Tag Archives: imam ahmad

ETIQUETTE WITH THE QUR’AN

The following question was asked of a marja`:

As-Salaamu `Alaikum wa Rahmatullah,

Is it permitted to place the Noble Qur’an in the bedroom, i.e. on a table while the husband and the wife are having sexual intercourse in that room? Does this not constitute a lack of etiquette with the Book of Allah? May Allah reward you with good for answering this question.

The marja, Imam Abdur-Rahman Ash-Shami, may Allah preserve him, answered with what follows,

Yes, what you have said is indeed true. To have sex in the same room where the Qur’an is on the table is lack of etiquette with the Qur’an. What you should do if possible is place the Qur’an in another room.

AND SO SHALL IT BE…pt.4

Imam Ahmad Salih Ash-Shami (d. 1414)

Did Imam Abu Ja`far At-Tabari (d. 310) have Shi`ii tendencies?

I don’t know. Perhaps we should take a look.

قال الصفدي في الوافي الوافيات ج 2 ص 214-213

 دار إحياء التراث العربي بيروت 1420ه

The historian As-Safadi (more about him later) makes this remark:

ولما قدم من طبرسنان إلى بغداد تعصّب عليه أبو عبد الله ابن الجصاص وجعفر بن عرفة والبياضي وقصده الحنابلة فسألوه عن أحمد بن حنبل يوم الجمعة في الجامع وعن حديث الجلوس على العرش فقال أبو جعفر أمّا أحمد بن حنبل فلا يعد خلافه فقالوه له: فقد ذكره العلماء في الإختلاف فقال: ما رأيته رُوي عنه ولا رأيت له أصحابًا يعوّل عليهم وأما حديث الجلوس على العرش فمُحال ثم أنشد الرجز: سبحان من ليس له أنيسُ ولا له في عرشه جليسُ

“…whereas At-Tabari arrived in Baghdad from Tabiristan, those who grew partisan to him include Abu `Abdullah ibn Al-Jassas, Ja`far ibn `Arafah and Al-Bayadi. The Hanbalis came to him and asked him regarding Ahmad ibn Hanbal on Friday in the Central Masjid and regarding the hadith of Enthronement. Abu Ja`far [At-Tabari] remarked, “In terms of Ahmad ibn Hanbal, he is not numbered among those whom his dispute is recorded”. The Hanbalis responded, “No, the scholars have mentioned him on matters of difference of opinion”. At-Tabari answered, “I don’t see anything narrated from him nor any of his Companions. As for the hadith of Enthronement, then it is not possibly correct”. Then he recited the following poetry:

Glory be to the One who has no equal

Nor any on the Throne seated[1] as an equal![2]

This exchange actually came after another one that he had had with one of the Imams of theology in Iraq his time, Abu Bakr ibn Abi Dawud (d. 310).

قال ابن الأثير في المامل في التاريخ ج7 ص 9-8 دار الكتب العلمية بيروت 1407ه

Ibn Abi Dawud mentioned that one of the statements that At-Tabari in a book was similar to the Shi`ii and At-Tabari decided to bring about the following circumstances as mentioned in a stroke of honesty by another historian, Ibn Al-Athir (more about his situation later):

وادعو عليه الرفض ثم ادعوا عليه الإلحاد

“So they accused him of Shi`ii tendencies, then they accused him of denying Allah’s Names and Attributes”.

وأما ما ذكره من تعصّب العامة فليس الأمر كذلك وإنما بعض الحنابلة تعصّبوا عليه ووقعوا فيه فتبعهم غيرهم ولذلك سببٌ وهو أن الطبري جمع كتابًا ذكر فيه اختلاف الفقهاء لم يصف مثله ولم يذكر فيه أحمد بن حنبل فقيل له في ذلك فقال: لم يكن فقيهًأ وإنما كان محدثًا فأشتد ذلك على الحنابلة وكانوا لا يحصون كثرة ببغداد فشغبوا عليه وقالوا ما أرادوا.

“As far as what was mentioned of him regarding the partisanship of the laity, the matter is not like that. It was only some of the Hanbalis that showed partisanship against him and fell into this issue and others besides them followed them in the affair. And that came about on account of the fact that At-Tabari gathered together a book in which the differences of opinion among the fiqh scholars was mentioned – and there was no book like this before – and yet he did not mention Ahmad ibn Hanbal. When he was asked about this, he said, “[Ahmad ibn Hanbal] was not a faqih. He was only a muhaddith”. This ignited the anger of the Hanbalis against him and they were an untold number in Baghdad. They moved against him and said that which they wanted”. (Al-Kamil fit-Tarikh, vol.7, pp.8-9, Dar ul-Kutub il-`Ilmiyyah, Beirut, 1407)

So from what we can see from here we notice that after their exchange, Imam At-Tabari reviled and lowered the status of the Imam, Ahmad ibn Hanbal, may Allah be pleased with him, which triggered violence from some of the laity of the Hanbalis (among others) who threw ink wells and such that injured him in his head.

Why should this be a surprise? Anyone who reviles any of the First Three Generations has to expect nothing but something to happen. Most assuredly it is for the Qadis and those among them to make judgement about the individual’s penalty and the like however reviling one of the First Three generations is still reviling one of the First Three Generations. And he ultimately found what he was looking for and faced the outcome of the action.

What is most disgusting about today’s fake Sufis (especially the fake Qadiris) is that At-Tabari’s ending exchange is quoted but not what led to it. People are then given the canard that this statement was just said while he was calmly reading over some book or reviewing notes and it was a fact of history without any background to it. The bad adab and intentions of At-Tabari aren’t even mentioned.

These same diabolical deceivers don’t bother to even give the audience the full chain of events to let them make their own choice. So was At-Tabari a Shi`ii in tendency? It doesn’t appear to be so.

But he spoke out of line regarding Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal and the laity did what any laity would be expected to do whether it was the Companions, their Followers or their Followers. Didn’t the Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, say, “A time will come in which the last of my Ummah will curse the first of it”.

