction​​to​​The​​Salafi​​Da’wah​​(by​​Jam’iat​​Ihyaa’​ ​Minhaaj​​Al-Sunnah​,​​pg.​​4):​​“He​​is​​not​​(i.e.​​the​​“Salafi”)​​of​​the​​Ash’ariyah​​who​​deny​​Allah’s​​attributes.”​ ​This​​by​​Allah​​is​​a​​gross​​slander​​against​​the​​Ash’aris​​and​​far​​from​​the​​truth.​​It​​is​​an​​undeniable​​fact​​that​​the​ ​foremost​​scholars​​of​​the​​Ahl​​as-Sunnah​​have​​been​​either​​Ash’aris​​or​​Maturidis​​(the​​difference​​between​ ​them​​is​​on​​some​​six​​minor​​points).​​It​​was​​also​​stated​​in​​the​​above​​named​​booklet​​(pg.​​3)​​after​​quoting​​the​ ​Hadith:​​“​My​​Ummah​​wilI​​not​​unite​​upon​​error.​​[Tirmidhee​​and​​Haakim​​-​​Saheeh]​​-​​It​​is​​not​​correct​​that​ ​this​ ​hadeeth​ ​refers​ ​to​ ​the​ ​people​ ​of​ ​later​ ​ages,​ ​since​ ​it​​was​​within​​the​​first​​three​​generations​​that​​the​ ​Ummah​​was​​free​​from​​divisions.​​The​​deviant​​sects​​separated​​themselves​​from​​the​​Jamaa’ah​​and​​from​​that​ ​time onwards there was disunity.”​ ​The​ ​above​ ​statement​ ​is​ ​factually​ ​incorrect,​​since​​it​​was​​not​​in​​the​​first​​three​​generations​​that​​the​ ​Ummah​ ​was​ ​free​ ​from​ ​divisions;​ ​but​ ​rather​ ​divisions​ ​arose​ ​during​ ​the​ ​time​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Sahabah!​ ​The​ ​first​ ​deviant​​sect​​that​​arose​​during​​the​​time​​of​​the​​Sahabah​​was​​the​​Khawarij​,​​followed​​by​​heresies​​like​​the​ ​Mu’tazilah​,​​Shi’ah​,​​Qadariyya​,​​Jabariyya​,​​Jahnuyya​…​​-​​in​​the​​first​​three​​generations​​of​​Islam.​​But​​we​ ​must​ ​not​ ​forget​ ​that​ ​the​ ​Ahl​ ​as-Sunnah​ ​wal​ ​Jama’ah​​were​​dominant​​at​​that​​time,​​in​​terms​​of​​scholarly​ ​numbers​​and​​the​​overwhelming​​majority​​of​​ordinary​​Muslims​​as​​well​​(as​​they​​have​​also​​been​​throughout​ ​Islamic​ ​history).​ ​As​ ​for​​the​​statement:​​“It​​is​​not​​correct​​that​​this​​hadeeth​​refers​​to​​the​​people​​of​​later​ ​ages”;​​then​​this​​is​​just​​one​​opinion​​out​​of​​many.​​But​​from​​the​​Hadith​​evidence​​that​​I​​have​​provided​​above​ ​(more​ ​than​ ​15​ ​Hadiths),​ ​certain​ ​scholars​ ​(of​ ​Usool​)​ ​have​ ​used​ ​it​ ​as​ ​proof​ ​in​ ​favour​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Ijma​ ​(consensus)​ ​of​ ​the​ ​scholars​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Saved​ ​sect​ ​after​ ​the​​first​​three​​generations​​of​​Islam​​if​​considered​ ​deeply​​(in​​fact​​the​​scholars​​have​​mentioned​​when​​there​​has​​been​​Ijma​​after​​the​​first​​three​​generations;​​this​ ​includes​​scholars​​like​​Ibn​​Taymiyya​​and​​Ibn​​Hazm​​al-Zahiri).​​It​​seems​​that​​to​​the​​“Salafis”​​(i.e.​​those​​who​ ​accept​ ​the​ ​contents​ ​of​ ​the​ ​above​ ​named​ ​booklet),​ ​the​ ​term​ ​‘Ummah’​ ​only​ ​refers​ ​to​ ​the​ ​first​ ​three​ ​generations!! But clearly Ummah refers to all Muslims in general; does it not?