The objectors say that the hadith is a product of the Umayyad era. For this purpose, the well-known Tabi'i Imam Zahri played a major role. Ibrahim bin Walid Umayyad brought a scroll to Imam Zahri in which he had written his preferred narrations and sought permission from Zahri. Zahri also granted permission without any hesitation and said: (مَنْ يَسْتَطِيْعُ أَنْ يُخْبِرَكَ بِهَا غَيْرِيْ؟) Translation: (Who else besides me can narrate these hadiths to you?) Then hadiths began to be narrated through Zahri.
Reference: Al-Sunnah wa Makanatuha by Al-Sibai: 192
Similarly, on one occasion Imam Zahri himself admitted: (أَكْرَهَنَا هَؤَلَاءِ الْأُمَرَاءُ عَلَى أَنْ نَكْتُبَ أَحَادِيْثَ).
Translation: (These rulers forced us to fabricate hadiths) The Jewish orientalist Goldziher translated it in the same way!
First Point
Hadiths were read, taught, and commonly known among Muslims even before the era of Banu Umayyah, and if we talk about compilation, the Sahifah of Humam bin Munabbih and other Sahabah's documents are evidence that collections of hadith existed during the time of the Sahabah. Detailed information can be found in the book "Dirasat fi al-Hadith al-Nabawi" by Janab Mustafa A'zami
Reference: pp. 84 – 325
, and further details are available on our website:Second Point
Imam Zahri, after Abdullah bin Zubair (RA) was martyred, established relations with the Umayyad caliphs. He played an important role in the compilation of hadiths during the reign of the righteous Caliph Umar bin Abdul Aziz, under his orders. The strange thing is that Imam Zahri, who taught people the importance of chains of narration (Isnad), which is the basis for distinguishing authentic from fabricated traditions, was himself accused of fabricating hadiths
Reference: Tarikh al-Islam by Al-Dhahabi: 3/512
.Third Point
Someone's frequent visits to rulers or caliphs do not prove that they fabricated hadiths. Imam Zahri had faced such objections before, to which Imam Dhahabi responded:
(بعض بے وقعت لوگوں نے امام زہری سے احادیث لینے سے اس لیے گریز کیا کیونکہ وہ خلفاء کے پاس جایا کرتے تھے۔ اگر انہوں نے ایسا کیا بھی ہے تب بھی وہ حجت اور معتبر ہیں اور زہری جیسا اور کہاں ہے؟)
Reference: Siyar A'lam al-Nubala: 5/339
Historically, it is also proven that he did not hesitate to speak the truth even in front of the caliphs. Once, an Umayyad caliph, Hisham ibn Abd al-Malik, asked Imam Zahri as a test about the meaning of this verse of the Holy Quran ﴿وَالَّذِي تَوَلَّى كِبْرَهُ مِنْهُمْ لَهُ عَذَابٌ عَظِيمٌ﴾
Reference: An-Nur: 11
, asking who it referred to. Imam Zahri said: Abdullah ibn Abi. Upon this, Hisham said: You have lied. It refers to Ali ibn Abi Talib. Imam Zahri angrily replied: Even if a voice from the sky proclaimed that Allah has made lying permissible, I would not lie. Then he narrated on his authority that Lady Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her) said: It refers to Abdullah ibn Abi
Reference: Fath al-Bari: 12/328
.Fourth point
As far as the statement that Imam Zahri said that these rulers forced us to fabricate hadiths is concerned, in fact, there is a semantic distortion in this narration. The real matter was that Imam Zahri did not consider the writing of hadiths commendable, but when Imam Zahri was summoned by Abdul Malik bin Marwan, he had the hadiths written down and then told the people that now you are also permitted to write. This incident is present in several books, for example:
Ibn Saad and Khateeb Baghdadi have mentioned that Imam Zahri said:
كُنَّا نَكْرَهُ كِتَابَ الْعِلْمِ حَتَّى أَكْرَهَنَا عَلَيْهِ هَؤُلاءِ الأُمَرَاءُ. فَرَأَيْنَا أَنْ لا نَمْنَعَهُ أَحَدًا مِنَ الْمُسْلِمِينَ.
Reference: Al-Tabaqat al-Kubra by Ibn Saad: 2/334, Taqyeed al-Ilm by Khateeb al-Baghdadi: 107
We (initially) did not like to write knowledge until these rulers forced us to do so. Now we think that we should not prevent any Muslim from doing so.
Imam Zahbi mentioned that when Imam Zahri left Abdul Malik bin Marwan, he said to the people:
يَا أَيُّهَا النَّاسُ! إِنَّا كُنَّا قَدْ مَنعنَاكُم شَيْئاً قَدْ بَذَلنَاهُ لِهَؤُلَاءِ، فَتَعَالَوْا حَتَّى أُحَدِّثَكُم.
Reference: Siyar A'lam al-Nubala: 5/334
O people! We had forbidden you from writing (Hadith), and now we have started (writing) for these rulers, so come that I may narrate Hadith to you.
In the light of these words, it becomes clear how much exaggeration and even distortion has been used in the claims of fabricating Hadith, whereas the fabrication of Hadith has no connection whatsoever with this; rather, the matter is only about writing down Hadith.
Fifth Point
As far as the story of Ibrahim bin Walid Al-Umwi and Imam Zahri is concerned, the very first thing is that Ibrahim bin Walid was a student of Imam Zahri
Reference: Tarikh Dimashq by Ibn Asakir: 7/247
. The real story was that he presented a collection of Hadith to Imam Zahri and sought permission whether he could narrate these Hadith from him. To this, Imam Zahri granted permission saying, (مَنْ حَدَّثَكُمُوهُ غَيْرِي) Who else besides me has narrated these Hadith to you?
Reference: Al-Ma'rifah wa al-Tarikh by Al-Fasawi: 2/828
.That is, Imam Zahri was certain that these hadiths were narrated by him, and why wouldn't he be certain? It is from his method that the most hadiths have been transmitted. In fact, according to Imam Muslim, there are about ninety (90) hadiths that exist only through Imam Zahri and no one else
Reference: Sahih Muslim: 1647
. Therefore, there is nothing objectionable in this story. A student presenting hadiths to his teacher and seeking permission to narrate from him is called "Arz al-Manawalah" among the muhaddithin, which is a well-known and reliable method of taking and narrating hadiths among the muhaddithin
Reference: See: Muqaddimah Ibn al-Salah: 166
.Sixth Point
When Imam Zahri was fabricating hadiths on the orders of Banu Umayyah, why did Imam Zahri's teachers, including Saeed bin Musayyib, not disassociate themselves from their 'incompetent' student? Or should it be said that they were all involved in this conspiracy as well!
Even if this is accepted, when the era of Banu Abbas came, the scholars of that time, including Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal, Imam Bukhari, etc., did not level any such accusation against Imam Zahri, even though at that time there was no fear of Banu Umayyah; rather, the enmity of Banu Abbas towards Banu Umayyah was clear! On the contrary, they continued to include the narrations of Imam Zahri in their books! All these points are sufficient to prove the baselessness of this accusation.
Final point
Here, it is also surprising that first they say the hadiths were written two and a half centuries later, so they are not authentic, and when evidence is presented that they were written before two and a half centuries, they say these hadiths are fabricated!
