How to understand weak hadeeth
Many of the early scholars held the firm opinion that to act upon, or derive rulings from a hadith which has been declared to be weak, by the scholars of hadith is unacceptable. Their reasoning being that Islam has no need of anything weak, and the authentic material of Islam will suffice for all time, the da'eef hadith amounting only to a conjecture which has the possibility of being correct.
I quote from the introduction of The Prophet's Prayer Described of Shaykh al-Albani,
"...this is because I hold that the authentic ahadith are sufficient, leaving no need for anything weak, for the latter does not amount to anything except dhann (conjecture, suspicion), and incorrect conjecture at that; as the Exalted says: "...and conjecture is of no use against the truth."
The following quotes show the position of the early Scholars of hadith on this issue:
Imam ash-Shafi'i[1]wrote in his Risaalah,
Surely, the greatest of liars is he who ascribes to me that which I did not say, and who claims to have dreamt what he did not dream, and who claims that he is the son of someone other than his own father.
Whoever ascribes to me that which I did not say, will surely have to occupy his seat in the fire [of hell]
Surely, whoever tells untruths about me, will have a house built for him in the fire [of hell].
Whoever tells untruths about me is surely seeking for himself a resting place in the fire [of hell]. The Messenger of Allah began to say that while he was wiping the ground with his hand.
From Abu Hurayra, "You may report about the Children of Israel and there is no blame (haraj). Report about/from me, but do not tell untruths about me."
This is the most emphatic hadith ever transmitted from the Messenger of Allah on this matter. We have relied on it as well as on others (ahadith or evidences) in not accepting any report except from a trustworthy [transmitter], and that we know the truthfulness of those who transmitted the hadith since it was begun till its end is reached.
If someone would say: What evidence is there in this hadith for what you have stated?
It would be said: Knowledge surely has made it certain that the Prophet would never, in any circumstances, order anyone to lie about the Children of Israel, nor about anyone else. So when he has permitted reporting about (al-haditha 'an) the Children of Israel, it was not accepting untruthfulness about the Children of Israel that he has permitted, but he only has permitted accepting that from whom reported it, whose truthfulness or untruthfulness is not known."
Imam Muslim states in the introduction to his Sahih, under the chapter heading, "the weak ahadith are to be discarded and only authentic ahadith are to be narrated":
"To proceed, may Allah have mercy upon you. If it were not from the evil practice that we have seen from many who take upon themselves the position of Muhaddith, in their leaving the obligation to discard the weak ahadith and munkar narrations and to suffice with only the authentic ahadith - well known and transmitted from reliable narrators, well known for their truthfulness and trustworthiness. After knowing and admitting with their tongues that much of what they fling at the ignorant is to be rejected and is transmitted by unsatisfactory narrators whose narrations are censured by the scholars of hadith like Malik, Yahya bin Sa'eed al-Qattaan and others..... And know may Allah have mercy upon you, that which is obligatory upon everyone who is able to distinguish between authentic and weak narrations and between the suspect and reliable narrators, is that he should narrate therefrom except those known to be authentic and have trustworthy narrators..."
Imam ibn Rajab al-Hanbali[2] says, 'and it is clear from what Muslim mentions in the introduction to his book that it is necessary that the ahadith to do with targheebwa’tarheeb (encouragement and discouragement) are not narrated except from those that ahkaam (rules and regulations) are narrated [meaning the authentic ahadith]'
al-Allamah Jamaal ud-Deen al-Qasimi narrates from a group of the Imams of hadith that they did not accept acting by a weak hadith at all, like ibn Ma'een, al-Bukhari, Muslim, Abu Bakribn al-Arabi al-Maaliki, ibn Hazm and others. [3]
Abu Bakribn al-Arabi[4] said while commenting on the hadith, “the halal is clear and the haram is clear",
".... What I have [as the reason] regarding that, and Allah knows best, is that which we have transmitted from Ahmad ibnHanbal that he permits weak ahadith regarding al-wara’ (abstaining from doubtful matters). May Allah be pleased with al-Bukhari who did not see for the heart to hold to, or for the religion to be connected through anything except the authentic [ahadith], and that is our position. If we were to incline to the position of Ahmad; then holding to da'eef ahadith cannot be [accepted] except in lessons/admonishment which soften the heart, but as for the basis (usul) there is no way to [accept] that." [5]
Ibn Hazm[6] says in al-Milal, "and it is not permissible with us that we say as these ahadith say (i.e. those weak and fabricated narrations), or to trust in them, or to take anything from them."
Ibn Taymiyyah stated,
'And it is not permissible to rely in the Shari’ah upon da'eef ahadith which are not sahih or hasan. But Ahmad bin Hanbal and other scholars considered it permissible to report with regards to fadaa'il al-amaal(rewards and excellences of actions) that which they did not know to be affirmed, when it is known that it is not a lie. And that is because when the action is known to be legislated with Shari’ah evidence, it is possible that the reward be a fact. And not one of the Imams said that he considered it to be permissible to make something obligatory or recommended based upon a da'eef hadith.'[7]
Ibn Taymiyyah then said,
'And Ahmad bin Hanbal or others like him from the Imams did not rely upon this type of ahadith in the Shari'ah. And the one who relates from Ahmad that he used to rely upon the weak ahadith, which are not sahih or hasan, has erred.'
So the narrations from him that he would act upon a da'eefhadith when there was nothing else present in the texts on that subject, or nothing that contradicted that da'eef hadith, does not mean that Imam Ahmad used them as proof in the Shari’ah. Allah knows best.
al-Allamah Ahmad Shakir says,
'And as for what Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal and Abd’Rahman bin Mahdi, and Abdullah bin al-Mubaarak said,
"When it is narrated to us pertaining to al-halal wa’l-haram we are strict. And when it is narrated to us pertaining to fadaa'il al-amaal (the rewards and excellence of actions) then we are lenient;"
They mean, according to what I find to be most convincing - and Allah knows best - that the leniency was in their taking the hasan hadith, that which does not reach the level of sahih. Because the convention of distinguishing between the Sahih and Hasan was not present at their time... rather many of the early scholars did not describe a hadith except by it being sahih or da'eef only.'[8]
So what is clear is that the term hasan was not present at that time, and a great deal of what these scholars used to narrate in terms of fadaa'il al-amaal was of the level of what the later scholars called hasan.
So the opinion from the above mentioned scholars is to leave acting by the weak hadith in totality, except where there is a consensus of the Islamic scholars on the issue at hand, and Allah knows best. And as for the claims of some that Imam Ahmad amongst others of the early scholars allowed weak ahadith to be used in Shari’ah rulings then that has no firm basis as mentioned above. [9]
And especially in this day and age, when so many innovations and misunderstandings about religion are present, many of them having their roots in these da'eef ahadith, it becomes even more essential to narrate only authentic ahadith as part of the process of purifying the understanding of the religion.
The preceding was with regards to acting upon the da'eef hadith, as regards to using the da'eef hadith in certain Islamic sciences like in the Hadith science in which the weak ahadith are used to support or strengthen other ahadith, then this has been done and is being done by all of the Scholars of Hadith.
For those that follow the opinion that acting upon a da'eef ahadith is permissible, it would be good to mention the three conditions for acting upon a da'eef ahadith as laid out by Ibn Hajr al-Asqalani:
1) Upon that which they all agree, that it should not be very weak so that it excludes that only narrated by a liar, one accused of lying and one who makes serious mistakes.
2) That is falls under a general proof already present - which excludes that which is invented having no basis.
3) That acting upon it the person does not think that it is something established - in order that he does not attribute to the Prophet what he did not say. [10]
We can see from these conditions the following: The first principle lays out the obligation to make known the weak ahadith from the authentic, even in fadaa'il al-amaal. Something that many people who follow this opinion do not do - many of the scholars who follow this opinion today are not even capable of discerning whether the hadith they are quoting contains the types of weaknesses indicated above!
The second principle establishes that in reality the person is not acting by the weak hadith but rather by the general proof already present. [11]
Notes:
Sources: www.islam21c.com
Islam21c requests all the readers of this article, and others, to share it on your facebook, twitter, and other platforms to further spread our efforts.
