Dear readers! It is possible that you have also heard from the Tablighi Jamaat members that not everyone should narrate Hadith, because Sayyiduna Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him) had a collection of five hundred Hadiths which he burned out of caution. The benefit of this statement for the Tablighi Jamaat members is that those who narrate Hadith against them become afraid, thinking, “Where am I and where is Sayyiduna Abu Bakr Siddiq (may Allah be pleased with him)? When he was so cautious, I should also remain silent.” Thus, the Tablighi Jamaat members get ample opportunity to tell false and polytheistic stories. In fact, this lesson was taught to them by their Sheikh al-Hadith Zakariya Kandhlawi:
Accordingly, Muhammad Zakariya Kandhlawi Tablighi wrote:
Burning the collection of Sayyiduna Abu Bakr Siddiq (may Allah be pleased with him):
Hazrat Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her) narrates that my father, Hazrat Abu Bakr Siddiq, had compiled a collection of five hundred hadiths. One night, I saw that he was very restless, tossing and turning. Seeing this state, I became anxious and inquired if there was any trouble or if he had heard something worrisome. The entire night passed in this restlessness, and in the morning he said that the hadiths I had kept with you, bring them to me. I brought them, and he burned them. I asked why he burned them. He replied that he feared that he might die and these hadiths would remain with me, and among them were narrations he had heard from others which he considered authentic but in reality might not be authentic, and there might be some flaw in their narration which would be a burden on him.
Hazrat Abu Bakr Siddiq’s was a scholarly excellence and passion that he compiled a collection of five hundred hadiths and then burned it; this was an act of utmost caution. The companions of the Prophet (may Allah be pleased with them) were similarly cautious about hadith. For this reason, very few narrations are transmitted from many companions. We need to learn a lesson from this incident, especially those who sit on pulpits and recklessly narrate hadiths.
Dear readers! This same story was written by a hadith denier, Barq Sahib, in his book according to Sarfaraz Safdar Deobandi. Listen to the rest of the story in Sarfaraz Safdar’s own words:
Sarfaraz Safdar has written:
In our opinion, it is in no way fair that we do not provide you with the feast of intellect from Mr. Barq’s other scholarly, historical, and critical research and investigation, although the treasure of knowledge he has uncovered about the Islamic era is vast. We are certainly unable to present everything. But it is well known that
مَا لَا يُدْرَكُ كُلُّهُ لَا يُتْرَكُ كُلُّه
“Meaning, if everything cannot be done, then not everything can be abandoned either.”
Therefore, we present a few examples for your consideration.
Dishonesty in quoting references:
1: Allama Zahabi writes in Tadhkirat al-Huffaz that Hazrat Abu Bakr Siddiq compiled a collection of five hundred hadiths (it is obvious that no collection could be more reliable than the collection of Hazrat Siddiq), but one morning he woke up and burned it.
Response: Firstly.
Here too, Barq Sahib has proven his betrayal. After narrating this hadith, Allama Zahabi writes: فهذا لا يصح
This hadith is not authentic, and in some printed copies of Tadhkirah, فهذا لا يصلح appears, meaning this hadith is not suitable for argumentation. Since Allama Zahabi (may Allah have mercy on him) had an opposing judgment regarding the mentioned hadith, Barq Sahib did not bother to mention this so that his deceit would not be exposed.
Secondly.
If Hazrat Abu Bakr Siddiq (may Allah be pleased with him) had really done so and did not consider hadiths as evidence, then he would not have narrated a single hadith, whereas many hadiths are narrated from him. Even if we disregard his other hadiths and only consider that regarding inheritance of the grandmother, Abu Bakr Siddiq asked the Companions if anyone knew a hadith, and Muhammad bin Muslama and Mughirah bin Shu’bah narrated a hadith. After assuming the caliphate, Siddiq himself presented the narration and hadith نحن معاشر الانبياء لا نورث regarding the Prophet’s property, in which the law of inheritance was not applied, and the Companions agreed with this.
