Jump to content
Islamic Forum

Absolute truth

IF Guardian
  • Content count

    857
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    27

Absolute truth last won the day on December 8 2017

Absolute truth had the most liked content!

Community Reputation

118 Excellent

About Absolute truth

  • Rank
    Full Member

Previous Fields

  • Marital Status
    Unavailable
  • Religion
    Islam

Profile Information

  • Gender
    Male

Recent Profile Visitors

1,144 profile views
  1. My job is in conflict with my religion.

    Welcome to the forum Prophet Muhammad -sala Allahu alayahe wa salam- said: "إنَّ الْحَلَالَ بَيِّنٌ، وَإِنَّ الْحَرَامَ بَيِّنٌ، وَبَيْنَهُمَا أُمُورٌ مُشْتَبِهَاتٌ لَا يَعْلَمُهُنَّ كَثِيرٌ مِنْ النَّاسِ، فَمَنْ اتَّقَى الشُّبُهَاتِ فَقْد اسْتَبْرَأَ لِدِينِهِ وَعِرْضِهِ، وَمَنْ وَقَعَ فِي الشُّبُهَاتِ وَقَعَ فِي الْحَرَامِ، كَالرَّاعِي يَرْعَى حَوْلَ الْحِمَى يُوشِكُ أَنْ يَرْتَعَ فِيهِ، أَلَا وَإِنَّ لِكُلِّ مَلِكٍ حِمًى، أَلَا وَإِنَّ حِمَى اللَّهِ مَحَارِمُهُ، أَلَا وَإِنَّ فِي الْجَسَدِ مُضْغَةً إذَا صَلَحَتْ صَلَحَ الْجَسَدُ كُلُّهُ، وَإذَا فَسَدَتْ فَسَدَ الْجَسَدُ كُلُّهُ، أَلَا وَهِيَ الْقَلْبُ". “That which is lawful/halal is clear and that which is unlawful/haram is clear, and between the two of them are doubtful matters about which many people do not know. Thus he who avoids doubtful matters clears himself in regard to his religion and his honor, but he who falls into doubtful matters [eventually] falls into that which is unlawful, like the shepherd who pastures around a sanctuary, all but grazing therein. Truly every king has a sanctuary, and truly Allah’s sanctuary is His prohibitions. Truly in the body there is a morsel of flesh, which, if it be whole, all the body is whole, and which, if it is diseased, all of [the body] is diseased. Truly, it is the heart.” [Bukhari & Muslim] Do your best to avoid haram just like Sahaba when they heard that alcohol has been forbidden, so the roads of Al-Madinah were full of wine.
  2. God in Bible and Quraan

    Bible VS Quran: In Bible Satan Is The God Of The World !! In Quran Allah Is The Lord Of The Worlds !! In Bible Jesus Is The Cursed One !! In Quran Satan Is The Cursed One !! ◄ 2 Corinthians 4:4 ► New Living Translation 4 Satan, who is the god of this world, has blinded the minds of those who don’t believe. They are unable to see the glorious light of the Good News. They don’t understand this message about the glory of Christ, who is the exact likeness of God. ◄ Galatians 3:13 ► New International Version 13 Christ redeemed us from the curse of the law by becoming a curse for us, for it is written: “Cursed is everyone who is hung on a pole. =========================== ◄ Quran 1:2 ► All praise is to Allah, Lord of the worlds. ◄ Quran 16:98 ► So when you recite the Qur'an, [first] seek refuge in Allah from Satan, the expelled and cursed one [from His mercy].
  3. Why Do We Send Peace and Blessings Upon the Prophet? Over and over again, we send blessings on the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), but do we know the meaning of what we are saying or why we are even saying it? Understanding what it is that we repeat at every mention of Prophet Muhammad’s name will not only increase our love for him but increase our awareness of how great this man really was. God says: إِنَّ اللَّهَ وَمَلَائِكَتَهُ يُصَلُّونَ عَلَى النَّبِيِّ ۚ يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا صَلُّوا عَلَيْهِ وَسَلِّمُوا تَسْلِيمًا Indeed, Allah confers blessing upon the Prophet, and His angels [ask him to do so]. O you who have believed, ask [Allah to confer] blessing upon him and ask [Allah to grant him] peace. (Quran 33: 56) The Muslim scholar, Sheikh Al-Sa’di says: “And in this there is an indication of the Prophet’s completeness, high rank, elevated status with Allah and His creation, and his wide fame. Indeed, Allah the Exalted and His angels confer blessings upon him, meaning that Allah praises him before the angels, and in the exalted assembly of angels due to His love for him. And the angels also praise him, make dua [supplication] for him, and seek forgiveness for him in humbleness and humility.” Imagine the status of Prophet Muhammad: Pure, sinless angels praise him and make dua for him. Not only that – our creator (God) praises him before these pure creations Himself! Sheikh Sa’di continues: “Oh you who believe, ask Allah to send blessings upon him and ask Allah to grant him peace. Through this you will be following the example of Allah and the angels, rewarding him for some of the rights he has upon you, completing your faith, glorifying him, loving and honoring him, increasing your good deeds, and expiating your sins.” When Should We Send Blessings and Peace? There is only one time that the blessing upon the Prophet is mandatory, and that is in the last part of the prayer, the tashahhud (when one sits down after the last prostration). There are, however, many times that sending blessings upon the Prophet are highly recommended. These include: – After hearing his name mentioned – After hearing the call to prayer – While making dua – During the prayer offered when a person dies – During the Friday khutba (sermon) – When entering or leaving the masjid – All through the day of Friday – When teaching and conveying knowledge – At the time of the marriage contract – In times of hardship and stress Some of the Virtues of Sending Blessings Upon the Prophet: – Fulfilling the command of God, as in the verse mentioned above – Following the example of God and the angels – Receiving ten blessings from God The Prophet said: He who sends blessings on me once, Allah sends blessings on him ten times and removes from him ten sins and raises him by ten degrees. (Muslim) – Having the intercession of the Prophet on the Day of Judgment:The Prophet said: Whoever sends blessings on me ten times in the morning and ten times in the evening will have my intercession on the Day of Judgment. (Al-Albani) – Relief from worries and sins:Ubayy ibn Ka’b relates: “I said: “O Messenger of Allah, I send much blessings on you. What proportion of my prayer should I devote to (sending blessings on) you?” He said: “As much as you like.” I said: “A quarter?” He said: “As much as you like, and if you increased it would only be better for you.” I said: “Then a half?” He said: “As much as you like and if you increased then it would only be better for you.” I said: “Then two thirds?” He said: “As much as you like and if you increased it would only be better for you.” I said: “I’ll devote all of my prayers to sending blessings on you.” The Prophet said: In that case it will suffice you from your worries and your sins will be forgiven. (At-Tirmidhi) – It increases your love for the Prophet. O Allah! Send Your mercy on Muhammad and on the family of Muhammad, as You sent Your mercy on Abraham and on the family of Abraham. And send Your blessings on Muhammad and the family of Muhammad, as You sent your Blessings on Abraham and on the family of Abraham. Verily You are the Most Praise-worthy, the Most Glorious. (Al-Bukhari) http://aboutislam.net/reading-islam/about-muhammad/why-do-we-send-peace-and-blessings-upon-the-prophet/
  4. Proofs Of The Bible's Corruption