1.He is the MujtahidImam and the Mujaddid of his time, Muhammad bin Idrees ash-Shaafi'ee. He studied under a galaxy of prominent Imams, amongst them Imam Maalik.
2.'Sharh at-Tirmidhee' (2/112).He is the exemplary Imam and great Mujtahid scholar, ibn Rajab al Hanbali, a student of both ibn Taymiyyah and ibn al-Qayyim amongst others.
3.'Qawaa'id al-Hadith' (pg. 113) of al-Qaasimee.
4.'Aridat al-AhwadheeSharhSunan at-Tirmidhee' (5/201)
5.Quoted from Abu Ghuddas introduction to al-Muhasibi's 'Risalah al-Mustarshideen' (pp58) where he states that he has abridged the quote from ibn al-Arabi.
6.He is the great Imam who championed the Dhaahiree School of thought and wrote many invaluable treatise, amongst them his 'Muhalla' in usul al-fiqh, and 'MilalwaNahl' on different sects. He died in the year????
7.'al-Qaa'idah al-Jaleelah' (pg.82) of IbnTaymiyyah
8.'al-Baa'ith al-Hatheeth' (pg.101) of Ahmad Shakir.
9.So what would the author of 'al-Albani Unveiled' say about the position of all these scholars, would he label them all as ignorant as well, as he has done in his amazing 'scholarly' work?!
10.As mentioned by his student as-Sakhaawi
11.The quotes are taken from the introductions of 'Sahih al-Jaami as-Sagheer', 'Tamaam al-Minna', 'Silsilah ad-Da'eefah' (Vol. 1) of al-Albaanee, with the exception of the quotes of Imam ash-Shaafi'ee and ibn al-Arabi.
Many of the early scholars held the firm opinion that to act upon, or derive rulings from a hadith which has been declared to be weak, by the scholars of hadith is unacceptable. Their reasoning being that Islam has no need of anything weak, and the authentic material of Islam will suffice for all time, the da'eef hadith amounting only to a conjecture which has the possibility of being correct.
I quote from the introduction of The Prophet's Prayer Described of Shaykh al-Albani,
"...this is because I hold that the authentic ahadith are sufficient, leaving no need for anything weak, for the latter does not amount to anything except dhann (conjecture, suspicion), and incorrect conjecture at that; as the Exalted says: "...and conjecture is of no use against the truth."
The following quotes show the position of the early Scholars of hadith on this issue:
Imam ash-Shafi'i[1]wrote in his Risaalah,
Surely, the greatest of liars is he who ascribes to me that which I did not say, and who claims to have dreamt what he did not dream, and who claims that he is the son of someone other than his own father.
Whoever ascribes to me that which I did not say, will surely have to occupy his seat in the fire [of hell]
Surely, whoever tells untruths about me, will have a house built for him in the fire [of hell].
Whoever tells untruths about me is surely seeking for himself a resting place in the fire [of hell]. The Messenger of Allah began to say that while he was wiping the ground with his hand.
From Abu Hurayra, "You may report about the Children of Israel and there is no blame (haraj). Report about/from me, but do not tell untruths about me."
This is the most emphatic hadith ever transmitted from the Messenger of Allah on this matter. We have relied on it as well as on others (ahadith or evidences) in not accepting any report except from a trustworthy [transmitter], and that we know the truthfulness of those who transmitted the hadith since it was begun till its end is reached.
If someone would say: What evidence is there in this hadith for what you have stated?
It would be said: Knowledge surely has made it certain that the Prophet would never, in any circumstances, order anyone to lie about the Children of Israel, nor about anyone else. So when he has permitted reporting about (al-haditha 'an) the Children of Israel, it was not accepting untruthfulness about the Children of Israel that he has permitted, but he only has permitted accepting that from whom reported it, whose truthfulness or untruthfulness is not known."
Imam Muslim states in the introduction to his Sahih, under the chapter heading, "the weak ahadith are to be discarded and only authentic ahadith are to be narrated":
"To proceed, may Allah have mercy upon you. If it were not from the evil practice that we have seen from many who take upon themselves the position of Muhaddith, in their leaving the obligation to discard the weak ahadith and munkar narrations and to suffice with only the authentic ahadith - well known and transmitted from reliable narrators, well known for their truthfulness and trustworthiness. After knowing and admitting with their tongues that much of what they fling at the ignorant is to be rejected and is transmitted by unsatisfactory narrators whose narrations are censured by the scholars of hadith like Malik, Yahya bin Sa'eed al-Qattaan and others..... And know may Allah have mercy upon you, that which is obligatory upon everyone who is able to distinguish between authentic and weak narrations and between the suspect and reliable narrators, is that he should narrate therefrom except those known to be authentic and have trustworthy narrators..."
Imam ibn Rajab al-Hanbali[2] says, 'and it is clear from what Muslim mentions in the introduction to his book that it is necessary that the ahadith to do with targheebwa’tarheeb (encouragement and discouragement) are not narrated except from those that ahkaam (rules and regulations) are narrated [meaning the authentic ahadith]'
al-Allamah Jamaal ud-Deen al-Qasimi narrates from a group of the Imams of hadith that they did not accept acting by a weak hadith at all, like ibn Ma'een, al-Bukhari, Muslim, Abu Bakribn al-Arabi al-Maaliki, ibn Hazm and others. [3]
Abu Bakribn al-Arabi[4] said while commenting on the hadith, “the halal is clear and the haram is clear",
".... What I have [as the reason] regarding that, and Allah knows best, is that which we have transmitted from Ahmad ibnHanbal that he permits weak ahadith regarding al-wara’ (abstaining from doubtful matters). May Allah be pleased with al-Bukhari who did not see for the heart to hold to, or for the religion to be connected through anything except the authentic [ahadith], and that is our position. If we were to incline to the position of Ahmad; then holding to da'eef ahadith cannot be [accepted] except in lessons/admonishment which soften the heart, but as for the basis (usul) there is no way to [accept] that." [5]
Ibn Hazm[6] says in al-Milal, "and it is not permissible with us that we say as these ahadith say (i.e. those weak and fabricated narrations), or to trust in them, or to take anything from them."
Ibn Taymiyyah stated,
'And it is not permissible to rely in the Shari’ah upon da'eef ahadith which are not sahih or hasan. But Ahmad bin Hanbal and other scholars considered it permissible to report with regards to fadaa'il al-amaal(rewards and excellences of actions) that which they did not know to be affirmed, when it is known that it is not a lie. And that is because when the action is known to be legislated with Shari’ah evidence, it is possible that the reward be a fact. And not one of the Imams said that he considered it to be permissible to make something obligatory or recommended based upon a da'eef hadith.'[7]
Ibn Taymiyyah then said,
'And Ahmad bin Hanbal or others like him from the Imams did not rely upon this type of ahadith in the Shari'ah. And the one who relates from Ahmad that he used to rely upon the weak ahadith, which are not sahih or hasan, has erred.'
So the narrations from him that he would act upon a da'eefhadith when there was nothing else present in the texts on that subject, or nothing that contradicted that da'eef hadith, does not mean that Imam Ahmad used them as proof in the Shari’ah. Allah knows best.
al-Allamah Ahmad Shakir says,
'And as for what Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal and Abd’Rahman bin Mahdi, and Abdullah bin al-Mubaarak said,
"When it is narrated to us pertaining to al-halal wa’l-haram we are strict. And when it is narrated to us pertaining to fadaa'il al-amaal (the rewards and excellence of actions) then we are lenient;"
They mean, according to what I find to be most convincing - and Allah knows best - that the leniency was in their taking the hasan hadith, that which does not reach the level of sahih. Because the convention of distinguishing between the Sahih and Hasan was not present at their time... rather many of the early scholars did not describe a hadith except by it being sahih or da'eef only.'[8]
So what is clear is that the term hasan was not present at that time, and a great deal of what these scholars used to narrate in terms of fadaa'il al-amaal was of the level of what the later scholars called hasan.