Does this not indicate the obligatory implementation of the Prophet’s hadith? If this was not an affirmation of the authority of hadith, then let Mr. Barq fairly explain for what purpose it was?
Thirdly.
Hazrat Anas narrates that when Hazrat Abu Bakr Siddiq appointed me as the governor of Bahrain and sent me, he wrote down for me in full detail the nisab (minimum amount) for Zakat, which he had taken from the Prophet Muhammad ﷺ.
and so on, the entire narration is present. If the hadith was not considered authoritative by Hazrat Abu Bakr and writing it down was sinful, then he would never have written the Prophet’s hadith for his governor. It is regrettable that the deniers of hadith close their eyes to such narrations and rely on very weak and incorrect narrations.
Fourth.
The narration in Tazkirat al-Huffaz is very weak and unreliable. Firstly, it includes Ali bin Saleh Madani, who is unknown.
Secondly, the narrator in this chain is Musa bin Abdullah bin Hasan bin Hasan. Imam Bukhari, may Allah have mercy on him, says فيه نظر
. According to the Muhaddithin, there is a problem with this narration, and Allama Suyuti, may Allah have mercy on him, clarifies that when Imam Bukhari فيه نظر اور سكتوا عنه says this about a narrator, the narration of that person is completely abandoned among the noble Muhaddithin.
Dear readers! You have seen from the statement of Sarfaraz Khan Safdar Deobandi that, like Dr. Ghulam Jilani Barq, Muhammad Zakariya Kandhlawi Deobandi Tablighi also acted treacherously and did not quote the decision of Hafiz Zahabi, may Allah have mercy on him. It is proven that so-called “Sheikh al-Hadith” types, whether self-proclaimed or appointed, by following the path of the deniers of Hadith, commit treacheries. May Allah Almighty protect all Muslims from the schemes of such people.
Warning:
The difference between Zakariya Tablighi and Dr. Ghulam Jilani Barq is that Dr. Ghulam Jilani had retracted from such statements. See Al-Shariah Special Edition
, and it is not proven that Zakariya Tablighi retracted from the mentioned narration.
Benefit:
The mentioned narration has been transmitted by Hafiz Zahabi from Hakim with this chain:
«حدثني بكر بن محمد الصيرفي بمرو: أنا محمد بن موسى البربري أنا مفضل بن غسان أنا على بن صالح أنا موسى بن عبد الله بن حسن بن حسن عن إبراهيم بن عمر بن عبيد الله التيمي: حدثني القاسم بن محمد قالت عائشة»
Its narrator Muhammad ibn Musa ibn Hammad al-Barbari was a famous Akhbari scholar, but his reliability in this narration is not established; rather, Imam Dar Qutni said: ليس بالقوي He is not strong.
Ibn Kathir mentioned another chain in which Ahwas ibn Mufaddal ibn Ghassan contradicted al-Barbari so much that the continuity of this chain becomes doubtful.
Regarding the second narrator Ali ibn Salih, Hafiz Ibn Kathir said in Musnad al-Siddiq: و على بن صالح لا يعرف and Ali ibn Salih is not recognized, meaning he is not well-known.
Hafiz Ibn Kathir declared Hakim Nishapuri’s narration as هذا غريب من هذا الوجه جدا this is much weaker than its chain (the upper narration).
Hafiz Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani said about Ali ibn Salih al-Madani, the mentioned narrator: مستور meaning his condition is unknown.
Its third narrator Musa ibn Abdullah ibn Hasan ibn Hasan al-Alawi was declared trustworthy by Imam Yahya ibn Ma’in, but Bukhari, Aqili, and Zahabi considered him defective, meaning he is weak according to the majority. Its fourth narrator Ibrahim ibn Umar ibn Ubaidullah al-Taymi’s authentication is unknown. It is clear that this narration is invalid and rejected due to being a bundle of contradictions.