    The Gospel of Mark: Note: This gospel is the oldest and supposedly the most original one in the New Testament! "Although the book is anonymous, apart from the ancient heading "According to Mark" in manuscripts, it has traditionally been assigned to John Mark, in whose mother's house (at Jerusalem) Christians assembled. (The New American Bible, ISBN: 978-0-529-06484-4, Page 1064)" "Although there is no direct internal evidence of authorship, it was the unanimous testimony of the early church that this Gospel was written by John Mark. (From the NIV Bible Commentary [1], page 1488)" We certainly do not know whether Mark was the author or not! The quote clearly states "no direct internal evidence of authorship". Also, the so-called unanimous testimony of the early church: - Does not prove that the author was Mark. - Nor does it prove that other people did not alter and modify the book, especially when the book was written at least 40-50 years after Christ. We don't even know if Mark even wrote the book. "Traditionally, the gospel is said to have been written shortly before A.D. 70 in Rome, at a time of impending persecution and when destruction loomed over Jerusalem. (The New American Bible, ISBN: 978-0-529-06484-4, Page 1064)" "Serious doubts exists as to whether these verses belong to the Gospel of Mark. They are absent from important early manuscripts and display certain peculiarities of vocabulary, style and theological content that are unlike the rest of Mark. His Gospel probably ended at 16:8, or its original ending has been lost. (From the NIV Bible Foot Notes [1], page 1528)" "This verse, which reads, "But if you do not forgive, neither will your heavenly Father forgive your transgressions," is omitted in the best manuscripts. (The New American Bible, ISBN: 978-0-529-06484-4, Page 1081)" "This passage, termed the Longer Ending to the Marcan gospel by comparison with a much briefer conclusion found in some less important manuscripts, has traditionally been accepted as a canonical part of the gospel and was defined as such by the Council of Trent. Early citations of it by the Fathers indicate that it was composed by the second century, although vocabulary and style indicate that it was written by someone other than Mark. (The New American Bible, ISBN: 978-0-529-06484-4, Page 1088)" So, in reality, we don't really know whether Mark was the sole author of this Gospel or not, nor do we know when and where the "gospel" was even written. And since The New Testament wasn't even documented on paper until 150-300 years (depending on what Christian you talk to) after Jesus, then how are we to know for sure that the current "Gospel of Mark" wasn't written by some pro of Mark? (http://www.biblegateway.com/passage/?search=Mark%2016:9-20;&version=31;) The above text reads: "The most reliable early manuscript and other ancient witnesses do not have Mark 16:9-20." Now my concern to this corruption and 'answer-the-problem-away' statement is that what are those so-called "reliable early manuscript(s)" and who are the "ancient witnesses"? I hope you see the real danger in making these assumptions when you are willing to DIE for the fact that such Gospel is the actual True Word of GOD Almighty! Further regarding this Gospel, we read the following commentary about Mark 16:9-20: "Serious doubts exists as to whether these verses belong to the Gospel of Mark. They are absent from important early manuscripts and display certain peculiarities of vocabulary, style and theological content that are unlike the rest of Mark. His Gospel probably ended at 16:8, or its original ending has been lost. (From the NIV Bible Foot Notes [1], page 1528)" This quote raises a very serious issue here. First of all, as we've seen above in the first quote, we have no evidence that proves that John Mark was the sole author of this so called "Gospel". Second of all, we see that this Gospel has some serious problems/suspicions in it. The issue of Mark 16:9-20 is a scary one, because many Christian cults today use poisonous snakes in their worship and end up dying. (see above) Removing Mark 16:9-20 is quite appreciated, because it prevents people from dying from snake bites. But however, the serious issue of man's corruption of the Bible remains. We can be absolutely certain now that the above quotes prove without a doubt that the Bible is doubtful. The quote "or its original ending has been lost" proves that what we call today "Gospels" were not written by their original authors such as Mark, John, Matthew, etc... It proves that the Gospel had been tampered with by man. Let alone considering it as the True Living Words of GOD Almighty. If John Mark wasn't the one who wrote Mark 16:9-20, then who did? And how can you prove the ownership of the other person? Let alone proving that it was GOD Almighty's Revelation. And as we saw in the first quote above, we don't even know that John Mark was indeed the one who wrote the so called "Gospel of Mark". To say the least in our case here, we now have enough evidence to discard the entire Gospel of Mark from the Bible, because you can't take bits and pieces of it and say some of it belongs to him and some of it doesn't! Let alone considering the entire corrupted Gospel as the True Living Word of GOD Almighty, which is a complete blasphemy. Please visit A dangerous forgery was inserted at the end of the so-called "Gospel of Mark". Dr. James White acknowledges that the Bible has been tampered with ! https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=U6BNvoy8FHU If the "gospel of Mark" was indeed Divine and from GOD Almighty, then we wouldn't have this corruption in it.
  5. Manuscript Review: The Book of Observations and Admonitions, by Ibn Sina [Ibn Sina] flourished as a great physician and philosopher, but was also a distinguished scientist, mathematician, logician, and poet at the same time… Editor’s Note: The following is an extract from N.A Baloch’s ‘The Great Books of Islamic Civilisation’. This is a short summary of Ibn Sina‘s Kitab al-Isharat wa al-Tanbihat ‘ كتاب الإشارات و التنبيهات The Book of Observations and Admonitions’. *** Figure 2. Great books of Islamic civilization by Nabi Bakhshu Khanu Balocu, 1989 (Source) Abu Ali al-Husayn b. Abdullah b. Sina, أبو علي الحسين بن عبد الله بن سينا the famous ‘Ibn Sina’ of the Islamic world and ‘Avicinna’ of the West (370-428/980-1037), was a scholar of vast learning, prodigious memory, brilliant mind, practical approach and penetrating common sense, who wrote a number of works on different subjects. He flourished as a great physician and philosopher, but was also a distinguished scientist, mathematician, logician, and poet at the same time. The historic influence of his scientific thought has come to light more recently with the publication of “Avicenna, Scientist and Philosopher” (London, 1952). His stature as a medical scientist and physician is amply confirmed by his Qanun fi al-Tibb (‘Canon Medicinae’). Though Ibn Sina was the greatest philosopher, he was not isolated from the world and lost in books or wedded only to abstract thinking. He was a busy physician, welded political influence and served as Wezier (Prime Minister) to his patron Princes. His full involvement in the living currents of life lends meaning and validity to his experience and vitality to his reflection. Besides philosophy and medicine, Ibn Sina also wrote on physics, chemistry, mathematics, natural history, astronomy and music. Of his numerous works on philosophy, only a few have survived in their complete authentic text. Among these are his encyclopaedia of natural sciences and philosophy Kitab al-Shifa’ (‘The Book of Healing’ – from ignorance), Kitab al-Isharat wa al-Tanbihat (The Book of Hints/Observations and admonitions) and Danishnama-i-ALa’i The Knowledge Book for `Ala’i’, i.e. for Prince ‘Ala’ al-Dawla). His philosophical encyclopaedia AL-SHIFA implies the following classification: (1) Theoretical Knowledge sub-divided, with regard to increasing abstraction, into physics, mathematics and metaphysics); (2) Practical Knowledge (ethics, economy, politics). Figure 3. Ibn Sina. From medieval manuscript entitled ‘Subtilties of Truth’, 1271 (Source) In al-Shifa’, Avicenna embraces the totality of the sciences according to the following plan: 1. Logic 2. Physics 3. Mathematics 4. Metaphysics In ‘The “Logic” of the Orientals’, which has survived partly, he proposed to present, for the elite, the “Oriental Philosophy”. Avicenna repudiated his own earlier works, which are chiefly Aristotelian, as being suitable for the common people; instead, he proposed to present, for the elite, the “Oriental philosophy”. His trilogy – Hayy Ibn Yaqzan (Living Son of the Awake), al-Tair (The Bird), and Salaman and Absal – deals with the complete cycle of the Gnostic’s journey from the “world of shadows” to the Divine Presence, the Orient of Light (Nasr.). Within the limits of metaphysics Avicenna includes all the ‘revealed’ data contained in the Quran. He establishes that God, the only necessity, is good, all-powerful, creator of all things, provident. Another work of Ibn Sina, much shorter than al-Shifa’ but of great importance, is Kitab al-‘Isharat wa al-Tanbihat. This impressive title may be translated literally as Hints and Warnings, or meaningfully as Directives and Remarks, Remarks and Admonitions, Observations and Admonitions, or Briefings and Criticism. It consists of four independent and self-containing parts, each dealing with a single discipline. These are: Part I – Logic Part II – Physics Part III – Metaphysics Part IV – Sufism Figure 4. Ibn Sina’s Canon of Medicine Manuscript (Source) The scheme followed by Ibn Sina in the treatment of each subject is that first he fives his own views and observations on the subject and then a critical evaluation of the views of others, both the predecessors and the contemporaries, correcting and admonishing them on their mistakes and misgiving. In his very brief preface Ibn Sina says: I have formulated principles and generalities of wisdom in this work, ‘Observations and Admonitions’, for you who are anxious to discern the truth. Guided by your own intelligence, it should be easy for you to differentiate (the principles and generalities) and determine the more specific details.” The merit of Kitab al-Isharat wa al-Tanbihat is twofold. Firstly it is of one of the complete works of Ibn Sina, and secondly in its being the latest and the most mature exposition of the four significant dimensions of Ibn Sina’s philosophical system. He wrote it for the most informed and advanced students of philosophy in his times, and hence couched it is concise, terse and abstruse style. According to him logic is a science or academic discipline in itself and at the same time also a basis or instrument for philosophical thought. Figure 5. Folios from Ibn Sina’s celebrated work AI-Qanun fit-tibb, known as The Canon of Medicine (Source) Regarding Ibn Sina’s system of philosophy it has been observed: He is the only one among the great philosophers of Islam to build an elaborate and complete system of philosophy – a system which has been dominant in the philosophical tradition of Islam for centuries, because that system had features of remarkable originality displaying a type of genius-like spirit in discovering methods and arguments whereby he sought to reformulate the purely rational and intellectual tradition of Hellenism, to which he was an eminent heir, and, to an extent, within the religious system of Islam” (Fazlur Rahman) source: http://www.muslimheritage.com/article/observations-and-admonitions-ibn-sina
  6. Hadith Collections From Early Islamic period

