The Madhhab of Ahl-e-Madina and Ahl-e-Hadith
Our contemporary Jhangvi Sahib has also enumerated the differences of Ahl al-Hadith with the people of Madinah. Under this, he tries to prove the difference between Imam Malik (may Allah have mercy on him) and Ahl al-Hadith. Whereas the residents of Madinah Tayyibah are not only Imam Malik but there are many Imams who are descendants of the Companions. But Abu Bilal Sahib saw only one scholar in Madinah Tayyibah and he makes his stance the stance of the people of Madinah. This is a clear proof of his ignorance.
Undoubtedly, Imam Malik is a great Imam. He is a devotee of the Sunnah and a scholar of the Qur’an. But the truth is not confined to him alone. Nor does the interaction of the people of Madinah mean only the stance of Imam Malik (may Allah have mercy on him) because Imam Malik is counted among the scholars of Madinah. In short, he is a part of the scholars of Madinah but not the whole.
Now let us sequentially observe the reality of those issues which Jhangvi Sahib has explained.
◈Issue of Raising the Hands (Raf’ al-Yadain):-
It is narrated from Hazrat Abdullah bin Umar (RA) that when the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم started the prayer, when he bowed, and when he raised his head from bowing, he would raise his hands.
The narrator of this hadith is Imam Malik (may Allah have mercy on him), and he acted upon this hadith.
❀ Hafiz Ibn Abdul Barr Al-Maliki (may Allah have mercy on him) says that
روى ابن وهب والوليد بن مسلم وسعيد بن ابی مریم واشهب وابو المصعب عن مالك أنه كان يرفع يديه على حديث ابن عمر هذا الى ان مات
“That is, Imam Ibn Wahb, Imam Waleed bin Muslim, Imam Saeed bin Abi Maryam, Imam Ash’ab, and Imam Abu Mus’ab narrate from Imam Malik that he used to raise his hands in prayer in accordance with the hadith of Ibn Umar until he passed away.”
Wiping over the turban:
It is stated that you believe in wiping over the turban, while the Imam of Medina does not permit it.
Answer: Brother, if Imam Malik of Medina was not aware of this Sunnah, then what happened, while it is proven from the Emigrant of Medina and the Imam of the Prophets and the Seal of the Prophets, Prophet Muhammad ﷺ, that wiping over the turban was practiced.
❀ Hazrat Amr bin Umayyah (RA) narrates that
رایت النبي نكت يمسح على عمامته وخفيه
“That is, I saw the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم wiping over the blessed turban and the socks.”
❀ Hazrat Bilal (RA) is a narrator that
ان رسول الله ﷺ مسح على الخفين والخمار
“That is, without doubt, the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم wiped over the socks and the turban during ablution.”
❀ Hazrat Thawban رضي الله عنه narrates that the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم sent an army, and they felt cold. When he came to the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم, the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم ordered wiping over the turban and socks.
Imam Hakim and Dhahabi state that this condition is authentic in Sahih Muslim.
❀ Hazrat Sulaiman Farsi رضي الله عنه states that
فانی رایت رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم يمسح على حماره وعلى خفيه
“That is, I saw the Messenger of Allah ﷺ wiping over the turban and socks.”
❀ Hazrat Khuzaymah bin Thabit رضي الله عنه states that
ان النبي ما كان يمسح على الخفين والحمار
“Undoubtedly, the Prophet ﷺ used to wipe over the socks and turban.”
Allama Haishmi states that its chain of narration is Hasan (good).
Your respected teacher states that if Allama Haishmi was not the authority on authenticity and weakness in his time, then who else was.
There are numerous narrations about wiping over the turban from nearly twenty companions of the Prophet ﷺ. If the opposing party writes a response and we are compelled, then in reply to the reply, this humble servant will discuss it in detail, God willing, and will expose all the corrupt distortions and interpretations of the innovators, God willing.
Imam Tirmidhi, while mentioning those who advocate wiping over the turban, states that Abu Bakr Siddiq (may Allah be pleased with him), Umar Farooq (may Allah be pleased with him), Anas ibn Malik (may Allah be pleased with him), Imam Awza’i, Imam Ahmad, Imam Ishaq, and Imam Waki’ ibn al-Jarrah were proponents of wiping over the turban.
Similarly, Imam Abi Thawr, Imam Dawood bin Ali, Hazrat Abi Al-Mamahؓ, Hazrat Saadؓ, Hazrat Abi Dardaؓ, Hazrat Umar bin Abdul Aziz, Qatadah Makhool.
Hazrat Abu Musa Al-Ash’ariؓ, Hazrat Aliؓ, Imam Sufyan Thawri, Imam Hasan Basri were also proponents of wiping over the turban.
The question is that Muhammad, the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم, and the noble companions, especially the Rightly Guided Caliphs, were not residents of Madinah Tayyibah in your view. Otherwise, you would not accuse us of differing from the religion of the people of Madinah.