The same thing goes for Al-Khatib Al-Baghdadi (d. 463) who after falling out with some Hanbalis in Baghdad, decided not to number Imam Ahmad among the Fiqh Scholars of the early generations.[3]

In terms of Al-Wajiz by Imam Al-Ghazzali (d. 505), this is a Shafi`ii fiqh text, so what would be the purpose of why one would look for Imam Ahmad to be used in a madhhab specific text? Indeed, he was not mentioned in the introductory remarks but the rulings that are specific to his madhhab and followers are referenced under sections like Wiping Over the Khuff, Nullifiers of the Wudu’ and so forth. If they had no validity they would not have been cited as disputed matters. This is the fact, yet some duplicitous devils insist on pretending that there is some type of agenda or any other affair.

When discussing Ibn `Abdul Barr’s (d. 463) (الانتقاء في فضائل الثلاثة الأئمة الفقهاء مالك والشافعي وأبي حنيفة رضي الله عنهم) The Most Noble Merits of the Three Fiqh Scholars: Malik, Ash-Shafi`ii and Abu Hanifah and why Imam Ahmad is not mentioned, the answer is simple. His madhhab was not in Al-Andalus and so it had no presence to discuss with regard to rulings. This text was a comparison of Malik (the madhhab of Ibn `Abdul Barr) and the others that had a presence there.

When a presence was established, Imams such as Abu Ishaq Ash-Shatibi (d. 790) made reference to them in both fiqh[4] as well as theology[5] across a number of topics.

Then comes the interesting case of all the Hanafi sources that some quote as proof that Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal was not a mujtahid or the like as they did not include him. They of course would not include him as they were primarily Imam Ahmad’s torturers during the Inquisition.

When the Mu`tazilah came into power in the era of Al-Ma’mun, they completely infiltrated the Hanafi madhhab to the degree that this became popularly known that Hanafis were Mu`tazilah. This would carry on for centuries. Let’s look at what Imam Ahmad said of the Hanafis of his time period:

Imam, Ahmad ibn Hanbal, may Allah be pleased with him, who said of the Hanafis of his[6] time:

وأَصحاب الرأي: وهم مبتدعة ضلال أعداء للسنة والأثر يبطلون الحديث ويردون على الرسول عليه الصلاة والسلام

The people of speculative opinion are innovators and astray. They are the enemies to the Sunnah and narratives through time. They nullify the hadith and reject the Messenger, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him.

ويتخذون أبا حنيفة ومن قال بقوله إمامًا ويدينون بدينهم وأي ضلالة أبين ممن قال بهذا

They take Abu Hanifah and what he says as an Imam for themselves. They judge by their religion and each type of astrayness and who can be shown to be more astray than the one who said the aforementioned.

وترك قول الرسول وأصحابه واتبع قول أبي حنيفة وأصحابه؟ فكفى بهذا غيًّا مرديًا وطغيانًا

Such a one has left the statement of the Messenger and Companions and followed the words of Abu Hanifah and his companions? One can be called astray, rejected and transgressing the bounds for making such a statement.[7] 

The Hanafis in the time of Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal had been infiltrated by the Mu`tazilah and they went into the Abbasid government through the ijtihad of one of the students of Imam Abu Hanifah, Al-Qadi Abu Yusuf.

Furthermore, even the Shaikh, Abul Hasan Al-Ash`ari, may Allah have mercy upon him, discussed the innovators that were in the Hanafi School in the Muslim West:[8]

وذكر هارون بن إسحاق الهنداني عن أبي نعيم عن سليمان بن عيسى القاري عن سفيان الثوري قال: قال لي حماد بن أبي سليمان: بلغ أبا حنيفة المشرك أني منه برئ

Harun ibn Ishaq Al-Hamadani mentioned from Abu Nu`aim from Sulaiman ibn `Isa Al-Qari from Sufyan Ath-Thawri who said: Hammad ibn Abi Sulaiman said to me, “Convey to Abu Hanifah the mushrik that I am disavowing myself from him”.

قال سليمان ثم قال سفيان: لأنه كان يقول القرآن مخلوق وذكر سفيان بن وكيع قال

It was mentioned by Sulaiman and then Sufyan Ath-Thawri said, “Hammad said these words as Abu Hanifah used to say that the Qur’an is created”. Sufyan ibn Waqi` mentioned:

سمعت عمر بن حماد بن أبي حنيفة قال اخبرني أبي: قال: الكلام الذي استتاب فيه ابن ابي ليلى أبا حنيفة هو قوله القرآن مخلوق. قال: فتاب منه وطاف به في الخلق.

I heard `Umar ibn Hammad ibn Abi Hanifah say, “My father said to me, ‘The speech someone is to have repentance taken from Ibn Abi Laila is that Abu Hanifah said that the Qur’an is created.’ So he repented from it and went around telling the people”.

قال أبي: فقلت له كيف صرت إلى هذا؟ قال: خفت والله أن يقوّم علي فأعطيته التقية.

My father said to him, ‘How could you do that?’ Ibn Abi Laila responded, ‘I was afraid – by Allah – that the people would come against me. So I gave them what they sought although it was by way of dissimulation or deception’.[9]

This is most likely coming from Mu`tazilah narrators within the Hanafi School at the time in Baghdad that Al-Ash`ari was exposed to and this explains the problems.

The Imam, `Abdul Qadir Al-Jilani, may Allah be pleased with him, said of the Hanafis of his time:

وأما المرجئة ففرقها اثنتا عشرة فرقة: الجهمية والصالحية والشمرية واليونسية واليونانية والنجارية والغيلانية والشبيبية والحنفية والمعاذية والمريسية والكرامية،

The Murji’ah cult have twelve sects within them: (1) Al-Jahmiyyah, (2) As-Salihiyyah, (3) Ash-Shamariyyah, (4) Al-Yunusiyyah, (5) Al-Yunainiyyah, (6) An-Najjariyyah, (7) Al-Ghailaniyyah, (8) Ash-Shabibiyyah, (9) Al-Hanafiyyah, (10) Al-Mu`adhiyyah, (11) Al-Marisiyyah and (12) Al-Karramiyyah.

وإنما سموا المرجئة لأنها رعمت أن الواحد من المكلفين إذا قال لا إله إلا الله محمد رسول الله وفعل بعد ذلك سائر المعاصي لم يدخل النار أصلًا

They are called the Murji’ah on account of the fact that they claim that one of the people that has said: There is no god but Allah and Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah and after that commits all the acts of disobedience shall not enter the Fire at all.

