The Chains of Narration
for Ahaadeeth are Preserved
by the Ash'ari Scholars
One of the most popular Wahhabi/Pseudo-Salafi website, dedicated to the science of the hadeeth (ulûm al hadîth) which reunites all the Wahhabi/Pseudo-Salafi students and teachers around the world.
But to their disappointment, they were incapable of doing so.
On the contrary, they did manage to find “one hadeeth” which defeats the above challenge, only then to see a “Sufi” scholar stepping forward and refuting their claim.
------
Thread here:
------
And we can see at the end of the discussion an honest member,
“after much effort and many search, they are forced to admit that all chains of transmission go through Sufi and Ash'ari scholars”…
Here is his message:
الإخوة الكرام ... من اطلاعي عبر السنوات وصلتُ إلى قناعة أنه لا يوجد إسناد يخلو من الأوصاف التي يبحث الإخوة عن سندٍ يخلو منها ... وبعد قراءتي لما ساقه إخواننا من أول هذا الموضوع لم تتغيّر قناعتي، فأرجو أن نضع فيما يأتي إسناداً حديثياً واحداً محرَّراً خالياً لعله يكون كسراً لتلك الحال المطّردة ... والله المستعان
And if you look at the message #38, you can see a member who wonders as to how the whole religion (aqida, fiqh, etc.) could have been transmitted by « ahl al bida » (people of innovation, Ash'aris and Sufi in this instance).
He even says that the Book of Allah, the Holy Qur'an, we received it from the Ash'ari and Sufi and mufawwid !
And he
wonders how people of perversion
would have been reliable in transmission of religion?!
La
hawla wa la quwatta illa billah !
If that is not
ungratefulness, then what is?
Here is a part of
his message (#38) :
We would have wished this brother to take the problem on the other side.
It
is inconceivable as to how the whole Ummah is
upon falsehood and misguidance,
as opposed to the righteous path of
the “pious predecessors” him and his
sect are upon. ?
Our Messenger sallallâhu
alayhi wa sallam told us to “stick with
the majority” in case of divergence (which
is clearly The Ash'aris and Maturidis)
And
also Allah says in the Qur’an :
(
Indeed, it is We who sent down the Qur'an and indeed, We will be its
guardian) (Surat al Hijr -15-, verse 9)
Is it
possible that Allah would have chosen:
Ahl al Bid’a wa dalâl (people of innovation and error = still understand Ashari and Sufi) to preserve and transmit His book?
It reminds us of the khawârij when they thought to have a better comprehension of the Quran
than Ali (Radiallaahu 'Anhu) and his companions!
Or Shi'a who
say that Allah
chose three “kuffar and munaafiqeen” to
be successors of Prophet Muhammad Salallaahu
'Alayhi Wa Sallam.
(Astaghfirullah!)
To
conclude, here is a text from Shaykh al
Azharî -hafidahullah- which we can summarise with the
following words:
If you are looking among the different
groups of Islam like :
Mu’tazila,
Ibadi, Zaydi, Imami, etc we won’t find any place for them in
prophetic legacy, or perhaps just in a few things…
And if you
look at Ahl as Sunnah (the Ashâ’ira and
Maturidiyya) you will see THEM CARRYING ALL THE PROPHETIC
LEGACY, ALL THE SUNNAH AND QURAN.
THEY ARE the transmitters of Al Bukhari, al Muslim, Abi Dawoud, Tirmidhi, Ibn Majjah, the Muwatta’a of Malik and the Ahmed’s Musnad, etc… and you will never find a chain of narration for a single hadeeth that doesn't have an Ash'ari or Maturidi in it. Whereas we can find many many chain of narration which are with ONLY Ash'ari Scholars.
THEY
ARE ALSO carrying the commentary of books of
hadeeth… Commentators of Al
Boukhari like el Karmani,
Ibn Battale, Ibn El Arabi, Ibn El Tyn, Ibn Hajar al Asqalânî….