Furthermore, according to Imam Malikؒ, wiping over the entire head is obligatory. If any part of the head remains unwiped, ablution will not be valid.
It is evident that this stance is against the Hanafi school because, according to them, wiping over one-fourth of the head is obligatory. Moreover, Imam Malik does not accept wiping over the turban unconditionally.
Whereas the Hanafi school, combined with the Namiyah, accepts wiping over the turban.
فما کان جوابکم فھو جوابنا
◈ Evidence of a strike in Tamim:
It is stated that according to you, Tamim has one method, while the Imam of Medina has two methods.
Answer: Abdul Rahman bin Abzi narrates that a person came to Hazrat Umar Farooq (RA). He said, “I have become junub and cannot find water.” Hazrat Umar Farooq (RA) said, “Then perform the prayer of adhanah (until you find water).” At this point, Hazrat Ammar bin Yasir (RA) said, “O Umar Farooq (RA), remember the incident when you and I were in a military expedition and both of us became junub. You performed the prayer of adhanah, but I lay down on the ground and prayed. When we came to the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم, he said:
يكفيك ان تضرب بيدك الارض ثم تنفخ ثم تمسح بهما وجهك وكفيك
It was sufficient for you to touch the ground with your hands, then blow on your hands (to dust them off), and then wipe your face and hands with those two hands.”
This same hadith is narrated by Hazrat Abu Musa Al-Ash’ari (RA) from Hazrat Ammar bin Yasir (RA).
Imam Tirmidhi states that those who advocate for Tamim’s view include Hazrat Ali (RA), Hazrat Ammar (RA), Hazrat Ibn Abbas (RA), and many Tabi‘in, and this is also the opinion of Imam Ahmad (RA) and Imam Ishaq (RA).
This is also the fatwa of Qatadah, Saeed bin Musayyib, and Urwah bin Zubair.
Brother, the question for you is that the Imam of the Prophets and the Seal of the Prophets, Prophet Muhammad ﷺ, Hazrat Aliؓ, Hazrat Ibn Abbasؓ, Hazrat Ammar bin Yasirؓ, Imam Saeedؒ bin Musayyib, and Urwah bin Zubair are not from Madinah. If you truly do not consider them Madani, then you should admit yourself to a mental hospital; this composition is beyond your capacity. If they are indeed Madani, then with what face do you spread the rumor of disagreement with the religion of the people of Madinah?
Then it should be clear that there is also a narration from Imam Malikؒ about performing tayammum with one strike, which Maulana Muhammad Taqi Usmani has acknowledged. See:
It should also be noted that according to the Hanafis, two strikes are essential in tayammum, which means that division with one strike is not permissible. Whereas Imam Malik states that tayammum with one strike is permissible.
❀Imam Ibn Abd al-Barr (may Allah have mercy on him) writes that
وقال مالك ان مسح وجهه ويديه بضربة واحدة اجزاه وان مسح يديه الى الكوعين اجزاه
“That is, Imam Malik says that if one wipes the face and hands with a single stroke, it suffices, and if one wipes half of the hands, that also suffices.”
Whereas according to the Hanafis, wiping up to the elbows is obligatory, and similarly, Tamim and his followers do not accept wiping with a single stroke. However, the author of Tuhfat Ahl al-Hadith does not examine his own school but accuses the other party of rebellion against the Madhhab of Ahl al-Madina by proving disagreement with Imam Malik (may Allah have mercy on him).
O brother, if this is rebellion, then you are the greatest rebel.
◈Explanation of Surah Al-Fatiha in Prayer
He states that you consider Al-Fatiha obligatory for the follower in audible and silent prayers, whereas the Imam of Madinah does not permit Al-Fatiha for the follower in audible prayers.
Answer: Firstly: Undoubtedly, this is the well-known stance of Imam Malik. However, Imam Qurtubi, a Maliki scholar, states that
الصحيح من هذه الاقوال قول الشافعي واحمد ومالك في القول الآخر ان الفاتحة متعينة في كل ركعة لكل احد على العموم
meaning that among these opinions, the correct one is that of Imam Shafi’i, Imam Ahmad, and one opinion of Imam Malik, which holds that Al-Fatiha is necessary in every Rak’ah for everyone.
Allama Qurtubi is a recognized authority in Maliki jurisprudence. Rejecting his words without evidence is a great audacity.
Secondly:
How do you mention Imam Malik’s name when you admit that he advocated reciting Al-Fatiha silently? Whereas according to the Hanafis, it is not obligatory for the follower at all, and later scholars even consider it prohibited (haram).
Thirdly:
According to the Hanafis, recitation in the last two Rak’ahs is not obligatory at all, whether for the Imam or the follower. In fact, according to the Hanafis, if the Imam is traveling and the follower is resident, and the Imam recites from a distance and then says the salam, the follower is not permitted to recite in the last two Rak’ahs either. Whereas Imam Malik considers Al-Fatiha obligatory in all four Rak’ahs.