The author wrote an article titled “Sayyiduna Abu Bakr Siddiq (may Allah be pleased with him) did not burn any manuscript,” which was published in Al-Hadith Hazro
. In this article, the author proved that the statement written by Sheikh al-Hadith Zakariya Sahib of the Tablighi Jamaat on page 100 of Fada’il A’mal, that Sayyiduna Abu Bakr Siddiq (may Allah be pleased with him) burned his own collection of five hundred (500) hadiths, is completely false. Because the place from where Zakariya Sahib transmitted this narration also states in the same book that this narration is not authentic, and Zakariya Sahib deliberately concealed these words. The Tablighi Jamaat blindly trusts their Sheikh al-Hadith and assert this narration with certainty, but they are not willing to admit their Sheikh al-Hadith’s mistake. After Zakariya Sahib, a former hadith denier, Barq Sahib, made the same mistake, the Imam Sarfaraz Khan of the Deoband school commented on his mistake as: “Betrayal in transmitting references.”
1: Allama Zahni (may Allah have mercy on him) writes in Tadhkirat al-Huffaz that Hazrat Abu Bakr Siddiq (may Allah be pleased with him) had prepared a collection of five hundred hadiths (obviously, whose collection could be more reliable than that of Hazrat Siddiq), but one morning he got up and burned it.
Answer: Firstly:
At this place, Barq Sahib has also provided proof of betrayal. After quoting this narration, Allama Zahabi writes: فهذا لا يصح
This narration is not authentic, and in some copies of Tadhkirah, فهذا يصلح is written, meaning this narration does not have the capacity for argumentation. Since Allama Zahabi’s verdict regarding the mentioned narration was contrary, Barq Sahib did not bother to quote it so that the deception would not be exposed.
It is not unlikely that Barq Sahib fell into this deception by trusting Zakariya Sahib. Dear readers! According to Sarfaraz Khan Sahib, a Barelvi also quoted a narration from his sect, but in front of this narration, لا يصح was also written, meaning this narration is not authentic. The Barelvi did not quote this phrase, so Sarfaraz Safdar Deobandi wrote against the Barelvi: “It is the excellence of Maulvi Muhammad Umar Sahib that he quoted references from Tadhkirat al-Mawdu’at and al-Mawdu’at al-Kabir. But he digested the phrase لا يصح as if it were a lion’s milk. Shame on this scholarly betrayal and dishonesty.”
Similarly, Noor Muhammad Tunesvi Deobandi wrote against another Barelvi: If Allama Sahib had also quoted the phrase لم يصح, it would have been difficult to deceive people; therefore, to cover the truth, they digested the phrase لا يصح as if it were lion’s milk and deceived people.
Dear readers! You decide for yourselves whether the words used by the mentioned Deobandis against their opponents should also be used for the Sheikh al-Hadith of the Deobandis or not!
Dear readers! A Deobandi named Rizwan Aziz commented on the article of the writer, and although he did not have the courage to prove the narration presented by Zakariya Sahib as authentic, I will summarize and respond to the fallacies he presented in his commentary, InshaAllah.
Rizwan Aziz has used extremely foul language against Ahl al-Hadith in his article and, due to his habit, has done so before as well.
The writer quoted some of his indecent words and wrote on Al-Hadith number
: The answer to the statements of Rizwan Aziz Deobandi is that the famous debater of the Deobandis, Muhammad Manzoor Numani, openly said: “The Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) mentioned several signs of a hypocrite in a hadith. One of them is اذا خاصم فجر, meaning a sign of a hypocrite is that he starts using foul language in quarrels. May Allah protect every Muslim servant from this hypocritical habit.”
But this had no effect on Rizwan Aziz Deobandi either, so I remembered the hadith in which our beloved Prophet (peace be upon him) beautifully said: “The thing on which all the prophets agreed from the beginning is that if there is no modesty, then do whatever you want.”
