‘Ulama, Murabbis and two extremely weak hadiths

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم الحمد لله وحده و الصلاة و السلام على من لا نبي بعده و على آله و أصحابه أجمعين

Some of the Ahmadiyya leaders try to stereotype contemporary Islamic scholarship as a whole using some narrations recorded in Hadith works.

Before talking of the status of scholars (‘ulama) in the House of Islam and especially their role with regards to the Ahamdiyya cult, let us first see the narrations that some Ahmadiyya leaders use and scrutinize them to check their authenticity.

Narration 1:

The following is the translation of one such narration as it appears on the AlIslam.org website:

The Prophet once said, “There will come a time upon the people when nothing will remain of Islam except its name and nothing will remain of the Quran except its words. Their mosques will be splendidly furnished but destitute of guidance. Their divines will be the worst people under the Heaven; strife will issue from them and avert to them.”

In the following lines I will mention the wording of the narration as found in different works and dwell on the authenticity check for each narration in the light of scholarly works.

As a statement of the Holy Prophet (pbuh) narrated by ‘Ali (ra):

عَنْ عَلِيٍّ قَالَ: قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ: «يُوشِكُ أَنْ يَأْتِيَ عَلَى النَّاسِ زَمَانٌ لَا يَبْقَى مِنَ الْإِسْلَامِ إِلَّا اسْمُهُ وَلَا يَبْقَى مِنَ الْقُرْآنِ إِلَّا رَسْمُهُ مَسَاجِدُهُمْ عَامِرَةٌ وَهِيَ خَرَابٌ مِنَ الْهُدَى عُلَمَاؤُهُمْ شَرُّ مَنْ تَحْتَ أَدِيمِ السَّمَاءِ مِنْ عِنْدِهِمْ تَخْرُجُ الْفِتْنَةُ وَفِيهِمْ تَعُودُ» .

Narrated ‘Ali, the Messenger of Allah –may Allah’s peace and blessings be upon him- said: “There will come a time upon the people when nothing will remain of Islam except its name and nothing will remain of the Quran except its words. Their mosques will be splendidly furnished but destitute of guidance. Their divines will be the worst people under the Heaven; strife (fitna) will issue from them and avert to them.” (Mishkat al-Masabih 1/91 Hadith 276)

As it is known to the students of Hadith, Mishkat al-Masabih is not the original Hadith source book. It has narrations with reference to other works giving full chain of narrators.

For this narration, the author of Mishkat al-Masabih, Muhammad bin ‘Abdullah al-Khatib al-‘Umri (d. 741 A.H.) has quoted it from Shu’b al-Imam of al-Baihaqi.

Its chain of narrators is;

Al-Baihaqi – Abu al-Hasan Ali bin Ahmad bin ‘Abdan –Ahmad bin ‘Ubayd as-Safar – Muhammad bin ‘Eisa bin Abi Iyas – Sa’id bin Suleman – ‘Abdullah bin Dukayn – Ja’far bin Muhammad – Muhammad bin ‘Ali – ‘Ali bin Hussain – ‘Ali bin Abi Talib – Messenger of Allah, on whom be the peace and blessings of Allah

Dr. Abdul al-‘Aliy Abdul Hamid has classified it as Da’if due to the weakness of ‘Abdullah bin Dukayn and due to the fact of the chain being interrupted as ‘Ali bin Hussain did not meet ‘Ali bin Abi Talib, may Allah be pleased with him. See Shu’b al-Iman 3/317 Hadith 1763, Makteba al-Rushd, Riyadh, 2003

For those who are rather naive about the categorization of hadiths can have a introduction to this science HERE.

Muhammad bin Sa’d states that ‘Ali bin Hussain i.e. Zain al-‘Abidin was twenty-three of age at the tragic eve of pogrom at Karbala (See Tabaqat al-Kubra 5/212, Dar al-Sadir, Beirut 1968). We know the tragedy of Karbala took place in the year 63 A.H. and ‘Ali bin Abi Talib –may Allah be pleased with him- was martyred in the year 40 A.H. ‘Ali bin Hussain was therefore by any stretch of imagination no more than an year old when ‘Ali bin Abi Talib –may Allah be pleased with him- was martyred. This is enough to prove that ‘Ali bin Hussain –may Allah have mercy on him- could not report directly from the Pious Caliph.

The inqita’ (interruption) is mentioned by al-Baihaqi himself in his comment to a subsequent narration as we shall see below.

About ‘Abdullah bin Dukayn, Yahya bin Ma’in said: “He is nothing.” (See Lisan al-Mizan 7/260 No. 3503, Mo’assas al-‘Ilmi, Beirut 1971)

al-Dhahbi quotes the statement of Yahya bin Ma’in and then gives this narration pointing to its weakness. See al-Mizan al-A’itadal 2/417 No. 4296 Dar al-Ma’rifa, Beirut 1963.