THEY
ARE ALSO carrying the commentary of Muslim, like
al Nawawi, Îyad, al Qurtubi and al Sanoussi…
THEY
ARE the commentators, they are carrying the chains of
transmission of all theses books
THEY ARE ALSO carrying
the different readings (qira’âte) of the Quran and its tafassir
(exegesis)
ANYONE who reads in « Hafs » on this
earth see his chain of transmission carried by el Mazahi, el Asqati,
al Shabroumalissi, Abdurahmane el Yamani, el Nasser el Tablawi and
Sheikh al Islam Zakariya al Ansari, and all of them are Ashari….
THEY
ARE ALSO the linguists, and authors of dictionaries like al
Jawhari, al Fayrouz Abadi, al Fayoumi et al Zoubaydi.
YOU
WILL ALSO SEE that the maliki jusrists are Ashari, as the
Shafi’i and few Hanbali. For the Hanafi they are Maturidi.
ولا داعي لأن أتكلم عن فضائل الإسناد ومكانته وجلالته ، وهو من علامات أهل السنة وخصائصهم ، وفي أثناء الجوابات الأشعرية قلت الكلمة التالية أوجهها لهؤلاء الحشوية :
(( فهؤلاء ( المعتزلة ) ليس عندهم من إرث النبي شيء فكلهم أبى الاحتجاج بالسنة ورفضها فلم يعرف عنهم أنهم نقلة السنة ورواة الآثار وفقهائها وشراحها !! وهؤلاء ( الإباضية ) يزعمون أنهم ورثة النبي وليس عندهم من إرثه شيء إلا كتاب واحد !! لا يعرف من كتبه ولا متى مات ولا من روى عنه وليس فيه من العلم شيء يذكر !! وهؤلاء ( الزيدية ) مثلهم لا يملكون من السنة كتبا فهم على كتبنا يقتاتون وإليها يرجعون و‘لى أئمتنا يعتمدون ويعولون ، وهؤلاء ( الإمامية ) لا تجد عندهم عن أصحاب رسول الله سنة ولا أثر فهم لهم أعداء يكفرونهم ويبغضونهم فليسوا لهم بورثة .
فإذا نظرت إلى ( أهل السنة الأشاعرة والماتريدية ) رأيتهم هم حملة إرث النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم فهم رواة البخاري ومسلم وأبي داود والترمذي والنسائي وابن ماجه وموطأ مالك برواياته ومسند أحمد ومعاجم الطبراني وسنن الدارقطني وسعيدابن منصور وصحيح ابن خزيمة وصحيح ابن حبان ومسند الطيالسي وأبي عوانة والدارمي والبزار وأبي يعلى وووووووووووووووووووووو كتب لا تعد ولا تحصى في السنة ورأيتهم هم الرواة لها ، ولا تجد سندا يصلك بكتاب منها إلا وهم رواته ، وتجدهم هم شراح كتب السنة فشراح البخاري كالكرماني وابن بطال وابن العربي وابن التين ابن حجر والعيني والقسطلاني وووو وشراح مسلم كالنووي وعياض والقرطبي والأبي والسنوسي ووووو وهكذا وجدتهم هم الرواة والشراح وهم المسندون لهذه الكتب وحملة إسنادها وهم رواة القرآن الكريم بقراءاته وشروحها وكل من يقرأ برواية حفص عن عاصم على وجه الأرض فلا بد وأن يمر سنده في القرآن بالمزاحي والأسقاطي والشبراملسي وعبدالرحمن اليمني والناصر الطبلاوي وشيخ الإسلام زكريا الأننصاري هؤلاء كلهم أشاعرة ووووو وهم النحاة ومؤلفو المعاجم كالجوهري وابن منظور والفيروزآبادي والفيومي والزبيدي وووو.... ووجدت فقهاء المالكية أشاعرة وفقهاء الشافعية كذلك وفضلاء الحنابلة كذلك ثم وجدت الأحناف كلهم ماتريدية وكتب الحديث عندهم في الهند والباكستان والأفغان والبنغال والترك متدارسة ومحفوظة ومشروحة وكذلك الحالف في مصر والمغرب وإفريقيا كلها
[End of Shaykh Azhari's text]
If you see in the history, Ashari and Sufi are the Mujahiddin (warrior), are the Shuhada (martyr). They gave freedom to many lands, we can quote "Constantinople" (القسطنطينية) by Muhammad al-Fatih (Sultan Mehmet II) who were Matouridi, Hanafi & Sufi Qadiri (also quoted in a famous hadith about the conquest of Constantinople), also al Aqsa (by Salaheddine al Ayyubi al Ashari).