So the opinion from the above mentioned scholars is to leave acting by the weak hadith in totality, except where there is a consensus of the Islamic scholars on the issue at hand, and Allah knows best. And as for the claims of some that Imam Ahmad amongst others of the early scholars allowed weak ahadith to be used in Shari’ah rulings then that has no firm basis as mentioned above. [9]
And especially in this day and age, when so many innovations and misunderstandings about religion are present, many of them having their roots in these da'eef ahadith, it becomes even more essential to narrate only authentic ahadith as part of the process of purifying the understanding of the religion.
The preceding was with regards to acting upon the da'eef hadith, as regards to using the da'eef hadith in certain Islamic sciences like in the Hadith science in which the weak ahadith are used to support or strengthen other ahadith, then this has been done and is being done by all of the Scholars of Hadith.
For those that follow the opinion that acting upon a da'eef ahadith is permissible, it would be good to mention the three conditions for acting upon a da'eef ahadith as laid out by Ibn Hajr al-Asqalani:
1) Upon that which they all agree, that it should not be very weak so that it excludes that only narrated by a liar, one accused of lying and one who makes serious mistakes.
2) That is falls under a general proof already present - which excludes that which is invented having no basis.
3) That acting upon it the person does not think that it is something established - in order that he does not attribute to the Prophet what he did not say. [10]
We can see from these conditions the following: The first principle lays out the obligation to make known the weak ahadith from the authentic, even in fadaa'il al-amaal. Something that many people who follow this opinion do not do - many of the scholars who follow this opinion today are not even capable of discerning whether the hadith they are quoting contains the types of weaknesses indicated above!
The second principle establishes that in reality the person is not acting by the weak hadith but rather by the general proof already present. [11]
Notes:
Sources: www.islam21c.com
Islam21c requests all the readers of this article, and others, to share it on your facebook, twitter, and other platforms to further spread our efforts.
1.He is the MujtahidImam and the Mujaddid of his time, Muhammad bin Idrees ash-Shaafi'ee. He studied under a galaxy of prominent Imams, amongst them Imam Maalik.
2.'Sharh at-Tirmidhee' (2/112).He is the exemplary Imam and great Mujtahid scholar, ibn Rajab al Hanbali, a student of both ibn Taymiyyah and ibn al-Qayyim amongst others.
3.'Qawaa'id al-Hadith' (pg. 113) of al-Qaasimee.
4.'Aridat al-AhwadheeSharhSunan at-Tirmidhee' (5/201)
5.Quoted from Abu Ghuddas introduction to al-Muhasibi's 'Risalah al-Mustarshideen' (pp58) where he states that he has abridged the quote from ibn al-Arabi.
6.He is the great Imam who championed the Dhaahiree School of thought and wrote many invaluable treatise, amongst them his 'Muhalla' in usul al-fiqh, and 'MilalwaNahl' on different sects. He died in the year????
7.'al-Qaa'idah al-Jaleelah' (pg.82) of IbnTaymiyyah
8.'al-Baa'ith al-Hatheeth' (pg.101) of Ahmad Shakir.
9.So what would the author of 'al-Albani Unveiled' say about the position of all these scholars, would he label them all as ignorant as well, as he has done in his amazing 'scholarly' work?!
10.As mentioned by his student as-Sakhaawi
11.The quotes are taken from the introductions of 'Sahih al-Jaami as-Sagheer', 'Tamaam al-Minna', 'Silsilah ad-Da'eefah' (Vol. 1) of al-Albaanee, with the exception of the quotes of Imam ash-Shaafi'ee and ibn al-Arabi.
The above article is once again not the only (or even probably the majority) opinion. Sahih Bukhari contains around 2,500 ahadith. (Shaykh Albani doesn't consider all of them sahih either...).
Sahih Muslim contains around 2,200 unrepeated ahadith. Many of these will be sahihain, meaning in both Sahih Muslim and Sahih Bukhari.
Some classical scholars have numerated the existance of only about 4,400 sahih hadith in total.
The prophet preached for 23 years - that is about 8,500 days.
So if you follow the view above quoted view, you must reject all of the prophet (saw)'s preachings and life EXCEPT for a saying every few days.
I doubt anyone can accept this - we follow the complete sunnah.
A further issue is that in Islamic history, after the sahabahs came the time of the Imams who came to conclusions of Islamic importance.
and then a Generation or more later the major muhaddith emerged, with Imam Bukhari (ra) being born about 50 years after the passing of Imam Abu Hanifah (ra).
The problem here is that many acts could easily be established and unquestioned between the time of the prophet
and the arrival of the major compilers of ahadith where the people the compilers obtained the hadith from may not have been of the required calibre, but the earlier generations were. In such a situation, what the Imams of fiqh considered may have been sahih and then when it got to the compilers of hadith, the chain may have weakened in the meantime.
So rejecting a hadith where its chain is not sahih or even "weak" is not the right and historical way.
What the historical way was that hadith with weak chains of narration should not be used for commandments, but can be used for what is called "fadhail" - good actions, good behaviours etc where things are recommended.
Another point I want to add - its not "weak hadith" but a hadith with a weak chain of narration - big difference.
Further, if there are multiple weak narrations of the same hadith from different sources, the separate narrations add strength to the validity of the hadith and while you can sometimes find a singular reference questionable, when there are multiple references, that no longer remains the case.
(Shaykh Qaradawi's opinion is that some scholars ban on music is generally through verses with more than one meaning and hadith that generally have a weak chain of narration while the evidence allowing it has sahih hadith evidence.)
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.
Let me expand on this. The general principle is that the doubtful does not overrule the certain. So if you have sahih hadith that have no room for wiggling around and then someone suggests that there is another separate hadith with a weak chain of narration suggesting something counter to the hadith with the sahih chains of narration, the sahih is preferred.
This principle is not limited to hadith but all actions - if you hear a rumour which is in contradiction to facts, then you do not reject the facts based on the rumour.
As an example if you consume food that is halaal, but then you hear the rumour that it is not halaal, the rumour does not over rule the fact so you stick to considering it halaal. Then when the rumour is further investigated, if it is substantiated, you act on it. If it isn't you reject the rumour.
The same goes for other actions - even having wudu, where if you are certain you had wudu, but then cannot remember breaking it, it is valid to hold the assumption that you still have wudu, unless you then remember breaking it, (or in the case you are not aware of the rules, are informed that something broke it).
Now going back to that quote. I do not accept it, but I add to it that you cannot state "incorrect conjecture at that" for the simple reason that the hadith scholars who studied it did not consider it fabricated. If they did, they would not have classified it as having a weak chain of narration, but a weak chain of narration.
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.
The above is not about chains with a weak chain of narration, but fabricated ahadith, which is a totally different category. I have put the relevant bits in bold.
Please do not try to mix people up by mixing the two different categories.
Fabricating a hadith is different from a hadith having its chain of narration weakened over centuries before the hadith was compiled by one of the imams of hadith.
A chain can be weakened by many ways:
1. The most obvious is "incomplete". Sahabi A heard the prophet (saw), told Sahabi B who told tabi'een C who told traveler E who told F who told G, but these were not computerised times, and traveler E could always be hard to account for in that chain, making it weaker.
2. Then there is lack of proof over meeting - Same chain of above, but there is no documentary evidence putting traveler E specifically meeting F. Now if either E or F are asked, they could probably explain, but the classification is done maybe decades later after they have passed and only G or someone that G passed the hadith to (H) is alive.
3. Lack of evidence of them being in the same location at the same time. They may have been, but since there is no Kodak moment where they are smiling into a camera together, it can be hard to prove, especially in times where record keeping was not like it is now and many arabs stuck to an oral tradition.
In none of the above 3 situations is it suggested that the hadith was fabricated, but the end result would often be that the hadith is not classed as Sahih, but with a weaker chain of narration.
If a Muhaddith considered a hadith as being fabricated, the classification used is NOT "weak chain of narration" but "fabricated".