    In this article I will show evidences from non-Muslim Scholars that Hadith existed way before the dates they have brought forth. First Century Hadith Collections Sahifa Hamman B. Munabbih It is well-known fact among Muslim scholars that Hammam B. Munabbih was a student of Abu Huraira. The earliest hadith collection we have extant is Sahifa b. Munabbih which was written by the student of Abu Huraira. The Books name is ‘Sahifah Hammam b.Munabbih’. 1. American Scholar William Albert Graham who is a Professor of middle eastern studies states: “…..Of the four remaining collections, the earliest is the Sahifah of Hammam b. Munabbih (d. Ca. 101-02/719-20). It is a collection of 138 hadiths that dates from around the end of the first Century A.H. and contains some eighteen Divine sayings.” [1] 2. Professor Alfred Felix Landon Beeston also comments on Sahifa Hammam B. Munabbih, “An example is the Sahifah of Hammam b. Munabbih, (d. 110/719), a Yemenite follower and a disciple of Companion Abu Hurayrah, (d. 58/677), from whom Hammam learned and wrote this sahifah, which comprises 138 hadith and is believed to have been written around the mid-first/seventh Century. It is significant that Hammam introduces his text with the words: ‘Abu Hurayra told us in the course of what he related from the Prophet’, thus giving the source of his information in the manner which became known as sanad or isnad i.e. the teacher or chain of teachers through whom an author reaches the Prophet, a practice invariably and systematically followed hadith in compilations. [2] 3. In the Book ‘Encyclopaedic Historiography of the Muslim World’, written by Professor Nagendra Kr. Singh, he goes in detail on Hadith and also comments on Sahifa B. Munabbih. Take also notice of him saying that ‘ORAL TRANSMISSION’ OF HADITH was the most favoured. He writes: Compilation of hadith in a book form had become a known practice even during the prophet’s lifetime. We are told that Ali b. Abu Talib had compiled a small book containing Traditions of the Prophet, ‘Abdullah b. ‘Amr b. Al-As has also collected by permission of the Prophet, some Traditions in a book, which he named as al-Sahifa al-sadiqa. Similarly, Jabir b. Abdillah (d. 78 A.H.) was the compiler of a small collection of hadith. Abu Huraira and Amr b. Hazm are also reported to have gathered some Traditions while the latter had also committed to writing a number of such letters of the Prophet as he had despatched to the neighbouring rulers inviting them to embrace the new faith. Abu Huraira, a close companion of the Prophet, had preserved and transmitted a large number of traditions. Apart from oral transmission, he is reported to have dictated some traditions to his pupils who committed them to writing. Hammam b. Munabbih compiled a book entitled al-sahifa, of which the manuscripts are found in the libraries of Berlin and Damascus. Its Arabic text along with the Urdu Translation and necessary notes has recently been published by Dr. Hamidullah. Ma’mar b. Rashid, a disciple of Hammam, also compiled a book entitled Jami, Manuscripts of which are in the Ankara University Library and in Istanbul. Abu Bakr Abd al-Razzaq b. Hammam al-san’ani (126-211 A.H.) was a student of ma’mar and one of the teachers of Ahamd b. Hanbal. He is also the compiler of a book entitled ‘musannaf’. In view of these facts, it would be erroneous to assume, as some of the orientalists do, that the work of hadith-compilation was unknown during the prophet’s lifetime, and hence the entire collection of hadith becomes of questionable authenticity. We have seen that Abu Huraira, his pupil Hammam b. Munabbih, his disciple Ma’mar and his pupil Rashid, his student Abd al-Razzq and his pupil Ahmad b. Hanbal have made continued efforts in preserving and compiling the hadith literature. After the discovery of these works we may rightly suppose that there must have been some other compiled works which did not come down to us. It should be also kept in mind that because of scarcity and dearth of writing material, oral transmission was a popular practice during the early days of Islam. Furthermore, this had become a common practice since the pre-Islamic days because ‘Days of the Arab’, legends of the Prophets, and the Jahiliyya poetry were transmitted orally. Nay, dictation or writing of such material was rather looked down upon as compared to oral transmission. [3] ‘Musanaf of Abdul Razzaq’ to be a source of Authentic Hadith from the 1st Century’* Professor Harold Motzki believes ‘Musanaf of Abdul Razzaq’ to be a source of Authentic Hadith from the 1st Century*. His article is massive, I am just going to present his Conclusion. “While studying the Musannaf of `Abd al-Razzaq, I came to the conclusion that the theory championed by Goldziher, Schacht, and in their footsteps, many others – myself included – which in general, reject hadith literature as a historically reliable sources for the first century AH, deprives the historical study of early Islam of an important and a useful type of source.” [4] Muwatta Imam Malik’ compiled Mid-second century AH Mālik ibn Anas who was born in the year 711 and died 795 (93 AH – 179 AH ) is another Early Scholar of Islam who collected hadiths. He was one of the most highly respected scholars of fiqh (Islamic Jurisprudence) in Sunni Islam. Imam Malik while he was alive compiled a Hadith book. The Hadith Book’s name is ‘Muwatta Imam Malik’ and we still have this Hadith book extant to this day. Ilya Pavlovich Petrushevsky (1898–1977) who was a Professor of History of the Near East at the University of Leningrad for twenty years, comments on Imam Malik’s Muwatta. “The oldest collections of Hadith were compiled according to tariqs that is, the companions of the Prophet were listed in alphabetical order and under each name the hadith issuing from the particular fountain head would be supplied. This principle of compilation was known as ‘ala r-rijal, ‘ on (the names of) the earliest reporters’. Of the EXTANT COLLEXTIONS of this type two are celebrated. One if the Muwatta or Beaten Track of malik b. Anas (d. 795), eponymous founder of the Malikite system…..” [5] Professor Clinton Bennett “Topically arranged (musannaf) works also appear in the mid-second/eighth century. The earliest extant musannaf work is the Muwatta of Medinan Scholar malik b. Anas (d. 179 AH/795 CE), the eponymous founder of the Maliki school of Sunni jurisprudence and teacher of Muhammad ibn Idris al-Shafii (d. 204 AH/820 CE).” [6] I will finish my article of with a last reference by Professor Michael Bonner who refutes Joseph Schacht’s theory that somehow Hadith could not be traced before the year 718 -719. He says: “Schacht thought that no hadith could be proved to date from before year 100 of the Hijra (718-719 CE). There is much more to Schacht’s theory than this, but here it will suffice to point out that for several decades in the West, much of the argument over the hadith has been an argument over the theories of Joseph Schacht. Nowadays Schacht’s work, together with Goldizher, is less favoured than it was not very long ago. As more texts of hadith and early Islamic law have become available, several scholars have analyzed these materials, correlating the Isnad (the supporting chain of authority for such hadith itself) in more painstaking and systematic ways than Schacht had done in his day. As a result of this work, we can perceive in RICH DETAIL, the activities of transmission of learning and production of written texts, going on in early periods, sometimes before the cutoff date of AH 100 that Schacht declared to be the outer limit.” [7] Conclusion: From all the evidence presented it just goes to show how reliable early Hadith transmitters and collectors were. Whatever Muslim Scholars of the past have said on Hadith reliability, now non-Muslim Scholars affirm this truth. I believe everything I have brought forth in this article from Academic sources thoroughly debunk missionary and Hadith-rejecter lies. References: [1] Divine Word and Prophetic Word in Early Islam (1977) By William Albert Graham page 82 [2] Arabic Literature to the End of the Umayyad Period (2003) By A. F. L. Beeston page 272 [3] Encyclopaedic Historiography of the Muslim World By Nagendra Kr. Singh volume 1 Page 317 [Author Kr. Singh http://www.easternbookcorporation.com/moreinfo.php?txt_searchstring=3769] [4] The Muṣannaf of ʿAbd al-Razzāq al-Sanʿānī as a Source of Authentic Aḥādīth of the First Century A. H. Harald Motzki Journal of Near Eastern Studies Volume 50, No. 1 (Jan., 1991), pp. 21 [5] Islam in Iran By Professor Ilya Pavlovich Petrushevsky page 105 [6] The Bloomsbury Companion to Islamic Studies by Clinton Bennett page 80 [7] Jihad in Islamic History: Doctrines and Practice By Professor Michael Bonner page 48 https://discover-the-truth.com/2013/10/13/are-there-any-hadith-collections-from-early-islam/?_e_pi_=7%2CPAGE_ID10%2C4228172650
