‘Ulamā’, Murabbis and a rather strong Ḥadīth

In his blog letmeturnthetables Mr. Waqar Akbar Cheema tries to undervalue a famous Ḥadīth which is often presented by the scholars of the Aḥmadiyya Muslim Jamā‘at. It was narrated with some slightly different notations and asānīd, i.e. chain of narrators, by many authentic Muḥaddithūn:

عن علي بن أبي طالب رضي الله عنه، قال : قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم:” يوشك أن أو سيأتي على الناس زمان لا يبقى من الإسلام إلا اسمه، ولا يبقى من القرآن إلا رسمه، مساجدهم يومئذ عامرة وهي خراب من الهدى، علماؤهم شر من تحت أديم السماء، منهم أو من عندهم خرجت أو تخرج أو يمدح الفتنة وفيهم تعود“

‘Alī ibn Abī Ṭālib (ra) narrates that the Messenger of Allāh (sa) said: “A time will come in the near future when there will be nothing left of the Islam except its name. And there will be nothing left of the Holy Qur’ān except its words. The mosques of that age will apparently be full of people, but will be empty of righteousness. Their ‘Ulamā’ will be the worst creatures under the heaven. Discord will rise from them and will come right back to them.”

(Shu‘ab al-Īman by Imām Al-Bayhaqī (d. 1066), Ḥadīth No. 1766/1767; al-Mujālasa wa Jawāhir al-‘Ilm by Aḥmad ibn Marwān Dīnawarī (d. 895/896), Ḥadīth No. 526; al-‘Uqūbāt by Ibn Abī ad-Dunyā (d. 894), Ḥadīth No. 8; as-Sunan al-Wārida fī al-Fitan by Abū ‘Amr ‘Uthmān bin Sa‘īd bin ‘Uthmān al-Umawī ad-Dānī (d. 1052), Ḥadīth No. 239; Kanz al-‘Ummāl by al-Muttaqī al-Hindī (d. 1567) , Ḥadīth No. 44217)

The first objection Mr. Cheema brings forth is the ostensible inauthenticity of the narrator ‘Abdullah ibn Dukayn al-Kūfī which occurs in some asānīd. Let us examine what several noble scholars of ‘Ilm ar-Rijāl, viz. the biographical evaluation of Ḥadīth narrators, had to say about ‘Abdullah ibn Dukayn:

Yūsuf ibn ‘Abd ar-Raḥmān al-Mizzī (d. 1341) in his book Tahdhīb al-Kamāl fī Asmā’ ar-Rijāl, which in fact served as the model for the Tahdhīb at-Tahdhīb of his student adh-Dhahabī (d. 1348), says that:

• an-Nasā’ī (d. 915), the author of the Sunan aṣ-Ṣughrā, one of the al-Kutub as-Sitta, said about ibn Dukayn: Laysa bihī Ba’s
• Yaḥyā ibn Ma‘īn (d. 847) , a teacher of Imām Bukhārī and a famous Muḥaddith, said about ibn Dukayn: Lā Ba’sa bihī [Yaḥyā ibn Ma‘īn uses the terms Laysa bihī Ba’s / Lā ba’sa bihī to refer to someone who is thiqa, i.e. trustworthy and reliable. (Al-Khulāsa fī ‘Ilm al-Jarḥ wa at-Ta‘dīl by ‘Alī ibn Nāyif)]
• Abū Dāwūd (d. 888), the author of the Sunan Abū Dāwūd, also one of the al-Kutub as-Sitta, said that Shaykh al-Islām Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal told him about ibn Dukayn to be thiqa.

Based on these handful of examples it is clearly evident that ibn Dukayn can in no way be considered to be inauthentic regardless of what later scholars have said, for contemporary and higher-level scholars said the total opposite.

Another demur of Mr. Cheema is the authenticity of Muhammad ibn Maslama al-Wāsṭy who appears in another isnād as a narrator. al-Ḥākim an-Nīsābūrī (d. 1012), known as Imām al-Muḥaddithīn, narrates about Abū al-Ḥassan ad-Dāraquṭnī (d. 995) that he said Lā Ba’sa bihī about ibn Maslama. (Siyar A‘lām an-Nubalā’ by Muḥammad ibn Aḥmad ibn ‘Uthmān adh-Dhahabī (d. 1348))

The point brought up by Mr. Cheema that some asānīd of this Ḥadīth are Mawqūf is entirely insignificant, because there are other asānīd which obviously are Marfū‘.