Seeing the ill-manners of the writers of Ilyas Ghuman’s magazine Qafila, even his own people cried out, so Sarfaraz Hasan Khan Hamza Ehsani bin Abdul Haq Basheer Deobandi wrote:
“When one studied Qafila Haq, it was not found according to the style of the elders.”
It should be noted that Ehsani’s article was checked by Abdul Quddus Qarann Deobandi and Saeed Ahmad Jalalpuri.
Warning:
The word “Mufti” is also written alongside the name Muhammad Rizwan Aziz, whereas according to the respected book Fatawa Alamgiri by Aal Deoband, it is written:
«أجمع الفقهاء على ان المفتى يجب أن يكون من أهل الاجتهاد»
“Meaning, it is the consensus of the jurists that a Mufti must be among those qualified for Ijtihad.”
Ameen Okaraavi has written: “After the best of generations, the door of Ijtihad was also closed; now only Taqlid remains.”
In Okaraavi’s Tajalliyat, it is written: “Now the path of Ijtihad is so closed that if anyone claims Ijtihad today, his claim should be slapped in his face.”
Sarfaraz Safdar Sahib Deobandi has written: “Taqlid is only for the ignorant.”
In light of the aforementioned references of Aal Deoband, calling Rizwan Aziz Deobandi truly a “Mufti” is against consensus, and Ameen Okaraavi has written: “The Holy Prophet ﷺ has declared the one who deviates from consensus decisions as Satan and destined for Hell.”
Summary of Rizwan Aziz’s Misconception:
Muhammad Zakariya Sahib Deobandi gave this inspiring advice that when Sayyidna Abu Bakr رضي الله عنه, out of caution, burned the collection he himself had written, then how can an ordinary person narrate Hadith.
The Answer:
This advice of theirs is only meant for their opponents; they use their own name but intend to intimidate their opponents because they themselves also quote fabricated and weak narrations in their books. According to Sarfaraz Safdar, the narration quoted by Zakariya Sahib is not even worthy of reasoning, and since Rizwan Aziz Sahib himself fully trusts Sarfaraz Safdar, then according to Okaraavi, “Now all the boasting of Sheikh Sahib has been exposed”
.
And according to Okaraavi, we “challenge these boastful disciples of Sheikh al-Hadith”
that Rizwan Aziz Sahib and the Deobandi group should first prove this narration to be authentic and then use it for reasoning and giving advice. Moreover, if one reflects on the text of the narration on which Sheikh al-Hadith’s advice is based, then the justification for preserving fabricated and weak narrations found in Master Amin’s Tajalliyat, Zakariya Sahib’s Fazail-e-Amaal, and Ghuman Sahib’s Risalah Qafila no longer remains. The interesting thing is that Sheikh al-Hadith’s advice ends like this: “This is the secret that even very few narrations of Hadith have been transmitted from Hazrat Imam Azam, may Allah have mercy on him”
.
However, Muhammad Shakir Deobandi has mentioned in favor of Ilyas Ghuman Sahib’s Risalah Qafila that the number of Musnads and collections containing the Hadiths narrated by Imam Abu Hanifa exceeds twenty-five (25). See Qafila
.
It is also written: “Allama Khwarazmi has explained the reason for writing this Musnad collection as follows: I heard from some ignorant people in the land of Sham that the narrations of Hadith from Hazrat Imam Azam were few.”
.
Tablighi Curriculum and Subject, Men, and Narrations
It is remembered that Zakariya Kandhlawi Sahib did not even consider his own written advice, but rather included baseless, false, fabricated, and obsolete narrations in his famous books (such as Tablighi Nisab, Fazail-e-Amaal, and Fazail-e-Durood, etc.) and handed them over to the public. For example: 1: Zakariya Sahib wrote: In a hadith it is mentioned that whoever maintains prayer, Allah honors and respects him in five ways: first, the hardship of sustenance is removed from him; second, the punishment of the grave is removed from him; third, this hadith in full I have not found in the general books of hadith.
This is a completely unsound narration, and even an extreme follower, Latifur Rahman Baidachi Qasmi, has declared this narration as a false hadith.