  7. Table of Content Preface........................................................................................................................................3 History of the Arabic Region ...................................................................................................13 Controlling The Arabic Region And The Emergence of Colonies...........................................15 Palestine and the Historical Truth ............................................................................................16 Prehistoric Palestine .................................................................................................................16 The Ancient Stone Age ............................................................................................................16 8000 – 17000B.C.: Shifting from Gathering to Production ................................................17 4000 – 8000B.C.: appearance of agricultural communities.................................................17 2000 – 4000B.C.: The Closing of the Fourth millennium before Christianity....................17 Semites .....................................................................................................................................17 Canaanites ................................................................................................................................18 2000B.C. – 1200 B.C.............................................................................................................18 550 – 1200B.C.: Era of Kingdoms (Iron Age):....................................................................19 Israeli People:...........................................................................................................................19 The Persian Empire ..................................................................................................................20 550B.C. – 330 B.C.: the Persian Empire and the Era of Alexander the Great.......................20 330B.C. – 63 B.C. ..................................................................................................................21 The Roman Empire...................................................................................................................21 63B.C. – 636 A.D. ..................................................................................................................21 The Rise of Christianity............................................................................................................22 The Islamic Arabic Conquest ...................................................................................................22 Palestine During the Era of the Rightly-Guided Caliphs..........................................................23 The Era of the Umayyad Caliphs .............................................................................................23 The Era of the Abbasid Caliphate ............................................................................................24 The Tulunid State .....................................................................................................................24 The Ikhshidid Rule ...................................................................................................................24 The Fatimids.............................................................................................................................25 The Seljuk State........................................................................................................................25 Europeans .................................................................................................................................25 The Second Crusades (1146-1149 A.D.)..................................................................................26 The Ayyubid Dynasty...............................................................................................................27 Third Crusade...........................................................................................................................27 Mamluks...................................................................................................................................28 The Ottoman Era ......................................................................................................................28 Napoleon Bonaparte expedition (1798 – 1801):.......................................................................29 Muhammad Ali’s Campaign ....................................................................................................30 The Zionist Settlement in Palestine..........................................................................................31 British Mandate ........................................................................................................................32 The pre-British Mandate period ...............................................................................................32 The British Mandate in Palestine: 1923-1948 ..........................................................................32 Sheikh Eiz Al-Din Al-Qasam Revolution ................................................................................34 The Great 1936 Revolution and the Division Project...............................................................35 The Division Project.................................................................................................................36 The Division Resolution:..........................................................................................................38 Jewish emigration to Palestine .................................................................................................43 Immigration after the Creation of Israel 1948-1967:................................................................49 Expulsion of the Palestinians from their Homes ......................................................................54 The Most Important International Resolutions Concerning Palestine......................................60 https://islamicbookshub.wordpress.com/2013/01/06/history-of-palestine-by-fawzy-al-ghadiry/
  8. LOS ANGELES (CN) – When a Southern California woman was arrested on suspicion of domestic violence last year she was told she could not wear her headscarf in the Ventura County Jail even though she’s Muslim, according to a civil rights lawsuit filed in Los Angeles federal court Monday. Jennifer Hyatt, 44, said Ventura County officers yanked her hijab from her head and she suffered “severe discomfort, humiliation, and emotional distress,” according to the federal lawsuit filed by the Council on American-Islamic Relations in California on her behalf. On Jan. 1, 2017, Hyatt was arrested on suspicion of domestic violence near Thousand Oaks in California. When Ventura County Sheriff’s officers arrived on the scene she was placed into the back of a police car and was not allowed to explain what had happened in the incident between herself and her husband, according to the complaint. “Ms. Hyatt asserted that she had never touched her husband and told the arresting officer that her arm was hurting,” said the complaint. The officer said he’d already seen her arm, but that was not possible because Hyatt was wearing long sleeves at the time. In accordance with her religious beliefs, Hyatt covers her head and much of her body for the sake of dignity, modesty, and bodily integrity, according to the complaint. But at the Ventura County Jail a female deputy “snatched one piece of Ms. Hyatt’s two-piece hijab off of her head” while male officers were in the room. Despite being searched and explaining she can’t be seen by other men without her hijab because she’s Muslim, an officer said, “Not in here, you’re not,” according to the complaint. “She cried throughout the ordeal and experienced humiliation when both her religious beliefs and personal integrity were violated,” according to the complaint. “She felt that the male officers and male inmates had seen parts of her body that they should not have seen, according to her religious beliefs. Ms. Hyatt, who hails from Arkansas, was shocked and disappointed to receive such treatment in the supposedly tolerant state of California.” When Hyatt said she deserved constitutional protection for her religious beliefs an officer yanked off the second part of her hijab and left her uncovered, she says in the lawsuit. She asked for a blanket to cover herself but was denied, she says, adding her fingerprints were taken by a male officer. Hyatt was placed in a room with glass walls where she could be viewed by other men without her hijab as a means to intimidate her, according to her complaint. She tried to cover her head with her hands. She says she was taken to a cell with other women in custody, but was not provided any type of cover for her head and her hijab was only returned to her after her husband posted bond and she was released from jail. A booking photo was taken without her headscarf and this also distresses Hyatt, according to the complaint. Hyatt is also represented by Los Angeles-based attorney Erin Darling, who said in a statement, “It is shocking that in 2018 the county of Ventura permits its sheriff’s deputies to strip a Muslim woman of her religious head covering.” She added, “Religious expression is protected under the law and the county of Ventura cannot single out Muslim women as being undeserving of this basic right.” In a statement, Hyatt said, “I am seeking justice because I do still have the right to be a covered Muslim woman – even in jail.” Named defendants include Ventura County, its sheriff’s department and Sheriff Geoff Dean. Hyatt seeks compensatory and punitive damages on claims of federal and California civil rights violations. The Ventura County Sheriff’s Office said it hasn’t seen the lawsuit and doesn’t comment on pending litigation. https://www.courthousenews.com/muslim-woman-sues-jailers-for-removing-hijab/
  9. The Canonization of al-Bukhari and Muslim