And the putative liars of which Mr. Cheema is talking are also negligible, because there are asānīd of which they are not part of.

The inqiṭā‘ between ‘Alī ibn Abī Ṭālib and his grandson ‘Alī ibn Ḥusayn is insofar irrelevant as there exist many different asānīd. This consequentially raises the authenticity of this Ḥadīth.

Apart from this there are available many other Ahadith which deal with the very same subject.

1.  

أخبرنا يزيد أخبرنا العوام عن إبراهيم التيمي قال : بلغ بن مسعود أن عند ناس كتابا يعجبون به فلم يزل بهم حتى أتوه به فمحاه ثم قال إنما هلك أهل الكتاب قبلكم أنهم أقبلوا على كتب علمائهم وتركوا كتاب ربهم

Yazīd told us: al-‘Awām told us that Ibrāhīm at-Taymī said: Ibn Mas‘ūd was informed that the people have (other) books that they admire, so he stayed with them until they brought such a book to him and he destroyed it. Then he said: The people of the book before you were destroyed because they turned to the books of their scholars and left the book of their Lord. (Sunan ad-Dārimi by ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Abd ar-Raḥmān ad-Dārimi (d. 869), Ḥadīth No. 471, resp. 470)

Ḥusayn Salīm Asad ad-Dārānī said in his edition of Sunan ad-Dārimī of 2000 that the isnād of the above Ḥadīth is Ṣaḥīḥ.

2.  

حدثنا قتيبة بن سعيد حدثنا جرير عن هشام بن عروة عن أبيه سمعت عبد الله بن عمرو بن العاص يقول: سمعت رسول الله يقول:”إن الله لا يقبض العلم انتزاعا ينتزعه من الناس ولكن يقبض العلم بقبض العلماء حتى إذا لم يترك عالما اتخذ الناس رؤسا جهالا فسئلوا فأفتوا بغير علم فضلوا وأضلوا“

Qutayba ibn Saī‘d told us: Jarīr told us: Hisham ibn ‘Urwa narrated from his father: I heard ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Amr ibn al-‘Ās saying: I heard Allāh's Messenger (May peace be upon him) saying: “Verily, Allāh will not take away knowledge by snatching it from the people but He will take away knowledge by taking away the scholars, so that when there will be left no learned person, people will make the ignorant their leaders and will ask them (for guidance in matters of religion). Then these (leaders) will issue fatāwā (i.e. religious verdicts) without any knowledge. They will themselves be misguided and will lead others astray.” (as-Ṣaḥīḥ al-Muslim, by Muslim ibn al-Ḥajjāj (d. 875), Book 34: The Knowledge, Chapter 5: Knowledge would be taken away, and Ignorance would prevail upon People and the Turmoil at the End of the World, Ḥadīth No. 2673)

3.  

حدثنا عبد الرحمن، حدثنا حماد بن زيد، عن أيوب، عن أبي قلابة، عن أبي أسماء، عن ثوبان، قال: قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم :” إنما أخاف على أمتي الأئمة المضلين “

‘Abd ar-Raḥmān told us: Ḥammād ibn Zayd told us from Ayyūb, from Abū Qilāba, from Abū Asmā’, from Thaubān, he said: Allāh's Messenger (May peace be upon him) said: “What I truly fear for my Umma are misguided scholars!” (Musnad Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal (d. 855) by Aḥmad ibn Muḥammad ibn Ḥanbal, Ḥadīth No. 21803)

4.  