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.
first of all im not sure if sufis are aware of this but in islam theirs a term hafiz, hafiz is used for 2 things a person who has memorized the quran and a person who has memorized 100,000 sahih hadith, so in terms of number of hadith their are plenty
bukhari and muslim dont have many hadith narrated by abu dawood malik muwatta nisai majah kitab al athar and many other hadith books such as sunah targheeb riyadh as saliheen or the compilation of hayatus sahaba, tarikh al tabari collection of history the hadith qudsi collection and many others
anyway putting that aside all things you have said are explained both better and more correctly here
http://www.kalamullah.com/intro-to-hadith.html#8
Nukhbat al-Fikr
Author: Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani | Pages: 61 | Size: 1 MB
The classic work on Usool al-Hadith by the al-Hafidh Ibn Hajr
al-Asqalani. An essential title for anyone serisously interested in
learning about Hadith, their chains of tranmission, narrators, and
classfications.
Imam an-Nawawi {May Allah have mercy upon him} said:
” Praise be to Allah. Who singled out this nation with the science of Isnad, {this privilege} is shared by no other nation. “
{Sharh Sahih Muslim}
as stated by the great imam without chains of narration the authenticity is nothing obviously in certain chains the reason has to be checked why it was weak but in many of those weak ones it has already been declared that the person was a liar ot it contradicts with quran and sahih hadith
if you claim a weak has difference of opinion with a sahih then you are heading towards the road paul of christianity did, you are creating both flaws int he religion and allowing nonmuslims to attack and make it look false, how is it possible that muhammad saw can contradict within himself allah made that impossible as allah says this religion is from him it cant have flaws its perfect
also a hadith cannot contradict with quran again its impossible
the failure of sufis understanding this led to their disaster same with shias
as for historical way abu hanifa rh did not even accept a hasan hadith forget weak hadith it had to be sahih so it is very much the historical way again you need to look at history and the importance the scholars gave to chains of narration imam bukhari did not accept any hadith with weak chains of narration he would always go and do mroe research on ti afterwards if the person for example was known to be reliable and has simply made a mistake all this would be looked upon
the sufis had to create their own hadith explanation and try to change the history like shias did to mathc their whims and desires
the way a weak hadith can be found is
1.
Those concerning which the narrators differed, adding or omitting names in the isnaad. If the author of al-Saheeh narrated it with a longer isnaad, and the critic criticized it on the basis of the shorter isnaad, then it is a criticism that is to be rejected. And if the author of al-Saheeh narrated it with the shorter isnaad and the critic criticized it on the basis of the longer isnaad, then his objection implies that there is an interruption in the isnaad of the hadeeth which is regarded as saheeh by the author [i.e., al-Bukhaari]. The answer on behalf of the author of al-Saheeh is that he narrated such reports because there are other, corroborating reports or other evidence for regarding it as strong, and for that reason the hadeeth is strengthened to the point of being saheeh.
2.
Where the reports differ in that the names of some men in the isnaad are changed. The answer to this is that just because there is a difference in some of the names of the isnaad it does not mean that this is proof of a fault, because mere differences do not mean that there is a problem which renders the hadeeth da’eef (weak). Therefore this argument should also be ignored.
3.
Where some narrators narrated additional material that is not present in the reports which were narrated by many narrators or where narrators who were known for greater precision did not narrate this additional material. This does not mean that the hadeeth is to be regarded as faulty unless the additional material contradicts it in such a way that it is too difficult to reconcile the two. But if it is not difficult to reconcile the additional material with the hadeeth then it does not mean that the hadeeth is to be regarded as faulty, unless there is strong evidence that the additional material that is narrated alongside the hadeeth is the words of one of the narrators. What comes under this category is something to be taken into account, as in hadeeth no. 34.
4.
What is narrated only by some narrators who are those who are classed as da’eef or weak. There is nothing of this type in al-Saheeh apart from two hadeeths, and it became clear that they both have corroborating evidence.
5.
Hadeeth in which some of the men of the isnaad are determined to have been confused. In some cases this confusion may damage the hadeeth and in other cases it does not.
6.
Cases where there are differences in the wording of the text. Most cases of this type do not lead to regarding the hadeeth as faulty, because it is possible to reconcile the differences, or determine which is more correct. But Daaraqutni and other imams did not examine this issue with regard to these two books as they discussed the issue of isnaads. What they did not examine in this regard includes: the hadeeth of Jaabir which tells the story of the camel; his hadeeth concerning the paying off of his father’s debt; the hadeeth of Raafi’ ibn Khudayj about al-mukhaabarah; the hadeeth of Abu Hurayrah concerning the story of Dhu’l-Yadayn; the hadeeth of Sahl ibn Sa’d concerning the story of the woman who offered herself in marriage to the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him); the hadeeth of Anas about starting recitation of al-Faatihah with the words “al-hamdu Lillaahi Rabbi l-‘aalameen”; the hadeeth of Ibn ‘Abbaas about the case of the woman who asked about the vows of her mother and sister; and others.
that depends on the hadith narration and if quran or sahih hadith narration is their regarding this or even a hasan hadith
multiple hadith on certain hadith may have some value such as ali ra birth in kaabah as it is a known fact back in that time it was not a uncommon thing to be born inside the kaabah many others were born inside kaabah but again allah knows best if thats the case or not
but yeah it is valid in many hadith at the same time not valid with many other hadith
Ibn Mas’ood
– may Allaah be pleased with him – used to swear that what this
referred to was singing, because undoubtedly singing misleads people far
away from the path of Allaah by wasting their time. It was reported from
Abu ‘Aamir and Ibn Maalik al-Ash’ari (may Allaah be pleased with them)
that the Messenger of Allaah
(peace and blessings of Allaah be upon
him) said: “There will be among my ummah people who will permit illegal
sexual activity (zinaa), silk, alcohol and musical instruments…”
(narrated by al-Bukhaari).
it seems sheikh qaradawi missed out these hadith which have been declared sahih by both classical scholars and scholars of today
accept for him i guess which is obviously the incorrect view
http://qa.sunnipath.com/issue_view.asp?HD=1&ID=1786
Ibn al-Qayyim (may Allaah have mercy on him) said: The madhhab of Abu Haneefah is the strictest in this regard, and his comments are among the harshest. His companions clearly stated that it is haraam to listen to all musical instruments such as the flute and the drum, even tapping a stick. They stated that it is a sin which implies that a person is a faasiq (rebellious evil doer) whose testimony should be rejected. They went further than that and said that listening to music is fisq (rebellion, evildoing) and enjoying it is kufr (disbelief). This is their words. They narrated in support of that a hadeeth which could not be attributed to the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him). They said: he should try not to hear it if he passes by it or it is in his vicinity. Abu Yoosuf said, concerning a house from which could be heard the sound of musical instruments: Go in without their permission, because forbidding evil actions is obligatory, and if it were not allowed to enter without permission, people could not have fulfilled the obligatory duty (of enjoining what is good and forbidding what is evil).
(Ighaathat al-Lahfaan, 1/425).
and lastly i dont agree with everything on the article
i prefare this
http://www.kalamullah.com/intro-to-hadith.html
Now it probably has been over a decade since I last looked at this, but I am pretty sure you very are wrong here.
1. Hadith with a Hasan chain were not rejected outright by Imam Abu Hanifa (ra). But if there were multiple hadith with a weaker chain of narration, then Imam Abu Hanifa (ra) preferred preferred the multiple narrations with weaker chains over a singular hadith with a hasan chain of narration.
This is totally opposite to the original article, which more or less considered hadith with a weak chain of narration to be the same as fabricated.
2. The hahafi requirement for hadith with a sahih chain was was for orders/commandments. ie in matters of fardh, waajib or haraam. But for recommendations, dislikings (makruh) even a weak chain was considered enough.
That is the hanafi way.
Stop mixing things up as with the mixing you are confusing people. Lessons on Isnad etc are best delivered by qualified scholars as otherwise you get the case above where you cut and paste an article, and then later link to another saying that the article you cut and paste originally was probably wrong in places, making the article lose all its credibility (the best lie is one mixed with just enough truth...).
As for hundreds of thousands of hadith existing, I agree. As for how many of these that are recorded and are categorised as sahih, I would love to see a figure from you. I only did a quick google search on the number of sahih hadith. It quoted Scholars such as Ibn Hajar Asqalani when it mentioned the figure of 4,400. If this figure is very wrong I would love to know.