Zakariya Sahib wrote: Hazrat Zaid bin Arqam narrates from the Prophet ﷺ that whoever says لا اله الا الله with sincerity will enter Paradise. Someone asked what is the sign of sincerity in the kalima? He replied that it is to refrain from forbidden deeds.
In the chain of this narration in Al-Kabeer Al-Tabarani
and Al-Awsat
, the narrator is Muhammad bin Abdur Rahman bin Ghazwan.
About this Ibn Ghazwan, Haithami said: ” و هو وضاع “ and he used to fabricate hadiths.
Imam Darqutni, Imam Ibn ‘Adi, and others have declared him a fabricator of hadiths.
In the other chain of this narration, Abu Dawood Nafi’ is a liar. 2: Zakariya Sahib wrote: Hazrat Aisha (RA)’s mother, Umm Ruman (RA), narrates that once I was praying and started moving here and there during prayer. Hazrat Abu Bakr Siddiq (RA) saw this and scolded me so harshly that I almost broke my prayer out of fear. Then he said that I heard from the Prophet ﷺ that when a person stands for prayer, he should keep his entire body completely still, not move like the Jews. Keeping all parts of the body completely still during prayer is an essential part of completing the prayer.
In the chain of this narration is Hukm bin Abdullah bin Saad Al-Saadi, about whom Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal said: all his hadiths are fabricated. Abu Hatim Al-Razi said: he is a liar. Imam Ibn ‘Adi said: ignorant liar.
It is not sufficient to merely classify this fabricated narration as very weak by the author of Taqreeh al-Maqal. In a Sahih Bukhari hadith, it is mentioned that the Prophet ﷺ came and saw a rope tied between two pillars of the mosque. He asked: What is this rope for? People said: This rope is for Zainab (RA), when she gets tired during prayer, she leans on it. The Prophet ﷺ said: No! Untie this rope. When a person’s health is good, he should pray voluntary prayers, and if he gets tired, he should sit down.
This hadith is also found in the following books:
In contrast to this authentic hadith, Zakariya Sahib presented the following narration: Hazrat Abdullah bin Abbas says that initially, when the Holy Prophet ﷺ stood for prayer at night, he used to tie himself with a rope so that he would not fall due to sleepiness. Then طه ما انزلنا عليك القرآن تشقي was revealed.
This narration is in Tarikh Dimashq by Ibn Asakir
and its chain is: عبد الوهاب بن مجاهد عن أبيه عن ابن عباس. About its narrator Abdul Wahhab bin Mujahid, Hafiz Ibn Hajar wrote: متروك و قد كذبه الثوري He is a discarded narrator and Sufyan Thawri called him a liar.
For further severe criticism see Nasb al-Rayah
etc. Zakariya Sahib wrote another narration: It is narrated from the Prophet ﷺ that whoever misses a prayer and later makes it up, still due to not praying it on time, he will burn in the Hellfire for one Haqab, and the amount of Haqab is equal to one year.
This narration is completely without chain and origin. To our knowledge, no hadith book contains any chain for it, and its presence in the book Majalis al-Abrar, which is without chain, is not proof of its authenticity. Note that the author of Majalis al-Abrar, Ahmad bin Muhammad Al-Rumi, died in 1043 AH, meaning he was a scholar of the 11th century Hijri. By narrating such false narrations, Zakariya Sahib and the Deobandi Tablighis have effectively nullified the hadith in which it is mentioned that the Messenger of Allah ﷺ said: Whoever lies upon me will enter Hellfire.
Warning:
Rizwan Aziz has also raised the argument that it is a sin for a non-scholar to narrate Hadith.
However, he did not explain who is meant by a non-scholar, even though it is agreed that a follower (Muqallid) is not among the scholars.