    Jonathan AC Brown is Associate Professor of Islam and Muslim Christian Relations in the School of Foreign Service at Georgetown University (Washington DC) Editorial Reviews Review [Brown] has produced an ambitious study that will itself become a canon for the study of the canonization of the Saḥīḥayn and so like them it is worthy of much attention and analysis. Herbert Berg This is an unusual book in many ways, all of them good. Its scope is strikingly broad, it is in conversation with the latest scholarship both in the field of specialization and also in the wider world of theory, and it is well-written. Download: https://ia600202.us.archive.org/33/items/TheCanonizationOfAlBukhariAndMuslimByJonathanBrown/The Canonization of al-Bukhārī and Muslim By Jonathan Brown.pdf
  10. Hi all!

    welcome to the forum, you can start by the simplified Islam Guide.
  11. نقلا عن أ منقذ السقار جزاه الله خير الجزاء ولدى الرجوع إلى التاريخ والتنقيب في رواياته وأخباره عن حقيقة حادثة الصلب، ومَن المصلوب فيها ؟ يتبين حينذاك أمور مهمة: - - أن قدماء النصارى كثر منهم منكرو صلب المسيح، وقد ذكر المؤرخون النصارى أسماء فرق كثيرة أنكرت الصلب. وهذه الفرق هي: الباسيليديون والكورنثيون والكاربوكرايتون والساطرينوسية والماركيونية والبارديسيانية والسيرنثييون والبارسكاليونية والبولسية والماينسية، والتايتانيسيون والدوسيتية والمارسيونية والفلنطانيائية والهرمسيون. وبعض هذه الفرق قريبة العهد بالمسيح، إذ يرجع بعضها للقرن الميلادي الأول ففي كتابه " الأرطقات مع دحضها " ذكر القديس الفونسوس ماريا دي ليكوري أن من بدع القرن الأول قول فلوري: إن المسيح قوة غير هيولية، وكان يتشح ما شاء من الهيئات، ولذا لما أراد اليهود صلبه؛ أخذ صورة سمعان القروي، وأعطاه صورته، فصلب سمعان، بينما كان يسوع يسخر باليهود، ثم عاد غير منظور، وصعد إلى السماء. ويبدو أن هذا القول استمر في القرن الثاني، حيث يقول فنتون شارح متى: " إن إحدى الطوائف الغنوسطية التي عاشت في القرن الثاني قالت بأن سمعان القيرواني قد صلب بدلاً من يسوع". وقد استمر إنكار صلب المسيح، فكان من المنكرين الراهب تيودورس (560م) والأسقف يوحنا ابن حاكم قبرص (610م) وغيرهم. ولعل أهم هذه الفرق النكرة لصلب المسيح الباسيليديون؛ الذين نقل عنهم سيوس في " عقيدة المسلمين في بعض مسائل النصرانية " والمفسر جورج سايل القول بنجاة المسيح، وأن المصلوب هو سمعان القيرواني، وسماه بعضهم سيمون السيرناي، ولعل الاسمين لواحد، وهذه الفرقة كانت تقول أيضاً ببشرية المسيح. ويقول باسيليوس الباسليدي: " إن نفس حادثة القيامة المدعى بها بعد الصلب الموهوم هي من ضمن البراهين الدالة على عدم حصول الصلب على ذات المسيح". ولعل هؤلاء هم الذين عناهم جرجي زيدان حين قال: " الخياليون يقولون: إن المسيح لم يصلب، وإنما صلب رجل آخر مكانه ". ومن هذه الفرق التي قالت بصلب غير المسيح بدلاً عنه: الكورنثيون والكاربوكرايتون والسيرنثيون. وقالوا بصلب يهوذا الذي يذكر المستشرق المفسر جورج سايل بأنه كان يشبه المسيح في خَلْقه. ومما يؤيد هؤلاء: الخلاف في كيفية موت يهوذا. وثمة فِرق نصرانية قالت بأن المسيح نجا من الصلب، وأنه رفع إلى السماء، ومنهم الروسيتية والمرسيونية والفلنطنيائية , وهذه الفرق الثلاث تعتقد ألوهية المسيح، ويرون القول بصلب المسيح وإهانته لا يلائم البنوة والإلهية. كما تناقل علماء النصارى ومحققوهم إنكار صلب المسيح في كتبهم، وأهم من قال بذلك الحواري برنابا في إنجيله. ويقول ارنست دي بوش الألماني في كتابه " الإسلام: أي النصرانية الحقة " ما معناه: إن جميع ما يختص بمسائل الصلب والفداء هو من مبتكرات ومخترعات بولس، ومن شابهه من الذين لم يروا المسيح، لا في أصول النصرانية الأصلية. ويقول ملمن في كتابه " تاريخ الديانة النصرانية " : " إن تنفيذ الحكم كان وقت الغلس، وإسدال ثوب الظلام، فيستنتج من ذلك إمكان استبدال المسيح بأحد المجرمين الذين كانوا في سجون القدس منتظرين تنفيذ حكم القتل عليهم كما اعتقد بعض الطوائف، وصدقهم القرآن ". وأخيراً نذكر بما ذكرته دائرة المعارف البريطانية في موضوع روايات الصلب حيث جعلتها أوضح مثال للتزوير في الأناجيل. ومن المنكرين أيضاً صاحب كتاب " الدم المقدس، وكأس المسيح المقدس " فقد ذكر في كتابه أن السيد المسيح لم يصلب، وأنه غادر فلسطين، وتزوج مريم المجدلية، وأنهما أنجبا أولاداً، وأنه قد عثر على قبره في جنوب فرنسا، وأن أولاده سيرثون أوربا، ويصبحون ملوكاً عليها. وذكر أيضاً أن المصلوب هو الخائن يهوذا الأسخريوطي، الذي صلب بدلاً من المسيح المرفوع. وإذا كان هؤلاء جميعاً من النصارى، يتبين أن لا إجماع عند النصارى على صلب المسيح، فتبطل دعواهم بذلك
  12. The Preservation of the Ḥadīth Literature