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.
what are you talking about man its quite obvious you havent read biography of abu hanifa rh from his top 2 students or companions abu yusuf and muhammad
if you did youd know they said:
"he the great imam had 2 key attributes to accepting hadith the hadith had to be both sahih and famous, the reason to this was because of deviant sects like shia qadriyyah mutazilla khawarij and others"
second point do you know who introduced hasan hadith?
hasan hadith was first introduced by imam tirmidhi beofre imam tirmidhi hadith were classified in only 3 ways sahih weak and fabricated however later on imam trimidhi introduced a new classification hasan which was praised and accepted by all scholars
so with this we can conclude 2 things hasan hadith term didnt even exist during the time of imam abu hanifa rh 2 it doesnt matter how many weak hadith their was imam abu hanifa rh only accepted sahih hadith that were famous and sahih it had to be both not just one the other he accepted was reliable narrators with mursal hadith again well known famous narrators only
so abu hanifa accepting weka hadith is out of the question hasna ahdith this term didnt even exist at that time it was defined and created later on by imam tirmidhi
so again dont make accusaition on the great imam it is the false spread of knowledge by the likes of sufis which allwos people to criticize the great imam in accepting stupid hadith and making silly fiqh he never made
so again you must know the history of the science of hadith to cath these things such as when hasan hadith was itnroduced when mursal hadith and other types were introduced how the science of hadith came in stages
the exact number of sahih hadith that exists is hard to tell brother
better explanation is here
https://islamistruth.wordpress.com/2011/05/page/2/
many scholars tried to give the exact nubmer others said 20,000 some said 8000 and other numbers as we can see here
it is impossible for a single scholar to read every hadith in lifetime and give the verdict for it albani did a few senior scholars before him did many more then him
"Just recently one of the respectable scholars of kurdistan made an encyclopaedia called “Sahih wa Da’eef tareekh al-Tabari” and many more scholars are working on authenticating the entire Sunnah if possible, so we cannot say with Jazm what is the number of Sahih Hadith in Islam."
so amount of sahih hadith is not possible to tell yet but whether its 100,000 or 10,000 different unrepeated what difference does it make because allah ahs already given us the necessary knowledge to know in order to follow this religion
are you aware of what happened during the 20 years life of muhamamd saw with khadija ra? no becasue it wasnt revelaed because allah didnt will it if allah willed it wouldve been known it is said ali ra had many hadith or details of life of muhammad saw which he didnt narrate because of shias he only said hadith to a few selected people so again this doesnt mean information from islam is missing rather these information wasnt destined to be known but even without those we still have the key hadith neccesary to be known to follow islam
so total amount of hadith isnt importan whats improtant is islam is complete and allah says he will protect islam so the full knowledge and details of islam willalways be here whether we have a single copy of quran only or whatever nubmer of hadith
doing isnads is a scholarly matter but udnerstanding the basics is a must for every muslims and udnerstanding why a hadith is declared sahih hasan weak fabricated and how its done otherwise we will fail to realise were many sects went wrong
having this knwoledge doesnt mean we go and start looking at hadith chains and start declaring their authenticity no different to how i made another thread here on taqhleed and madhabs this doesnt mean we now start doing judgement on fiqh for this is stupidity this is for schoalrs and hadith matter is even higher and more dangerous so understanding hwo something is done is one thing but to do it is another
second i never said the article is wrong in some places rather i dont agree witnh some parts meaning overal article is good but some parts i personally dont fully agree with, if theirs a book in which i dont agree with 2 chapter but agree with 40 chapters doesnt mean i hold this book as unreliable
There would be more sahih hadith at the time of the sahabahs (as more people who had directly had heard the hadith) than the times of the tabieen than the times of the taba tabieen.
So once upon a time they would have probably been in the millions, but when it got to the stage of the famous collectors, the number that was still accessible and provable as sahih will have had diminished over time until the books were all compiled and (no longer lost) with the full isnad.
btw, I am referring to unique ahadith, not counting multiple isnad as multiple ahadith but as a singular.
On the matter of Imam Abu Hanifa, I will have to look it up, but I am pretty certain that what you are mentioning is aboutr ahkaam, rules, the issue of making something fardh or haraam.
If ahadith with a weak chain of narration had no value, the scholars would not have recorded them. They have a purpose and a use and should not be considered the same as fabricated as the original article does.
As an example, even Imam Bukhari refers to weak ahadith in his book "Adab al Munfrad" - it was not a book about laws but about good manners and virtuous behaviour.
Here, he considered the use of hadith with a weak chain of narration to be enough.
Quoting http://www.central-mosque.com/index.php/Practises/weak-ahadeeth-a-fadhai... :
This is why al-Bukhârî is willing to mention even weak hadîth in al-Adab al-Mufrad. Weak hadîth can be tolerated, because the book is talking about exhortations and virtues. The scholars used to tolerate the narration of moderately weak hadîth regarding virtuous behavior, but they did not tolerate weak hadîth for establishing legal rulings.
So you see that the scholars did not reject hadith with a weak chain of narration. Rather they did not consider the chain strong enough to use a singular narration enough to make a legal ruling (eg decide that something is fardh or haraam).
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.
at that time hadith were not written in books and compiled in one place a person from another country would have to travel all the way to iraq to get a sinlge hadith from a sahaba ra such as ibn mas'ud ra and the person didnt take many hadith at once but would take one with every detail
second we have more copies of the quran today compared to sahaba ra so this point proves nothing, when muhammad saw was alive people didnt make quran in book because they felt theirs no need muhammad saw is alive, same with the tabieen they didnt write hadith in books because they felt theirs no need as the sahaba are still alive or the people who were direct students of the sahaba are still around for the later tabieens, the tabitabieens however started to writ hadith books once of the first was kitab al athar by abu yusuf hadith that were compiled from abu hanifah ra himself which had over 70,000 hadith with chains of narration
brother its obvious you enver read introduction of hadith in the original books, in tabari book he famous wrote i didnt write the weak hadith and fabricated hadith and narrations in my book because i accept them but because i wanted people to know and expose these thats why, in tirmidhi book he wrote many fabricated hadith which he himself declared fabricated so why did he write them in because he wanted to expose it and want people to know its weak or fabricated after that many scholars began writing books which contained weak fabricated books so people will know these are weak or fabricated
so the purspose of hadith collectors in adding the weak and fabricated wasnt becasue they accepted them but with the intention people/muslims know these hadith are weak fabricated and so they expose them and other false narrators dont get the chance to trick people into accepting this
central mosque are of deobandi nature, deobandi are of different types such as deobandi mamati deobandi hayati, central mosque leans mroe towards hayati so they accept some bidah and weak and even fabricated hadith and narrations so using that is not the best thing
do you know why bukhari included those weak narration?
for that read this
http://islamqa.info/en/ref/122705
secondly read this
http://forums.islamicawakening.com/f44/does-sahih-al-bukhari-contain-all...
today we have aqeedah books but back then their wasnt any so again points like this dosnt prove anything
imam bukhari himself with his own weak hadith remained very carefull but as seen in the above link correction on bukfari hadith were made by many
http://forums.islamicawakening.com/f44/does-sahih-al-bukhari-contain-all...