وأن الإيمان قول بلا عمل، والأعمال الشرائع والإيمان قول مجرّد والناس لا يتفاضلون في الإيمان، وأن إيمانهم وإيمان الملائكة والأنبياء واحد لا يزيد ولا ينقص

They also believe that Iman is statements without action and actions are laws with Iman being words alone. The people have no distinctions in Iman and that their Iman and the Iman of the angels and the prophets is one that does not increase or decrease.

ولا يستثنى فيه، فمن أقرّ بلسانه ولم يعمل فهو مؤمن.

 They also do not take exception in Iman while to them whoever affirmed Iman with his tongue but then did nothing, he is classed as a believer.[10]     

In no way are Imams Ahmad ibn Hanbal, `Abdul Qadir Al-Jilani and many other scholars denouncing the entirety of the Hanafi School.

Rather they were contending with elements within the School that were the predominant position for some five hundred years.

This would finally be resolved with the Seljuks and Ottomans who restored the valor and dignity to the long-sullied Hanafi School through their strident doctrinal orthodoxy and emphasis on orthopraxy.

These same superhistorians then forget the fact that the author of the sixth of the Sihah Sittah, Imam Ahmad ibn Shu`aib An-Nasa’ii (d. 302) made the following statement:

وبعد هؤلاء أحمد بن حنبل وإسحاق بن راهويه ويحيى بن أكثم

“And after these came Ahmad ibn Hanbal, Ishaq ibn Rahuwaih and Yahya ibn Aktham”. [11]

But why go through all this hassle when we can just quote the elders of the early generations regarding Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal’s rank in fiqh?

Imam Muhammad ibn Idris Ash-Shafi`ii (d. 204/5) said the following:

أحمد بن حنبل إمام في ثمان خصال: إمام في الحديث، إمام في الفقه، إمام في القرآن، إمام في اللغة، إمام في الفقر، إمام في الزهد، إمام في الورع، إمام في السنة

“Ahmad ibn Hanbal is Imam in eight things: (1) Imam in Hadith, (2) Imam in fiqh, (3) Imam in Qur’an, (4) Imam in Arabic Language, (5) Imam in faqr, (6) Imam in zuhd, (7) Imam in wara` and (8) Imam in the Sunnah”.[12]

`Abdur-Razzaq As-Sana`ani (d. 211), may Allah be pleased with him, said of Imam Ahmad:

ما رأيت أفقه من أحمد بن حنبل ولا أورع

“I have not seen anyone more knowledgeable of fiqh and with more wara` than Ahmad ibn Hanbal”.[13]

Imam Yahya ibn Ma`in (d. 233) said of Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal:

فقال: كان أفقه القوم

“He is the most knowledge of fiqh out of the people”.[14]

سئل أبو حاتم عن أحمد وعلي ابن المديني فقال:

Abu Hatim was asked about Ahmad ibn Hanbal and `Ali ibn Al-Madini and he said,

كانا في الحفظ متقاربين وكان أحمد أفقه

“They are close in memorisation but Ahmad is more knowledgeable in fiqh”.[15]

Abu `Ubaid Al-Qasim ibn Sallam (d. 224), may Allah have mercy upon him, said:

انتهى العلم إلى أربعة: أحمد ابن حنبل، وعلي بن المديني، ويحيى بن معين، وأبي بكر بن أبي شيبة، وكان أحمد أفقههم فيه

“Knowledge reached its apex in four: Ahmad ibn Hanbal (d. 241), `Ali ibn Al-Madini (d. 234), Yahya ibn Ma`in (d. 233) and Abu Bakr ibn Abi Shaibah (d. 256) and Ahmad was the most knowledgeable of them in fiqh”.[16]

So these are some SIX sources that have been quoted from the early ages that are contemporaneous to Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal or just after his age. Why would someone neglect to mention this after carrying out an a smear campaign against the Imam?

“Well, Abu Ja`far”, they wheeze while wringing their gnarled hands. “They just don’t know. Maybe they didn’t know about these sources”.

The fact of the matter is that they do know and these same people love to tout themselves as the

“Scholars of the Ummah”,

“Spokesmen for Islam in the West”

“Voices of Reason in the Ummah”

 and the

“Personal Imams and Advisors” to the government.

The fact of the matter is these people are theologically sick and this is shown through their spiritual sickness. If you can’t love the First Three Generations then you can’t be guided.


[1] In a grotesque twist, At-Tabari actually has a contradictory statement to this which will come up later in his own words. It then becomes a worry about whether As-Safadi or At-Tabari are both lying, telling the truth simultaneously or doing either. Perhaps this explains At-Tabari’s classification as sadiq by Adh-Dhahabi (Siyar A`lam in-Nubala’, vol.14, pp. 268-282) and not thiqah without restraint.

[2] As-Safadi’s Al-Wafi ul-Wafiyat, vol.2, pp. 213-214, Dar Ihya’ it-Turath il-`Arabi, Beirut, 1420

[3] cf. Ibn Al-Jawzi’s Al-Muntazam, vol.16, pp. 131-132, Dar ul-Kutub il-`Ilmiyyah, Beirut, 1412. This was immediately pointed out by Ibn Al-Jawzi (d. 597) yet no reference is made to this text or any other cross referencing by claimants to “the true Sunni path”.  

[4] [4] Al-I`tisam, pp. 16-17. This contains a glowing tribute to the preacher, the, the Memoriser, Imam `Abdur-Rahman ibn Muhammad ibn Ishaq ibn Yahya ibn Ibrahim ibn Al-Walid ibn Mandah ibn Battah (391-470) who was a renowned Hanbali scholar (fiqh and creed) and the things he saw on his travels.

[5] Al-I`tisam, pp. 78-79. Here a statement is given by Imam Abu Bakr ibn Abi Dawud about the danger of injecting one’s opinion into Islam (!).

[6] And the Imam certainly knew the guided from the misguided as he learned from Imams Muhammad ibn Hasan Ash-Shaibani, Abu Yusuf Ya`qub ibn Ibrahim Al-Ansari, Waki` ibn Al-Jarrah and other direct students of the Imam, Abu Hanifah. So we know that for sure his condemnation was not of Imam Abu Hanifah or the entire school but what happened in his time in which most of the school was overwhelmed with this situation. In today’s Egypt, the situation is by and large the same as in the case of Mahmud Shaltut (Hanafi Mu`tazilah) and so many others.