    Appendix A central theme of this article was to establish that the major books of Ḥadīth have been transmitted so widely that it is unreasonable to doubt their authorship. Here we will take Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī as a case study to better understand this phenomenon. In his doctoral thesis,[57] Dr. Jumu‘ah ‘Abd al-Ḥalīm studies in detail the various routes and recensions of Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī. Adapted from his study, the following diagrams demonstrate how widely the Ṣaḥīḥ has been transmitted. To be sure, these diagrams are the tip of the iceberg in terms of the actual transmission of the Ṣaḥīḥ. I have chosen to outline only the chains of the Mamluk era Ḥadīth master, Ibn Ḥajar al-‘Asqalānī (d. 852 AH).[58] While mapping out his genealogy of the Ṣaḥīḥ, he leaves out some recensions and routes. For instance, he transmits the Ṣaḥīḥ via multiple routes that culminate at four students of al-Bukhārī, viz. Muḥammad ibn Yūsuf al-Firabrī (d. 320 AH), Ibrāhīm ibn Ma‘qil (d. 295 AH), Ḥammād ibn Shākir (d. 311 AH), and Abū Ṭalḥah Manṣūr al-Bazdawī (d. 329 AH), but he does not include the transmission of Ṭāhir ibn Muḥammad al-Nasafī.[59] Furthermore, he identifies nine routes from al-Firabrī, excluding thereby the transmissions of Muḥammad ibn Khālid al-Firabrī, Aḥmad al-Firabrī (d. 371 AH), Abū Ḥāmid al-Nu‘aymī (d. 386 AH), Abū Bakr al-Ishtīkhanī (d. 388 AH), et al.[60] From a wide array of routes that Ibn Ḥajar maps out, I selected only two routes for the purpose of brevity. Hence, from a pool of twelve transmitters in the third stratum of transmission, I sufficed on the transmissions of Abū Dharr al-Harawī (d. 434 AH) and Karīmah al-Marwaziyyah (d. 463 AH). Figure 1 details the routes from the third stratum via al-Firabrī from al-Bukhārī. Figures 2 and 3 continue further by tracing the transmissions of Abū Dharr and Karīmah al-Marwaziyyah until Ibn Ḥajar. Figure 4 traces the transmission of three non-Firabrī recensions from al-Bukhārī. The biographical information of the transmitters cited in the diagrams is easily accessible. To avoid enlarging the diagrams, their entire names were not mentioned. Figure 1: Routes from the third stratum of transmission Figure 2: Transmission via Abū Dharr al-Harawī (d. 434 AH) Figure 3: Transmission via Karīmah al-Marwaziyyah (d. 463 AH) Figure 4: Three non-Firabrī recensions from al-Bukhārī
  13. The Preservation of the Ḥadīth Literature

