Imam-al-Azam – aur – Imam Bukhari ki Tarikh al Kabir


Refutation to Wahhabi Slanders using Imam Bukhari‘s qowl about Imam al Adham Abu Hanifa (rd) (Urdu)

 

Helpful link:

Usool e Hadith    

Text file for easy unicode can be downloaded from this folder

Or visit author’s fb note

 

Rough english translation added by Zarbehaq:

(2:30; PM Oct 30 2014)

Tarikh al Kabir-Imam Bukhari (rd)===Imam Abu Hanifa (Rd)

A fabricated hadith  and Lie upon Imam al Azam (Rd)

The given hadith (see arabic), in this hadith its said that, in this hadith Imam Abu Hanifa (rd) was called ‘Mushrik‘ (naudobillah). And some deviants insist that Imam Bukhari (Rd) called him ‘Polytheist

(Reference: Abu Jabar abdullah damanwi ahlu hadith, in his book al-deen al khalis , Part 2, Pg.163).

Refutation to this!

For refuting this accusation, the Imam Bukhari’s own neglection is enough, which expose the all slanders of (al-Wahhabiya) which they used against Imam al Azam (Rd). See!

Translation: Narrated by Muhammad bin Abi Hatim al waraaq says! that “I heard Imam Bukhari (rd) saying, that there will be no one who brawl with me, so I asked him, that some people condemn you, that you had written ‘Gheeba’ (backbiting). Imam Bukhari (rta) answered me that I only wrote ‘Rivayahs’ (narrations), I didnt add something from myself‘.

(Sayr a’lamal Nubula; ad-Dahbi, Vol 12, Page 441, Mosisatal Risala Br)

Although that hadith (narration) regarding Abu Hanifa (rd) is been mentioned through Hammad bin Abi Sulaiman, but specially reckoning it by the name of Abu Hanifa is mentioned by Zarar bin Sard.

Let us see what was his status among narrators of hadith and what do have the scholars of Ummah said about him!

Imam yahya bin m’aeen declared him (Ka’zaban bil’Koofa) (among the Liars of Kufa), he declare him kufia’n kazzab

(Rf: Mizan al Ai’tidal Vol 2, No 3951, Zarar bin sard)

Imam Na’sai said ( Laisa bi’thiqa) means, NOT AUTHENTIC.

Husain bin muhammad al qababi, says ‘This zarar bin sard was been rejected’. (i.e., scholars do not take rivaya from him)

(Rf: Tahdhib al Tahzib, Vol 4, 798, Zarar bin Sard al Taymi)

Imam Hakim, said on authority of Abu ahmed, (Laisa b’qaw indahumal hakim). Means. Abu Ahmed said, he was not authentic in eyes of Muhaditheen.’

Imam Darqutuni declared him ‘Daeef‘.
Ibnu Qan’y also do the same.
Imam Bukhari (Rd) himself and Imam Nas’ai declared him (Matrook al Hadith) (means, the one from whom no one take narrations).
Imam Tirmidhi in his ‘Jamy al-Sunnan al Tirmizi‘ write that! (Wa Ra’ayita Yad’aff Zarar bin Sard),

(Tr: I had seen that Imam Bukhar declare zarar bin sard as ‘Daeef’).

(Rf: Kitab al Hajj – Chapter Ma’jaa fi Fadhl al Talbiyata wa-nahr- Hadith 828)

Now if Imam Bukhari (radiAllahutala anho) himself declared that person (Matrook) and (Da’ieef) then, how come is it possible to say that this narration which is explained in that Tarikh is correct? and Imam Bukhari (Rd) was having such belief?

It is also worth to be noted that, this style of Jirah of Imam Bukhari (rd) regarding Imam al Azam (rd) is totally against the rules and regulations of the science of hadith, in the field of Muhaditheen. (see)

Translation: “I (ad-Dahbi) says! that some scholars’s examining and cross examining about other Aima is not important in anyway. specially when, it is been cleared that, such (sayings) were based on some clashes, some religious prejudice, or because of jealousy its been written. No body is been saved from such thing, only but those who are been saved by Allah, according to my knowledge, no such era came into existence in which Aima (scholars) are been saved from such (wrong sayings etc), but only Prophets and the Siddiqeen. If i wish, i can write a whole book about their sayings of such kind about one another“.

[Ref: Meezan al Aitidal, Vol 1, No-438, Ahmed bin Abdullah al-Hafidh abu Nuaim al-Asbahani)


Translation:

I (ad-Dahbi) say!, sorry upon you, be in your senses, and seek reimbursement from your Rabb (Allah), because some of the (same-era-) scholars have prodigieously sayings (regarding one another). And many of the great scholars were been get involved in it, may Allah have mercy on them“.

