Tuesday, February 28, 2012

-17-Mostalah (hadeeth) Class by Abu Abdullah



Today we will do a practical example
-there are rules which govern how to say a hadith is sahih or not
-so if the rasul (saw) said Qul huwallahu ahad, will this be hadith sahih, without sanad?
-Yes it will be because Allah revealed it
-and the prophet told us what Allah said
-therefore it is proven he said it
-just like it will be proven that the rasul said Bismillahir Rahmanir Raheem
-because he said in a hadith say Bismillah before you eat
-so you make your verdict with a little bit of your brain

Al Imam Hafidh al Iraqi is a great scholar has talked about the hadith in a book of Ulumul hadith
-he said the sanad sometimes is a decoration
-you decorate the hadith with a sanad but you don’t need it for some kind of hadith
-e.g. hadith which are by nature true and make no difference
-but when mentioning it you need to mention the degree you think it belongs to
-you can say, it’s been said the prophet said so and so
-the ulama call it a method of trying to show people you are not really sure
-e.g. Qila, Qaalu, or I heard my shaikh saying so and so, but I’m not sure it is authentic
-sometimes it goes much further than that
-there is a hadith by way of muadh ibn Jabal
-he said the prophet (saw) asked him how will you rule between them?
-he was rasul (saw)'s messenger to Yemen

So he said I will use the book of Allah
-rasul (saw) asked him, what if it is not in the Qur'an
-he said he will do what rasul told him
-what if the rasul did not talk about it?
-he said I will rule by what I believe is right

Rasul (saw) tapped him on his chest and said Alhamdulillah
-who gave guidance to the messenger and his messengers
-to what pleases Allah and His messenger

حَدَّثَنَا حَفْصُ بْنُ عُمَرَ، عَنْ شُعْبَةَ، عَنْ أَبِي عَوْنٍ، عَنِ الْحَارِثِ بْنِ عَمْرِو ابْنِ أَخِي الْمُغِيرَةِ بْنِ شُعْبَةَ، عَنْ أُنَاسٍ مِنْ أَهْلِ حِمْصٍ، مِنْ أَصْحَابِ مُعَاذِ بْنِ جَبَلٍ، أَنَّ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ لَمَّا أَرَادَ أَنْ يَبْعَثَ مُعَاذًا إِلَى الْيَمَنِ قَالَ: «كَيْفَ تَقْضِي إِذَا عَرَضَ لَكَ قَضَاءٌ؟» ، قَالَ: أَقْضِي بِكِتَابِ اللَّهِ، قَالَ: «فَإِنْ لَمْ تَجِدْ فِي كِتَابِ اللَّهِ؟» ، قَالَ: فَبِسُنَّةِ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ، قَالَ: «فَإِنْ لَمْ تَجِدْ فِي سُنَّةِ رَسُولِ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ، وَلَا فِي كِتَابِ اللَّهِ؟» قَالَ: أَجْتَهِدُ رَأْيِي، وَلَا آلُو فَضَرَبَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ صَدْرَهُ، وَقَالَ: «الْحَمْدُ لِلَّهِ الَّذِي وَفَّقَ رَسُولَ، رَسُولِ اللَّهِ لِمَا يُرْضِي رَسُولَ اللَّهِ» ،
[Sunan Abu Dawud (3/303) No. 3592]

Narrated By Mu'adh ibn Jabal: Some companions of Mu'adh ibn Jabal said: When the Apostle of Allah (pbuh) intended to send Mu'adh ibn Jabal to the Yemen, he asked: How will you judge when the occasion of deciding a case arises? He replied: I shall judge in accordance with Allah's Book. He asked: (What will you do) if you do not find any guidance in Allah's Book? He replied: (I shall act) in accordance with the Sunnah of the Apostle of Allah (pbuh). He asked: (What will you do) if you do not find any guidance in the Sunnah of the Apostle of Allah (pbuh) and in Allah's Book? He replied: I shall do my best to form an opinion and I shall spare no effort. The Apostle of Allah (pbuh) then patted him on the breast and said: Praise be to Allah Who has helped the messenger of the Apostle of Allah to find something which pleases the Apostle of Allah. [Abu Dawud, Book 18, Hadith #3585]

-so this hadith gives us the rule to follow
-this hadith if you look for its takhreej
-you will find that before Muadh there is somebody
-written as friends of muadh not one person