​ ​Besides,​​what​​further​​goes​​against​​the​​above​​view​​is​​what​​their​​scholar​​-​​Hafiz​​Ibn​​Taymiyya​​said:​​“The​ ​greater​​part​​of​​his​​collection​​(al-Bukhari)​​has​​been​​found​​to​​be​​of​​this​​kind​​(i.e.​​Sahih),​​and​​scholars​​have​ ​approved​​of​​them​​and​​accepted​​them,​​and​​the​​Ummah​​does​​not​​agree​​on​​something​​which​​is​​not​​true.​ ​If​​the​​hadeeth​​of​​the​​purchase​​of​​the​​camel​​were​​in​​reality​​false​​and​​the​​Ummah​​approved​​it,​​it​​would​​mean​ ​79​ ​WHO ARE THE AHL AS-SUNNAH WAL JAMA’AH?​ ​that​​they​​agreed​​on​​approving​​a​​thing​​which​​was​​in​​fact​​false.​​It​​would​​amount​​to​​a​​consensus​​(Ijma)​​on​ ​untruth,​​which​​is​​ruled​​out​.”​​(see​​An​​Introduction​​to​​the​​Principles​​of​​Tafseer​,​​pg.​​35,​​trans.​​M.A.H.​ ​Ansari).​​Also​​Hafiz​​Ibn​​Kathir​​said:​​“​Muslims​​are​​assured​​of​​divine​​protection​​from​​error​​so​​long​ ​as​​they​​are​​united​​(e.g.​​when​​there​​is​​Ijma​​of​​the​​scholars).​​It​​was​​feared​​that​​they​​would​​fall​​into​​disunity​ ​and​​dissension,​​as​​this​​community​​has​​been​​indeed​​divided​​into​​73​​sects,​​only​​one​​of​​which​​is​​destined​​to​ ​salvation​​from​​the​​torments​​of​​the​​Fire.​​It​​is​​that​​party​​which​​has​​remained​​true​​to​​the​​way​​of​​the​​Prophet​ ​(Peace​​be​​upon​​him)​​and​​his​​Companions​​(Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​them).”​​(​Tafsir​​ibn​​Kathir​,​​vol.​​2,​​pp.​ ​83-4).​ ​The​​following​​is​​a​​defence​​of​​the​​Ash’ari​​school​​by​​one​​of​​the​​foremost​​scholars​​of​​Hadith​​and​​Fiqh​​in​ ​Makkah at the moment -​​Sayyid Muhammad Alawi al-Maliki​​(may Allah reward him).​ ​80​ ​THE ASH’ARI SCHOOL​ ​THE ASH’ARI SCHOOL​ ​Shaykh​​Muhammad​​‘Alawi​​Maliki:​​“Many​​sons​​of​​Muslims​​are​​ignorant​​of​​the​​Ash’ari​​school,​​whom​​it​ ​represents,​ ​and​ ​its​ ​positions​ ​on​ ​the​ ​tenets​ ​of​ ​Islamic​ ​faith​ ​(aqeedah),​ ​and​ ​yet​ ​some​ ​of​ ​them​ ​are​ ​not​ ​god-fearing​ ​enough​ ​to​ ​refrain​ ​from​ ​accusing​ ​it​ ​of​ ​deviance,​ ​departure​​from​​the​​religion​​of​​Islam,​​and​ ​heresy​​about​​the​​attributes​​of​​Allah.​​This​​ignorance​​of​​the​​Ash’ari​​school​​is​​a​​cause​​of​​rendering​​the​​unity​ ​of​​Ahl​​al-Sunnah​​and​​dispersing​​its​​ranks.​​Some​​have​​gone​​so​​far​​as​​to​​consider​​the​​Ash’aris​​among​​the​ ​categories​​of​​heretical​​sects,​​though​​it​​is​​beyond​​me​​how​​believers​​can​​be​​linked​​with​​misbelievers,​​or​ ​how​ ​Sunni​ ​Muslims​ ​can​ ​be​ ​considered​ ​equal​ ​with​ ​the​ ​most​ ​extreme​ ​faction​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Mu’tazilites,​ ​the​ ​Jahmites.