{Ref: Sayr alaam al Nubula: Vol 18 , 13. Al Buyuti Yusuf abu yaqoob bin yahya al-misri}

===
Translation:

Ad-Dahbi and Ibnu Hajar Asqalani (Rds) said, that the narrations of the same era of scholars about one – another is not sometimes acceptable. Specially when, it’s been open that, it was based on some religious confrontation or jealousy……till the end(same as before)“.

[Ref: Jila al Uyaineen fi Muhakamtil Ahmadeen, Al-Alusi. Page 32/33]

It is also worth to mention, that after explaining this, even Imam Ahmed bin Hanbal (rd) can also not been saved from the ‘dawa’ of abu jabar abdullah damanwi (ghair-muqallad).

Translation: “Just like this, some has written about Imam Maalik, Imam Shafi’e and Imam ahmed bin hanbal“. (Pg;32)

While Damanwi (wahhabi) has written: “While nobody can show a single bit of thing (like that) about Imam Ahmed bin Hanbal“. (see his book: “al-deen ul Khalis P2.page 164)

So that means, damanwi’s this saying is also useless and bias as his other sayings are, because from the books of “asma al rijal’ (the narrators’ biographies) that, Al-Hussain bin Ali bin yazid al-karabeesi al-Faqih al-Baghdadi, Sahib al-Shafi’e also had written objections and accusation about Imam ahmed bin hanbal.

Translation:
Hussain bin Ali Al Karabisi was of the belief like (Imam Bukhari) about human actions, and Talafuz bil Quran. While this was against the madhab of Imam ahmed bin hanbal (rd), he was much of conservative towards Talafuz bil Quran (makhlooq/or/not). Thats the reason that both had written such kind of sarcasticism about each other.”

Ibne Abdul Barr writes: (Fakana kuulu wahidin minhuma yat’anu ala Sahibihi)

Translation: “Those both do such objurgating about each other“.

[Ref: Al Intiqa fi Fa’dail al Thalatha’tal Aimatal Fuqaha: Page 165, 1st Edition, 1418H, Beirut Lebanon]

Yes its another thing, that the lovers of Imam ahmed bin hanbal, take all measures to refute that. And many among them seriously paid the right of the love by writing many writings about Husain bin ali al karabisi’s (Takalum fi Ahmed)’s refutation.

And even accepting hussain’s view about Imam Ahmed, those people also came into the web of Imam ahmed bin hanbal’s (sayings). Even Ad-Dahbi declared that his (Karabeesi)’s stance is correct, but still he supports him (imam Ahmed).’

(Sayr al alam al nubula . Vol 18, 23, al-karabeesi abu ali al hussain bin ali bin yazid)

For usool of hadith check the given link for further light on this issue, its in urdu.

End: I will try to translate it to farsi and pashto language, if time allowed me.

Updated: 3:16 Pm same date by zarbehaq

Roman Urdu translation for easy copy paste:

Tarikh e Kabir – Imam Bukhari – Imam Abu Hanifa (rd) se Mansoob aik Jhooti Rivayat:

Rivayat:

سليم بن عيسى القارئ الكوفي سمع الثوري وحمزة الزيات روى عنه أحمد بن حميد وضرار بن صرد قال لي ضرار بن صرد حدثنا سليم سمع سفيان قال لي حماد بن أبي سليمان أبلغ أبا حنيفة المشرك أني بريء منه قال وكان يقول القرآن مخلوق وهو مولى لبني تيم بن ثعلبة بن ربيعة

Mazkura baala rivayat main Imam Abu Hanifa (rd) ko (Mushrik) kaha gaya hai. Baaz kajfehmo ka israr hai keh Imam Bukhari (Rd) ne Imam al Azam (rd) ko (Mushrik) kaha hai
(Wahabi Book: Ahlu haidth- Abu Jabar abdullah damanwi- Al-Deen al Khaalis- Qist 2, Safha 163)

Jawab:

Is k tardeedi jawab k liye khud Imam Bukhari (Rta) ka qowl he kafi hai jo unki Imam Abu Hanifa (Rd) se narazgi balke bughz o inaad k ghalat Ta’sur k (Khas-Maqsad) k tehet parchaar karne ki koshishon par pani pher deta hai. Mulahiza ho!!

قال محمد بن أبی حاتم الوراق : سمعتھ – یعني البخاري – یقول : لا یکون لي خصمُُ في الآخرة ، فقلتُُ : إنَّ بعضَ الناس ینقِمُُون علیک في کتاب التاریخ ویقولون : فیه اغتیاب الناس ، فقال : إنما روینا ذلک روایةً لم نَقُُلھُُ من عند أنفسنا

Tarjuma: Muhamad bin abi hatim al waraq kehte hain keh mene Imam bukhari ko kehte hove suna keh Qayamat k din mujh se jhagrra karne wala koi na hoga, to mene un se kaha, keh Baaz log Ap par malamat karte hain keh ap ne apni tareekh ki kitabon main logon ki gheebat bayan ki hai.Imam Bukhari (rta) ne jawab diya keh main ne apni kitabon main mehez rivayat ko naqal kiya hai, apni taraf se kuch nahi likha hai”.