حدثنا أبو بكر الآجري، حدثنا جعفر بن محمد الفريابي، حدثنا هشام بن عمار، حدثنا صدقة بن خالد، حدثنا عبد الرحمن بن يزيد بن جابر، قال: سمعت مكحولا يقول: ”لا يأتي على الناس ما يوعدون حتى يكون عالمهم فيهم أنتن من جيفة الحمار“

Abū Bakr Al-Ājurrī told us: Ja‘far ibn Muḥammad al-Firyābī told us: Hishām ibn ‘Ammār told us: Ṣadaqa ibn Khālid told us: ‘Abd ar-Raḥmān ibn Yazīd ibn Jābir told us, saying: I heard Makḥūl saying: “What was promised to people will will not come upon them until a scholar from amongst them will be worse than a carcass of a donkey.” (Ḥilyat al-Awliyā’ wa Ṭabaqāt al-Aṣfiyā by Abū Nu‘aym al-Iṣfahānī (d. 1038), Ḥadīth No. 6957)

Prior to concluding my remarks I will provide evidence that the above mentioned prophecies have been fulfilled.

Imām al-Ghazālī (d. 1111) writes:

وقد استحوذ على أكثرهم الشيطان واستغواهم الطغيان. وأصبح كل واحد بعاجل حظه مشغوفاً فصار يرى المعروف منكراً والمنكر معروفاً. حتى ظل علم الدين مندرساً ومنار الهدى في أقطار الأرض منطمساً. ولقد خيلوا إلى الخلق أن لا علم إلا فتوى حكومة تستعين به القضاة على فصل الخصام عند تهاوش الطغام. أو جدل يتدرع به طالب المباهاة إلى الغلبة والإفحام. أو سجع مزخرف يتوسل به الواعظ إلى استدراج العوام

Satan has overpowered most of them (i.e. the ‘Ulamā’). Their transgressions have led them astray. Every one of them is so obsessed with his material advantage that for them a virtue becomes an evil, and an evil becomes a virtue. Religious knowledge has disappeared, and the lighthouses of guidance have fallen. These ‘Ulamā’ have convinced people that there are only three types of knowledge. First is the ‘knowledge’ of the directives issued by the government that judges use to settle disputes among thugs. Second is the ‘knowledge’ of argumentation, by which a conceited person subdues his opponent and renders him speechless. [Not through logic but through sheer arrogance.] Third, the rhymed and poetic oration by which a preacher tries to entice the general public. (Kitāb al-Imlā’ fī Ishkālāt al-Iḥyā’ by Imām al-Ghazālī (d. 1111))

And Shaykh ‘Uthmān ibn Fūdī (d. 1817) says:

كثيراً من علماء هذه الأمة وعبادهم يأكلون أموال الناس بالباطل، ويصدون عن سبيل الله، وبسبب هؤلاء العلماء والعباد شاع الفساد في جميع البلاد والعباد قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم ”هلاك أمتي عالم فاجر وعابد جاهل “وقال صلى الله عليه وسلم ”أنا من غير الدجال أخوف عليكم من الدجال“ فقالوا: ”ممن يا رسول الله“ قال: ”من علماء السوء “

Many of the so-called scholars and worshippers in this Umma devour the wealth of the people unjustly and bar them from the path of Allāh. And by means of these scholars and worshippers corruption has spread throughout the lands. The Messenger of Allāh, may Allāh bless him and grant him peace, said: “My Umma will be destroyed by the corrupt scholars and the ignorant worshippers. And he, may Allāh bless him and grant him peace, also said: “I am not the Dajjāl and I am more fearful for you from something other than the Dajjāl.” They said: “From whom O Messenger of Allāh?” He said: “From the evil scholars.” (Sirāj al-Ikhwān fī Ahamm wa Yuḥtāj ilayhi fī hādhā az-Zamān by Shaykh ‘Uthmān ibn Fūdī (d. 1817))

Then Abū al-A‘lā Mawdūdī (d. 1979), one of the most strident opponents of the Aḥmadiyya Muslim Jamā‘at, writes:

مگر افسوس کہ علماء (الا ماشاء اللہ) خود اسلام کی حقیقی روح سے خالی ہو چکے تھے۔ ان میں اجتہاد کی قوت نہ تھی، ان میں تفقہ نہ تھا، ان میں حکمت نہ تھی، ان میں عمل کی طاقت نہ تھی، ان میں عمل کی طاقت نہ تھی، ان میں یہ صلاحیت ہی نہ تھی کہ خدا کی کتاب اور رسول خدا کی علمی و عملی ہدایت سے اسلام کے دائمی اور لچکدار اصول اخذ کرتے اور زمانہ کے متغیر حالات میں ان سے کام لیتے۔ ان پر تو اسلاف کی اندھی اور جامد تقلید کا مرض پوری طرح مسلط ہو چکا تھا جس کی وجہ سے وہ ہر چیز کو ان کتابوں میں تلاش کرتے تھے جو خدا کی کتابیں نہ تھیں کہ زمانے کی قیود سے بالاتر ہوتیجں۔ وہ ہر معاملہ میں ان انسانوں کی طرف رجوع کرتے تھے جو خدا کے نبی نہ تھے کہ ان کی بصیرت اوقات اور حالات کی بندشوں سے بالکل آزاد ہوتی۔ پھر یہ کیونکر ممکن تھا کہ وہ ایسے وقت میں مسلمانوں کی کامیاب رہنمائی کر سکے جب کہ زمانہ بالکل بدل چکا تھا اور علم و عمل کی دنیا میں ایسا عظیم تغیر واقع ہو چکا تھا جس کو خدا کی نظر تو دیکھ سکتی تھی، مگر کسی غیر نبی انسان کی نظر میں یہ طاقت نہ تھی کہ قرنوں اور صدیوں کے پردے اٹھا کر ان تک پہنچ سکتی۔

It is sad that all but a few of the ‘Ulamā’ had lost the true spirit of Islam. They lacked the power of Ijtihād. They had forgotten the ability to acquire knowledge. They had no wisdom. They had lost the strength to do anything. They totally lacked the capability to extract lasting and adaptable principles of Islam from the Book of God or the verbal and practical guidance provided by the Messenger of God. They could not apply these principles to the changed times. They were overwhelmed by the disease of blindly following the traditions of their forefathers. Because of this, they looked for all their answers in the writings of their forefathers rather than the Books of God—which transcend the limitations of time. In every instance they turned to the people who were not prophets of God—whose vision is free from the constraint of time and situation. Therefore, how was it possible for the ulema to guide the Muslims successfully when the times had changed and a great transformation had occurred in the world of science and technology that only God could have known, but a person who is not a prophet could not have revealed what lay ahead in the centuries to come. (Daur-e-Jadīd kī Bīmār Qaumeyṅ by Abū al-A‘lā Mawdūdī (d. 1979) in Tarjumān al-Qur’ān, Oct. 1935)

And Allah knows best!

The 'Last Mosque' argument still intact - Updated!

In his blog letmeturnthetables Mr. Waqar Akbar Cheema alleges that Ahmadis would quote the following Ḥadīth to confuse the idea of Khātam an-Nabiyyīn (Seal of the Prophets). The Ḥadīth is from the as-Ṣaḥīḥ al-Muslim and is as follows:

قال رسول الله : فإني آخر الأنبياء وإن مسجدي آخر المساجد

Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) said: I am the last of the Apostles and my mosque is the last of the mosques. (as-Ṣaḥīḥ al-Muslim, by Muslim ibn al-Ḥajjāj (d. 875), Book 7: The Pigrimage, Chapter 90: The Merit of Praying in the two mosques at Mecca and Medina, No. 1394)

After mentioning this Ḥadīth, he quotes the inference of unsurpassed logic, which the Ahmadis generally deduce of this Ḥadīth, namely that by the fact that the Holy Prophet's mosque was not the last one on earth, it is clearly proven that the word ākhir is used here in a figurative sense.

Without any doubt the al-Masjid al-Nabawī is the Ākhir al-Masājid and the Khātam al-Masājid. But it is the last of all the mosques regarding new ways and methods of worship. Thereafter it would be unlawful to build a mosque in terms of a new way or kind of worship. Not even in the least does that mean that it would be irregular to build a mosque wherein the way of worship of the Prophet's Mosque is being practiced. In view of that, all the mosques that were built after the al-Masjid al-Nabawī are its ẓill, viz. shadow. In the exact same manner an-Nubuwwa, i.e. prophethood, was not cut off absolutely and ultimately after the advent of Khātam an-Nabiyyīn , but only the legislative (tashrī‘iyya) and indepepent (mustaqilla) prophethood were finalized through the person of his Holiness . The non-legislative (ghair tashrī‘iyya), the non-independent (ghair mustaqilla), a.k.a. the shadowy (ẓilliyya) prophethood is still unspoilt.