​ ​“Shall We deal with Muslims as We do criminals? How is it that you judge?” (Q. 68:35-36)​ ​The​ ​Ash’aris​ ​are​ ​the​ ​Imams​ ​of​ ​the​ ​distinguished​ ​figures​ ​of​ ​guidance​ ​among​ ​the​ ​scholars​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Muslims,​​whose​​knowledge​​has​​filled​​the​​world​​from​​east​​to​​west,​​and​​whom​​people​​have​​unanimously​ ​concurred​ ​upon​ ​their​ ​excellence,​ ​scholarship,​ ​and​ ​religiousness.​ ​They​ ​include​ ​the​ ​first​ ​rank​ ​of​ ​Sunni​ ​scholars​​and​​most​​brilliant​​of​​their​​luminaries,​​who​​stood​​in​​the​​face​​of​​the​​excesses​​committed​​by​​the​ ​Mu’tazilites,​ ​and​ ​who​ ​constitute​ ​whole​ ​sections​ ​of​ ​the​ ​foremost​ ​Imams​ ​of​ ​Hadith,​ ​Sacred​ ​Law,​ ​and​ ​Qur’anic​ ​exegesis.​ ​Shaykh​ ​al-Islam​ ​Ahmad​ ​ibn​ ​Hajar​ ​‘Asqalani​ ​(d.​ ​852/1449;​ ​Rahimahullah),​ ​the​ ​mentor​​of​​Hadith​​scholars​​and​​author​​of​​the​​book​​Fath​​al-Bari​​bi​​sharh​​Sahih​​al-Bukhari​,​​which​​not​​a​ ​single​​Islamic​​scholar​​can​​dispense​​with,​​was​​Ash’ari.​​The​​shaykh​​of​​the​​scholars​​of​​Sunni​​Islam,​​Imam​ ​Nawawi​​(d.​​676/1277;​​Rahimahullah),​​author​​of​​Sharh​​Sahih​​Muslim​​and​​many​​of​​other​​famous​​works,​ ​was​ ​Ash’ari.​ ​The​​master​​of​​Qur’anic​​exegetes,​​Imam​​Qurtubi​​(d.​​671/1273;​​Rahimahullah),​​author​​of​ ​al-Jami’​ ​li​ ​ahkam​ ​al-Qur’an​,​ ​was​ ​Ash’ari.​ ​Shaykh​ ​al-Islam​ ​Ibn​ ​Hajar​ ​Haytami​ ​(d.​ ​974/1567;​ ​Rahimahullah),​​who​​wrote​​al-Zawajur​​‘an​​iqtiraf​​al-kaba’ir​,​​was​​Ash’ari.​​The​​Shaykh​​of​​Sacred​​law​​and​ ​Hadith,​​the​​conclusively​​definitive​​Zakariyya​​Ansari​​(d.​​926/1520;​​Rahimahullah),​​was​​Ash’ari.​​Imam​ ​Abu​ ​Bakr​ ​Baqillani​ ​(d.​ ​403/1013;​ ​Rahimahullah);​ ​Imam​ ​‘Asqalani​;​ ​Imam​ ​Nasafi​ ​(d.​ ​710/1310;Rahimahullah);​​Imam​​Shirbini​​(d.​​977/1570;​​Rahimahullah);​​Abu​​Hayyan​​Tawhidi​,​​author​​of​ ​the​​Qur’anic​​commentary​​al-Bahr​​al-muhit​,​​Imam​​Ibn​​Juzayy​​(d.​​741/1340;​​Rahimahullah);​​author​​of​ ​al-Tashil​​li​​‘ulum​​al-Tanzil​,​​and​​others​​-​​all​​of​​these​​were​​Imams​​of​​the​​Ash’aris.​​If​​we​​wanted​​to​​name​​all​ ​of​​the​​top​​scholars​​of​​Hadith,​​Qur’anic​​exegesis,​​and​​Sacred​​Law​​who​​were​​Imams​​of​​the​​Ash’aris,​​we​ ​would​​be​​hard​​put​​to​​do​​so​​and​​require​​volumes​​merely​​to​​list​​these​​illustrious​​figures​​whose​​wisdom​​has​ ​filled​ ​the​ ​earth​ ​from​ ​east​ ​to​ ​west.​ ​And​ ​it​ ​is​ ​incumbent​ ​upon​ ​us​ ​to​ ​give​ ​credit​ ​where​ ​credit​ ​is​ ​due,​ ​recognizing​​the​​merit​​of​​those​​of​​knowledge​​and​​virtue​​who​​have​​served​​the​​Sacred​​Law​​of​​the​​Greatest​​of​ ​Messengers​ ​(Allah​ ​bless​ ​him​​and​​give​​him​​peace).