This excerpt is taken from the book Noor al-Aynayn fi Ithbat Raf’ al-Yadayn ‘inda al-Ruku’ wa Ba’dahu fi al-Salah by the contemporary scholar Hafiz Zubair Ali Zai رحمه الله.
Mahmoud bin Ishaq al-Bukhari al-Khuza’i al-Qawas رحمه الله
A complete overview of Abu Ishaq Mahmood ibn Ishaq al-Khuzai al-Bukhari al-Qawas رحمه الله, the narrator of two famous books (Juz’ Raf’ al-Yadayn and Juz’ al-Qira’ah) by Imam Sahih al-Bukhari رحمه الله, is presented below:
Name and Lineage: Abu Ishaq Mahmood ibn Ishaq ibn Mahmood al-Qawas al-Bukhari al-Khuzai رحمه الله
Teachers: Some of his teachers are as follows:
➊ Imam Abu Abdullah Muhammad ibn Ismail al-Bukhari رحمه الله
➋ Muhammad ibn al-Hasan ibn Ja’far al-Bukhari
➌ Abu Asim Sahl ibn al-Mutawakkil ibn Hajar al-Bukhari / Thiqah
Sahl ibn al-Mutawakkil was mentioned by Hafiz Ibn Hibban in his book Al-Thiqat
and Hafiz Khalili declared him Thiqah.
➍ Abu Amr Harith ibn Abdul Rahman al-Bukhari
➎ Abu Abdullah Muhammad ibn Abdak al-Bukhari al-Jadidi
➏ Khalaf ibn al-Walid Abu Salih al-Bukhari
➐ Ahmad ibn Hatem ibn Dawood al-Makki, Abu Ja’far al-Sulami
and others رحمه الله
Students: According to our knowledge, the names of his students (disciples) are as follows:
➊ Abu Nasr Muhammad ibn Ahmad ibn Musa ibn Ja’far al-Malahimi al-Bukhari
➋ Abu al-Abbas Ahmad ibn Muhammad ibn al-Husayn ibn Ishaq al-Razi al-Dhareer
About Abu al-Abbas al-Razi al-Saghir, Al-Khatib al-Baghdadi stated: ”و كان ثقة حافظا“
➌ Abu Bakr Muhammad ibn Abi Ishaq Ibrahim ibn Ya’qub al-Kalabazi al-Bukhari
This individual is an author, and his mention is found in Taj al-Tarajim (pp. 333 – 335) and others.
➍ Imam Abu al-Fadl Ahmad ibn Ali ibn Amr ibn Hamad al-Sulaymani al-Baykandi al-Bukhari رحمه الله
For their conditions, see Siyar A’lam al-Nubala
and others.
➎ Abu al-Husayn Muhammad ibn Imran ibn Musa al-Jurjani
His mention is found in Tarikh Jurjan li al-Suhmi
.
➏ Abu al-Husayn Ahmad ibn Muhammad ibn Yusuf al-Azdi al-Bukhari
➐ Abu Nasr Ahmad ibn Muhammad ibn al-Hasan ibn Hamed ibn Harun ibn al-Mundhir ibn Abdul Jabbar al-Niyazi al-Kermani.
I do not have a complete historical account of the narrators from Samarkand and Bukhara, and “Al-Qand fi Dhikr Ulama Samarkand” by al-Nasafi exists, but it is incomplete from the beginning and the end; the section on narrators named Mahmood has not been published. And Allah knows best.
Academic Contributions: You are the primary narrator of Imam Muhammad ibn Ismail al-Bukhari رحمه الله‘s two famous books, Juz’ Raf’ al-Yadayn and Juz’ al-Qira’ah.
Scholarly Status: The famous scholar of Yemen, Mawlana Sheikh Abdul Rahman ibn Yahya al-Mu’allimi رحمه الله, addressed Zahid ibn Hasan al-Kawthari (Jahmi) and wrote: إذا كان أهل العلم قد وثقوهما و ثبتوهما ولم يتكلم أحد منهم فيهما فما ذا ينفعك أن تقول : لا نثق بهما ؟ When the scholars (Muhaddithin and scholars) have declared both (Mahmood ibn Ishaq al-Khuzai and Ahmad ibn Muhammad ibn al-Husayn al-Razi) Thiqah and Sabit, and no one has made any (criticism) remarks about them, what benefit will your statement: “We do not rely on them” provide?