[7] Please see Al-Hussain’s Tabaqat ul-Hanabilah, vol.1, pp. 36-37.

[8] The Muslim West is from Iraq to Andalus.

[9] Please see Al-Ash`ari’s Al-Ibanah `an Usul id-Diyanah, pp. 56-57.

[10] cf. Al-Jilani’s Al-Ghunya, vol.1, pp. 126-127.

[11] Tasmiyat ul-Fuqaha’ il-Amsar, pp. 153-154

[12] Al-Minhaj ul-Ahmad, vol.1, pp. 8-10

[13] Al-Manaqib, pp. 95-96

[14] As-Sa`di’s Al-Jawhar ul-Muhassal, pp. 38-39

[15] Tahdhib ul-Asma’ wal-Lughat, vol.1, pp. 110-111

[16] Siyar A`lam in-Nubala’, vol.11, pp. 199-200

BIOGRAPHY: IMAM YUSUF AL-BARQAWI

A rare picture of the Imam, Yusuf Al-Barqawi

Known as the Shaikh of the Hanbalis at Al-Azhar, the Shaikh, the teacher of scholars, the well grounded Faqih, the high ranking, complete and virtuous `Alim, the teacher of high level, Yusuf Al-Barqawi.

Born in the year 1250 in the hamlet of Barqaa, one of the incorporated villages of Nablus, he started his career in his village and then made his way to Damascus, where he would sit with and study with none other than the great marja` and one of the revivers of the Religion in his time, Imam Hasan Ash-Shatti (d. 1274).

Imam Al-Barqawi kept company of Imam Ash-Shatti and studied usul, fiqh, inheritance law, grammar and syntax among other things. After the death of Ash-Shatti, he would go on and sit with one of his outstanding students, Imam `Abdullah Sufan Al-Qaddumi (d. 1331), also one of the renewers of the Religion in his time.

He sat with Al-Qaddumi, may Allah have mercy with him, for a number of years and then upon completion of a number of texts and their mastery, headed back to Nablus to teach and assist others.[1] He taught and benefited others before heading to Egypt, where he would finish his final lessons.

After realising this high aspiration, he was made Shaikh of the Hanbalis of Al-Azhar and this drew large numbers of students from all over that came to sit with him. People came to study fiqh and other sciences with him and became one of the most outstanding figures of his time.

He wrote many rulings and a few books, two of them hawkishly bearing down on Salafiyyah. One of his most outstanding students would be another grand Imam and enemy to the cults, Imam `Abdul Ghani ibn Yasin Al-Labadi (d. 1319). The Imam would later die, after a long life of teaching and hard work and be buried in his adopted homeland of Egypt in the year 1320. [2]

[1] It would be at this point that he became the Shaikh of most of the latter day people from the Qaddumi clan and Shattis along with so many others.

[2] cf. Muhammad Jamil Ash-Shatti’s Mukhtasar Tabaqat il-Hanabilah, pp. 210-211

COVERING THE HEAD AS PROPER DECORUM

Figure 1A: The great scholar of hadith and fiqh, Shaikh Muhammad Bakr Isma`il (d. 1426), dressed in the fine decorum of a Muslim man.

Someone once asked Imam Taqi ud-Din Ibn Taymiyyah:

Some initiates of Tasawwuf gather together making Remembrance of Allah, reciting from the Qur’an, then they make supplication and remove their head coverings and make themselves humble while not intending by that any self display or fame; instead they do this as a way to gain nearness to Allah. Is this sound or not?

Taqi ud-Din Ibn Taymiyyah (d. 728) remarked:

“Praise be to Allah, Lord of all creation. Gathering together for recitation of the Qur’an, Remembrance of Allah and supplication is good and praiseworthy as long as one does not take this as a regular and continuous customary action that the people must do like the gatherings that are called for in the Revealed Law. And this gathering should not resemble those of the people of innovation.

“As far as removing the headcovering with all of this, then this is disliked, and especially when one is doing so at a time of worship or during an act of worship. This is the case as it is a wrong action and it is not permitted for one to seek to gain nearness to Allah in this way.” [Al-Fatawa Al-Kubra, vol.1, pp. 52-53]

ETIQUETTE WITH THE QUR’AN

The Qur’an is to be respected.

The following question was asked of a marja`:

As-Salaamu `Alaikum wa Rahmatullah,

Is it permitted to place the Noble Qur’an in the bedroom, i.e. on a table while the husband and wife are having sexual intercourse in that room? Does this not constitute lack of etiquette with the Book of Allah? May Allah reward you with good for answering this question.

 

The marja,` Imam `Abdur-Rahman Ash-Shami, may Allah preserve him, answered with what follows:

Yes, what you have said is indeed true. To have sex in the same room where the Qur’an is on the table is lack of etiquette with the Qur’an. What you should do if possible is place the Qur’an in another room.

1 MUHARRAM 1442 AH: THE VALUE OF THE TAFSIR OF IBN `ABBAS

Figure 1A: Tanwir ul-Maqbas, the Tafsir of Ibn `Abbas

Tanwir ul-Maqbas as a source of tafsir literature

By Al-Hajj Abu Ja`far Al-Hanbali

The tafsir made use of is that of Tanwir ul-Maqbas min Tafsir Ibn `Abbas. This is a one volume work by `Abdullah ibn Al-`Abbas, the son of Al-`Abbas ibn `Abdul Muttalib, the uncle of the Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him.

This makes `Abdullah ibn `Abbas the first cousin of the Prophet Muhammad, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, in addition to his being one of his 124,000 Companions. In recent times, some doubt has been raised about this text so it deserves to be given treatment.

One of the sources of transmission

The chain quoted in the tafsir is: It was narrated to us by `Abdullah Ath-Thiqah ibn Al-Ma’mun Al-Harawi who narrated to us from my father. He said, It was narrated to us by Abu `Abdillah who said:

It was narrated to us by Abu `Ubaidullah Mahmud ibn Muhammad Ar-Razi who said: It was narrated to us by `Ammar ibn `Abdul Majid Al-Harawi who said:

It was narrated to us by `Ali ibn Ishaq As-Samarqandi from Muhammad ibn Marwan from Al-Kalbi from Abu Salih from Ibn `Abbas…

No dispute was raised about `Abdullah Ath-Thiqah ibn Al-Ma’mun Al-Harawi, Abu `Ubaidullah Mahmud ibn Muhammad Ar-Razi, `Ammar ibn `Abdul Majid Al-Harawi. This part of the chain is not argued at all by authorities.