​​What​​good​​is​​to​​be​​hoped​​for​​us​​if​​we​​impugn​​our​ ​foremost​ ​scholars​ ​and​​righteous​​forebears​​with​​charges​​of​​aberrancy​​and​​misguidance?​​Or​​how​​should​ ​Allah​​give​​us​​the​​benefit​​of​​their​​scholarship​​if​​we​​believe​​it​​is​​deviance​​and​​departure​​from​​the​​way​​of​ ​Islam?​​I​​ask​​you,​​is​​there​​a​​single​​Islamic​​scholar​​of​​the​​present​​day,​​among​​all​​the​​PhDs​​and​​geniuses,​ ​who​​has​​done​​what​​Ibn​​Hajar​​‘Asqalani​​or​​Imam​​Nawawi​​have,​​of​​the​​service​​rendered​​by​​these​​two​​noble​ ​Imams​​(Allah​​enfold​​them​​in​​His​​mercy​​and​​bliss)​​to​​the​​pure​​prophetic​​sunna?​​How​​should​​we​​charge​ ​them​​and​​all​​Ash’aris​​with​​aberrancy​​when​​it​​is​​we​​who​​are​​in​​need​​of​​their​​scholarship?​​Or​​how​​can​​we​ ​take​​knowledge​​from​​them​​if​​they​​were​​in​​error?​​For​​as​​Imam​​Zuhri​​[d.​​124/742;​​Allah​​have​​mercy​​on​ ​him] says,​​‘This knowledge is religion, so look well​​to whom you are taking your religion from.’​ ​Is​​it​​not​​sufficient​​for​​someone​​opposed​​to​​the​​Ash’aris​​to​​say,​​‘Allah​​have​​mercy​​on​​them,​​they​​use​ ​their​​reasoning​​(ijtihad)​​in​​figuratively​​interpreting​​the​​divine​​attributes,​​which​​it​​would​​have​​been​​fitter​ ​for​​them​​not​​to​​do’;​​instead​​of​​accusing​​them​​of​​deviance​​and​​misguidance,​​or​​displaying​​anger​​towards​ ​whoever​ ​considers​ ​them​ ​to​ ​be​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Sunni​ ​Community?​ ​If​ ​Imam​ ​Nawawi,​ ​‘Asqalani,​ ​Qurtubi,​ ​Baqillani,​ ​al-Fakhr​ ​al-Razi,​ ​Haytami,​ ​Zakariyyah​ ​Ansari,​ ​and​ ​others​ ​were​ ​not​​among​​the​​most​ ​brilliant scholars and illustrious geniuses, or of the Sunni Community, then who are the Sunnis?​ ​81​ ​THE ASH’ARI SCHOOL​ ​I​​sincerely​​entreat​​all​​who​​call​​others​​to​​this​​religion​​or​​who​​work​​in​​the​​field​​of​​propagating​​Islam​​to​ ​fear​ ​Allah​ ​respecting​ ​the​ ​honour​ ​of​ ​the​ ​Community​ ​of​ ​Muhammad​ ​(Allah​ ​bless​ ​and​ ​give​ ​him​​peace),​ ​especially​​its​​greatest​​sages​​and​​scholars​​in​​Sacred​​Law.​​For​​the​​Community​​of​​Muhammad​​(Allah​​bless​ ​him​​and​​give​​him​​peace)​​is​​possessed​​of​​goodness​​until​​the​​Final​​Hour,​​while​​we​​are​​bereft​​of​​any​​if​​we​ ​fail​​to​​acknowledge​​the​​worth​​and​​excellence​​of​​our​​learned.”​​(Mafahim​​yajibu​​an​​tusahhaha,​​38-40,​ ​see The Reliance of the traveller, W57.2, pg. 1009, trans. N. Keller)​ ​In​​conclusion,​​the​​Ahl​​as-Sunnah​​wal​​Jama’ah​​are​​the​​true​​followers​​of​​the​​Prophet​​(Peace​​be​​upon​ ​him)​​and​​his​​Companions​​(Allah​​be​​pleased​​with​​them​​all),​​followed​​by​​those​​who​​trod​​their​​path​​for​​the​ ​last​ ​1400​ ​years.