❀Allama Ibn Abd al-Barr (may Allah have mercy on him) says that
واجمع العلماء على ايجاب القرأة في الركعتين الأوليين من صلاة اربع واختلفوا في الركعتين الاخرتين فمذهب مالك والشافعي واحمد واسحق و ابی ثور وداود ان القرأة فيهما بفاتحة الكتاب واجبة ومن لم يقرا فيها بفاتحة الكتاب واجبة ومن لم يقرا فيهما بها فلا صلاة له وعليه اعادة ماصلی
meaning in the four Rak’ah prayer, reciting the Qur’an in the first two Rak’ahs is obligatory according to all scholars. However, there is a difference of opinion regarding the last two Rak’ahs. The school of Imam Malik, Imam Shafi’i, Imam Ahmad, Imam Ishaq, Imam Abu Thawr, Imam Dawood, etc., holds that reciting Surah Al-Fatiha in the last two Rak’ahs is also obligatory, and whoever does not recite Al-Fatiha in these last two Rak’ahs, his prayer is not valid, and it is obligatory upon him to perform the prayer again.
O Sunnis who criticize Ahl al-Hadith based on the sayings of Imam Malik, may Allah have mercy on him! What is the Imam of Medina saying, and where are you heading?
Fourthly:
This issue is indeed disputed among the blessed Ummah. Your respected teacher states that: Hazrat Ubada bin As-Samit considered it correct and incorrect. In any case, it is absolutely true that Hazrat Ubada was in favor of reciting Surah Al-Fatiha behind the Imam, and this was his understanding and his school of thought and sect. However, the understanding of a companion and the suspension of a companion are not conclusive evidence.
Hazrat Ubada رضي الله عنه was from the Ansar tribe of Khazraj and a resident of Madinah Tayyibah. He is a well-known Badri Sahabi.
Those who try to prove differences from the religion of Ahl Madinah should first thoroughly study their teacher’s book.
Fifthly:
From the mentioned statement of Maulana Sarfaraz Khan Sahib Safdar, it is proven that the suspended sayings (Mawqufat) of the Sahabah are not authoritative. Whereas the author of Tuhfa Ahl-e-Hadith says that this is the position and religion of the Shia.
It is understood that you also mean Shia as brothers.
Sixthly:
In debates, the way you all avoid Surah Al-Fatiha is remarkable. You insist strongly that it be proven that Surah Al-Fatiha is recited behind the Imam. Perhaps you remember, or maybe not, that in the debate at Jalalpur Bhattian, your entire team insisted on this. Upon which I stood up and said that undoubtedly it is not our sect’s belief that it is mandatory and necessary for the Imam, follower, and individual to recite Surah Al-Fatiha, and that without it the prayer is invalid. But since you insist that only the follower’s recitation of Al-Fatiha be proven, we accepted your point. Just as the discussion reached this point, you and your companions were very pleased with it. But when I completed my point by saying that according to you, the follower should not recite Surah Al-Fatiha behind the Imam, so you must prove that the follower should not recite Surah Al-Fatiha, you all knelt down.
Finally, you took the support of the public and said that they should decide. The public decided that the followers of the Ahl al-Hadith would prove that the follower recites the Fatiha behind the Imam, while the followers of the Hanafi school would prove that the follower does not recite the Fatiha behind the Imam. As a result, you had to engage in four or even four debates, but as promised, you could not present a single authentic hadith supporting the claim that the follower does not recite the Fatiha. However, you did commit dishonesty in these debates.
◈ Does Rukoo have a Rak’ah or not?
It is stated that the rak’ah performed by the one who joins in rukūʿ (bowing) with you is not counted as a rak’ah, whereas according to the Imam of Madinah, it is counted.
Answer: Firstly, it has already been mentioned that according to Imam Malik (may Allah have mercy on him), reciting Surah Al-Fatiha in all four rak’ahs is obligatory. Whereas the Hanafi school denies the recitation of the complete Qur’an in the last rak’ahs.
فماکان جوا بکم فھو جو ابنا؟
Secondly:
There is a mutawatir authentic marfū‘ hadith that
لاصلاة لمن يقرا بفاتحة الكتاب
That is, the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said: “Whoever does not recite Surah Al-Fatiha, his prayer is invalid.”
This hadith, due to its generality, includes both the Imam and the follower, and the individual as well. Therefore, counting the rak’ah of the one who joins in rukūʿ contradicts the generality of this hadith, for which there is no evidence. You should make an effort and read the entire collection of hadiths and point out any authentic, marfū‘, continuous hadith in which it is stated that the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) instructed to count the rak’ah of the one who joins in rukūʿ. But be certain that even if all the innovators in the world try their utmost, they cannot establish such a hadith.
◈Recitation of Surah Al-Fatiha in the Funeral:
It is stated that in your view, reciting Surah Al-Fatiha in the funeral prayer is obligatory, whereas the Imam of Medina says that this is not practiced in our city of Medina.