Dispute around four personalities

The dispute then centres on `Ali ibn Ishaq As-Samarqandi, Muhammad ibn Marwan, Al-Kalbi and Abu Salih. So let us look at the points in perspective.

With regard to `Ali ibn Ishaq As-Samarqandi, it was said by Ibn Hajar Al-`Asqalani,

He is `Ali ibn Ishaq ibn Ibrahim ibn Muslim ibn Maimun ibn Nadhir ibn `Adi ibn Maahaan Al-Hanzali Abul Hasan As-Samarqandi. He narrated from `Abdullah ibn Al-Mubarak, Isma`il ibn Ja`far, Sufyan ibn `Uyainah, Abu Mu`awiyah, Abu Bakr ibn `Ayyash and others. [1]

Imam Ibn Hajar sums up,

Abu Hatim said, “He is sound”. Muhammad ibn Ibrahim ibn Mansur Al-Qari remarked, “As-Samarqandi died in the month of the Shawwal in the year 237”. I would like to further mention that Imam Ad-Daraqutni stated in his book Al-`Ilal of As-Samarqandi, “He is trustworthy”. [2]

Now that the trustworthiness of As-Samarqandi has been established, we turn our attention to Muhammad ibn Marwan.

Imam Muhammad ibn Hussain Adh-Dhahabi (d. 1397 AH) said of him,

He is Muhammad ibn Marwan As-Sudai Al-Kufi. This is As-Sudai the younger, who narrates from Hisham ibn `Urwah and Al-A`mash. They left him and one of them did accuse him of lying. As-Sudai the younger is also the student of Al-Kalbi.[3]

Imam Muhammad `Uthman Adh-Dhahabi says further:

Al-Bukhari said, ‘The people were silent about him’. He is the freed slave of the Khattabi people but hadith are not written from him. Yahya Ibn Ma`in mentioned, ‘It is clear that this man’s narrations are weak’.[4]

Looking at this, we can see that some people differ in As-Sudai the lesser. Someone accused him of lying, another said his narrations are weak and Al-Bukhari quoted that the people were silent about him.

Thus his narrations have not been ruled out although scrutinised. If it is him by himself, there is doubt, but in a chain, everyone is examined. Everyone up until him has been sound, so he is left in place.

As for Al-Kalbi, Imam Muhammad `Uthman Adh-Dhahabi (d. 748 AH) said of Al-Kalbi:

He is Muhammad ibn As-Sa’ib Al-Kalbi…Sufyan ibn `Uyainah said, “Al-Kalbi said, ‘Abu Salih told me: Look into everything that you narrate from me. Do not narrate it verbally’.”[5]

The Imam said further:

Ya`la ibn `Ubaid said, “Sufyan said, ‘Be careful what you take from Al-Kalbi’. Someone remarked, ‘But you take from him’. Sufyan responded, ‘I am aware of where the truth is from the lie’.” [6]

Thus Al-Kalbi is not altogether rejected. Rather, it must be checked what he has taken, when he took it and from where it came in the end. If everything else is sound, then there is no issue. Anything else has to be examined.

The fact that major Imams upon examination took from him shows that there is some dispute about him but not one great enough that disqualifies him from being used in the discussion of Ibn `Abbas’s tafsir at all.

Finally, there is Abu Salih. Let us go to the words of Imams Muhammad `Uthman Adh-Dhahabi and Ibn Hajar Al-`Asqalani (d. 852 AH) on the topic. Imam Adh-Dhahabi states:

He is `Abdullah ibn `Salih ibn Muhammad ibn Muslim Al-Juhni Al-Masri Abu Salih. He is the writer and scribe of Al-Laith ibn Sa`d regarding his wealth. Abu Salih is a man of abundant hadith and knowledge although he has some repudiation in that regard.

Abu Salih narrated from Mu`awiyah ibn Salih, Al-Laith ibn Sa`d, Musa ibn `Ula, Ibn Wahb, Ibn Ma`in, Ahmad ibn Al-Furat and others.[7]

Imam Ibn Hajar writes:

Abu Hatim also said, “I heard `Abdul Malik ibn Shu`aib say, ‘Abu Salih is trustworthy and reliable. He heard the hadith from my grandfather Al-Laith ibn Sa`d. My father used to sit in his company for hadith and he would also narrate hadith in the presence of my father’. ”[8]

The Imam further stated,

Ibn Abi Hatim stated, “I asked Abu Hatim Ar-Razi about Abu Salih and he replied, ‘He has not narrated anything in my sight that depended upon or was based upon lying or falsehood. He has good hadith’. ”[9]

Within these same texts, some other authorities question aspects of his narration or reliability. Keeping this in mind, the fact that no categorical statement was made about him being unreliable leaves him in the realms of acceptability as the basic principle in this field is reliable until proven otherwise without doubt.

Is Al-Fairuzabadi the author of the text?

It was claimed by one author that Abu Tahir Muhammad ibn Ya`qub Al-Fairuzabadi (d. 817 AH) gathered together the sources for the tafsir Ibn `Abbas and then attributed it to him. The problem with this position is that Al-Fairuzabadi’s supposed patchwork of Ibn `Abbas’s tafsir is four volumes while Tanwir ul-Maqbas is only one volume.[10]

In closing, we should also keep in mind that this is but one chain of transmission from which we recover the tafsir of Ibn `Abbas. There are numerous other chains, such as those of Mujahid, Tawoos and `Ali ibn Talhah as was alluded to by Imam Ibn Hajar Al-`Asqalani.[11]

When the content of these chains and aspects of commentary are compared with that in Tanwir ul-Maqbas, the statements are the same with the exception of the chains of transmission. The actual text being given over is virtually the same albeit a few words and two sentences are different.

This therefore shows us that the commentary of Ibn `Abbas has come to us from numerous sources and they are reliable through all of them although individual narrators have required research to establish this point.