Thus ash-Shaikh al-Akbar Muḥyī ad-Dīn ibn ʿArabī  (d. 1240), one of the most prolific Ṣūfīs write:

فما إرتفعت النبوة بالكلية ولهذا قلنا إنما إرتفعت نبوة التشريع فهذا معنى لا نبي بعده

Prophethood was not lifted off entirely. Therefore, we rather say that the legislative prophethood was put to an end. This is the meaning of “there is no prophet after him”. (Futūḥāt al-Makkiyya, Vol. 2, Chap. 73)

And the well-known Shāfiʿī scholar Abd al-Wahhab al-Sha‘rani (d. 1565) confirms him by saying:

إعلم أن النبوة لم ترتفع مطلقا بعد محمد، وإنما إرتفع نبوة التشريع فقط

Be aware that prophethood has not been abolished absolutely after Muhammad, but only the legislative prophecy has been put to an end. (Kitāb al-Yawāqīt wa-l-Jawāhir fī bayān ‘Aqā‘id al-Akābir, Vol. 2, p. 3)

 
Through sordid rhetoric he then tries to ascertain the reader that anyone who has acquired even a fundamental knowledge about the Aḥādīth, could not have overlooked the following Ḥadīth:

أنا خاتم الانبياء و مسجدي خاتم مساجد الانبيا و أحق المساجد أن يزار و يشد إليه الرواحل مسجد الحرام و مسجدي، و صلاة في مسجدي أفضل من ألف صلاة فيما سواه إلا المسجد الحرام

I am the seal of the prophets and my mosque is the seal of the mosques of the prophets. And the mosques which deserve mostly to be visited and towards which the mounts should be driven are the mosque of Mecca and my mosque. The prayer in my mosque is better than a thousand prayers in any other mosque except that of Mecca. (Kanz al-‘Ummāl, by al-Muttaqī al-Hindī (d. 1567), Chapter Faḍl al-Ḥaramain wa-l-Masjid al-Aqsā min al-Akmāl, Vol. 12, p. 270, No. 34999)

The first step to examine the reliability of this Ḥadīth is to have a look at the book itself where this tradition has been narrated, i.e. the Kanz al-‘Ummāl. Regarding this book, Sheikh Muhammad al-Turkī, professor at the King Sa‘ūd University in Riyāḍ, says that definately not all Aḥādīth in it are authentic and that it is full of weak and false Aḥādīth. It is, in fact, a rearrangement of the al-Jāmi‘ al-Kabīr of Jalāl al‐Dīn al‐Suyūṭī. When he wrote his book, his intention was to gather together all the Aḥādīth that he knew, whether they were authentic or not and he openly admitted that there were some false Aḥādīth in it. Therefore, when al-Muttaqī al-Hindī rearranged al‐Suyūṭī's book, it was obvious that his book would also contain a number of weak and false Aḥādīth, since the original work on which it was based contained the same. (http://en.islamtoday.net/node/1169)

However, Mr. Cheema provides us with another source, which probably is meant to serve as a substantiation of the Ḥadīth he presented. The source is the Ḥadīth No. 1175 of the book al-Targhīb wa-l-Tarhīb by Muḥammad Nāṣir ad-Dīn al-Albānī. What Mr. Cheema does not seem to know is, is that Al-Albānī is considered to be the chief innovator of our time and that most of the contemporary Sunni scholars warned of his heresy and many of them wrote articles or full-length works against him. (http://www.sunnah.org/history/Innovators/al_albani.htm)

Nevertheless, there is also another source to a hadith that is similar to the one that Mr. Cheema has put forth:

 حدنا حسين بن حسن, قال: حدثنا عبد العزيز بن أبي عثمان، عن موسى بن عبيدة، عن داود بن مدرك، عن عروة بن الزبير، عن عائشة رضي الله عنها, قالت: قال رسول الله : أنا خاتم الأنبياء، ومسجدي خاتم المساجد، وأحق المساجد أن يزار وتركب إليه الرواحل المسجد الحرام، ومسجدي هذا، وصلاة في مسجدي أفضل من ألف صلاة فيما سواه من المساجد إلا المسجد الحرام