Now, I present more than ten references for the explicit and implicit authentication of Mahmood ibn Ishaq رحمه الله:
➊ Hafiz Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani declared a narration reported by Mahmood ibn Ishaq as “Hasan.”
Note: Declaring a narrator’s unique narration as Hasan or Sahih is an authentication of that narrator.
➋ Allama Nawawi transmitted a narration from Juz’ Raf’ al-Yadayn with certainty and stated: بإسناده الصحيح عن نافع
It is evident that Nawawi considered Juz’ Raf’ al-Yadayn to be an authentic and established book of Imam al-Bukhari.
➌ Ibn al-Mulaqqin (Sufi) transmitted a narration from Juz’ Raf’ al-Yadayn with certainty and stated: بإسناد صحيح عن نافع عن ابن عمر
➍ Zaili al-Hanafi transmitted narrations from Juz’ Raf’ al-Yadayn with certainty.
➎ The famous Muhaddith Abu Bakr al-Bayhaqi رحمه الله transmitted the book Juz’ al-Qira’ah reported by Mahmood ibn Ishaq with certainty from Imam al-Bukhari.
➏ Allama Abu al-Hajjaj al-Mizzi رحمه الله transmitted Juz’ al-Qira’ah with certainty from Imam al-Bukhari.
➐ Ayni al-Hanafi transmitted Juz’ Raf’ al-Yadayn with certainty from Imam al-Bukhari.
Also see Sharh Sunan Abi Dawood al-Ayni
and Ma’ani al-Akhbar
➑ Badr al-Din Muhammad ibn Bahadur ibn Abdullah al-Zarkashi transmitted the mentioned Juz’ with certainty.
➒ Muhammad al-Zarqani transmitted Juz’ Raf’ al-Yadayn with certainty from Imam al-Bukhari.
➓ Al-Suyuti transmitted Juz’ Raf’ al-Yadayn with certainty from Imam al-Bukhari in Fadl al-Wa’i.
⓫ Al-Dhahabi
⓬ Mughultai al-Hanafi
And others, for example, see Tanqih al-Tahqiq
Many scholars from the Deobandi and Barelvi sects and the followers of Taqleed have transmitted Juz’ Raf’ al-Yadayn and Juz’ al-Qira’ah (both or either one) with certainty from Imam al-Bukhari, some of which references are as follows:
➊ Nimawi
➋ Sarfraz Khan Safdar Kattar Mangi Gakhrawi Deobandi
➌ Sufi Abdul Hamid Swati Deobandi
➍ Faiz Ahmad Multani Deobandi
➎ Jameel Ahmad Naziri Deobandi
➏ Ali Muhammad Haqani Deobandi
➐ Ghulam Mustafa Noori Barelvi
➑ Ghulam Murtaza Saqi Barelvi
➒ Abu Yusuf Muhammad Wali Darwish Deobandi
➓ Abdul Shakur Qasimi Deobandi, etc.
and others.
All of them have transmitted references from Juz’ al-Qira’ah or Juz’ Raf’ al-Yadayn with certainty and as evidence, and some have even declared a narration mentioned in Raf’ al-Yadayn as having an authentic chain.
To our knowledge, no Muhaddith or credible scholar has criticized Mahmood ibn Ishaq, and declaring the books and narrations he reported as certain or mentioning them with certainty (in the absence of any criticism against him) is evidence that he was considered Thiqah and Saduq by all the mentioned scholars and others. Therefore, both Juz’ al-Qira’ah and Juz’ Raf’ al-Yadayn are established from Imam al-Bukhari, and the criticisms and objections of some people from the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries against these books are rejected.