(Sair al alam al nubula – Al Zahbi; Jild 12/ Safha 441/ Tab’at Mosisatal Riala beirut)

Halanke Tarikh al Kabir main mazkoora Imam Abu Hanifa (Rd) k mutaliq qowl sanad k sath Hamad bin abi Suleman se mansub hai . Abu Hanifa (rd) k naam ki sarahat ke sath is ko Imam Bukhari se bayan karne wala Zarar bin sard hai. Or is Zarar bin sard ko:::

وقال يحيى بن معين : كذابان بالكوفة

Yahya bin Ma’en (rd) kehte hain keh Kufa ka Kazzab hai (Miza al aitidal jild, 2, nb- 3951,zarar bin sard)

Imam Nasai kehte hain keh “THIQA NAHI”.

قال حسين بن محمد القبابي تركو

Hussain bin muhammad alqababi kehte hain. Keh is (zarar bin sard) ko TARK KARDIYA GAYA HAI‘.

(Tahzib ul Tahdhib jild 4, 798, zarar bin sard al taymi)

Hakim abu ahmed kehte hain keh Muhaditheen k nazdeek wo PUKHTA NAHI HAI.

Imam Darqutuni ne bhi isko Daeef qarar diya hai
Ibn Qaney ne bhi isko Daeef kaha hai.

Imam Bukhari or Imam Nasai ne isko (Matrook al Hadith) qarar diya hai.

Tirmizi apni kitab “Jame al Sunan al Tirmiz” main likhte hain keh:

Tarjuma:”Main ne dekha keh Imam Bukhari, zarar bin sard ko Daeef qarar dete hain.”

(Kitab ul hajj; bab maa jaa’a fi fadhl al talbiyata wal nahr . Hadith 828)

Jub Imam bukhari khud zarar bin sard ko (Matrook) or (Daeef) qarar dete hain to yeh kis tarha kaha ja sakta hai keh Imam bukhari is ke bayan karda qowl ko sahih tasleem karte hain?

Is silsilay main ye baat bhi pesh e nazar rahe keh kuch maslak paraston ka Imam Abu Hanifa (rd) k mutaliq jirah k akhaz ka ye andaz Aima’e fann k usoolon k sareehan khilaf hai. Mulahiza ho!!

قلت : كلام الاقران بعضهم في بعض لا يعبأ به ، لا سيما إذا لاح لك أنه لعداوة أو لمذهب أو لحسد ، ما ينجو منه إلا من عصم الله ، وما علمت أن عصرا من الاعصار سلم أهله من ذلك ، سوى الانبياء والصديقين ، ولو شئت لسردت من ذلك كراريس

Tarjuma:

Main (al Dahbi) kehta hun keh baaz hum asar Aima ki baaz k mutaliq jirah wa qadha laiq e tawaju nahi hoti , khususan jubkeh tum par wazeh ho jai keh ye kalam ADAWAT, MAZHABI TA’SAB ya HASAD ki waja se waqiya hova hai. Is se koi bhi mehfooz nahi raha siway us ke jise Allah ne bachaya, aur mere ilm k mutabiq koi zamana aisa nahi aya jis main aima is se bachy hon , Sivay Anbiya or Siddiqeen k aur agar main chahun to in ki aik dosre se mutaliq is qisam ki baton se kitaben muratab kar dun.

(Mezan al aitidal jild 1, 438, Ahmed bin abdullah al hafidh abu nuaim al asbahani).
قُلْتُ: اسْتَفِقْ، وَيْحَكَ! وَسَلْ رَبَّكَ العَافِيَةَ، فَكَلاَمُ الأَقْرَانِ بَعْضُهُم فِي بَعْضٍ أَمْرٌ عَجِيْبٌ، وَقَعَ فِيْهِ سَادَةٌ – فَرَحِمَ اللهُ الجَمِيْعَ

Tarjuma: “Main (al Zahbi) kehta hun keh tujh par afsos, hosh main Aaa or apne Rab se aafiyat maang, kionkeh baaz HUM-ASR Aima ka baz k mutaliq kalam ajeeb o ghareeb tarha ka hota hai. IS main bare bare aima mubtila hove hain, Allah sub par Rehm farmay”.