Who are they?
-we know Muadh had many friends, maybe good or bad
-like Ali had many friends, good and bad like Abdullah ibn Sabah

In this instance the ulama said even though we are not happy
-to be uninformed of these names
-we still accept that it is sahih
-unlike the rules of hadith which require you to have names
-I will give you a detailed one now and that will be our practice
-here is the Arabic form of it

مَا أَحَلَّ اللهُ فِي كِتَابِهِ فَهُوَ حَلَالٌُ ، وَمَا حَرَّمَ فَهوَ حَرَامٌ ، وَمَا سَكَتَ عَنهُ فَهُوَ عَفْوٌ ، فَاقبَلُوا مِنَ اللهِ عَافِيَتَه ( وَمَا كَانَ رَبُّك نَسِيَّا ) أخرجه الدارقطني في سننه (2/137) والحاكم في المستدرك (2/406) (10/12) والطبراني في مسند الشاميين (3/209) من طرق عن عاصم بن رجاء بن حيوة عن أبيه عن أبي الدرداء عن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم به .

It was narrated from Abu'l-Darda' (may Allaah be pleased with him) in a marfoo' report: “Whatever Allaah has permitted in His Book is halaal, whatever He has forbidden is haraam, and whatever He was silent about is pardoned, so accept the pardon of Allaah, for Allaah was not forgetful. Then he recited this verse: 'and your Lord is never forgetful' [Maryam 19:64].”

Narrated by al-Daaraqutni in his Sunan (2/137); al-Haakim in al-Mustadrak (2/406 and 10/12); al-Tabaraani in Musnad al-Shaamiyeen (3/209) through a number of isnaads from 'Aasim ibn Raja' ibn Haywah from his father from Abu'l-Darda' from the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him).

What Allah has made halal in the book is halal
-and what Allah made haram is haram
-whatever Allah never mentioned is an offering, so accept His offering
-for verily Allah never forgets

This hadith is a prime example of how people look at hadith
-of problematic hadith
-and I will show you why it is a big problem

If you go to Albani,

This hadeeth was classed as saheeh by al-Albaani in al-Silsilah al-Saheehah (5/325), and classed as hasan on p. 14 of Ghaayat al-Maraam.

Al-Albaani said: There is some interruption in its isnaad. Tahqeeq Riyadh al-Saaliheen (1841).

Al-Albaani said in al-Ta'leeqaat al-Radiyyah (3/54): Its isnaad is very weak (da'eef jiddan), but its meaning is sound.

Al-Albaani said in Tahqeeq al-Eemaan li Ibn Taymiyah (43): It is hasan because of corroborating reports.

Al-Albaani classed as hasan the hadeeth of Salmaan al-Faarisi in Saheeh al-Tirmidhi (1726). In al-Mishkaat (4156) it says: It is saheeh mawqoof, but it may be classed as hasan because of marfoo' corroborating reports.

It was classed as saheeh by al-Albaani in Saheeh Abi Dawood and Mishkaat al-Masaabeeh (4074).

-he once said it is authentic hadith in his book of authentic hadith book 5
-and then said in another book it is Hassan in the book of Ghaayat al maram pg. 14
-and another time he said the chain is Daeef but the meaning is fine
-he said if it is sahabi’s saying fine
-but it is not the prophet’s saying

Then he said there is a man in the chain who is daeef (Barjami)
-Huwaini, a shaikh from Egypt said it is daeef
-so there is mix judgment
-this is not acceptable
-because when you give a verdict on hadith, that is how people get excuses
-like Albani when he said it is daeef he meant the occurrence
-so if am reading Tirmidhi and see a hadith is daeef I accept
-and then I read from Abu Dawood and see Hassan, I accept
-because I did not see the name of the daeef man in this chain
-this is not good

You should be very careful in judging hadith
-because you should not mislead people
-you should say it is daeef in a book and that is it and give the takhreej
-this is because if a person buys one sunan and sees daeef he will accept it as so
-he will not know it is mentioned as sahih in another book because he has only one book
-so a good alim should do all his homework and then give a final verdict

I read a piece of information in an Iranian newspaper
-and I know they are Shi’ites and liars
-so I will not go and say the ship did not sink because I believe they are liars
-so if people read it in a British newspaper and see something different
-they will say this is true and not the first verdict
-people cannot read from many newspapers
-they read one and accept what is in it