Refutation of the Ignorance or Willful Ignorance of Some People:
In the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries, some people (for example, Amin Okaraavi Deobandi) declared Mahmood bin Ishaq al-Bukhari to be unknown (majhool), whereas the narration of seven narrators, after the authentication by Hafiz Ibn Hajar and other scholars and non-scholars, renders such a claim invalid and rejected. To our knowledge, Mahmood bin Ishaq, who passed away in 332 AH, has not been declared majhool al-‘ain or majhool al-hal (hidden) by any hadith scholar or credible scholar.
Hafiz Dhahabi wrote:
محمود بن إسحاق البخاري القواس : سمع من محمد بن إسماعيل البخاري و محمد بن الحسن بن جعفر صاحب يزيد بن هارون و حدث و عمر دهرا . أرخه الخليلي و قال : ثنا عنه محمد بن أحمد الملاحمي
Mahmood bin Ishaq al-Bukhari al-Qawwas: He heard from Muhammad bin Ismail al-Bukhari and Yazid bin Harun’s student Muhammad bin al-Hasan bin Ja’far, narrated hadiths, and lived for a long time. Al-Khilaali mentioned his date of death and stated: We have heard hadith from him through Muhammad bin Ahmad al-Malahimi.
A well-known principle of hadith states that if two or more trustworthy narrators narrate from a narrator, he is not considered majhool al-‘ain (unknown), and if such a narrator lacks authentication, he is considered majhool al-hal (hidden). The following references are noted:
➊ Al-Khatib al-Baghdadi wrote: و أقل ما ترتفع به الجهالة أن يروي عن الرجل اثنان فصاعدا من المشهورين بالعلم ، كذلك and the ignorance of a person (being majhool al-‘ain) is at least removed when two or more well-known narrators narrate from him, just as it is.
Ibn al-Salah al-Shahrzuri wrote: و من روى عنه عدلان و عيناه فقد ارتفعت عنه هذه الجهالة and if two trustworthy narrators narrate and specify him (by name), then this ignorance (being majhool al-‘ain) is removed.
Hafiz Dhahabi wrote about Usama bin Hafs:
ليس بمجهول فقد روى عنه أربعة He is not majhool, because four narrators have narrated from him.
Note: This phrase has been omitted from the printed editions of Mizan al-I’tidal.
Opposing Hafiz Ibn Taymiyyah, Ali bin Abdul Kafi al-Sabki al-Shafi’i openly wrote:
و برواية اثنين تنتفى جهالة العين فكيف برواية سبعة ؟ The ignorance is completely removed by the narration of two, so how can it not be removed by the narration of seven?!
Hafiz Ibn Abdul Barr wrote about a narrator, Abdul Rahman bin Yazid bin Aqbah bin Kareem al-Ansari al-Saduq: و قد روى عنه ثلاثة ، وقد قيل : رجلان فليس بمجهول Two or three people have narrated from him, therefore he is not majhool.
Abu Ja’far al-Nahhas said: و من روى عنه اثنان فليس بمجهول
And if two narrate from him, he is not majhool.
Ayni Hanafi wrote about a narrator (Abu Zaid):
والجهالة عند المحدثين تزول برواية اثنين فصاعدا ، فأين الجهالة بعد ذلك ؟ ! إلا أن يراد جهالة الحال
And according to the hadith scholars, the ignorance is removed by the narration of two or more, so where is the ignorance left after that?! Unless the ignorance of condition is meant.
There are many more references of this kind.
➋ Zafar Ahmad Thanwi Deobandi wrote a principle about Aisha bint Ajrad:
وليس بمجهول من روى عنه اثنان And if two trustworthy narrators narrate, he is not majhool.
Note: The phrase after و عرفها يحيى بن معين فقال : لها صحبة is separate and does not contradict this principle.
Zafar Ahmad Thanwi Deobandi further wrote: برواية عدلين ترتفع جهالة العين عند الجمهور و لا تثبت به العدالة According to the majority, the ignorance is completely removed by the narration of two trustworthy narrators, and this does not establish justice (authentication of the narrator).
➌ Abdul Qayyum Haqqani Deobandi wrote about a narrator:
In response, the hadith scholars state that his name is Yazid, and three narrators narrate from him, and according to the principle, the ignorance of a person from whom two narrate is removed.