Ibn ‘Adi mentions this report in the profile of ‘Abdullah bin Dukayn in his work al-Kamil fil Du’afa al-Rijal 5/377-378. This work was compiled to warn against the weak narrators. The chain also has the interruption  (inqita’) problem as above.

Abu Tahir Muhammad bin Fazl al-Maqdisi Ibn al-Qaysarani (d. 507 A.H.) has quoted the narration from Ibn A’Adi. About ‘Abdullah bin Dukayn he says, “He is nothing.” See Zakhirah al-Huffaz 5/2808 Narration 6583, Dar al-Salaf, Riyadh 1996

Shaykh Albani has referred to its weakness in his first research on Mishkat al-Masabih by stating that it is given by Ibn ‘Adi in his above mentioned work. See Mishkat al-Masabih 1/91 Hadith 276 pub. Al-Makteb al-Islami, Beirut 1979

In 1985 the Shaykh Albani’s second research on Mishkat al-Masabih was published in which he categorically graded it as Da’if i.e. dubious.

With the same chain the report is mentioned in Abu ‘Amr al-Dani’s (d. 444 A.H. ) Sunan al-Waridah fil Fitan No. 236

Same narration with the same chain from ‘Abdullah bin Dukayn onwards is given by Ibn Abi Dunya in his work ‘al-‘Uqubat 1/23 Hadith 8, Dar Ibn Hazm, Beirut, 1996.

The report is also found in Abu Bakr Ahmad al-Daynawari’s (d. 333 A.H.) al-Mujalisa wa Jawahir al-‘Ilm 2/359 Narration 519. Its chain is same from ‘Abdullah bin Dukayn onwards so it adds nothing to the equation. However in this work between al-Daynwari and ‘Abdullah bin Dukayn is a narrator named Muhammad bin Masalama who is much criticized. al-Dhahbi quotes al-Khallal who said, “He is extremely da’if (weak).”(Mizan al-A’itidal 4/42 No. 8179) Shaykh Mashhur bin Hasan has graded the narration as “Extremely Da’if”. See al-Mujalisa wa Jawahir al-‘Ilm 2/359 Narration 519, Dar Ibn Hazm, Beirut, 1998

The report is also quoted in al-Suyuti’s Jami’ al-Kabir (No. 11451) with reference to Ibn ‘Adi and al-Baihaqi.

Moreover, the narration is found in a Shiite scholar Muhammad Baqir al-Majlisi’s (d. 1111 A.H.) work Bihar al-Anwar (18/146 Chapter 12) as well. Its chain involves a narrator al-Sakouni who is Isma’il bin Abi Ziyad and he is a well known liar. Ibn Hibban said, “A great liar! It is not permissible to make a mention of him in hadith except by the way of condemnation.” (al-Majruhin 1/129 No. 50, Dar al-Wa’iy, Aleppo 1396 A.H)

In all the works the narration appears it has the same issues with its chain, so it remains Da’if and dubious. The point is mentioning all the works is to set the record straight lest someone may try to play clever by saying it is found in ‘other works’ as well.

As a statement of the Holy Prophet (pbuh) narrated by Ibn ‘Umar (ra):

In his Musnad (1/107) al-Daylami reports through al-Hakim the following, narrated by Ibn ‘Umar that the Messenger of Allah, may Allah’s peace and blessings be upon him, said:

سيأتي على الناس زمان لا يبقي من القرآن إلا رسمه، ولا من الإسلام إلا اسمه، يقسمون به وهم أبعد الناس منه، مساجدهم عامرة، خراب من الهدى، فقهاء ذلك الزمان شر فقهاء تحت ظل السماء، منهم خرجت الفتنة، وإليهم تعود

“Soon a time would come upon people when nothing will remain of Quran except its script, and nothing of Islam will remain except its name, they will divide and will be farthest from it. Their mosques will be furnished but devoid of guidance. The scholars of that age will be the worst people under the heavens. Strife will emerge from them and return to them.”

As Shaykh Albani mentions the chain of narrators of this report includes;

Khalid bin Yazid al-Ansari – Ibn Abi Zi’b – Nafi’ – Ibn ‘Umar — Messenger of Allah, on whom be the peace and blessings of Allah

Shaykh Albani has commented to it in detail in Silsala Da’ifa. He writes:

“Khalid- it is evident that he is al-‘Umri al-Makki. He narrates from Ibn Abi Zi’b. Abu Hatim and Yahya described him as a liar. And Ibn Hibban said, “He narrates fabricated narrations from trustworthy people.” (Silsala Da’ifa wa Mawdu’a 4/410 No. 1936. Dar al-Ma’arif, Riyadh, 1992)

For the original reference to Ibn Hibban’s statement about Khalid bin Yazid, See al-Majruhin 1/284-285 No. 308.