Answer: Firstly, Hazrat Talha bin Abdullah (RA) says that
صلیت خلف ابن عباسؓ على جنازة فقراً بفاتحة الكتاب وقال لتعلموا انها سنة
“I prayed the funeral prayer following Hazrat Abdullah bin Abbas (RA), and he recited Surah Al-Fatiha in the funeral prayer and said, ‘Know that this is Sunnah.'”
When a Sahabi says that this speech is Sunnah, it means the Sunnah agreed upon by the Messenger of Allah ﷺ. See in detail
Two points are understood from this Hadith:
➊ Reciting Surah Al-Fatiha in the funeral prayer is the method of the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم.
➋ Hazrat Ibn Abbas (RA) used to recite Surah Al-Fatiha in the funeral prayer. Hazrat Ibn Abbas (RA) is counted among the noble Sahabah. The Ummah has honored him with the title “Hamr al-Ummah.” The question to Jhungvi Sahib is: Is Ibn Abbas (RA) not from Medina? If he is, certainly he is, then with what face do you insult us by accusing the followers of the Medina school of sectarian difference? Have some shame.
Talha bin Abdullah is from Medina. (Taqreeb, p. 157) It is evident that this incident occurred specifically in Medina Tayyiba in the presence of a group of Sahabah and many Tabi‘in and children of Sahabah, but no one’s denial of Ibn Abbas (RA) is proven. This proves that the correct stance and sect of all the people of Medina was this. But Jhungvi Sahib, like novices, are shouting at us and making a fuss against the people of Medina.
Those who advocate recitation in the funeral prayer include Ibn Mas’ud (RA), Hasan bin Ali, Sahl bin Hunayf (RA), Ali Murtaza (RA), Abu Hurairah (RA), Abu Darda (RA), Anas bin Malik (RA), Abdullah bin Amr (RA), Mas’ur bin Mukhramah, and from the Tabi‘in, Saeed bin Musayyib (RA), Hasan Basri, etc.
Apart from the Companions of the Prophet, tell me whether Saeed bin Musayyib is counted among the top jurists of Madinah Munawwarah or not. If you deny this, then frequently recite [ رب زدنی علما]. Also, use Majoon Najah. InshaAllah, you will be cured of the disease of blind imitation and will become capable of reading the books of Tabaqat al-Ulama. From this, you will come to know who Hazrat Saeed bin Musayyib (may Allah have mercy on him) was.
◈ Funeral Prayer in the Mosque :
It is stated that a funeral prayer can be performed in your mosque, whereas the Imam of Madinah considers it undesirable.
Answer: Firstly:
The founder of the mosque where you are the preacher and khateeb, the respected Hafiz Abdul Shakoor (may Allah have mercy on him), had his funeral prayer performed in the mosque. In fact, he was also buried in the courtyard of the mosque. Please tell us, which Imam or elder from the people of Madinah supports you in burying in the mosque?
Secondly:
Umm al-Mu’minin, the leader of the women of the universe, Hazrat Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her) says:
والله لقد صلى رسول الله على ابنا بيضاء في المسجد سهيل واخيه
By Allah, the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) performed the funeral prayer in the mosque for the sons of Baisaa, Suhail and his brother.
❀ Allama Ibn Abdul Barr states that
ويدل على صحة ذلك ان ابابكر صلى عليه عمر في المسجد وصلى صهيب على عمر في المسجد بحضر جلة الصحابة من غير نكير منهم وليس من انكر ذلك بعد هم بحجة عليهم فصار بمان كرهنا سنة يعمل بها قديما فلا يجوز مخالفتها
and the authenticity of the narration from Umm al-Mu’minin is evidence that the funeral prayer of Hazrat Abu Bakr Siddiq (RA) was led by Umar Farooq (RA) in the (Prophetic) Mosque, and the funeral prayer of Umar Farooq (RA) was led by Hazrat Suhaib (RA) in the (Prophetic) Mosque. The senior and most eminent companions performed these prayers in the presence of others without any objection, and the denial by later generations does not hold any weight against them. Therefore, the permissibility of funeral prayers in the mosque mentioned here is a Sunnah, which has been practiced since ancient times, and opposing it is not permissible.
Only Jhangvi Sahib can clarify this: Were Muhammad Mustafa ﷺ, Umm al-Mu’minin Hazrat Aisha (RA), Umar Farooq (RA), Suhaib (RA), and other noble and senior companions residents of Madinah or not? If all of them were indeed residents of Madinah, then on what basis do you claim disagreement with the people of Madinah?
◈ Number of Rak’ahs of Witr:
It is stated that you have one Witr while the Imam of Madinah has at least three Witr.
Answer: Firstly:
Hazrat Abdullah bin Umar (RA) says that the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) said that the night prayer is two rak’ahs; if any of you fears the dawn, then
(صلى ركعة واحدة توترله ماقد صلى )
he should pray one rak’ah of Witr, and this rak’ah will make his first prayer odd.
In a hadith of Sahih Muslim,
الوتر ركعة من اخر الليل
meaning Witr is one rak’ah, at the last part of the night.