​​It​​is​​in​​summary​​the​​followers​​of​​Imam​​Abul​​Hasan​​al-Ash’ari​​and​​Imam​​Abu​​Mansur​ ​al-Maturidi​​(Allah’s​​mercy​​be​​upon​​them)​​in​​Aqeedah,​​and​​this​​saved​​sect​​is​​represented​​by​​the​​adherents​ ​of​​one​​of​​the​​four​​schools​​-​​Hanafi,​​Maliki,​​Shafi’i​​and​​Hanbali​​only​​today.​​This​​is​​the​​sect​​which​​has​​had​ ​the​​largest​​following​​throughout​​Islamic​​history​​(as-Sawad​​al-A’zam)​​as​​confirmed​​by​​the​​Qur’anic​​and​ ​Ahadith​​based​​evidence​​I​​have​​provided​​in​​the​​previous​​pages.​​Insha’Allah​​it​​will​​remain​​dominant​​until​​the​ ​Hour is established.​ ​82​ ​CONCLUSION​ ​CONCLUSION​ ​By​​the​​will​​of​​Allah,​​it​​has​​been​​proven​​without​​a​​shadow​​of​​doubt​​that​​al-Albani​​has​​fallen​​into​​the​ ​abyss​​of​​contradictions,​​errors,​​misquotes​​and​​so​​on.​​Whether​​these​​blunders​​of​​his​​are​​due​​to​​a​​weak​ ​memory​​gained​​through​​old​​age,​​or​​otherwise,​​Allah​​alone​​knows​​best!​​We​​know​​that​​al-Albani​​sincerely​ ​admits​​on​​some​​occasions​​his​​errors​​in​​the​​classification​​of​​Hadith;​​and​​this​​is​​praiseworthy.​​For​​example,​ ​he​​admitted​​in​​Sifah​​salah​​an-Nabee​​(pg.​​28,​​footnote​​1)​​about​​the​​classification​​of​​a​​particular​​Hadith:​ ​“I​ ​used​ ​to​ ​declare​ ​this​ ​hadeeth​ ​hasan​ ​(good)​ ​in​ ​previous​ ​works,​ ​until​ ​I​ ​realised​ ​that​ ​I​ ​had​ ​been​ ​mistaken,​​because​​this​​hadeeth​​depends​​on​​Hanzalah​​al-Dawsi,​​who​​is​​da’eef,​​and​​I​​do​​not​​know​​how​ ​this​​was​​unknown​​to​​me;​​maybe​​I​​thought​​he​​was​​someone​​else.​​Anyway,​​praise​​is​​due​​to​​Allah​​who​ ​guided me to recognise my mistake, and that is why I hurried to correct it in print…”​ ​As​​far​​as​​I​​know​​at​​the​​time​​of​​writing​​this​​short​​exposition,​​al-Albani​​has​​not​​taken​​much​​heed​​to​ ​correct​ ​his​ ​errors​ ​let​ ​alone​ ​make​ ​aware​ ​to​ ​his​ ​readership​ ​his​ ​mistakes​ ​-​ ​as​ ​well​ ​as​ ​their​ ​necessary​ ​rectifications.​​I​​say​​this​​because​​even​​at​​the​​time​​of​​writing,​​his​​supporters​​in​​England​​are​​still​​quoting​​his​ ​“authentications”​​of​​Hadith​​in​​various​​books​​that​​have​​been​​translated​​into​​English.​​I​​have​​noticed​​quite​ ​surprisingly​​that​​most​​of​​his​​followers​​are​​still​​oblivious​​of​​the​​fact​​that​​Shaykh​​Saqqaf​​has​​publicised​ ​al-Albani’s​​errors;​​even​​though​​Shaykh​​Saqqaf’s​​books​​have​​been​​available​​in​​Jordan​​(and​​other​​countries)​ ​for more than two years!​ ​I​​sincerely​​entreat​​all​​serious​​seekers​​of​​the​​truth​​to​​beware​​of​​al-Albani’s​​“classifications”,​​“fatwas”​ ​and​ ​his​ ​extreme​ ​revilement​ ​towards​ ​the​ ​scholars​ ​and​ ​laity​ ​within​ ​the​ ​four​ ​schools​ ​of​ ​Islamic​ ​jurisprudence.