    Ibn al-Wazīr’s Rejoinder Ibn al-Wazīr al-Yamānī (d. 840 AH) responds to a skeptic by discussing in length why it is unreasonable to doubt the attribution of the major books of Ḥadīth to their purported authors. It is beyond the scope of this article to present his entire exposé, but we will build on three of his main arguments. First, doubting the ascription of the major Ḥadīth compilations to their respective authors if carried to its logical conclusion will lead to doubting the ascription of transmitted books in all other fields.[23] If a person maintains such a profound level of skepticism of written sources, it becomes nearly impossible for him to function effectively in the world. Al-‘Izz ibn ‘Abd al-Salām (d. 660 AH) posits a similar argument and then states, “Whoever assumes that all these people erred in that [i.e. transmitting these books] has in fact himself erred. Were it not for the permissibility of relying on these books, countless benefits in medicine, grammar, and language would be obstructed.”[24] It is disingenuous to accept the authorship of books on history and language, for example, and not the Ḥadīth literature when the Islamic civilization has given unprecedented care to maintain the latter.[25] Second, overall knowledge that these books were compiled by their respective authors is definitively known (ma‘lūm bi al-ḍarūrah) to the point that there is no reason to doubt their ascription.[26] Two centuries earlier, Ibn al-Ṣalāḥ (d. 643 AH) had already noted that the major Ḥadīth books have circulated too widely to be tampered with or interpolated,[27] let alone have their authorship doubted.[28] A brief survey of the Muwaṭṭa’’s immediate transmission may help to understand this better. Muḥammad al-Zurqānī (d. 1122 AH) writes that the following number of narrators, distributed geographically, have transmitted the Muwaṭṭa’ directly from Imām Mālik: seventeen from Madinah, two from Makkah, ten from Egypt, twenty-seven from Iraq, thirteen from Andalusia, two from Kairouan, two from Tunis, and seven from the Levant.[29] More than the their numbers, the staggering geographical diversity of the narrators demonstrates the point being made here. Taking Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī as a case study, the appended diagrams illustrate how widely it has been transmitted.[30] Finally, the fact that countless manuscripts of these Ḥadīth collections in various parts of the Muslim world concur on the presence of their ḥadīths,[31] as well as multifarious commentaries,[32] secondary sources, and supplementary works throughout history all converging on referencing these ḥadīths to their respective compilations establishes confidence in the credibility of their authorship.[33] Moreover, there are numerous cases of inter-textual and contemporaneous citations of early compilations. In al-Tārīkh al-Kabīr, al-Bukhārī makes reference to his Ṣaḥīḥ;[34] in his Sunan, al-Tirmidhī also makes reference to the Ṣaḥīḥ.[35] According to Ockham’s Razor, when provided with two competing explanations, a person should opt for the simpler one. Given the preponderance of evidence, it is more reasonable, and a simpler proposition, to accept the ascription of the major Ḥadīth collections to their purported authors than believe in a wide-spread collusion of false attribution. The Usage of Non-Samā‘ Copies It may be useful to shed light on the concept of وجادة wijādah, that is, to find and then transmit ḥadīths from a collection for which one does not have transmission or authorization.[36] When studying the debate on the usage of wijādah as a mode of transmission,[37] one needs to bear in mind the bifurcation of the history of Ḥadīth studies into the era before the crystallization of ḥadīths in books and the era after it. [38] By the early 5th century, it was untenable that a person could exclusively transmit a narration not recorded in any earlier Ḥadīth work.[39] Abū Bakr al-Bayhaqī (d. 458 AH) writes that during his time if someone were to present a ḥadīth that was not already recorded, it would be rejected.[40] After this point, the primary function of chains of transmission and authorizations was to uphold the revered tradition of isnād, which “is a unique source of ennoblement,” and attain blessings by remaining connected to the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), because the main corpus of ḥadīths was already stabilized.[41] This explains why overtime scholars became relatively lenient on the stringent conditions that early scholars placed on the oral/aural transmission of Ḥadīth collections. Although it is difficult to pinpoint the exact date when this shift took place, an incident involving Abū Ṭāhir al-Silafī (d. 576 AH) and ‘Abd al-Ghanī al-Maqdīsī (d. 600 AH) hints to this transition. [42] In order to transmit ḥadīths from a collection, scholars now turned their focus to the authenticity of the copy and its correct ascription.[43] The process of evaluating manuscripts is more than just relying on their chains of transmission or dating their parchment; rather, Miklos Muranyi explains, it is judged by “wholistic study of structure, technique, and scribal notes in addition to comparative analysis of cross-references and collated texts.”[44] In the 8th century, Ibn Kathīr (d. 774 AH) raised the question of a person who transmits a Ḥadīth collection like Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī from his teacher and then finds a copy of that collection, which was not cross-referenced with the teacher’s copy nor does he find an attestation of his audition on it, but he believes it to be an authentic copy—can he transmit from it? Although the majority of early Ḥadīth scholars prohibited such a practice, Ayyūb al-Sakhtiyānī (d. 131 AH) and Muḥammad al-Bursānī (d. 203 AH) held that there was dispensation for him to transmit from it.[45] Ibn Kathīr adds that this is the position he inclines towards.[46] He was not alone in his inclination. Al-Dhahabī (d. 748 AH) and Ibn Rajab al-Ḥanbalī (d. 795 AH) state that latter-scholars maintained much dispensation in this regard.[47] It is, therefore, anachronistic to apply the negative scholarly attitude towards the usage of non-source copies for transmission before the crystallization of ḥadīths to the subsequent era. Apart from transmission, Ibn al-Ṣalāḥ explains that it is permissible to practice upon what one reliably finds in Hadīth books through wijādah.[48] Based on scholarly acceptance of a letter the Prophet had sent with ‘Amr ibn Ḥazm to the people of Yemen on almsgiving and indemnities, one can make a case for consensus upon this issue.[49] ‘Umar ibn Khaṭṭāb abandoned his own view on indemnities based on ‘Amr ibn Ḥazm’s letter that was found in the possession of his family;[50] This was also the case with other Companions and Successors.[51] As Ibn ‘Abd al-Barr (d. 463 AH) explains, Scholars from all regions have unanimously relied upon the letter of ‘Amr ibn Ḥazm.[52] The relevance of this discussion cannot be overstated because, as Dr. Subhī al-Ṣāliḥ explains, after the advent of the printing press, usage of Ḥadīth books for the most part are through the mode of wijādah.[53] Early scholars were cautious towards the usage of non-samā‘ copies out of fear of interpolation;[54] printing has considerably assuaged this concern.[55] Shaykh Ḥatīm al-‘Awnī aptly observes, “It is ironic that critics would object to the validity of Hadīth books that are found through wijādah when the very books they cite concerning wijādah are themselves found through wijadah.”[56] That being said, the practice of oral/aural transmission of Hadīth books, particularly the six canonical works, has continued unabated in various institutions and seminars throughout the world until the present day. Conclusion Far from leaving the literary heritage of their predecessors unattended, Ḥadīth scholars expended considerable energy in maintaining its integrity. From the tradition of oral/aural transmission, to careful handling of manuscripts, to meticulous dictation sessions, the Islamic civilization’s unparalleled precision vis-à-vis the Ḥadīth literature develops within the hearts of its readers confidence in its authorship. Unwarranted skepticism of such a robust system can lead a person to doubt all transmitted knowledge. A person is required to take more leaps of faith in doubting the ascription of books that were transmitted from their authors by a multitude of narrators hailing from diverse regional backgrounds and were cited by a dizzying array of sources over a millennium.
  14. The Preservation of the Ḥadīth Literature