The following Sahabah (RA) were proponents of one rak’ah Witr:
(1) Abu Bakr Siddiq (RA)
(2) Umar Farooq (RA)
(3) Uthman Ghani (RA)
(4) Ali Murtaza (RA)
(5) Abdullah bin Umar (RA)
(6) Abu bin Ka’b (RA)
(7) Zaid bin Thabit (RA)
(8) Muadh bin Jabal (RA)
(9) Amir Muawiyah (RA)
(10) Saad bin Abi Waqqas (RA)
(11) Ibn Abbas (RA)
(12) Fazl bin Abbas (RA)
(13) Muadh al-Qari (RA)
(14) Abu Darda (RA)
(15) Fudala bin Ubaid (RA)
(16) Hudhayfah bin Yaman (RA)
(17) Ibn Masood (RA)
(18) Uqbah bin Walid (RA)
(19) Abdullah bin Zubair (RA)
(20) Abu Musa al-Ash’ari (RA)
(21) Abu Umamah (RA)
(22) Abu Hurairah (RA)
(23) Tamim al-Dari (RA)
(24) Abu Ayyub al-Ansari (RA)
(25) Saib bin Yazid (RA)
(26) Umm al-Mu’minin Hazrat Aisha (RA)
If the list of the Tabi‘in (followers) is included, a very good booklet would be prepared. But we limit ourselves to the Sahabah and ask Mr. Jhangvi whether these persons were residents of Madinah or were from non-Arab lands?
Secondly:
Undoubtedly, in Muwatta, Imam Malik’s statement is that Witr is three rak’ahs. But the details of how to pray them are not given. Imam Ibn Abdul Barr has clarified that they are proponents of praying two rak’ahs, then saying salam, and then praying one rak’ah of Witr. He has narrated with an authentic chain from Imam Malik (RA) that if someone’s Witr remains incomplete and the morning comes, how should he perform it? Imam Malik (RA) replied that if he had prayed some Nawafil (supererogatory prayers) at night, then he should pray one rak’ah of Witr; and if he had not prayed Nawafil at night, then he should pray two rak’ahs, say salam, and then pray one rak’ah of Witr.
From this detail, it is understood that according to Imam Malik, may Allah have mercy on him, Witr is only one rak’ah, but it should be prayed by combining the two rak’ahs with the Witr. We also agree with this method of Witr. In fact, according to us, it is the best method. In summary, Imam Malik, may Allah have mercy on him, believes in one rak’ah for Witr. Maulana Muhammad Taqi Usmani Hanafi Deobandi states that according to the three Imams, Witr is permissible from one rak’ah up to seven rak’ahs.
If according to Imam Malik, Witr is only three rak’ahs, then clearly say that Maulana Usmani lied? No brother, he did not lie; rather, Imam Malik’s position is only one rak’ah. This statement has been attributed to Imam Malik by Imam Tirmidhi
and by Ibn Hazm
.
◈The Permissibility and Prohibition of the Horse:
It is stated that the horse is halal according to you, whereas generally in Medina, the horse is considered haram.
Answer: Firstly:
Undoubtedly, Imam Malik (may Allah have mercy on him) considers horse meat disliked (makruh). But please tell us, what is the stance of Imam Abu Hanifa? There are two opinions attributed to him in this regard, one implying that the dislike is of the prohibitive kind (makruh tahrimi), while the other implies it is of the commendable kind (makruh tanzihi).
It is clear that there is a strong difference between these opinions because makruh tahrimi is closer to haram, while makruh tanzihi is closer to halal. Whom do you prefer in this matter?
Then your trusted book, Dar al-Mukhtar, about which you never tire of saying that it is the reliable book of Hanafi fiqh written by Allama Ala al-Din while sitting near the Rawdah of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم. See, you neither accept the Imam of Medina nor the book of Medina.
Thank goodness you consider Dar al-Mukhtar reliable. You call it a composition of Medina and also criticize those who do not accept it, Mashallah. But brother, in the same book it is written that
ان أبا حنيفة رجع عن حرمته قبل موته بثلاثة ايام وعليه الفتوى
meaning one opinion is that Imam Abu Hanifa retracted the prohibition of horse meat three days before his death, and this is the basis of the fatwa.
Now see, do you accept your own reliable book and the composition of Medina or not? But dear readers, be assured that this is just the ivory of the elephant. Mr. Jhangvi will never trust his Madani book.
Secondly:
Qadi Abu Yusuf and Imam Muhammad both consider the horse halal.
Tell me, were they deniers of the greatness and honor of Medina?
فماکان جو ابکم فھو جوابنا
Thirdly:
Hazrat Asma bint Abi Bakr (may Allah be pleased with her) narrates that
نحرنا فرسا على عهد رسول الله ن فا كلناه
meaning we slaughtered horses and ate their meat during the blessed time of the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم.
❀Hazrat Jabir bin Abdullah (RA) narrates that
النبي ﷺ يوم خيبر عن لحوم الحمر و رخص في لحوم الخيل
The Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم prohibited eating the meat of domesticated donkeys on the day of the Battle of Khaybar and permitted eating horse meat.