For further details, see Shumara al-Hadith
and in our article, Sarfaraz Sahib’s statement has also been mentioned that Taqlid (imitation) is only for the ignorant. For the interest of the readers, it is stated that Palan Haqqani was a Deobandi person who wrote books such as Shariah ya Jahalat (Shariah or Ignorance) and Jama’at Ahl al-Hadith ka Khilafah-e-Rashideen se Ikhtilaf (The Disagreement of the Ahl al-Hadith Group with the Rightly Guided Caliphs), although the Deobandi family admits that he was not a scholar. See Jama’at Ahl al-Hadith ka Khilafah-e-Rashideen se Ikhtilaf
. He was almost illiterate.
His entire study was limited to Urdu translations; he did not know Arabic or Persian.
According to the Deobandi family, he used to speak in gatherings of over a hundred thousand.
It is a big thing that he was not even a graduate of any religious seminary, and they (the Deobandis) had not even seen his face (Palan Haqqani).
He used to narrate Quranic verses, Hadiths, and some baseless stories.
Despite this, Zakariya Tablighi, the Sheikh al-Hadith of the Deobandi family, wrote a foreword on his book.
Many other Deobandis also wrote endorsements, forewords, etc., only because he worked for the Deobandi sect, and thus the Deobandis honored him with titles like Hazrat Maulana, etc.
But according to Rizwan Aziz’s principle, he died as a sinner and Rizwan Aziz’s Sheikh al-Hadith did not refrain from advising others but instead became an example of disgrace himself. He praised a person like Palan Haqqani and said about the Muhaddithin (Hadith scholars): “Listen to the oppression of these Muhaddithin.”
Rizwan Aziz wrote a Hadith that the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) said: “It is sufficient for a man to be a liar that he narrates whatever he hears without verification.”
It is stated that Zakariya Sahib did exactly this, and if he had investigated like Sarfaraz Sahib, he would not have become the subject of the mentioned Hadith, because he narrated a tradition attributed to Sayyiduna Abu Bakr Siddiq (may Allah be pleased with him) without verification, and to this day, the Tablighi Jamaat members trust him and narrate this unverified tradition without investigation.
A summary of Rizwan Aziz’s fallacy: When Sarfaraz Sahib had already criticized the tradition presented by Zakariya Sahib, then what was the use of quoting the criticism of Hafiz Zubair Ali Za’i (may Allah preserve him)?
Answer:
The benefit of quoting the detailed criticism by Hafiz Zubair Ali Zai Hafizahullah was that the Deobandi scholars easily accepted the narration presented by Zakir or Sahib as weak; otherwise, earlier the writer had quoted Amin Okaraavi’s criticism on the narration presented by Ilyas Ghuman.
But some unknown writer of Ghuman Sahib had rejected Okaraavi’s criticism.
Therefore, the Deobandis should think before speaking.
Summary of Rizwan Aziz’s Misconceptions:
Rizwan Aziz wrote:
Ahl al-Hadith are the ones referred to in this hadith where the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) said that in the last times some impostors and liars (writers of Al-Hadath, etc.) will bring you such hadiths which neither you nor your forefathers have heard, so protect yourselves from them (the Ahl al-Hadith) so that they do not mislead you and cause you to fall into trials.
Warning:
The words in brackets are also from Deobandi.
Answer:
Dear Rizwan and the entire Deoband faction should consider their own party as the subject of this hadith, because in their books they have narrated such ahadith which neither the earlier Deobandis and the followers of imitation had heard, nor had their spiritual forefathers, that is Ibn Turkmani, Aini, Anwar Shah Kashmiri, and Ashraf Ali Thanwi, heard or read them.
For example, in the matter of abandoning the raising of hands during prayer, they have presented a new narration in the fifteenth century Hijri from the magazine Al-Fuqaha wal-Muhaddithin. See Asif Lahori Deobandi’s book: Sunnat-e-Rasool al-Thaqalayn fi Tark Raf’ al-Yadain
. Similarly, the narrations attributed to Musnad Hamidi and Abu Awana regarding abandoning the raising of hands were also unknown to the forefathers and others of these followers of imitation.