Ḥussain ibn Ḥassan told us, he said: ‘Abd al-‘Aziz ibn Abī ‘Uthmān told us from Mūsā ibn ‘Ubaida, from Dāwūd ibn Mudrik, from ‘Urwa ibn az-Zubair, from ‘Āisha (may Allah be pleased with her), she said: Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) said: I am the seal of the prophets and my mosque ist the seal of the mosques. And the mosques which deserve mostly to be visited and towards which the steeds should be ridden are the mosque of Mecca and this my mosque. The prayer in my mosque is better than a thousand prayers in any other mosque except that of Mecca. (Akhbār Makka, by Muḥammad Ibn Isḥāq al-Fākihī (d. 892), Chapter of the mentioning of the virtue of praying in the Holy Mosque, No. 1140)

This Ḥadīth is charaterized as marfū‘. In fact all the Aḥādīth of this book have been regarded as being at least ḥasan.

But even if the Ḥadīth stated in the Kanz al-‘Ummāl is regarded as authentic, it does not conflict with the Aḥmadiyya point of view at all. In fact it totally clarifies our perspective. In this Ḥadīth the Holy Prophet declares that after the mosques of all the prophets who passed before him the al-Masjid al-Nabawī is the last mosque. And declaring the al-Masjid al-Nabawī as being the last of the mosques implicates that henceforth by no prophet may a mosque be erected for any new ways of worship until the day of resurrection, but rather all of the mosques that may be built after the al-Masjid al-Nabawī shall be built to adopt the way of worship exemplified by the al-Masjid al-Nabawī, only then their construction would be acceptable, because all those mosques would then be ẓilāl, that is to say shadows, of the al-Masjid al-Nabawī. Similarly, the concept of the declaration of the Holy Prophet as Khātam al-Anbiyā in juxtaposition to Khātam al-Masājid is this, that the Holy Prophet is the last prophet to bring new laws and that after him there can be no prophet who brings a new law. Whosoever may appear, will have to be from his Umma and appear as his shadow (ẓill) and will have to be subject to his very law. Hence, as it is permitted to build ẓillī mosques of the al-Masjid al-Nabawī after it, in exactly the same way the coming of a ẓillī prophet after the Khātam al-Anbiyā is unaffected by it. The mosque which will be permissible to build in future will be that which will be according to the way of worship of the al-Masjid al-Nabawī, notwithstanding whether the builders of it are Anbiā Ummatī (prophet of the Umma) or ordinary people.

At a glance we may notice the following:

1. The first Ḥadīth brought forth by the Ahmadis is from al-Muslim, which is the second one of the so called Ṣaḥīḥān. All followers of the Ahl al-Sunna wa-l-Jamā‘a are muttafiq ‘alai thereon that this is the second most authentic book of Aḥādīth. Here, the word al-Anbiyā’ is not mentioned after al-Masājid.
2. Ibn ‘Arabī and al-Sha‘rani both support the Ahmadiyya standpoint.
3. The second Ḥadīth, which is presented by Mr. Cheema, is from Kanz al-‘Ummāl. The authenticity of this tradition is more than questionable, because there is not even given an isnād and al‐Suyūṭī, who is the original compiler of the book, himself admits that even non-authentic Aḥādīth were also collected in his work.
4. The so called scholar who verifies this Ḥadīth, i.e. al-Albānī, is viewed by most of the Sunni scholars as a falsifier and heretic.
5. The next Ḥadīth which my humble self presents is from al-Fākihī and has almost the exact same wording as the Ḥadīth of al-Muttaqī al-Hindī, except for the non-existent word of al-Anbiyā’. Furthermore al-Fākihī's work was praised by Ibn Ḥajar and Taqī ad-Dīn al-Fāsī.
6. Even if the Ḥadīth brought forth by al-Muttaqī al-Hindī is genuine, it does not oppose our idea of Khātam an-Nabiyyīn.

Finally, one can say with some certainty that the narration of the Kanz al-‘Ummāl is faulty and even if not there is nothing to dispute on.

And Allah knows best!