❀Imam Nawawi (RA) states that
Imam Shafi’i and the majority of scholars from the Salaf and Khalaf hold the view that horse meat is permissible and not disliked. This is the belief of Abdullah bin Zubair (RA), Fudala bin Ubaid (RA), Anas bin Malik (RA), Asma bint Abi Bakr (RA), Suwaid bin Ghaflah (RA), Alqamah, Aswad, Ata, Shurayh, Saeed bin Jubair, Hasan Basri, Ibrahim Nakha’i, Hammad bin Sulaiman, Ahmad Ishaq, Abu Thawr, Abu Yusuf, Muhammad Dawood, and the majority of the respected Muhaddithin.
Abu Bilal Sahib, I have a question for you: among those mentioned great personalities, was any of them a resident of the Two Holy Mosques or not? If they were, certainly they were, then why do you lie by mentioning Medina?
Fourthly:
The Hanafi scholars have also recently started declaring horse meat as halal and permissible. Accordingly, the well-known translator of Barelvi, Maulvi Ghulam Rasool Sahib, Sheikh al-Hadith of Jamia Naeemia Karachi, states that the correct view is that according to Imam Abu Hanifa, eating horse meat is makruh tanzihi (disliked in a mild sense). This mild dislike was based on the fact that horses were needed for jihad, and now is the era of tanks, cannons, trucks, and jeeps, and horses are absolutely not needed for jihad. So, even according to Imam Abu Hanifa’s statement, eating horse meat is not makruh tanzihi, and in the light of the Holy Quran and Ahadith, eating horse meat is permissible without dislike.
❀Your Sheikh al-Hind Maulana Mahmood Hasan Khan (may Allah have mercy on him) states that there are prohibitive and discouraging traditions regarding this as well, but the prevailing view is that the dislike is of a discouraging nature.
The clear meaning of this statement is that the horse is halal, not haram. However, brother Imam Malik considers it disliked (haram), so our disagreement is not only with the Imam of Medina but also with your respected self.
فماکان جوابکم فھو جوابنا
◈Days of Sacrifice:
It is stated that for you, the sacrifice period is four days, whereas for the Imam of Madinah, it is three days.
Answer: Firstly:
The proponents of the four-day sacrifice period are not only the Ahl al-Hadith but also many scholars from the Ummah of the past hold the same view. Hafiz Ibn Abdul Barr states that Imam Shafi’i and Imam Awza’i say that the sacrifice period is four days, and this is also narrated from Ali ibn Abi Talib (رضي الله عنه), Ibn Abbas (رضي الله عنه), Ata (رضي الله عنه), Hasan (رضي الله عنه), and Umar ibn Abdul Aziz (رضي الله عنه).
Allama Ibn Hazm also narrated the same from Imam Zahri.
Secondly:
Hazrat Jubair bin Mut’im (رضي الله عنه) narrates that
ان رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم قال كل ايام التشريق ذبح
The Messenger of Allah (صلى الله عليه وسلم) said: The days of Tashreeq are days of slaughter (sacrifice).
Allama Haishami states that the narrators of Musnad Ahmad are trustworthy, and the narrators of the Thousand (Musnad al-Alf) have been authenticated. It is agreed upon by both parties that the days of Tashreeq are the three days following the Day of Sacrifice (Yawm al-Nahr).
From this, it is established that the sacrifice period is four days. Now, it is for Jhungvi Sahib to clarify whether Hazrat Ali (رضي الله عنه), Hazrat Ibn Abbas (رضي الله عنه), Hazrat Umar ibn Abdul Aziz (رضي الله عنه), and Imam Zahri were from Madinah or not?
If they were certainly from Madinah, then on what basis do you claim that the Ahl al-Hadith differ from the Imams of Madinah?
◈The Madness of the Lover
He says that the Sahih Sitta (the six authentic books) ………… were not written in Medina but were written in various regions of Russia. The book written in Medina is Muwatta Imam Malik, with which you have a strong disagreement. The other book, a reliable Hanafi fiqh book, Dur Mukhtar, was written by Allama Alauddin sitting near the Roza of the Prophet ﷺ. See, you neither accept the Imam of Medina nor the book of Medina, yet you are Ahl al-Hadith and people of Medina. What a great deception this is.
Answer: Firstly:
Do the Hanafis consider every single word of Muwatta Imam Malik to be obligatory to obey and interpret any disagreement on any issue as rebellion against Medina? If not, surely not, then what is the purpose of your cursing and abuse? Who is more ignorant and foolish than the person who does not act upon what he says but tries to convince the opponent with it?
Secondly:
If you say just to avoid conflict that we accept every single statement of Muwatta Imam Malik, then this is such a big lie that no scholar except Maulvi Abu Bilal can say it. By the way, we have also pointed out some issues ahead which are against the Hanafi issues in Muwatta.