[1] Tahdhib ut-Tahdhib, vol.4, pp. 563-564 entry #5500, Dar ul-Kitab il-`Ilmiyyah, Beirut, 1425 AH

[2] Tahdhib ut-Tahdhib, vol.4, pp. 563-564 entry #5500, Dar ul-Kitab il-`Ilmiyyah, Beirut, 1425 AH

[3] Please see the Imams Muhammad Hussain Adh-Dhahabi in At-Tafsir wal-Mufassirin, vol.2, pp. 25-27; Muhammad ibn `Uthman Adh-Dhahabi in his  Mizan ul-I`tidal fi Naqd ir-Rijal, vol.4, pp. 31-33, Dar ul-Ma`rifah, Beirut, 1382 AH

[4] Mizan ul-I`tidal fi Naqd ir-Rijal, vol.4, pp. 31-33

[5] Mizan ul-I`tidal fi Naqd ir-Rijal, vol.3, pp. 556-559 entry #7575

[6] Mizan ul-I`tidal fi Naqd ir-Rijal, vol.3, pp. 556-559 entry #7575

[7] Mizan ul-I`tidal fi Naqd ir-Rijal, vol.3, pp. 440-445 entry #4383

[8] Tahdhib ut-Tahdhib, vol., pp. 513-517, vol.3, pp. , Dar ul-Kitab il-`Ilmiyyah, Beirut, 1425 AH

[9] Tahdhib ut-Tahdhib, vol., pp. 513-517, vol.3, pp. , Dar ul-Kitab il-`Ilmiyyah, Beirut, 1425 AH

[10] Please see Hajji Khalifah in his work, Kashf uz-Zunun, vol.1, pp. 501-502, Dar Ihya’ ut-Turath il-`Arabi, Beirut, 1360 AH

[11] Hadi us-Sari, vol.1, pp. 410-416

PLURAL MARRIAGE: IS JUST ONE WIFE THE ONLY OPTION? part 2

The following question was asked of a marja`:

 

As-Salaamu `Alaikum wa Rahmatullah,

Does polygamy have conditions? What is it that we are to do when the first wife categorically rejects polygamy and explicitly states that she will seek a divorce if the husband should engage in the act during their marriage?

The marja,` Imam `Abdur-Rahman Ash-Shami, may Allah preserve him, answered with what follows:

 

There are no conditions set for polygamy when the practice in its’ essence is permitted. And when someone has made a covenant of marriage with a second or third wife and the pillars and conditions of the marriage are completed, then the contract is sound.

The main issue is that that the polygamy in its’ essence must be adhered to according to what affairs are permitted, disliked and impermissible. Polygamy is permitted when there is a benefit for the husband such as in the case when his first wife has not been faithful to him or the first wife is barren and he wants more children.

Polygamy would be disliked when there the husband has no need. It was said by Imam Mustafa Ar-Ruhaibani: “He does not marry more than one wife and this is praiseworthy as long as she has been faithful and submissive to him and there is not seeking towards that which is impermissible.” The scholars of the Sunan collections have narrated with a sound chain of transmission the following hadith, ‘Whoever had two wives and inclined to one of them over the other, then he will come on the Day of Resurrection with one side leaning.’

Polygamy would be impermissible for the husband when he reasonably knows or is certain that he would not be able to be just in that situation and this has basis according to what has been narrated by Imams Malik ibn Anas and Ibn Majah in a hadith where the Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, said, “There is no harm or reciprocating harm.” This hadith is indeed authentic.

When the first wife rejects being in a polygamous marriage and explicitly states that she will seek a divorce if this is done in marriage, then in the event that he is just and it is not necessary for him but he insists on it, then he may divorce her. If he chooses not to, that is his choice. If she is patience and does not want it or she wants a khula` then this is permitted. Allah knows best in that regard.

Taken from the website of the maraji`

PLURAL MARRIAGE: IS JUST ONE WIFE THE ONLY OPTION?

Is marrying only one wife what is best?

Is it praiseworthy to only marry one wife and not engage in polygamy?

 

Imam Mansur ibn Yunus Al-Buhuti,[1] may Allah be pleased with him, said the following:

Yahya ibn Ja`adah narrated that the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, said, “The best benefit that a man could be shown after his Islam is a beautiful wife that makes him happy when he looks at her, obeys him when he commands her and preserves his hidden matters when he is away regarding his wealth and his honour.” This is collected by Sa`id ibn Mansur.

It is praiseworthy that she be an intelligent and foreign woman to him. This will mean that the child will be intelligent and that if he is not there is no safeguard from Talaq and his going to near relatives and going towards cutting family ties when the command is to keep them.

And as marriage is for the intent of living together in harmony and maintainance, this is not realised with stupid or small minded women and this will not lead to a good life. It may be that this same stupidity is passed on to the child. It has been said, “Avoid the stupid women for her child will be a waste of time and her health will be a trial”.

And it is praiseworthy that he should not marry more than one as long as his his sexual needs and chastity are being preserved through being with her on account of the fact that the avoidance of the impermissible has already been achieved.

The Exalted One has said,

And you will never be able to do justice between the women, even if you should strive to do so.[2]

And the Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, said, “Whoever has two wives and includes towards one other the other shall come on the Day of Resurrection with one side inclining.” This is collected by Abu Dawud, At-Tirmidhi, Ibn Majah, An-Nasa’ii and Ad-Darimi.

Imam Ahmad once wanted to get married to both a free woman and a slave woman and said, “My desire is that they should both have a little bit of heft.” It has been said by some that one should seek out what type of hair the woman has as this will indicate whether her build is hefty or not.

Imam Al-Buhuti said further:

Thus marrying more than one wife is permitted as explicitly stated in Al-Hidayah and Al-Madhhab,[3] Al-Mustaw`ib,[4] Al-Khulasah,[5] Al-Kafi,[6] Ar-Ri`ayah – both the large and small editions[7]Al-Hawi As-Saghir,[8] Al-Fa’iq [9]and other texts.

This ruling is given precedence by the author[10] of Al-Furu` and the author[11] of Tajrid ul-`Inayah. The author[12] of Al-Insaf  said, “And this is the ruling of the School.”

