Question
The following is a post from 6/12/24. "Shaykh Abdul Malik, in his Muhadharat, highlights several excuses presented by scholars to justify their abuse of weak narrations: 1. Exploiting the prestige of a scholar to bypass verification of Ahadith. Reliance on Prestigious Sources: Some scholars argue that the presence of a hadith in the works of a respected and renowned scholar, such as Ihya Ulum al-Din (of Imaam Ghazaali), is sufficient to narrate and rely upon it without the need for independent verification or authentication. 2.Validity of Fabricated Hadiths due to their meaning Another justification is the belief that even if a hadith is fabricated, it may still be valid to narrate if its meaning is deemed correct. Case in point: 3. Verification Through Kashf Some argue that the authenticity of a hadith need not always rely on the science of Usul al-Hadith but can instead be validated through kashf— spiritual insight or unveiling experienced by certain pious individuals. 4.Weak Narrations for Fadha'il Although this is an established principle, some Scholars abuse this by completely jettisoning any narrations authentication, on the mere grounds "Its about virtue", hence no need to verify the level of authentication, completely disregarding the chain of transmission, even to the extent of using highly problematic narrations (Munkar), the common trope is as long as it is not fabricated and is about virtue, all weak narrations get the green light." Regarding the author of the kitaab, the following is what someone shared: "Shaykh Mohammad Abdul Malik Ibn Shamsul Haq Al Kamulai Al Bangladeshi is from Dhaka, Bangladesh and has studied from Shaykh AbdurRasheed Numani, Shaykh Abdul Fatah Abu Ghudah, Mufti Taqi Usmani, Maulana Ameen Safdar Okarwi, Shaykh Idrees Mirthi and Shaykh Waliul Hasan Khan Thonki. ShaykhRasheedNomani said in a letter 27/12/1411 that – 'I have never seen a student as clever or gifted as him.' Shaykh Abdul Fatah Abu Ghudah said ' he is a unique student whom there is no comparison to from my beloved ones and companions'. ShaykhAwamah and Shaykh Saeed Ahmad Palanpuri have also praised him as a master of Hadith. Please clarify these issues.
Answer
The accolades conferred on the Shaykh do not awe us. We are not impressed by praises lauded on the Shaykh. The issue at hand is the views he has expressed, concern, not the praises lauded on him nor his string of august Asaatizah.
A personality such as Imaam Ghazaali is of such lofty status that he has the ability to wrap up the Shaykh, his Asaatizah and many other seniors and put them all in his pocket.
Imaam Nawawi (Rahmatullah alayh) expressing his opinion Ihyaul Uloom of Imaam Ghazaali (Rahmatullah alayh), said: "Al-Ihya is almost (like) the Qur'aan." According to Imaam Nawawi (Rahmatullah alayh) and others, Imaam Ghazaali (Rahmatullah alayh) was the Mujaddid of the 5th century.
Imaam Ghazaali is not the little brother of the Shaykh who has displayed temerity in degrading narrations stated in Al-Ihya. His 'prestige' was not the product of facebook, youtube and the like who become stupid 'celebritis' via these shaitaani media on which today's 'hadhrats', 'muhaddiths' and the like display their snouts.
The problem with these puny 'muhadditheen' of today is that they have gained the corrupt idea of their own 'status' – that they are Muhadditheen of the calibre of bygone times, hence they waste time in talking drivel. There is no goodness in their attempt to flaunt expertise.
1) Relying on the narrations cited by an authority such as Imaam Ghazaali (Rahmatullah alayh) is valid and proper. The Shaykh is off the mark. His allegation of 'exploiting the prestige of a scholar' is nonsense. In which way do they exploit? Citing a Hadith from an authority is proper. Regardless of the accolades conferred on him by his Asaatizah, he does not come even near to the Toes of Imaam Ghazaali (Rahmatullah alayh) and other 'prestigious' Ulama with whom he has some baseless issues.
2) If a narration is genuinely fabricated, then obviously it should not be cited even if the meaning is acceptable.
3) Verification through kashf is valid for only the Saahib-e-Kashf. It is not hujjat for others.
4) Dhaeef are valid for naseehat and fadhaail purposes. The Shaykh is in a daze with his self-contradiction. Despite conceding the validity of the principle, he mentions some 'abuse'. His claim is drivel.
These pseudo-'muhadditheen' of this era are fakes who are too big for their boots. No one is under any obligation to submit to his concocted view.
- Source
- themajlis.co.za
- Published in
- The Majlis Vol 27 No 11
- PDF page
- 16
Appears under THE FOLLY OF TODAY'S PSEUDO-'MUHADDITHEEN' (approximate).