(Sair al alam al nubula, Jild 18, 13, al Buyuti yusuf abu yaqoob bin yahya al misri)

وقال الذهبي والعسقلاني : إن قول الأقران بعضهم في بعض غير مقبول ؛ لا سيما إذا لاح أنه لعداوة أو لمذهب إذ لحسد لاينجو منه إلا من عصمه الله تعالى

Tarjuma: Al Dahbi or Ibn hajr Asqalani kehte hain keh baaz k mutaliq hum assar aima k aqwal qabil e qabool naih hote hain khususan jubke ayan ho keh ye aqwal inad, mazhabi tasub ya hasad ki bina par kahe gay hon. Is se koi mehfoz nahi raha hai siway uske jise Allah ne bachaya.

(Jila ul Ayneen fi Mahakamatal Ahmed bin, Al Alsui , Safa 32/33)

Is moqa par ye bhi wazeh kar diya jai keh is jirah wa qadah ya kalam se abu jabar abdullah damanwi (wahabi) k daway k barkhilaf ahmed bin hanbal bhi nahi bach sakte.

كما تكلم بعضهم في مالك وبعضهم في الشافعي وبعضهم في أحمدترجمہ : اسی طرح بعض نے امام مالک ، امام شافعی اور احمد بن حنبل پر کلام کیا ہے – (ایضاً ، صفحہ ٣٢)

Jubke Damanwi likhte hain keh :”Jubke mosoof ahmed bin hanbal ke mutaliq aisa lafz to kya kisi muhadith ki mamooli jirah bhi nahi dikha sakte“.

(Hawala: Al deen al khalis , qist 2, safha 164)

damanwi sahab ka ye dawa bhi guzishta dawo ki tarha bay bunyad hai. kutub e asma ur rijal se maloom hota hai keh (al hasan bin ali bin yazid al karabeesi al fiqh al baghdadi) Sahib-al-Shafie ne Ahmeb bin hanbal par Ta’n or Kalam kiya hai.

وقال الخطيب : حديثه يعز جدا ، لان أحمد بن حنبل كان يتكلم فيه بسبب مسألة اللفظ ، وهو أيضا كان يتكلم في أحمد ، فتجنب الناس الاخذ عنه . ولما بلغ يحيى بن معين أنه يتكلم في أحمد لعنه ، وقال : ما أحوجه إلى أن يضرب . وقد سمع الكرابيسى من معن بن عيسى والطبقة / وكان يقول : القرآن كلام الله غير مخلوق ، ولفظي به مخلوق ، فإن عنى التلفظ فهذا جيد ، فإن أفعالنا مخلوقة ، وإن قصد / الملفوظ بأنه مخلوق ، فهذا الذى أنكره أحمد والسلف وعدوه تجهما ، ومقت الناس حسينا لكونه تكلم في أحمد – (میزان الاعتدال ، جلد ١ ، ٢٠٣٢ ، الحسين بن على الكرابيسى الفقيه / تہذیب التہذیب ، جلد ٢ ، ٦١٨ ، الحسين بن علی بن يزيد الكرابيسی الفقيه البغدادی)

Hussain bin ali al karabesi Imam bukhari ki tarha Insani af’aal wa talafuz bil-quran k qail thay. ye ahmed bin hanbal k moaqif k khilaf tha, wo talafuz bil quran makhlooq k masle main tashadud se kam lete thay. yahi waja hai keh dono ne aik dosre par taan kiya hai.

Ibne Abdul Brr likhte hian:
:فَكَانَ كُلُّ وَاحِدٍ مِنْهُمَا يَطْعَنُ عَلَى صَاحِبِهِیعنی وہ دونوں ایک دوسرے پر قدح و طعن کیا کرتے تھے – (الانتقاء فی فضائل الثلاثة الأئمة الفقہاء ، صفحہ ١٦٥ ، الطبعة الأولٰی ١٤١٧ ھ ، بیروت – لبنان)

Han ye or baat hai keh ahmed bin hanbal k parastaron ne unke difaa main koi daqeeqa faroguzasht nahi kiya . baaz unki shuhrat ya zahiri waza qata k aseer hove hain to baaz ne unke aqeeda wa nazriya ki himayat ka (HAQ) ada kiya hai. Hussain bin ali k (takalum fi ahmed) ki har mumkin tardded ki gayi hai. Hussain bin ali al karabesi k moqif ko sahih tasleem karne walay bhi Ahmed bin hanbal k daam e fareb main giriftar hove hain. Al zahbi ne karabeesi k moaqif ko haq batlane k bawajood ahmed bin hanbal k sath wabastagi ka saboot diya hai.

وَلاَ رَيْبَ أَنَّ مَا ابْتَدَعَهُ الكَرَابِيْسِيُّ ، وَحَرَّرَهُ فِي مَسْأَلَةِ التَّلَفُّظِ ، وَأَنَّهُ مَخْلُوْقٌ هُوَ حَقٌّ – (سیر اعلام النبلاء ، جلد ١٨ ، ٢٣ ، الکرابیسی ابو علی الحسین بن علی بن یزید)

==========
end roman translation.

Advertisements

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s