The hadith we quoted above first occurred by way of Abu Dardaa
-and it is Marfooa
-meaning he is a sahabi
-and attributed it to the prophet (saw) not I am saying

This occurred in the sunan of Darul Qutnee
-and that of Tabarani and Mustadraq, 3 books
-the hadith came like this

Asem bin Rajaa bin Haywah>>> Rajaa bin Haywaa>>> Abu Al Dardaa
-this is the chain
-before Asem there are many men but that does not matter
-these are the last 3 men before the prophet

We know very well that Rajah died 112H

We also know Abu Dardaa died in 32H
-meaning there is 80 years difference between their death
-this makes it very difficult for him to hear from Abu Dardaa
-he must have lived at least 95years or heard it from his last days of life
-and his students carried it with him for 80 years, this is impossible
-unless he heard it when he was a baby
-so he must have been born in the year 17H
-and nobody is born in the year 17 and die 112H

So we say there is a cut in the chain
-he could not have heard from Abu Dardaa
-and this is one route of the chain
-and it occurred in 3 books;
Dara Qutnee

They have 4 names in the chain before rasul (saw)
-and all these books agree to that

Rajah was a good man but he could not have heard from the man before him

This was mentioned in the book of ibn Hajar in Tahdheeb
-he said that there was a pitfall
-also imam Dhahabi said it is Munqatee

There is a man from Yemen called Mu’alimee who wrote the same thing

The 2nd route is by way of Salman al Farisi
-if we read the chain, we will find it in several places
1. Tirmidhi
2. Ibn Majah
3. Mustadraq
4. Bayhaqi

Narrated by al-Tirmidhi (1726); Ibn Maajah (3367); al-Haakim in al-Mustadrak (4/129); and from him by al-Bayhaqi in al-Kubra (9/320 and 10/12). It was narrated by al-Tabaraani in al-Kabeer (6/250) via Sayf ibn Haroon al-Barjami from Sulaymaan al-Taymi from Abu 'Uthmaan from Salmaan.

-these are the 4 books
-Haakim is the teacher of Bayhaqi
-so you will find similar things in their books

In this sanad, it goes like this

Saif ibn Haroon Al Barjami>> Sulaiman Al Taymi>> Abi Uthman>> Salman
-there are many names before Saif but they don’t matter
-all the 4 books have this sanad the same
-Salman is a sahabi; we can’t say anything about him
-Abi Uthman and Sulayman are sahih

The problem happened with Saif ibn Haroon
-he is daeef
-Ibn Maeen, Darul Qutnee and Imam Nassai said so

Al-Mazzi said in Tahdheeb al-Kamaal (8/255): Its isnaad includes Sayf ibn Haroon. Ibn Ma'een said: That is not the case. Al-Nasaa'i said: He is da'eef (weak). Al-Daaraqutni said: He is da'eef matrook (weak, rejected).

However, Sufyan at Thawri heard from Sulayman at Taymi something similar
-but the trouble is when it was said by Sufyan
-he did not say Salman said the prophet said
-he said Salman said so
-so it is totally different, whether Salman or the prophet is saying it
-so the hadith becomes Mawqoof

Al-Tirmidhi said: This is a ghareeb hadeeth which we do not know in any marfoo' report except via this isnaad. Sufyaan and others narrated these words from Sulaymaan al-Taymi from Abu 'Uthmaan from Salmaan. It is as if the mawqoof hadeeth is more sound. I asked al-Bukhaari about this hadeeth and he said: I do not think it is known. Sufyaan narrated from Sulaymaan al-Taymi from Abu 'Uthmaan from Salmaan in a mawqoof report. Al-Bukhaari said: Sayf ibn Haroon is muqaarib al-hadeeth.

Imam Bukhari did not like this hadith
-he said I don’t think it is sahih
-and Saif is a bit of a problem

Ibn Abu Haatim said ok it is Mursal
-there is no Salman
-we don’t even know if Salman said it
-so it becomes Daeef now

Imam Ahmad said it is munkar
-he denied the hadith

Ahmad said: It is munkar, and it was also classed as munkar by Ibn Ma'een.
This was quoted by Ibn Rajab in Jaami' al-'Uloom wa'l-Hukam (2/69).