Also see Tazeeh al-Sunan
➍ Muhammad Taqi Usmani Deobandi, while responding to an objection regarding a majhool al-hal narrator Abu Aisha, said:
And it has been established in the principles of hadith that if two narrators narrate from a person, his ignorance is removed, therefore the objection of ignorance is not valid, and this hadith is not less than Hasan.
➎ Abdul Haq Haqqani Akoravi Deobandi mentioned the objection of majhool in a narration: The answer is that there are two types of majhool.
● Majhool al-Dhat ● Majhool al-Sifat
When a narrator says حدثنی رجل (A man told me) and that man is unknown, then this is majhool al-Dhat. If two students who are trustworthy, just, and reliable narrate from such an unknown man, then the narration of these two students from one teacher serves as a testimony to the reliability of the teacher (the unknown man). Because accomplished students never learn from an incompetent teacher.
➏ Ahmad Hassan Sanbhali Taqleedee Muzaffar Nagri, in response to the first objection against Imam Ibn Abi Shaiba (on his alleged Imam), wrote:
Thus, when two persons narrated from him, the ignorance was removed, so they will be considered well-known, just as this principle has been established in the principles of hadith.
This book is favored by four individuals:
⟐ Ashraf Ali Thanwi
⟐ Master Amin Okaraavi
⟐ Mushtaq Ali Shah Deobandi (See the first page of Tarjuman Ahnaf)
⟐ Muhammad Ilyas Ghaman Hayati Deobandi
If the principle of hadith mentioned in this reference is denied, then the defense of the followers of Taqleed for their alleged Imam in the first issue collapses, and Imam Ibn Abi Shaiba’s objection is proven correct that (Imam) Abu Hanifah opposed the hadiths.
➐ Nimwi Taqleedee wrote about a majhool al-hal narrator Abu Aisha:
قلت : فارتفعت الجهالة برواية الاثنين عنه
I said: Thus, the ignorance was removed by the narration of two from him.
Also see Aathar al-Sunan
➑ Shabbir Ahmad Usmani Deobandi wrote:
ثم من روى عنه عدلان ارتفعت جهالة عينه
Then if two trustworthy narrators narrate from him, his ignorance is completely removed.
➒ Muhammad Irshad al-Qasimi Bhagalpuri (Deobandi) wrote:
“When the narration of majhool al-‘ain is established by two just narrators, then the ignorance will be removed.”
➓ Muhammad Mahmood Alam Safdar (Nanha) Okaraavi wrote: It should be noted that the ignorance of a narrator being one is based on the views of other hadith scholars, and according to them, if there are two narrators, the ignorance of the individual will be removed. According to us, majhool al-‘ain is one from whom one or two hadiths are narrated and whose justice is also unknown; it is generally accepted that two or more narrators narrate from him. If such ignorance exists in a companion, it is not harmful, and if it exists in others, then if his hadith appears in the second or third century, it will be permissible to act upon it, and if it appears and the predecessors testify to its authenticity, then it will be accepted, and if they reject it, it will be rejected, and if they differ, then if it agrees with analogy, it will be accepted, otherwise, it will be rejected.
According to this Deobandi principle of Nanha Okaraavi, the narrations of Mahmood bin Ishaq al-Khazai and Nafi’ bin Mahmood al-Maqdisi, etc., رحمه الله, become accepted (Sahih or Hasan).
Further references can also be found, proving that the narrator Mahmood bin Ishaq رحمه الله, who has seven students, cannot be declared majhool or majhool al-‘ain at all.
As for declaring him majhool al-hal or hidden, this only occurs when the narrator’s authentication is completely absent (or unreliable), as Hafiz Ibn Hajar رحمه الله stated: و إن روى عنه اثنان فصاعدا ولم يوثق فهو مجهول الحال وهو المستور و قد قبل روايته جماعة بغير قيد و ردها الجمهور If two or more have narrated from him and his authentication is not present, then he is majhool al-hal and hidden, and he has been accepted by a group without any condition, and the majority has rejected it.