[1] d. 1051 (AD 1656). He is Abus-Sa`adat Mansur ibn Yunus ibn Salah ud-Din ibn Hasan ibn Ahmad ibn `Ali Al-Buhuti. Egyptian marja` and one of the depended upon sources in the Hanbali School in the later age, he studied with premier scholars of Sham, such as Imams Yahya Al-Hajjawi and others. He became the leading Hanbali scholar in Egypt, even outranking the senior Subki, Futuhi and Sa`di families in importance. He wrote five large works in fiqh and smaller texts on selected topics. The Imam, Sulaiman ibn `Ali (d. 1079 (AD 1674), when he learned that Al-Buhuti had penned his fiqh text, Ar-Rawd ul-Murbi`, burned his own text and told all his students in Najd to follow the Imam. Please see Ibn Humaid’s As-Suhub ul-Wabilah, pp. 472-474

[2] Surat un-Nisa’ (4), ayah 129

[3] 432-510 (AD 1041-1116). He is Abul Khattab Mahfuz ibn Ahmad Al-Kalwadhani. The Imam was perhaps the greatest teacher of `Abdul Qadir ibn Musa Al-Jilani and stood shoulder to shoulder with the greatest scholars of the madhhab in his time. The khalifa of his time made him the chief Qadi for the Islamic world and often when scholars saw him, they would comment, ‘Here comes the law,’ referring to his penchant for enforcing justice. Imam Al-Kalwadhani saw no difference between prosecution for the rich or the poor.  But he was even handed, believing no one to be above the law. He left behind some 10 or more books in various sciences. Please see Ibn Rajab’s Adh-Dhailu `Ala Tabaqat ul-Hanabilah, vol. 3, pp. 97-106

[4] d. 610 (AD 1213). He is Nusair ud-Din Abu `Abdullah Muhammad ibn `Abdullah ibn Al-Hussain, known as Ibn Sunainah. Hailing the city of Rayy in today’s Iran, he was the author of books on inheritance, theology and poetry, his main accomplishment being gathering together some ten books within one for his amazing work, Al-Mustaw`ab, still considered a masterpiece. cf. Ibn Rajab’s Adh-Dhailu `Al Tabaqat il-Hanabilah, vol.4, pp. 95-96.

[5] 519-606 (AD 1124-1207). He is Wajih ud-Din Abul-Mu`ali As`ad ibn Al-Munajja ibn ibn Barakat At-Tanukhi. One of the Shaikhs of the Hanbalis in his time, he narrated from Imam Muwaffaq ud-Din Ibn Qudamah and left behind a considerable written legacy. cf. Ibn Rajab’s Adh-Dhailu `Al Tabaqat il-Hanabilah, vol.3, pp. 49-50.

[6] 541-620 (AD 1146-1223). He is Muwaffaq ud-Din Abu Muhammad `Abdullah ibn Ahmad ibn Qudamah An-Nabulsi Al-Jamma`ili Al-Maqdisi. Renewer of his age, scholar, judge, jurist and expounder, he wrote some 200 or more books, touching on every subject in Islam. He learned from scholars of Iraq and Sham, combining both traditions successfully to bring about one of the greatest scholars the world had seen. cf. Ash-Shatti’s Mukhtasar Tabaqat il-Hanabilah, pp. 52-54

[7] d. 695 (AD 1296). He is Najm ud-Din Abu `Abdullah Ahmad ibn Hamdan ibn Shabib ibn Hamdan ibn Shabib ibn Hamdan Al-Harrani. Specialist in fiqh, Usul, he is author of some five works and later taught in Cairo. cf. Ibn Rajab’s Adh-Dhailu `Ala Tabaqat il-Hanabilah, vol.3, pp. 271-272.

[8] 624-684 (AD 1227-1287). He is Abu Talib Nur ud-Din `Abdur-Rahman ibn `Umar  ibn Abil Qasim ibn `Ali ibn `Uthman Al-Basri Al-`Abdaliyari. High ranking scholar of his time, he was a student of Majd ud-Din Ibn Taymiyyah (d. 652), memorised Al-Hidayah and other fiqh works. cf. Ibn Rajab’s  Adh-Dhailu `Ala Tabaqat il-Hanabilah, vol.2, pp. 312-313.

[9] 693-771 (AD 1294-1370). Known as Qadi Ibn Al-Jabal, he is Abul `Abbas Ahmad ibn Al-Hasan ibn `Abdullah ibn Abi `Umar Al-Maqdisi As-Salihi. Scholar of many disciplines, he authored a work on fiqh that summarized the rulings of the Hanbali School in bullet points as well as some six other books. He taught and lived his life on the famed Mount Qasiyun. cf. Ibn Rajab’s Adh-Dhailu `Al Tabaqat il-Hanabilah, vol.4, pp. 372-373.

[10] 712-762 AH (AD 1311-1362). He is Muhammad ibn Muflih ibn Muhammad ibn Mufarraj Al-Maqdisi Ar-Ramini As-Salihi. Marja` of his time, scholar of many disciplines, he is the author of books on fiqh, theology, medicine and more in addition to be one of the authorised commentator’s on Al-Muqni`. He would later die and be buried at the foot of Mount Qasiyun. Please see Ibn Humaid’s As-Suhub ul-Wabilah `ala Dara’ih il-Hanabilah, pp. 452-454.

[11] 750-803 (AD 1353-1406). He is `Ala’ ud-Din `Ali ibn Muhammad ibn `Ali ibn `Abbas ibn Fityan Al-Ba`li Ad-Dimashqi. Known as Ibn ul-Liham (or Laham), he became leader of the School in Sham along with Imam Ibn Muflih. He is the author of some five texts and summarised a number of tomes for easier application for students of knowledge. cf. Imam Ibn Humaid’s As-Suhub ul-Wabilah, pp. 309-310.

[12] 820-885 (AD 1417-1480). He is `Ala’ ud-Din Abul Hasan `Ali ibn Sulaiman ibn Ahmad ibn Muhammad Al-Mardawi As-Sa`di As-Salihi. Judge, jurist, historian and grammarian, he was known for writing books on the narrations and debates within the Hanbali School. He organised the arguments under chapter headings, then acted as chief judge for most of his later life until his death. He wrote more than 20 books and was a mujtahid murajjih. Please see Ash-Shatti’s Mukhtasar Tabaqat il-Hanabilah, pp. 76-81

AL-WA`II AL-ISLAMI INTERVIEW WITH IMAM ISMA`IL BADRAN AD-DUMI FROM 1422

Gatherings for hearing and reciting the Books of Hanbali Fiqh 

An Interview with Imam Isma`il Badran Ad-Dumi

It is well known that the scholars are the inheritors of the prophets due to their being the successors of these people in the Muslim societies and in reality they have taken on the inheritance of direct knowledge of Allah, Usul of the methodology and different judgements that cover life.