Third route of the hadith is through a sahabi called,
-Abu Thaalaba Al Kheshni
-the hadith occurred by way of

Dawood ibn Abi Hind>>> Makhool>>>Abi Thaalaba
-3 names
-but when they said it, Dawood sometimes said Thaalaba said it and then stoped there
-or they will go from Thaalaba to the rasul (saw)
-so this man made the problem
-Makhool also did not hear from Abu Thaalaba
-so this chain also has pitfalls
-we are trying to reach the prophet but we having problems all the time

But the ulama when they looked at it said it is cut
-some said Mursal
-some said there are men who are not trustworthy

But imam Nawawi said the hadith is Hassan
-because he saw it occurring many times in different routes
-he said it can’t be baseless

Al Baani went further and said it is sahih
-ibn Arabi al Maliki is a famous man and said the hadith is as solid as gold
-so how do we treat this hadith?

-do we make fatwa based on it?
-the answer is NO.
-naturally if Allah said something is halal it is and vice versa
-and if it is not mentioned in Qur’an then Allah has accepted it for us to do

-this means to make aqeeda
-the answer is NO
-aqeeda means believing in Allah, the angels, books etc.
-so we make of it that it is something to make life for people
-therefore the sanad is just a decoration

There is another hadith where the rasul said speak good about the dead
-the hadith is munkar but it does not make any difference
-the rasul did not say speak well about the kuffar
-so there is nothing wrong with speaking good about your dead
-if they used to be good but had some weaknesses
-but you have to tell people that it is daeef hadith

You will not go to hell for speaking well about your dead who was Muslim

عطاء عن عائشة قال و عمران بن أبي أنس مصري أقدم وأثبت من عمران بن أنس المكي K ضعيف
Ibn Umar (RA) reported that Allah’s Messenger said, “Mention the goodness of your dead and desist from their evils.” (Tirmidhi 1021),

Like Ikrima's father was Abu Jahl
-but he never said he was an honorable person
-because he was not one of us
-so the hadith does not involve kuffar

Another example of a hadith
-that says you take fatwa from your heart
-you do what Allah and rasul said and then fatwa from your heart
-the hadith of Muadh ibn Jabal
-so we accept it even though its sanad is not good

You may find hadith that have good sanad but still not good
-like the hadith that says Ali is the route to jannah
-this is not true
-we love Ali and following him is good but it does not mean
-loving him is what will take you to jannah
-you can’t say if you don’t love Ali then you will enter hell
-these were the 3 examples I wanted us to talk about

We will talk a little bit about Firaq of Islam and how they developed
-there are huge miss conceptions that I want us to clarify
-nowadays we have the murjia
-and they say the ulama of Saudi are murjia
-I will like to differ and will give you my reason

A Murjia is a person who puts deeds under belief
-so he says when you believe then you can do what you want
-but your deeds are ok

The ulama of Saudi have cancelled the deeds all together
-they are not murjia
-they are now talking about Jensil amal
-you don’t have to do anything so far as you are Muslim
-these people are Jahmiyya

They say if you have the faith nothing can hurt you
-they think their faith is as strong as the sahabah
-they don’t deserve to be called Murjia that will be an honor
-these are Jahmiyya

Even Albaani used to say it is alright to bow to an idol
-they are worst Human beings, these Jahmiyya

The Firaq started after Ali's time
-people called Al Musta'arida appeared
-they don’t give any sanctity to the honour of the Muslims
-they were called the Khawarij but I don’t agree
-their real name is Musta’arida
-the people who fought Ali were called Qurraa and then were later called Khawarij

These people said minor kufr makes someone a mushrik
-and his life and property is yours
-even for a minor sin

These Musta’arida caused other people to start saying
-you can do kufr but if your heart is not thinking it is halal
-then you are still Muslim
-some people went further to use Qur'an and hadith
-and allow people to do major things
-just to allow their rulers to do what they want

These were called the Murjia
-that if you have the faith you are ok
-then you do the amal

The Musta’arida said if you commit minor sins you become a kaafir

Then you had the Mu'tazila who said some sins are on the fence
-Then the Asha'ira and Shi'a came

The latter came during the time of Ali (ra)
-but they are not the same as those of our time
-this goes as far as 250H
-they had nothing to do with those of today
-they just shared the same name

Next time we will talk about these insha Allah
-to tell you that the Murjia are better than the Saudi salafis
-they took the name Jaamiya for themselves but in reality they are Jahmiyya
-people make jokes about them now