Thirdly:
We wholeheartedly accept the authentic and elevated hadiths narrated in Muwatta Imam Malik; we consider them our religion and faith. As for the sayings of the great Tabi‘in and Imam Malik in Muwatta, we also accept those which are in accordance with the Quran and Sunnah, and we abandon those things which contradict the Quran and Sunnah. And we also accept Imam Malik, may Allah have mercy on him, as a Mujtahid and scholar, but we do not consider his investigations as the final word.
❀ Hafiz Ibn Kathir says that
وقد طلب المنصور من الامام مالك أن يجمع الناس على كتابه فلم يجبه إلى ذلك وذلك من تمام علمه واتصافه بالانصاف وقال ان الناس قد جمعوا واطلعوا على اشياء لم نطلع عليها
meaning Caliph Mansur asked Imam Malik, may Allah have mercy on him, for permission to gather all people on his book, but Imam Malik, may Allah have mercy on him, did not accept it. This shows the vastness of his knowledge and the perfection of his justice, and Imam Malik, may Allah have mercy on him, said that people gathered and were informed about matters that we were not informed about.
This incident has also been narrated by Imam al-Hind Hazrat Shah Waliullah Muhaddith Dehlvi with slight changes in wording
.
See what the Imam of Madinah is saying and what Jhungvi Sahib is singing. He does not consider his research obligatory and necessary for the Ummah, but Jhungvi Sahib, by disagreeing with him, tries to portray it as enmity and hatred towards Madinah.
Fourthly:
Imam Bukhari compiled Sahih Bukhari in Masjid al-Haram, and the work of writing the translations of the chapters was done in Masjid al-Nabawi, between the Rawdah of the Prophet ﷺ and the Prophet’s pulpit, peace and blessings be upon him
.
But contrary to this fact, Jhungvi Sahib has falsely claimed that the entire Sihah Sittah was written in Russia. Is there any limit or boundary to this falsehood and lie? We challenge the entire progeny of Deoband to prove from any established historian or Muhaddith with authentic chains that the entire Sihah Sittah was written in different regions of Russia and not a single letter of it was written in the Sacred Land. If you prove this, we will give you a well-deserved reward. But remember, even if all the innovators of the world gather and try their best, they cannot prove their claim with any clear evidence. All this is nonsense and rubbish borrowed from the deniers of Hadith that the treasury of Islamic hadiths is a conspiracy by non-Arabs against Islam
.
It is regrettable that the innovators only have a grievance against non-Arabs in hadith; five out of the seven Qira’at are non-Arabs,
.
The leadership of the Arabic language, the majority of scholars of Usul, Mutakallimin, and Mufassirin are non-Arabs, Ibn Khaldun’s Muqaddimah p. 500. Leave others aside, your greatest Imam is also not of Arab descent. But how tragic it is that if a Muhaddith is non-Arab, it bothers them, but they take pride in the non-Arab identity of the one whose following they boast about.
Disagreement of Imam Malik (may Allah have mercy on him) with the Hanafi School
We also find it necessary to point out some issues that are established from the Quran and Sunnah and accepted by the majority of the Ummah. Especially, Imam Malik (may Allah have mercy on him) adopted them. However, the Hanafi school abandoned them and opposed the name of Madinah, even though in these issues the Hanafi school has nothing but corrupt analogy and a multitude of interpretations and distortions.
Let us also observe.
❀Hazrat Rafi narrates that
ان رسول الله استسلف من رجل بكرا
That is, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ borrowed a young camel from a person.
This hadith is evidence that borrowing animals is permissible, and this is the position of the majority of Islamic scholars and the fatwa of Imam Malik (may Allah have mercy on him).
❀Hazrat Abu Huraira (RA) narrates that the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم was asked about a female slave who is not married and commits adultery, and he (PBUH) said:
ان زنت فاجلدوها
“If she commits adultery, then flog her.”
This hadith is evidence that the Master can apply the punishment (Hadd) on his slave woman.
This is the doctrine of Imam Malik and the majority of Islamic scholars, as clearly stated by Mulla Ali al-Qari in Mirqat, p. 138 vol. 7.
❀The Divine command is that
ولا تباشروهن …
“And do not touch women while you are in i’tikaf in the mosque.”
It is mentioned in the Hadith that
لا اعتكاف الافى مسجد جامع
“Meaning i’tikaf is only in the congregational mosque.”
The verse of the Quran and the Hadith testify that i’tikaf is only permissible in the mosque. However, the Hanafi school holds that a woman can observe i’tikaf at home. Although this position is against the stance of the Imam of Madinah and the majority of Islamic scholars.
As Nawawi has explicitly stated
.
❀Hazrat Ali Murtaza (RA) narrates that the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم said
الا لا يقتل المومن بكافر
“That is, beware, a Muslim shall not be killed in retaliation for a disbeliever.”
This hadith testifies that a believer should not be killed in place of a disbeliever. This prohibition of killing is the doctrine of the Imam of Madinah and the majority of the Ummah, may Allah have mercy on them.