the scholars didnt reject but it depends on what the reason for it being weak was, it depends on the hadith as i mentioned, when tabari and ibn kathir wrote their tafsir did they use weak or even hasan hadith no they didnt it was all purely based on sahih ahdith only
and jsut because one scholar accepts weak hadith doesnt mean everyone agreed, some weak hadith of bukhari remained weak others have been declared fabricated others have been declared hasan/sahih by other scholars so it depends on the reasoning of authenticity or the hadith type itself does it ahv any contradiction with sahih hadith and quran many thigns have to be looked into however some weak hadith are closer towards being fabricated others a bit closer towards hasan some have contradiction some dont such as shube berat is a hard one to tell its very weak but has no contradiction to islam and it is had ot determine what to do about it i personally take the safer option and leave it alone as advised by scholars so it all depends on the reasoning of being weak and type and overall view, the problem with sufis is they take weak hadith in the same level as hasan or sahih and view it all good which isnt the case otherwise the scholars of past wouldve declared it sahih to start with not weka fabricated and they themselves were careful of it
some hadith had weak chains of narration but it had strong narrators which gave it some value many others has to eb checked but again problem is not accepting weak hadith and declaring it hasan or sahih but the reason for doing this,
problem with sufi is they never have a valid reason in declaring it hasan sahih they just do it for all the wrong reasons even the hadith that contradict directly against quran and sahih hadith such as the first creation being noor of muhammad saw or muhamamd saw being light when quran and sahih hadith prove this wrong
to view weak hadith in the same level of hasan sahih is obviously wrong and to give it the same value is also wrong unless a scholar does proper research on it and declares it safe if not then be careful even if its bukhari
and bukhari himself if he wanted he coudlve declared those weak ahdith strong but he didnt he stil lcalled it weak so he leaves it open to people and more people can further look into it
million billion doesnt matter islam is complete and will remain complete the hadith necessary to know is available
ali ra knew more hadith then abu hurraira ra aisha ra and others but couldnt narrate them this doesnt mean with him not narrating those islam has lost hadith it means it not destined by allah to know them and hadith necessary for us to know has been revealed by allah
their were parts of the lfie of muhammad saw and khadija ra which fatima ra was aware of hasnt been revelaed either due to fatima ra early death but again doesnt mean we lost out or lack hadith just emans these were never meant to be revelaed for the neccesary parts of islam has been protected and revealed by allah
Dont you guys think you've gone 10,000 miles off topic?
Back in BLACK
Erm, what is relevant to us is the number that are available as sahih now.
That they were all sahih at one point doesnt make the original post any less wrong.
you seem to be waffling around in circles.
But atleast we both agree that the original article you posted was wrong.
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.
and the amount of sahih hadith is high besides its not like thier has been a person who read every single hadith in life as the saying goes thier is no end to duas not that thier isnt but its so high its impossible ot know them all
explain this bit better
not al wrong only a few parts and id say its wrong becuase it isnt explained in detail so it came out wrong rather then it being awrong view
anyway
What is the ruling on offering congratulations on Friday?
What is the ruling on offering congratulations on Friday, because now it is the custom in our country on Friday to send text messages and people congratulate one another on the occasion of Friday by saying “Jumu‘ah mubaarak” or “Jumu‘ah tayyibah.”.
Praise be to Allaah.
Firstly:
There is no doubt that Friday is an “Eid” or “festival” for the Muslims, as it says in the hadeeth narrated from Ibn ‘Abbaas (may Allah be pleased with him) who said: The Messenger of Allah (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) said: “This is a day of ‘Eid that Allah has ordained for the Muslims, so whoever comes to Jumu‘ah, let him do ghusl, and if he has any perfume let him put some on, and you should use the miswaak.” Narrated by Ibn Maajah, 1098; classed as hasan by al-Albaani in Saheeh Ibn Maajah.
Ibn al-Qayyim (may Allah have mercy on him) said, describing the special virtues of Friday:
Thirteen: It is a day of ‘Eid that is repeated every week.
Zaad al-Ma‘aad, 1/369
Thus the Muslims have three Eids: Eid al-Fitr and Eid al-Adha, which come once every year, and Jumu‘ah which is repeated once every week.
Secondly:
With regard to the Muslims congratulating one another on the occasions of Eid al-Fitr and Eid al-Adha, this is prescribed and it is narrated from the Sahaabah (may Allah be pleased with them). This has been discussed previously in the answers to questions no. 49021 and 36442. As for congratulating one another on the occasion of Friday, what seems to us to be the case is that it is not prescribed, because the fact that Friday is an Eid was known to the Sahaabah (may Allah be pleased with them), and they were more knowledgeable than us about its virtues, and they were keen to respect it and give it its due, but there is no report to suggest that they used to congratulate one another on Fridays. And all goodness is in following them (may Allah be pleased with them).
Shaykh Saalih ibn Fawzaan (may Allah preserve him) was asked: What is the ruling on sending text messages every Friday and ending with the phrase “Jumu‘ah mubaarak”?
He replied:
The early generation did not congratulate one another on Fridays, so we should not introduce anything that they did not do.
End quote from Ajwabat As’ilah Majallat al-Da‘wah al-Islamiyyah.
A similar fatwa was issued by Shaykh Sulaymaan al-Maajid (may Allah preserve him), when he said:
We do not think it is prescribed to exchange congratulations on Fridays, such as saying to one another, “Jumu‘ah mubaarak” and so on, because it comes under the heading of du‘aa’s and dhikrs, which must be based on a text (of the Qur’aan or Sunnah) because this is purely the matter of worship and if it were good, the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) and his Companions (may Allah be pleased with them) would have done it before us. If anyone suggests that this is permissible, then that may imply that it is prescribed to say du‘aa’s and congratulate one another after having done the five daily prayers and other acts of worship, and du‘aa’ at these times was not done by the early generations.
End quote from the Shaykh’s website (may Allah preserve him)
http://www.salmajed.com/ar/node/2601
If a Muslim prays for his brother on Friday with the intention of softening his heart and making him happy, and seeking the time when supplications are answered, there is nothing wrong with that.
And Allah knows best.
Islam Q&A
Mixing weak and fabricated is a big thing and not just coming out wrong. and when you get something like tht wrong, the whole article loses credibility as nothing in it can be used as something to learn from. Instead it becomes a piece that can just be critiqued, but not a useful text to teach because those looking to learn will not be able to separate the true from the false, and its all corrupted.
Saying "its high" is not enough.
Using a historical quote from a tabi'i is not enough either as that would be at a time when they were not being recorded into books and many hadith with a sahih chain will have the chains weakened before the time of the imams who recorded the ahadith in books.
There will also be many sahih hadith which are just "repeats" - for instance in 10,000 people heard the farewell sermon, and all reported it, the muhaddith would record that as 10,000 narrations. Now when counting the total number of ahadith that are sahih, as all these are not unique narrations, this will count as one.
From my google searches, the number of 4,400 is not from me - I had no idea. It is one that the search result came from Ibn Hajar Asqalani.
That is the number suggested of unique recorded sahih ahadith that can still be verified through the books. If you can get to a higher figure, I wouldnt mind seeing a table - mention book, followed by unique sahih hadith recorded in it. This way I will be able to verify where you get your number from and see where they all are recorded.
As for your latest cut and paste article, AFAIK Shaykh Munajjid is not hanafi. The general hanafi rule on fiqh is that everything is allowed unless forbidden and since there is nothing forbidding people from friday greetings, it is not banned.
Other schools of fiqh may have different views.
It is weird though that when there is so much bad out there, you focus on the bits where Muslims are trying to be better - when they want to pray more, be more social with other muslims, build a better community, celebrate the blessings from our lord, those are the things you focus on discouraging.
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.
a weak hadith which is fabriated but simply hasn been written as one is in the same level suh as muhammad saw being reated from light is
fabricated although declared weak however weak hadith of shube berat is different it is simply weak
and as i said a book with 38 good chapters and only 2 wrong doesnt make it useless
i am aware of hanafi fiqh better then you for i ahve studied it more hanafi fiqh says bidah in all fomrs is harram or have you already forgotton the quotes of abu hanifa rh i showed but you rejeted his quotation on bidah so it is not surprising that you dont know the hanafi fiqh ruling on saying jummuah mubarak, their is no reords of hanafi fiqh saying jummuah mubarak on friday and at the same time hanfi fiqh says all bidah is harram theirfore saying jummuah mubarak fits in here
again dont get fiqh in this i have studied fiqh and now when and how its used so dont ge the this is not in hanafi madhab shafi madhab maliki and hanbali madhab exxuse here it doesnt fit here
read the aqeedah of abu hanifa first then you an udnerstand his fiqh but your aqeedah is opposite of abu hanifa rh so it is natural you and your group will get his fiqh wrong and twisted aswell
i focus on discouraging doing bad, and encourage to gain knowledge or they mess up like you in not even knwoing the basics like salatul duha and try to do the advanced things their not even in the league of
abu hanifa rh says if my fatwa is agains the sunnah rejet my fatwa and follow the sunnah have your teaher taught you this or you ignore but in this ase hanafi fiqh is against all bidah in religion
not all 10,000 people narrated the farewell sermon did they, only some did, the number of repeated hadith for some is high but not all that high
as for how many sahih hadith check this link
https://islamistruth.wordpress.com/2011/05/page/2/
It is narrated that Imam Ahmad (rah) said: “What is the Sahih from al-Hadith are 700,000 and a little more, the scholars of Islam
considered that amongst them are prophetic Hadiths and the sayings of the Sahaba and Tabi’een and Imams in the same Matn but with different chains.”