This is the correct understanding and fulfillment of the statement of the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, “The rank of the scholar over the worshipper is like my rank over the least of you.” And this is collected by Imam At-Tirmidhi.

There is no action without knowledge and no completion of an action without fiqh. Knowledge and action are both saving graces for the human being in this life and the Hereafter from certain destruction, evil and tribulations.

Al-Wa`ii Al-Islami magazine recently came to one of the seniormost scholars of Sham and the Muslim world – namely the Shaikh, Isma`il Badran Ad-Dumi – in order to sit down and shed light on the matters of the scholars today, knowing the levels and affairs between the schools of knowledge of the Revealed Law, the ways to preserve our Usul in the different challenges that arise and those who are taking on madhhab in this time. We present to you the following interview:

Al-Wa`ii Al-Islami: What do you say about the lack of righteous scholars that fear Allah in this time and this absence is abundantly clear? What do you say about that?

Imam Isma`il Badran Ad-Dumi: By the Favour of Allah, there are indeed righteous scholars that fear Allah in this time, scholars that act by what they know as well as fiqh scholars.

We have in Sham some trustworthy and respected scholars, for example Dr. Muhammad Sa`id Ramadan Al-Bouti, Muhammad Ratib An-Nabulsi, Muhammad Kurayyim Rajih and Mahdi Mustafa An-Nur – and these scholars are indeed head over the Muslim world and not just Sham alone.

AWI: What is the difference between the shaikh, the `alim and the `allamah?

Imam Isma`il Badran Ad-Dumi: The word ‘shaikh’ in the language does not entail the word ‘`alim.’ In our day to day language, the word ‘shaikh’ signifies faqih or fiqh scholar and the imam of a central masjid. In terms of the word ‘`alim’ this is a higher rank and the word ‘`allamah is an even higher rank.

AWI: What was the reason for your recent visit to Kuwait?

Imam Isma`il Badran Ad-Dumi: Our visit was due to coming together to listen to the books of fiqh with the students of knowledge. Books read to me at this time include Kashf ul-Mukhaddarat – the Commentary on Aksar ul-Mukhtasarat, Nail ul-Ma’arib – the Commentary on Dalil ut-Talib, Bulugh ul-Qasid – the Commentary on Bidayat ul-`Abid.

AWI: Upon who does the responsibility fall for reviewing and safeguarding the sciences of the Revealed Law and any short comings?

Imam Isma`il Badran Ad-Dumi: There is a shortcoming from both the scholars and the people. The people have this idea that whoever seeks knowledge should have no other work for him to support himself; but I was a farmer and I would came from the farm land to the house of the beloved in order for us to review the lesson. This was done by both myself, my brother and my cousin.

Then there are those who argue, “We are not able to review knowledge and seek knowledge due to day to day needs and other pressing matters.” However speech such as this is rejected as there are 24 hours in a day and it is actually possible for you to remove one hour of your sleep or work in order to engage in the pursuit of the knowledge of the Revealed Law that is required.

AWI: What is your opinion on the taking on madhhabs and ijtihad in the subject of seeking knowledge?

Imam Isma`il Badran Ad-Dumi: In terms of the one who has the ability to exert himself in the Usul, there is no prohibition, like in the case of the Shaikh, `Abdul Qadir Badran, the scholar of Sham.

He had reached the level of ijtihad while it was not dire necessity that he take a madhhab with the knowledge that he had been Hanafi and in his later life he took the Hanbali madhhab.[1] So Consensus is possible in some of the affairs and in some judgements. It is not a condition that one adhere to the madhhab in all affairs without question as this would be named partisanship or bias and I am indeed at war with bias such as this in affairs.[2]

In terms of the body of people who recite to me texts I would say to them, “Do not call me solely Hanbali. Indeed in my Usul I am Hanbali but I do not give support to bias and partisanship.”[3] When the judgement of a piece of evidence is stronger than another piece of proof, then following the stronger position has the most right to be followed.[4]

AWI: What is your opinion on the profusion of rulings today?

Imam Isma`il Badran Ad-Dumi: I would say that the shaikh, the `alim who has reached the level of fatwa that he read the text I`lam ul-Muwaqqi`in[5] before he would engage in rulings. As for the one who did not read such a book as this, then it is impermissible for him to engage in giving rulings.[6]

If the question was in Arabic language or fiqh and he is not completely certain, then he should not answer while he does not have the information yet. Remember that the Imam, Malik ibn Anas – may Allah be pleased with him – was asked 36 questions and only answered three of these and the other 33 he said, “I don’t know.”

There is also the narrative that one of the scholars of the Yemen came to Al-Madinah the Radiant and asked him a question, to which he replied, “I don’t know.” The man responded, “Dear Imam, I came all the way from the Yemen to ask Malik questions and his response was ‘I don’t know?!’ ”

The Imam responded, “Go back to your people and say to them, ‘I went and asked Malik a question and he said he didn’t know.’ ”

 

[1] trans note: In his early life, the Imam was studying several different things at once. Before he sat with people to systematise his knowledge, he studied Hanafi fiqh, Shafi`ii fiqh, different books of logic, prosody and Tasawwuf in various masjids with various people but it was not organised.

[2] trans note: In terms of the fiqh, there are some 15-20% of issues that the four madhhabs differ in and of these there are a certain percentage that are currently open and need resolving. So when that is possible and Consensus can be made a reality, this should indeed be done.

[3] trans note: So if there is some need in which he needs to borrow from another school or another ruling within one’s school, the individual should do so.

[4] trans note: So the Imam is referring to a principle in Usul ul-Fiqh in the madhhab that when the mujtahid should see a text that in his research and exertion is indeed stronger, then he would refer to this and utilise this position rather than the other one. So one would be Hanbali using Usul ul-Fiqh but in the branch issues he would be looking at the masa’il, he would be looking at the texts and coming to conclusions.

[5] trans note: This is a text on Usul written by Imam Ibn ul-Qayyim.

[6] trans note: This is because this individual did not learn the requisite knowledge and principles to carry out the principles of Usul ul-Fiqh that would lead to the ruling.