They gave their lives for Islâm and Knowlegde…
95% Ummah?
The Ummah for 95% have been Ashari / Maturidi and Sufi !
I
would like to ask the Wahhabi/Pseudo-Salafi to STOP referring
to ANY Ashari / Sufi to learn their religion,
to STOP referring them to Ahl al
Bid’a wa Dalâl, who made « error
in aqida » like an Nawawi, Ibn Hajar al 'Asqalânî,
al Ghazali, al Juwayni, al Haytami.
How
can you take the most part of your knowledge
from innovators and lost people?
It's
Unthinkable…
Ashari
are Ahl al Bid’a ?
Well
ok! So forget ALL their books of fiqh, of
aqida, of tafsir, of gammar, of idiom, of usul al fiqh, of
history, if you have enough of scholars following the way of
« salaf »
as you define it, to learn your religion from them…
I
would like to see what will be the final outcome...!
They
are Ahl
al Bid’a in theory but
when Wahhabi/Pseudo-Salafis need
their books, they go running back to Ash'ari scholars like Imam
an-Nawwawi, ibn Hajar al-Asqalaani, al-Bayhaqi, etc!
Last
day I was reading a Wahhabi/Pseudo-Salafi
fatwa about
legality of nutmeg : Here
, and who they quoted to support their claims?
Ibn Hajar al Haytami al Shafi’î al Ash’ari al Sufi… (they put in brackets to warn people that we were Ashari and Sufi). Without saying that he is opines for istighatha and other "shirk" according to them.
Why
they need people of innovation who
called towards shirk to prove
their opinions?
It’s still like that… If you look
at Wahhabi/Pseudo-Salafi fatawa,
they are filled with Ash'ari and Sufi scholars… I just quoted
this example but we can find many others and their books and
websites are full of them.
So brothers and
sisters, be proud of your heritage, be proud of your scholars
which nobody on this earth can do without. Be proud of the Salafus
Saaliheen which you follow who followed the Prophetic
Legacy.
More info: Here
(Edited by ADHM)
--------------------------------------
Sheikh al- Albani from his Maktaba Dhahiriyya
Albani admitted that there has never been a completely "salafi"
commentary on sahih al Bukhari and al Nawawi and ibn Hajar were Asharis
Al-Albaani said:
Firstly, I don’t think this is what their objective is, and secondly, if their objective [by not quoting from these scholars or asking for Allaah’s Mercy for them] is a way of warning then I say:
These
people [i.e.,
the ones who hold the views mentioned above of not asking for
Allaah’s Mercy] who
you just alluded to, do they read Fathul-Baari [i.e.,
the explanation of Sahih Bukhaari by Ibn Hajr al-Asqalaani] or
not?
Whichever
of the two answers we assume, then it is a mistake in relation to
them. If
it is said they do
not read it, then where
do they understand Sahih al-Bukhaari from, its explanation, its
understanding, the differences of opinion, the terminology,
[things related to the] hadith
and so on …
They
will not find, in the whole world, explanations of Sahih Bukhaari
that are entirely Salafi.
They
will not find a [totally] Salafi
explanation of Sahih Bukhaari like we want, and even
if they did it would only have the main points [and
wouldn’t be as detailed as Fathul-Baari]. As for this ocean replete
with comprehensive knowledge, which Allaah granted to the author of
Fath [ul-Baari]
they will not find what it contains in any of the books that have
taken up the task of explaining Sahih Bukhaari.