As Nawawi has explicitly stated in Sharh Muslim, page 260, and Ibn Hajar in Fath al-Bari, page 219, volume 12.
❀ Hazrat Ibn Abbas (RA) says:
ان رسول الله ﷺ قضى بيمين و شاهد
The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) has ruled based on one witness and an oath.
This hadith is narrated from about twenty companions.
This hadith testifies that if the claimant cannot produce two witnesses to prove the claim, then the claim is established by one oath and testimony.
This is the doctrine of Imam Malik and the majority of the Islamic Ummah.
As Nawawi has explained in Sharh Sahih Muslim, page 74, volume 2, and Ibn Abdul Barr has explicitly stated in Al-Tamhid, page 153, volume 2.
❀Hazrat Abu Huraira (RA) narrates that
ان رسول الله قال اذا شرب الكلب في اناء احدكم فليغسله سبعا
The Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) said that if a dog licks the utensil of any one of you, it should be washed seven times.
From this hadith, it is established that the utensil licked by a dog must be washed seven times as per the Prophetic command. This is the doctrine of the Imam of Madinah and the majority of Islamic scholars.
As Nawawi clarified in Sharh Muslim p. 137 vol. 1 and Ibn Abdul Barr in Al-Tamhid p. 268 vol. 18. However, according to the Hanafi school, washing three times is sufficient.
❀ Umm al-Mu’minin Umm Salamah (may Allah be pleased with her) narrates that
the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم heard some quarrelling at the door of his chamber, so he came out and said: I am also a human being; a case comes to me, and sometimes the speech of one of you is better than the other, and I think that he is truthful. I then decide in his favor. Then whoever, based on apparent trust, takes the right of another Muslim, let him take it or leave it (it is his choice).
فانما قطعة من النار
Indeed, it is a piece of fire.
This hadith is evidence that a judge’s ruling cannot make something unlawful lawful or lawful unlawful. This is the doctrine of the Imam of Madinah and the majority of Islamic scholars.
As stated explicitly by An-Nawawi in Sharh Muslim p. 75 vol. 2 and Hafiz Ibn Hajar in Fath al-Bari p. 149 vol. 13.
But the Hanafi position is that the judge’s decision is also effective inwardly. If a woman claims that a man has married her and even produces false witnesses, and the judge rules in favor of the woman, declaring that this man is her husband, then even if in reality the marriage did not take place, the woman’s living with that man and having intercourse with him is lawful and valid.
❀Hazrat Aisha (RA) narrates that
كان النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم اذا صلي ركعتي الفجر فان كنت مستيقظة حدثني
Meaning, when the Prophet ﷺ performed the Fajr Sunnah prayer, if I was awake, he would talk to me.
From this hadith, it is established that after the Sunnah of Fajr, a person can engage in conversation.
This is the position of the Imam of Madinah and the majority of the Ummah, whereas according to the Hanafi school, speaking after the Sunnah of Fajr is disliked.
As Nawawi has explicitly stated in Sharh Muslim p. 255 vol. 1.
❀Hazrat Abu Huraira (RA) narrates that
The Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم said
اذا ادرك احدكم سجدة من صلوة العصر قبل ان تغرب الشمس فليتم صلاته واذا ادرك سجدة من صلوة الصبح قبل ان تطلع الشمس فليتم صلاته
Meaning, whoever prays one rak’ah of Asr prayer before the sun sets, he completes the Asr prayer, and whoever prays one rak’ah of Fajr prayer before the sun rises, he completes the Fajr prayer.
This hadith indicates that if during the prayer the sun rises or sets, the prayer is valid. This is the madhhab of the Imam of Madinah and the majority of the Ummah, may Allah have mercy on them. However, the Hanafi school accepts only half of this hadith, that if one rak’ah of Asr prayer was performed before the sun set, then the rest of the prayer should be completed, but they do not accept the other half due to traditional rigidity, that if the sun rises during the Fajr prayer, the prayer is considered invalid. The madhhab of the majority of the Ummah, the Imam of Madinah, and the Hanafis has been explained by Imam Nawawi in
.
❀Hazrat Abdullah bin Zaid (RA) narrates that
ان رسول الله به خرج إلى المصلى فاستسقى فاستقبل القبلة وقلب ردائه وصلى رکعتین
meaning the Prophet ﷺ went with the people to the Eidgah to ask for rain. There, facing the Qibla, he ﷺ turned his cloak inside out and prayed two rak’ahs at a distance.
This hadith is evidence that performing a distant two-rak’ah prayer to ask for rain is Sunnah. This is the practice of the Imam of Madinah and the majority of the Ummah.
As Imam Ibn Abdul Barr has clarified
, and Nawawi has explained
.
However, Imam Abu Hanifa’s opinion is that there is no prayer for Istisqa (asking for rain).
◈Tilka Asharatu Kamilatu :
These are the issues in which the Hanafi Imam differs from the Imam of Madinah, although the majority of the Ummah follow the Imam of Madinah, and clear texts from the Qur’an and Sunnah also support them.