In the explanation of “a group has accepted,” Mulla Ali Qari Hanafi wrote:
منهم أبو حنيفة Among them is Abu Hanifah…
Shabbir Ahmad Usmani Deobandi wrote: و منهم أبو بكر بن فورك و كذا قبله أبو حنيفة خلافا للشافعي، و من عزاه إليه فقد وهم And among those (who accepted the narration of the hidden) are Abu Bakr al-Furq and before him Abu Hanifah, (this principle) is against the Shafi’i, and whoever attributed it to them (the Shafi’i) (that the narration of the hidden is accepted) has made a mistake.
In the favored book of Hadith Sciences by Habib al-Rahman Azami Deobandi, Muhammad Ubaidullah al-Asadi (Deobandi) wrote: According to Imam Abu Hanifah, the details regarding the rulings of majhool are:
(a) Majhool al-‘ain: This state of jarh is not valid; his hadith will be unacceptable unless the predecessors have declared it rejected or it appears after the era of the Tabi’ al-Tabi’in. If it appears before that, whether the predecessors have strengthened it or some have agreed or all have remained silent, it is permissible to act upon it.
(b) Majhool al-hal: The narrator is accepted, whether he is just in appearance but hidden in reality or is majhool from both aspects.
(c) Majhool al-ism: It is also accepted provided he belongs to the three generations.
This detail also shows that according to the Imam, majhool is not accepted absolutely; at least the condition of belonging to the three generations must be considered, as explicitly stated.
Abu Sa’ad Shirazi (Deobandi) wrote:
“A narrator who is not majhool al-‘ain and whose authentication is not reported from anyone is called hidden; his narration is accepted.”
Shirazi Deobandi quoted from his “Sultan al-Muhaddithin,” Mulla Ali Qari:
And the narration of the hidden has been accepted by a group without the condition of time; among them is Abu Hanifah رحمه الله. Al-Sakhawi mentioned this, and Ibn Hibban adopted this saying while following Imam al-Azam رحمه الله.
Note: The claim that Hafiz Ibn Hibban followed the Hanafi Imam Abu Hanifah in this principle is baseless and unsupported.
Deobandi “Mufti” Shabbir Ahmad (modern) wrote: The third narrator is Imam Abu Asim Sa’d bin Ma’adh al-Muroozi. Ali Zai has reported the jarh of him being majhool. However, according to the principles of hadith, this jarh is also rejected because there are two types of majhool:
● Majhool al-hal ● Majhool al-‘ain
Majhool means one whose justice is not apparent, but he is a Muslim. According to Imam al-Azam Abu Hanifah رحمه الله and his followers, the narration of majhool al-hal will be accepted, meaning that the narrator being a Muslim and avoiding corruption is sufficient for the acceptance of his narration.
Majhool al-‘ain means that scholars do not recognize this narrator and his narration. If only one narrator has transmitted from him, in other words, if only one student has narrated from him.
None of the categories of majhool apply to Abu Asim, neither majhool al-hal nor majhool al-‘ain. According to the principles of the Ahnaf, his narration is accepted, and according to the principles of other Imams, his narration is also accepted because he has several students and he is a Muslim. Therefore, his narration will be accepted.
Fair-minded readers should consider that several narrators have narrated from Abu Asim, and no single reliable hadith scholar or scholar has provided explicit or implicit authentication of him, rather Hafiz Dhahabi clearly wrote that مجهول و حديثه باطل he is majhool and his hadith is invalid.
This Abu Asim is being established as trustworthy and truthful (!) while Mahmood bin Ishaq al-Khazai al-Bukhari and Nafi’ bin Mahmood al-Maqdisi, etc., are being labeled as majhool and hidden. Glory be to Allah!
Summary of the investigation: Mahmood bin Ishaq al-Khazai mentioned is not majhool or hidden but is trustworthy and truthful and has authentic and good hadiths, therefore the criticism of him by Master Amin Okaraavi Deobandi and his followers is rejected.
Date of death: 332 AH
(Date written: 4/November 2011, Maktabah al-Hadith, Hazro, Attock)