Imam al-Nawawi (rah) mentioned that the Sahih hadiths (meaning those which can be used as hujjah so it includes Hasan) are near 10,000. And this number is close to the number of Hadith in sheikh al-Albani’s book Sahih al-Jami’i (more than 8,000).
Egyptian Sheikh of Hadith Abu Ishaq al-Huweini said about the number of Sahih hadith after Hussein Ya’aqoub asked him: “they do not reach 20,000.”
how many sahih hadiths we have even if its only 10 then even then as allah says this religion is complete and allah will protect it i can say in confidence that all allah wnats to know of islam is here
If the muhaddith considered it fabricated, it would be labeled as fabricated, not weak. Fabricated is a category in and of itself. when a muhaddith came across a hadith which he considered fabricated, it would be labeled so and not as "weak".
Stop second guessing the muhaddith who did the isnad and came to the conclusion that they could not lable it fabricated, but considered the chain of narration weak.
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.
as for how many sahih hadith check this link
and that posts vastly different figures, ranging from 700,000 to 8,000 (which is not too far from the figure I posted...)
The question is how many are recorded and available now. and from there I guess the answer comes to less than 10,000 - so about one saying per day after declaring prophethood.
But once again, it goes to show how if there 700,000 with a sahih isnad in circulation at some point and now we only have 8,000 recorded as sahih... that is... 1% of what the likes of Imam Abu Hanifa would have had access to (and I suspect that by the time of Imam Taymiyyah, you could only rely on the number that we have now that are recorded in the books, maybe a few more but unlikely as they would be recorded in the books...).
You want people to come to their own conclusions (an earlier topic by you about how people of knowledge cannot rely on taqlid), rely on only sahih hadith, discarding all others, and then only use one saying a day from the prophet (saw)'s life.
Your Islam is interesting.
The sunnah is more than the remaining sahih ahadith that number in the few thousand and we are the ahlus sunnah.
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.
if the first collector hasnt then the later muhaddith have declared it fabricated such as the muhamamd sa nor ahdith ahs been delared fabricated by many scholars including the scholar who wrote the book 100 fabricated hadith so it has been done so again this shows a hadith that had been given a certain authenticty earlier can be further corrected later on by finding evidence for it
sometimes a collector didnt declare a hadith fabricated simply because they didnt have enough evidence to declare it fabricated so the strongest at the time was weak declaration later it would be discovered by other schoars to be fabriated some hadith however like salatul tasbih as originally weak hadith but later scholars then confirmed it sahih due to finding the evidene so the original declaration sometimes can be improved or corrected such as a hasan hadith can be turned into sahih or eak into hasan or weak into fabricated
so again you have to understand how labeling a hadith works it is by seeing the evidence for it first by following the rules of isnad not jsut ebause they felt like it
the isnad has category to be labeled fabricated all has to be mentioned not just one or the other
my islam is based on
(We have, without doubt, sent down the Reminder [i.e., the Quran]; and We will assuredly guard it [from corruption].) (Al-Hijr 15:9)
(It was We who revealed the law [to Moses]: therein was guidance and light.
By its standard have been judged the Jews, by the prophets who bowed
[as in Islam] to Allah's will, by the rabbis and the doctors of law: for
to them was entrusted the protection of Allah's book, and they were
witnesses thereto: therefore fear not men, but fear Me, and sell not My
signs for a miserable price. If any do fail to judge by [the light of]
what Allah hath revealed, they are [no better than] unbelievers.) (Al-Ma’idah 5:44)
your islam is absed on nubmer mine is trust on allah
my islam is based on
(We have, without doubt, sent down the Reminder [i.e., the Quran]; and We will assuredly guard it [from corruption].) (Al-Hijr 15:9)
(It was We who revealed the law [to Moses]: therein was guidance and light.
By its standard have been judged the Jews, by the prophets who bowed
[as in Islam] to Allah's will, by the rabbis and the doctors of law: for
to them was entrusted the protection of Allah's book, and they were
witnesses thereto: therefore fear not men, but fear Me, and sell not My
signs for a miserable price. If any do fail to judge by [the light of]
what Allah hath revealed, they are [no better than] unbelievers.) (Al-Ma’idah 5:44)
your islam is based on nubmer mine is trust in allah
you sound like a madkhali salafi who bash abu abu hanifa rh for not having enough hadith
and you call your self a follower of hanafi fiqh seems you have no real knowledge about teh great imam
and amongst those 700,000 how many were repeated hadith
as i said the scholar of the past didnt rely on the amount of hadith but the fact that whether the hadith is sahih or not but a sufi obviously relies on the nubme rot big themselves up like a christian does with the amount of bible they ahve by updating it every year
Once there was a man who led a normal
life; talking, laughing as all people do, but suddenly started to cry
for no apparent reason and he would cry so much that sometimes he would
become unconscious. Some companions of the Prophet brought him to
Prophet Muhammad (SAW) so that he might be cured by the Prophet’s (SAW)
dua. Prophet Muhammad (SAW) took him to a side and asked him what the
matter with him was. He replied that he had done a terrible crime but he
had not told it to no one, but since the Prophet (SAW) was asking him
himself, he would tell his story. The following is the story of the man.
When I had not embraced Islam, a daughter was borne to me. When I
heard the news of her birth, I wanted to bury her as was expected of me.
My ancestors had done the same because it was considered better to kill
the girl at birth before she could run away with someone in youth and
bring shame to the whole family. The culture and tradition demanded that
I bury the daughter as soon as she was born, but my heart had already
developed feelings for the child and I could not do so. Time went by,
and she grew day by day. Every day, I felt an urge to kill her but every
day the fatherly love wrestled with the thought and put it to rest. But
when she came to the age of becoming a lady, the thoughts of her
running away and bringing shame to the whole family started to haunt me
every second of the day. It grew so unbearable that I could not rest; I
could not sleep or eat. One day, I asked my wife to dress her in nice
clothes and get her ready and tell her that I was going to take her out
so she could play with her friends. Although my wife did the same, but
somehow she sensed this was not what I intended to do. She kept on
crying silently while she combed my daughter’s hair and dressed her. My
daughter, on the other hand was delighted that I was going to take her
out.
When she was finally done and I was about to leave, my wife mustered up enough courage to come up to me and whisper in my ears, ”Don’t lose your trust!”
I rushed
out of my house with my daughter and started on my way. I had no plan;
my mind was in a state of confusion. Should I kill her or not? If I
should, then how? Suddenly I saw an old deserted well that I knew was
filled up with sharp stones. Should I throw my daughter in the well? My
heart and mind were going in two opposite directions. My mind told me to
kill her as she would bring shame to me one day while my heart kept on
fighting but the fatherly love grew weaker and weaker. All this while,
my daughter had been running around me, talking to me about things she
would do with her friends oblivious to what a turmoil I was going
through. I could not stand it no longer; I grabbed her and pushed in the
well.
She must have been surprised, but all she could say was “Don’t lose your trust!” and this is what she kept on repeating until I could hear her no longer.
When the man finished his story, he looked up and saw the Prophet
Muhammad (SAW). The Prophet’s (SAW) beard was soaked with tears and he
said that "If He had been allowed to punish a person for his
crimes before embracing Islam, that man would have been the first one
to get punished."
It was narrated on the authority of Jaabir (RA) that the Prophet (SAW) said:
“Whoever has three daughters whom he gives refuge to, provides for and
shows mercy to, Paradise is certainly guaranteed for him.” A man asked, “And (for) two, O Messenger of Allaah?” He replied: “And also (for the one who has) two (daughters)." [Ahmad] [Al-Bukhaari in Al-Adab Al-Mufrad]
It was narrated on the authority of Abu Sa‘eed (RA) that the Prophet (SAW) said: "No
one has three or two daughters or sisters, and he fears Allaah
regarding them and is kind to them, except that he will enter Paradise."