    The Preservation of the Ḥadīth Literature By Muntasir Zaman “Marks of ink on one’s mouth and clothes are emblems of honor.”[1] – Ibrāhīm al-Nakha‘ī Introduction How has the Islamic civilization maintained the rich literary heritage of Ḥadīth developed by early Muslim scholars? What guarantee is there that the collections of ḥadīths in our possession have reached us accurately or that they were compiled by their purported authors? Far from being exhaustive, this article intends to provide answers to these questions. It begins by examining the procedures scholars instituted to ensure accurate transmission of Ḥadīth books. It then proceeds to study the practice of oral/aural transmission (samā‘ سماع) and public reading sessions and their influence in preserving the Ḥadīth literature. Thereafter, the article builds on three arguments that Ibn al-Wazīr al-Yamānī (d. 840 AH) posits in response to those who doubt the authorship of the major Ḥadīth collections. Before concluding, it sheds light on the usage of wijādah وجادة in terms of transmission and practice. The appendix contains diagrams on the transmission of Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī. Procedures for Preservation The attention and care scholars gave to the vast literature of Ḥadīth to ensure that the efforts of their predecessors were not in vain is truly awe-inspiring. They were methodical in their treatment of the Ḥadīth literature. They laid out guidelines on issues like book authorization, auditions, and the handling of manuscripts and registers. Qāḍī ‘Iyāḍ’s (d. 544 AH) al-Ilmā‘ ilā Ma‘rifat Uṣūl al-Riwāyah wa Taqyīd al-Samā‘ is among the most prominent titles on the subject.[2] Although an oft-cited authority on the subject, Qāḍī ‘Iyāḍ was by no means the first to address this topic. He drew extensively from earlier works like al-Rāmahurmuzī’s (d. 360 AH) al-Muḥaddith al-Fāṣil and al-Khaṭīb al-Baghdādī’s (d. 462 AH) al-Kifāyah fī‘ ‘Ilm al-Riwāyah and al-Jāmi‘ li Akhlāq al-Rāwī wa Ādāb al-Sāmi‘. At times, scribes would devise creative techniques to prevent confusion when reading their manuscripts. For instance, Shu‘bah ibn al-Ḥajjāj (d. 160 AH) narrated the ḥadīth of Abū al-Ḥawrā’ to a student who wrote the ḥadīth and further added the word “ḥūr ‘īn” (wide-eyed damsel) as a note beneath the name Abū al-Ḥawrā’. The reason for this peculiar note was the presence of a narrator by the name Abū al-Jawzā’ in the same generation as Abū al-Ḥawrā’. To avoid confusing the two similar yet distinct narrators, the student diligently wrote ḥūr as a note to remind him of al-Hawrā’, which is the singular form of ḥūr.[3] Muslims rightfully pride themselves in the countless volumes Ḥadīth scholars produced in order to detail the lives of the narrators whose names fill the chains of transmissions of ḥadīths. But they did not stop there. They also wrote biographical dictionaries on the lives of the narrators who transmitted the collections that contained these ḥadīths. A researcher can easily access the biographical details of the narrators Abū Dāwūd (d. 275 AH), for instance, cites in his Sunan when transmitting a ḥadīth. He could also find the biographical details of those who transmitted the Sunan from Abū Dawūd and of those who in turn transmitted it from them, et cetera,[4] in works written for this purpose like Abū Bakr Ibn Nuqṭah’s (d. 629 AH) al-Taqyīd li Ma‘rifat Ruwāt al-Sunan wa al-Masānīd.[5] As such, the major Ḥadīth collections were transmitted by people whose lives are well documented.[6] The tradition of oral/aural transmission (samā‘) ensured the preservation of the Ḥadīth literature. Ḥadīth scholars disseminated their works by teaching them to students, who in turn taught them to their students, ensuring scholarly supervision of these books as they were being transmitted down the generations.[7] Prior to the canonization of the Ḥadīth corpus,[8] to transmit a book for which one did not have oral/aural transmission was an offence not taken lightly in Ḥadīth circles.[9] Muḥammad ibn Ṭāhir al-Maqdisī (d. 507 AH) impugned Abū ‘Abd Allah al-Kāmikhī because he transmitted the Musnad of Imām al-Shāfi‘ī from a non-samā‘ copy.[10] Abū Bakr al-Qaṭī‘ī’s (d. 368 AH) copy of a book was destroyed in a flood, so he rewrote it from another copy. Despite having heard the original from a teacher, he was criticized for transmitting the second copy only because it lacked oral transmission.[11] Al-Ḥākim al-Naysābūrī (d. 405 AH) announced that he was in possession of a copy of al-Naḍr ibn Shumayl’s Gharīb al-Ḥadīth, but dutifully added that it lacked oral transmission.[12] Failure to understand this culture of transmission has led Alphonse Mingana (d. 1937) to erroneously criticize the authorship of Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī. Based on a manuscript—perhaps the earliest extant[13]—via the recension of Abū Zayd al-Marwazī (d. 371 AH) from al-Firabrī (d. 320 AH), the prime transmitter from al-Bukhārī, Mingana argues that since the chains of transmission include the name of al-Bukhārī,[14] the Ṣaḥīḥ could not have been authored by him, but rather by a later source like al-Firabrī or al-Marwazī.[15] Apart from the fact that this objection indicates a lack of awareness regarding the methodology of transmitting Ḥadīth books, it is problematic on several grounds. To mention one, in addition to al-Firabrī, there are multiple recensions of Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī like that of Ibrāhīm ibn Ma‘qil (d. 295 AH) and Ḥammād ibn Shākir (d. 311 AH);[16] likewise, besides al-Marwazī, there are other routes from al-Firabrī, such as Abū Isḥāq al-Mustamlī (d. 376 AH) and Abū al-Haytham al-Kushmīhanī (d. 389 AH). Based on the chains found in the aforementioned manuscript, if it is argued that al-Firabrī or al-Marwazī authored the Ṣaḥīḥ, how does one account for parallel chains through the other recensions/routes from al-Bukhārī that mention the same ḥadīths?[17] Public reading sessions of Ḥadīth books also helped to ensure their textual integrity. Apart from the cross-analysis of the audited books, details about the participants in these reading sessions were methodically documented. Based on information detailed in manuscript notes and reading certificates, a recent study restructured a micro-history of the reading sessions of Ibn ‘Asākir’s (d. 571 AH) mammoth Tārīkh Madīnat Dimashq in Damascus, determining thereby “the background of individual participants in terms of the cultural milieu, social position and status.”[18] Abū Bakr al-Bayhaqī’s multi-volume compendium, al-Sunan al-Kubrā, is another prime example.[19] Abū ‘Amr Ibn al-Ṣalāḥ (d. 643 AH) dictated the entire book to a congregation of scholars over 757 sessions. The following are some of the points that were noted after he dictated the eighth volume: the number of sessions held; personal details of the attendees, e.g. names, lineages, and honorifics; the state of the attendees, e.g. who spoke during the dictation; the date of completion; the venue; and the name of the registrar.[20] Considering the minutiae noted down about the attendees, one gets a sense of how scrupulous Ḥadīth scholars were in their analysis of the books they were dictating. That Tārīkh Madīnat Dimashq and al-Sunan al-Kubrā are not from the six canonical books is significant as it demonstrates the care given to more important, and less voluminous, collections. The proverbial audition of Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī in Damascus around the year 666 AH headed by the celebrated Ḥadīth scholar, Sharaf al-Dīn al-Yūnīnī (d. 701 AH), and the renowned linguist, Ibn Mālik (d. 672 AH), in a gathering of scholars who utilized critically acclaimed manuscripts and recensions of the Ṣaḥīḥ for cross-referencing is a case in point.[21] ‘Abd Allah ibn Sālim al-Baṣrī (d. 1134 AH) is on record for his meticulous treatment of the six canonical books and Musnad Aḥmad, spending twenty years in refining and cross-referencing his personal copy of Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī with other manuscripts.[22]
  15. http://www.mediafire.com/file/husk7uog3u78kcn/Befreie-dich-von-deinem-Atheismus+2018_aktuelle+Version.pdf
×