​ ​This​ ​no​ ​doubt​ ​applies​ ​most​ ​strongly​ ​to​ ​those​ ​brothers​ ​and​ ​sisters​ ​who​ ​may​ ​have​ ​wholeheartedly​​relied​​on​​al-Albani’s​​classifications​​of​​Hadith​​by​​way​​of​​Taqleed;​​in​​their​​quest​​to​​adhere​ ​to​ ​the​ ​authentic​ ​Sunnah.​ ​It​ ​is​ ​always​ ​possible​ ​for​ ​criticism​ ​to​ ​be​ ​made​ ​by​ ​a​ ​group​ ​of​ ​people​ ​whose​ ​understanding​​is​​inadequate​​and​​who​​lack​​sufficient​​knowledge.​​But:​​“How​​many​​there​​are​​who​​find​​fault​ ​with​​a​​sound​​statement,​​while​​their​​trouble​​is​​due​​to​​faulty​​understanding!”​​We​​should​​all​​take​​heed​​of​​the​ ​Ayat:​​“Nay,​​but​​those​​who​​do​​wrong​​follow​​their​​own​​lusts​​without​​knowledge.​​Who​​is​​able​​to​​guide​​him​ ​whom Allah has sent astray? For such there are no helpers.”​​(Qur’an 30: 29)​ ​And​ ​my​ ​last​ ​word​ ​on​ ​this​ ​subject​ ​are​ ​in​ ​the​ ​words​ ​of​ ​Imam​ ​Muhammad​ ​ibn​ ​Sirin​ ​(d.​ ​110​ ​AH;​ ​Rahimahullah,​ ​vide:​ ​Mishkatul-Masabih,​ ​1/273,​ ​on​ ​the​ ​authority​ ​of​ ​Imam​ ​Muslim):​ ​“Verily​ ​this​ ​knowledge​ ​is​ ​the​ ​knowledge​ ​of​ ​religion.​ ​You​ ​must​ ​carefully​ ​see​ ​from​ ​whom​ ​you​​are​​receiving​​the​ ​knowledge of your religion.”​​The weak, meek, slave​​in need of Allah -​ ​Ahmed ibn Muhammad BSc (Hons), GRSC​ ​Shawwal/March 1414/1994​ ​England​ ​83​ ​BIBLIOGRAPHY​ ​(1) Al-Albani, M. N.​​Adaab Uz-Zufaaf​, Maktab al-Islami​​and Maktab al-Islamiyyah, Amman, 1409 AH.​ ​-​​Daeef al-Jami al-Saghir Wa Ziyadatuh​, Maktab​​al-Islami, Beirut, 3rd ed’n.​ ​-​​Ghayatul​​Maram​​Takhreej​​Ahadith​​al-Halal​​Wal​​Haram​,​​Maktab​​al-Islami,​​Beirut,​​3rd​​ed’n,​​1405​ ​AH.​ ​-​​Irwa al-Ghalil​, Maktab al-Islami, Beirut, 2nd​​ed’n, 1405 AH.​ ​-​​Mishkat Ul-Masabih​, Maktab al-Islami, Beirut,​​3rd ed’n, 1405 AH.​ ​-​​Sahih al-Jami al-Saghir wa Ziyadatuh​, Maktab​​al-Islami, Beirut, 3rd ed’n, 1402 AH.​ ​-​​Sahih al-Targhib wal Tarhib​, Maktab al-Islami,​​Beirut, 2nd ed’n, 1406 AH.​ ​-​​Sharh al-Aqeedah at-Tahaweeah​​(by Ibn Abi al-Izz),​​Maktab al-Islami, Beirut, 8th ed’n, 1404 AH.​ ​-​​Silsila al-Ahadith al-Daeefah​​(“​Daeefah​”) Maktab​​al-Islami, Beirut, vol. 1, 5th ed’n, 1405 AH.​ ​- “​Daeefah​”, Maktab al-Islami, Amman, vol. 2,​​2nd ed’n, 1404 AH.​ ​- “​Daeefah​”, Maktab al-Ma’rif, Riyadh, vol. 3​​and 4, 1st ed’n, 1408 AH.​ ​-​​Silsila​​al-Ahadith​​al-Sahihah​​(“​Sahihah​”),​​Maktab​​al-Islami,​​Beirut,​​vol.​​1​​and​​2,​​4th​​ed’n,​​1405​ ​AH.​ ​- “​Sahihah​”, Maktab al-Ma’rif, Riyadh, vol. 3,​​2nd ed’n, 1407 AH.​ ​- “​Sahihah​”, Maktab al-Islami, Amman, vol. 4,​​3rd ed’n, 1406 AH.​ ​-​​The Etiquettes of Marriage & Wedding​, Jam’iat​​Ihyaa’ Minhaaj Al- Sunnah, May 1992.​ ​-​​The​​Prophet’s​​Prayer​​described​​from​​the​​beginning​​to​​the​​end​​as​​though​​you​​see​​it​​(Sifah​​salah​ ​an-nabee)​, Trans. Hasan U. al-Haneef publications,​​1st ed’n, 1413/1993.