Excerpted from: Monthly al-Ḥadīth, Hazro
❖ Introduction:
نحمده و نصلي على رسوله الكريم، أما بعد
Ghulam Mustafa Noori, in his book “Tark-e-Rafʿ al-Yadayn”, demonstrates severe inconsistencies and contradictions in the evaluation of narrators. His method appears biased, whereby he accepts a narrator when the narration supports his position, and rejects the same narrator when the narration contradicts his view. This article highlights multiple documented examples of such inconsistencies.
◈ Example ①: Ismāʿīl ibn ʿAyyāsh
- ✅ When it supports his view, Noori writes:
“Ismāʿīl ibn ʿAyyāsh is a trustworthy narrator; Ibn Ḥajar stated that some scholars declared him thiqah.”
➤ (Page 293) - ❌ When it opposes his view, he writes:
“Ismāʿīl ibn ʿAyyāsh is weak when narrating from people of Madīnah like Ṣāliḥ ibn Kaysān, and such narrations are not proof.”
➤ (Page 445)
📌 Same narrator, same chain — accepted once, rejected the second time.
◈ Example ②: Ḥakam ibn ʿUtaybah
- ❌ Rejected:
“Ḥakam ibn ʿUtaybah is majhūl (unknown).”
➤ (Page 453) - ✅ Accepted:
“He is thiqah (trustworthy).”
➤ (Page 462)
📌 Selective authentication based on narrative alignment.
◈ Example ③: Muḥammad ibn Faḍīl
- ❌ When against him:
“He is a Shīʿī; Ibn Saʿd said his narrations are not taken as evidence.”
➤ (Page 424) - ✅ When in his favor:
“All narrators in this chain, including Muḥammad ibn Faḍīl, are from Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī and are trustworthy.”
➤ (Page 457)
◈ Example ④: Muḥārib ibn Dithār
- ❌ Rejected:
“He is not accepted by scholars; had problematic views about ʿUthmān and ʿAlī رضي الله عنهما.”
➤ (Pages 423, 440) - ✅ Accepted:
“He was a Qāḍī of Kūfah, a knowledgeable and virtuous man.”
➤ (Page 256)
◈ Example ⑤: Abū Hilāl Muḥammad ibn Sulaym
- ❌ Rejected:
“He is weak; his narration is not reliable.”
➤ (Pages 426–427) - ✅ Accepted:
Used his narration as evidence when it served his purpose.
➤ (Pages 236–237)
◈ Example ⑥: ʿIkrimah ibn ʿAmmār
- ❌ Declared weak:
➤ (Page 253) - ✅ Used his narration as proof:
➤ (Page 289)
◈ Example ⑦: Ibrāhīm ibn Munḏir
- ❌ Rejected:
“He is weak; Imām Aḥmad criticised him; narrated munkar (unacceptable) reports.”
➤ (Page 441) - ✅ Accepted:
Used his narration as evidence.
➤ (Page 237)
◈ Example ⑧: Ibrāhīm ibn Ṭahmān
- ❌ Rejected:
“He is weak.”
➤ (Page 441) - ✅ Accepted:
Used his narration.
➤ (Page 237)
◈ Example ⑨: Ḥumayd Ṭawīl
- ❌ Rejected a narration:
“He is a mudallis (ambiguous narrator) and narrated with ‘ʿan’, hence the report is not proof.”
➤ (Page 379) - ✅ Accepted similar narration:
“This shows ʿAnas’s narration only proves Rafʿ al-Yadayn at the opening takbīr.”
➤ (Page 224)
📌 Same narrator, same style (ʿanʿanah), different verdicts based on narrative bias.
◈ Example ⑩: Abū Qilābah
- ❌ Rejected:
“He is a mudallis and narrates via ‘ʿan’; not accepted.”
➤ (Pages 443–444) - ✅ But previously admitted:
“First level mudalliseen are accepted by consensus.”
➤ (Page 463)
🔎 Hāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajar listed Abū Qilābah among the first category (طبقة الأولى) — whose tadlīs is accepted.
◈ Example ⑪: Saʿīd ibn Abī ʿArūbah
- ❌ Rejected:
“He is a mudallis and narrated from Qatādah via ʿan, thus not hujjah.”
➤ (Page 425) - ✅ But when it supports his claim:
No objection made, despite same issue of tadlīs.
📌 Ibn Ḥajar listed him in the same class of mudallis as Sufyān al-Thawrī, whose similar narrations Noori accepted.
◈ Example ⑫: Yaḥyá ibn Saʿīd
- ❌ Rejected:
“He is a mudallis and narrates via ʿan; hence not accepted.”
➤ (Page 382) - 🔎 However, Yaḥyá ibn Saʿīd is free from tadlīs, as shown in Fatḥ al-Mubīn fī Taḥqīq Ṭabaqāt al-Mudalliseen (T32, p. 31–32)
❖ Summary of Noori Ṣāḥib’s Contradictions:
🛑 Same narrator, same method, yet double standards.
✅ When narrations support his view: “Thiqah”, “Ṣaḥīḥ”, “Proof”
❌ When against him: “Weak”, “Mudallis”, “Not Hujjah”
❖ A Quotation from Noori Ṣāḥib’s Own Book:
“A narrator is accepted when he appears in Bukhārī, but when he narrates something against the Ghair-Muqallid viewpoint, they try to discredit him with full effort — a clear contradiction in their honesty.”
(Page 259)
💠 Ironically, this very attitude is evident in Noori Ṣāḥib’s own work, as exposed above.
❖ Final Reminder:
“We must all one day return to Allah. Let us fear the Day of Judgment and speak with truth and justice in religious discourse.”
May Allah ﷻ grant us all the ability to recognize truth as truth and to follow it, and to recognize falsehood as falsehood and to avoid it.
Āmīn