It was narrated on the authority of Anas (RA) that he said, “The Messenger of Allaah (SAW) said: ‘Whoever
has two daughters or sisters to whom he is kind as long as they are
with him, he and I will be in Paradise (as close to each other) as these
(and then he put two of his fingers together).”
Let this
be a lesson for all of us who look down and have shame up on their
daughters and sisters and commit this despicable crime of honor killing,
which made the Muhammad
cry.
Bangladesh and Di-Islamisation
Abu Abdullah
Last Updated on Sat, 02 Mar 2013 17:53 Please help us run Islam21c and its' projects for the next 12 months. Donate to our Just Giving page.
**Note; Action Alert: Bangladesh - Demand a fair trial for Professor Ghulam Azam - click here**
You may know that Bangladesh is now going through the worst crisis in its history. This third largest Muslim country of over 160 million people was once one of the two parts of Pakistan which was created to give space to aspiring Muslims for a separate homeland.
However, the leaders of Pakistan had failed to realise the founding principles of the country leading to a war of secession and eventual break up in 1971; and the birth of Bangladesh as an independent state.
During that era, the nation became divided into two, those who supported the break up of Pakistan and those who did not. All the Islamic parties and Ulema of the country wanted to maintain the unity of Pakistan in order to be secured from Indian hegemony. On the other hand, the liberation war was led by the left-leaning secularists under the close supervision of Indian military and intelligence.
Since the independence, communists and ultra-secularists are working closely to uproot Islam from the fabric of the society and its moderate reference to the constitution and other spheres of life.
Although the previous efforts for de-islamisation were harmful, no doubt, but the present government, with the blessings of the powerful neighbour, for the first time in the history of Bangladesh, was formed as a direct result of communist-secularist coalition with an agenda to defame and degrade Islam. A large number of the cabinet ministers of the present government are atheist and was heavily involved in communist movements. They not only hate Islam but also want to wipe out the Islamic symbol and practices forever.
Needless to mention that almost 89% of population are Muslim; however, the situation today has become so dire that Islam, is treated in Bangladesh as if it is something alien or foreign . Young men are discriminated in the work place and on the street because of their practice of Islam and sporting of beard.
There are times when the teachers forced the Muslim pupils to take their headscarf off in front of other students or at times headscarf were torn apart on the street in broad daylight. This amounts to almost a ban on young women with hijab entering the school/college/university/work place. Many had to stop education or work to save their belief. Prayer facilities within the educational premises had been shut on health and safety pretext. For the first time Islamic Studies has been withdrawn from the curriculum during this government.
Police had been raiding mosques and other places of worships, mainly to harass Islamic dawah activists belonging to opposition parties and arresting over 20,000, many thousands were tortured and hundreds went missing or shot dead by the state intelligence and police. Alongside the government, a large section of journalists, intellectuals, writers and media outlets have been working day and night to fulfil their anti-Islamic agenda.
The process of de-Islamisation has reached its climax when recently the Muslims of Bangladesh were stunned by discovering most abhorrent blogs and facebook writings degrading Allah, the Prophet and everything Muslims hold dear. No one in the 1400 years history of Islam ever dared to vilify Islam to this extent A group of atheist writers and bloggers are promoted and protected by state to defame Islam and Islamic. Despite the order from the highest court and call from the Imams and Khatibs around to shut down those Islam-bashing websites, the government not only turned a blind eye rather used encouraged such bloggers in Shahabagh protest to chant vile slogans such as; ‘Hang Islamic leaders and scholars’, ‘ban the Qur’an’ and ‘Ban islamic organisations’.
When on Friday the February 22nd the faithful came out en mass to protest against such vulgar attack on Islam, the police attacked the peaceful procession and shot over a dozen to death. A number of Imams and Khatibs were harassed and beaten inside the mosques by the ruling party thugs and police and hundreds arrested. However, on Thursday the 28th February an unprecedented mass-killing of Muslim protesters took place all around the country and 74 people were mercilessly shot dead while protesting against the unjust sentence of death verdict imposed upon the most popular Islamic scholar, Mawlana Delwar Hossain Saydee.
Since last three years, the government had set up a highly controversial tribunal to prosecute the pro-Islamic opposition leaders under the pretext of crimes against humanity committed during the liberation war in 1971. The controversial tribunal had already sentenced two prominent ulema, Sheikh Abul Kalam Azad and Shiekh Dilowar Hussain Sayedee, to death by hanging for no other reason but for Islamic dawah.
The entire international community, international NGOs, Jurists, Human Rights organisations including the United Nations had severely criticised the trial process and termed it flawed and not in accordance with the international standard but the government took no heed as they just want to hang the Islamic leaders.
Presently, a public campaign has been orchestrated by intelligence and popular left-wing medias to ban not only the Islamic parties but also the businesses, banks and newspapers and media outlets owned by pro-Islamic block were attacked, smashed and burned down by the ruling party thugs watched by the police.
The picture above is a small part of the large and alarming reality; if our brothers in Ummah do not come forward to save 160 million Muslims and their faith from such onslaught and carnage, we will all stand responsible in the eyes of Allah Subhanahu Ta’ala.
On the other hand, maybe the people are hiding their crimes (serious crimes too - murder, rape, torture) behind religion. Wouldn't be the first time.
I do not know enough to take sides in this current political environment, but horrendous crimes were committed in 1971.
(I have read somewhere that 20,000 people have been killed in Bangladesh in the past few years, no idea how accurate that is, but if it is the case, it is rather high.)
In this case either it is accepted that it is fabricated and it is treated as fabricated. Or it is not accepted by others as fabricated and it is not treated as fabricated.
However, that does not cover all ahadith wth a weak chain. That would be only some that fall into either category, and then are either considered fabricated ( = have no weight) or not fabricated but with a weak chain (= some weight and the original article does not apply.). Then there are the hadith that have a weak chain that have never been considered to be fabricated. They are all rejected and considered fabricated with the author of the original article. Which is wrong and has never been the ahlussunnah way.
"For too long, we have been a passively tolerant society, saying to our citizens 'as long as you obey the law, we will leave you alone'" - David Cameron, UK Prime Minister. 13 May 2015.
weak hadith doesnt mean it is accepted that is why it is called weak, their are sufis holike you say regarding fabrricated so wha tif it is fabricated hte fact that the collector added it in his book shos it is accepted this is ho you sound regarding weak ahdith, just because it has been written in the book doesnt mean its accepted it means the scholar views it as weak thats why he wrote it as that
you need to read the original book in arabic in which the muhadith state this clearly in the begning dont your teachers ever mention this to you
so when ibn hajar corrected a few bukhari hadith and cosidered them wrong are you trying to say he went out of the way of ahlus sunnah wal jamaah
i think what you mean is this is the way of ahlus sunnah wal jamaah but its out of the way of ahlul bidah ays which you use
as for bangladesh people did commit crime but the question is why they are being punnished not for their crime but because the government are now seein the uprise of islam like other countries and want to stop it before it reaches that level but as the sings of judgement says it will happen is muslim lands and nothing can be done
and one mroe thing either get my account deleted for good so i dont ahve to write 7 at the end or unlock it one or the other
weak hadith doesnt mean it is accepted that is why it is called weak, their are sufis holike you say regarding fabrricated so wha tif it is fabricated hte fact that the collector added it in his book shos it is accepted this is ho you sound regarding weak ahdith, just because it has been written in the book doesnt mean its accepted it means the scholar views it as weak thats why he wrote it as that
you need to read the original book in arabic in which the muhadith state this clearly in the begning dont your teachers ever mention this to you
so when ibn hajar corrected a few bukhari hadith and cosidered them wrong are you trying to say he went out of the way of ahlus sunnah wal jamaah
i think what you mean is this is the way of ahlus sunnah wal jamaah but its out of the way of ahlul bidah ays which you use
as for bangladesh people did commit crime but the question is why they are being punnished not for their crime but because the government are now seein the uprise of islam like other countries and want to stop it before it reaches that level but as the sings of judgement says it will happen is muslim lands and nothing can be done
and one mroe thing either get my account deleted for good so i dont ahve to write 7 at the end or unlock it one or the other
Pages