​ ​(2) Asad, M.​​Sahih al-Bukhari​, Dar al-Andalus, 2nd​​ed’n, 1981.​ ​(3)​​Ayoub,​​M.​​M.​​The​​Qur’an​​and​​its​​interpreters​,​​vol.​​2:​​The​​House​​of​​Imran,​​State​​University​​of​​New​ ​York, 1992.​ ​(4)​​Bayhaqi - The Seventy Seven Branches of Faith​,​​Trans. Murad, A.H; The Quilliam Press, 1990.​ ​(5) Bukhari, al-Imam.​​Sahih al-Bukhari​, Eng. Trans.​​Khan, M.M; Dar al-Fikr, 9 vols.​ ​(6) Dawud, Abu.​​Sunan Abu Dawud​, Eng. Trans. Hasan,​​A. Sh. M. Ashraf Publishers, 1st ed’n, 1984.​ ​(7)​ ​Dhahabi,​ ​M.​ ​Siyar​ ​a’lam​ ​al-Nubala​,​ ​Ed.​ ​by​ ​Shu’ayb​ ​al-Arnaoot,​ ​Mu’assasa​ ​al-Risala,​ ​23​ ​vols,​ ​1401/1981.​ ​(8)Gibb, H.​​Ibn Battuta, Travels in Asia and Africa​,​​1929.​ ​(9)​​Harras,​​M.​​K.​​Sharh-ul-Aqeedat-il-Wasitiyyah​​-​​(of​​Ibn​​Taymiyya),​​Trans.​​Khan,​​M.R;​​Salafi​​Press,​ ​Varanasi, India, 1989.​ ​(10)​​Ibn​​Abdal​​Hadi,​​Uqud​​al-Durriyya​​min​​manaqib​​Shaykh​​al-Islam​​Ibn​​Taymiyya​,​​ed.​​al-Fiqi,​​M.​​H;​ ​Matba’at Hijazi, Cairo, 1938.​ ​(11) Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani,​​Bulugh al-Maram​, Trans.​​al-Selek, M. Dar al-Fikr, Beirut, 1993.​ ​-​​Durar​​al-kamina​​fi​​a’yan​​al-mi’a​​al-thamina​,​​ed.​​al-Haqq,​​M.​​S.J;​​Dar​​al-Kutub​​al-Haditha,​​Cairo,​ ​1966.​ ​84​ ​-​​Talkhis​​al-habir​​fi​​takhrij​​ahadith​​a-Rafi’i​​al-kabir​,​​4​​vols​​in​​2,​​Maktaba​​al-Kulliyyat​​al-Azhariyya,​ ​Cairo, 1399/1979.​ ​(12) Ibn Hajar al-Haytami,​​al-Ftawa al-Hadithiyya​,​​N.d. Dar al-Ma’rifa, Beirut.​ ​(13) Ibn al-Humam, K.​​Fath al-Qadir​, 10 vols. Mustafa​​al-Babi al-Halabi wa awladuhu, Cairo, 1389/1970.​ ​(14)​​Ibn​​al-Jawzee,​​The​​Devil’s​​Deception​​of​​the​​Shee’ah​,​​Eng.​​Trans.​​Philips,​​A.​​A.​​B;​​Almar​​Press,​​N.​ ​York.​ ​(15) Ibn Kathir,​​Tafsir al-Qur’an al-Azim​, 4 vols,​​Dar al-Ma’rifa, Beirut, 1983.​ ​-​​The Signs Before The Day of Judgement​, Dar​​al-Taqwa, London, 1991.​ ​(16)​​Ibn​​Naqib​​al-Misri,​​A.​​The​​Reliance​​of​​The​​Traveller​,​​Trans.​​Keller,​​N.​​H.​​M.​​Modern​​Printing​​Press,​ ​Dubai, 1991.​ ​(17)​ ​Ibn​ ​Rajab​ ​al-Hanbali,​ ​al-Dhayl​ ​ala-Tabaqat​ ​al-Hanabila​,​ ​ed.​ ​al-Fiqi,​ ​M.H.​ ​Cairo,​ ​Maktabat​ ​al-Sunnah, 1953.​ ​(18)​ ​Ibn​ ​Tahir​​al-Baghdadi,​​al-Farq​​bayn​​al-firaq​,​​(Moslem​​Schisms​​and​​Sects),​​vol.​​2,​​Trans.​​Halkin,​ ​A.S; Porcupine Press, Philadelphia.​ ​(19)​​Ibn​​Taymiyyah,​​A.​​An​​Introduction​​to​​the​​Principles​​of​​Tafseer​,​​Trans.​​Ansari,​​M.A.H,​​al-Hidaayah​ ​Publishers, 1414/1993.​ ​-​​Majmu​​Fatawa​​Shaykh​​al-Islam​,​​ed.​​Ibn​​Qasim,​​A.​​Rahman​​and​​Muhammad,​​Riyadh,​​39​​vols,​​1398​ ​AH.​ ​(20) Jilani, A. Q.​​Ghunyat at-Talibin​, al-Halabi press,​​Cairo, 3rd ed’n, 1956.