Thus,
they will lose out on a huge amount of knowledge. So
if they mean or what they say includes, amongst the things they warn
against, preventing people from benefitting from what this Imaam
[i.e., Ibn Hajr] says, then
they will lose out on knowledge whereas it is possible for them to
gather between taking the benefit and repelling the harm which is
what the scholars do.
In
the [whole]
world now, not a scholar after al-Asqalaani and al-Nawawi can be
found, to
this day, who can do without benefitting from both of their
explanations–this one’s [i.e., Ibn Hajr
al-Asqalaani’s] explanation
of Bukhaari and
that one’s [i.e.,
Imaam al-Nawawi’s] explanation
of Muslim.
Yet
along with that, when they [i.e.,
the scholars] take
benefits from both of their books, they know that in many issues they
were Ash’aris and were contrary to the methodology of the Salaf
as-Saalih. So with their knowledge and not with ignorance they [i.e.,
the scholars] were
able to take the knowledge which benefits them from these two books
or their authors, and turn away from what would harm them and not
benefit them....
[Al-Hudaa wan-Noor, 665.] Source: Here
Note:
See how he claimed Nawawi and Ibn Hajar were allegedly contrary to the methodology of the Salaf!
We never heard this for hundreds of years until these revisionists came to the surface and attempted to put down such giants...
---
As-Sawaadul A`zham:
The Vast Majority
The Ash`aris and the Maatureedis
The ridiculous claim of the Salafis that “the Ash`aris and Maatureedis were always just a fringe, heretical cult, and were the minority.”
The reality is that all the years, the “vast majority” of the Ummah have been Ash`aris and Maatureedis. That is the case right up until the present day.
We shall list hereunder some of the well-known A’immah who were Ash`aris and some who were Maatureedis. Bear in mind that this is just a brief list and not an exhaustive one; the actual number of `Ulamaa throughout the ages who were Ash`aris or Maatureedis is innumerable.
Imaam ibn `Asaakir رحمة الله عليه writes in Tabyeenu Kidhbil Muftari, p.410:
“The majority of the `Ulamaa in all the lands were upon the Ash`ari Madh-hab (in `Aqeedah), and the A’immah of all the cities in all eras called towards it. Were there any of the Fuqahaa of the Hanafiyyah, the Maalikiyyah and the Shaafi`iyyah except that they were either in agreement with it, or attributed themselves to it, or were pleased with the praiseworthy effort he (Imaam al-Ash`ari) had made in the Deen of Allaah?”
Imaam ibn as-Subki رحمة الله عليه writes in at-Tabaqaat:
“Shaykhul Islaam Al-`Izz ibn `Abdis Salaam mentioned that the Shaafi`is, the Maalikis, the Hanafis and the great ones among the Hanbalis were all unanimous upon the `Aqeedah of (Imaam al-Ash`ari). His contemporary, the Shaykh of the Maalikis of that time, Imaam Abu `Amr ibn al-Haajib, agreed with him on this, as did another contemporary of his: the Shaykh of the Hanafis of that time, Imaam Jamaal-ud-Deen al-Haseeri.”
[Note: There is very little difference between the Ash`ari `Aqeedah and the Maatureedi `Aqeedah; in most cases it is just semantics. Thus, many `Ulamaa of the past when using the term “Ash`ari `Aqeedah” included the Maatureedi `Aqeedah in that as well.
The Salafis of today do the same: when they condemn “The Ash`aris”, they are including the Maatureedis in that at the same time. The term Ash`ari was often used to refer to both the Ash`aris themselves as well as the Maatureedis, on account of the two Madh-habs being almost exactly the same. That is the reason why here, Imaam Al-`Izz ibn `Abdis Salaam, even though he mentions Imaam al-Ash`ari, he is referring to both the Ash`ari Madh-hab and the Maatureedi Madh-hab of `Aqeedah.].
---(Edited by ADHM)