​ ​(21) Kamali, M. H.​​Principles of Islamic Jurisprudence​,​​Islamic Texts society, 1991.​ ​(22)​​al-Khajnadee,​​M.​​S.​​M.​​Blind​​following​​of​​Madhhabs​,​​ed.​​Hilaalee,​​S.​​Trans.​​ibn​​Ronald​​Burbank,​​D.​ ​al-Hidaayah, 1993.​ ​(23) Lajpuri, A. R.​​Fatawa Rahimiyyah​, Trans. Quraishi,​​M. F, 3 vols, Maktaba Rahimiyyah, Gujarat, India.​ ​(24) Madrasa Arabia Islamia,​​Is Taraweeh 20 rakaats?​,​​Azadville, S. Africa.​ ​(25) Malik, Imam.​​al-Muwatta​, Trans. Tarjumana, A.​​and Johnson, Y. Diwan Press, 1982.​ ​(26) al-Munawi, A.R.​​Fayd al-Qadir sharh al-Jami as-Saghir​,​​Dar al-Ma’rifa, 6 vols, 1972.​ ​(27) Murabit, A. Q.​​Root Islamic Education​, 2nd ed’n.​​1993.​ ​(28) Muslim. Imam.​​Sahih Muslim​, Trans. Siddiqi, A.H.​​Kitab Bhavan, 4 vols, 7th ed’n, 1987.​ ​(29) Nawawi, Imam.​​Sahih Muslim bi Sharh al-Nawawi​,​​Dar al-Fikr, Beirut, 18 vols in 9, 1401/1981.​ ​85​ ​(30) Numani, S.​​Imam Abu Hanifa: Life and Work​, Trans.​​Hussain, M. H. Kitab Bhavan, 1st ed’n, 1988.​ ​(31) Philips, A. A. B.​​The Evolution of Fiqh​, Tawheed​​Publications, 2nd ed’n, 1990.​ ​(32) Qardawi, Y.​​Islamic Awakening Between Rejection​​and Extremism​, I. I. I. T, Publication.​ ​(33)​​Qur’an al-Karim​, Trans. Pickthall, M. and Ali,​​Y.​ ​(34)​ ​Sabiq,​ ​S.​ ​Fiqh​ ​us-Sunnah​,​ ​Trans.​ ​Dabas,​ ​M.​ ​S.and​ ​Zarabozo,​ ​J.M.​ ​ATP​ ​Publications,​ ​Vol.​ ​1,​ ​1405/1985.​ ​(35) Safadi, S.​​al-Wafi bi al-Wafayat​, ed. Abbas,​​I.​ ​(36) Sahnoon, Qadi.​​al-Muddawwanah al-Kubrah​, N.d.​ ​(37)​​Sakhawi,​​Imam.​​al-I’lan​,​​English​​trans.​​in​​A​​History​​of​​Muslim​​Historiography​,​​Trans.​​Rosenthal,​​F.​ ​2nd ed’n, Leiden, 1968.​ ​(38) al-Shafi’i, Imam.​​Risala​, Trans. Khadduri, M.​​Islamic Texts Society, 1987.​ ​(39)​ ​Shahrastani,​ ​M.​ ​Muslim​ ​Sects​ ​and​ ​Divisions​ ​(Kitab​ ​al-Milal​ ​wal-Nihal)​,​ ​Trans.​ ​Kazi,​ ​A.​ ​K.​ ​and​ ​Flynn, J. G. Kegan Paul Int; 1984.​ ​(40) Siddique, A. H.​​Selection from Hadith​, Islamic​​Book Publishers, Kuwait, 3rd ed’n, 1987.​ ​(41)Sirhindi, A.​​Maktubat Imam Rabbani​, Lahore, 3​​vols, 1964.​ ​(42) Subki, T.​​Tabaqat al-Shafiyya al-Kubra​, Matba’a​​Isa al-Babi al-Halabi, Cairo, 10 vols, 1383/1964.​ ​(43) Tabrizi, W.​​Mishkatul-Masabih​, Siddiqui, A.H.​​Islamic Publishers, Lahore, 2nd ed’n, 1980.​ ​(44) al-Tahawi, Imam.​​Islamic Belief​, Trans. A’zami,​​I.A. UK Islamic Academy, 1989.​ ​(45) al-Tirmidhi, Imam.​​Sunan al-Tirmidhi​, ed. Shakir,​​A.M. 5 vols, Makkah, N.d.​ ​(46) al-Uthaimin, M. S.​​The Muslim’s Belief​, Trans.​​al-Johani, M.H. 2nd ed’n, Saudi Arabia.​ ​(47)​ ​Zaman,​ ​W.​ ​Sahih​ ​Muslim​ ​sharif-Mukhtasar​ ​sharh​ ​Nawawi​,​ ​Khalid​ ​Ahsan​ ​Publishers,​ ​Lahore,​ ​Pakistan.​ ​(48) Zirikly, K. D.​​al-A’lam​, Dar al-Ilm li al-Milayin,​​Beirut, 8 vols, 1405/1984.​ ​86​