As a statement of the Holy Prophet (pbuh) narrated by Ma’az (ra):

Shaykh Albani further mentions:

“Then al-Daylami narrated it through, Isma’il bin Abi Ziyad – Thawr – Khalid bin Ma’dan from M’az, likewise. I say: ‘It is –like the earlier one- a fabrication. The trouble with it is (the narrator) Isma’il and he is al-Sakouni al-Qadi. Ibn Hibban said, “A great liar! It is not permissible to make a mention of him in hadith except by the way of condemnation.” (Silsala Da’ifa wa Mawdu’a 4/411 No. 1936)

For the origin reference to Ibn Hibban’s statement about Isma’il bin Abi Ziyad al-Sakouni, See al-Majruhin 1/129 No. 50

As a statement of ‘Ali (ra):

According to Shu’b al-Iman of al-Baihaqi ‘Ali, may Allah be pleased with him, mentioned almost the same while addressing the people in Kufa. Abu Wa’il reports that he heard him saying:

يُوشِكُ أَنْ لَا يَبْقَى مِنَ الْإِِسْلَامِ إِِلَّا اسْمُهُ، وَمِنَ الْقُرْآنِ إِِلَّا رَسْمُهُ …. مَسَاجِدُكُمْ يَوْمَئِذٍ عَامِرَةٌ، وَقُلُوبُكُمْ وَأَبْدَانُكُمْ مُخَرَّبَةٌ مِنَ الْهوى، شَرُّ مَنْ تَحْتَ ظِلِّ السَّمَاءِ فُقَهَاؤُكُمْ، مِنْهُمْ تَبْدَأُ الْفِتْنَةُ، وَفِيهِمْ تَعُودُ “، فَقَامَ رَجُلٌ فَقَالَ: فَفِيمَ يَا أَمِيرَ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ؟ قَالَ: ” إِِذَا كَانَ الْفِقْهُ فِي رُذَّالِكُمْ وَالْفَاحِشَةُ فِي خِيَارِهِمْ، وَالْمُلْكُ فِي صِغَارِكُمْ فَعِنْدَ ذَلِكَ تَقُومُ السَّاعَةُ

“Soon nothing will remain of Islam except its name and of Quran except its script … In that day your mosques will be well furnished but your hearts and bodies will have no guidance. At that time the worst people under the sky will be your scholars, strife will originate with them and return to them.” A man stoop up and asked: “Why would this happen O Commander of the Faithful?” He said: “When the knowledge is the worst among you and when immorality spreads even amongst your best people and rule with the lowest amongst you, then the Doomsday will set in.” (Shu’b al-Iman, Hadith 1765)

Its chain of narrator is;

Al-Baihaqi – ‘Ali bin Ahmad bin ‘Abdan – Ahmad bin Abi Hassan Yahya bin Ahmad al-Dhibbi – Hafs bin Muhammad bin Najih al-Basri – Bishr bin Mihran – Sharik bin ‘Abdullah al-Nakhai’ – al-‘Amash – Abi Wa’il – ‘Ali bin Abi Talib, may Allah be pleased with him.

Just after giving the report through this chain, al-Baihaqi writes:

هَذَا مَوْقُوفٌ، إِسْنَادُهُ إِلَى شَرِيكٍ مَجْهُولٌ، وَالْأَوَّلُ مُنْقَطِعٌ وَاللهُ أَعْلَمُ

“This is mawquf. Its chain up to Sharik is ‘majhool’ (i.e. contains unknown narrators) and the first one (i.e. earlier narration) is ‘munqati’’ (i.e. interrupted) And Allah knows the best!”

Practically expounding the above, Dr. Abdul al-‘Aliy Abdul Hamid mentions that Ahmad bin Abi Hassan Yahya bin Ahmad al-Dhibbi and Hafs bin Muhammad bin Najih al-Basri are both unknown. About Bishr bin Mahran, al-Dhahbi quotes Ibn Abi Hatim as saying, “My father (i.e. Abu Hatim) rejected his narrations.” (Mizan al-A’itadal 1/325 No. 1224)

The same report is quoted in Kanzul ‘Ummal (Hadith 44217)

As to the words of al-Baihaqi,

وَالْأَوَّلُ مُنْقَطِعٌ

“And the first one (i.e. earlier narration) is ‘munqati’’ (i.e. interrupted).”

It refers to the above discussed narration through ‘Ali –may Allah be pleased with him- attributing the words to the Messenger of Allah –may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him.

Narration 2:

Another narration that Murabbis use comes from Nawadir al-Usool of Hakim al-Tirmidhi (d. 320 A.H.).

It is narrated through Abu Umamah –may Allah be pleased with him. He said:

قَالَ رَسُول الله صلى الله عَلَيْهِ وَسلم تكون فِي أمتِي فزعة فَيصير النَّاس إِلَى عُلَمَائهمْ فَإِذا هم قردة وَخَنَازِير

“The Messenger of Allah –may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him- said: Terror and dismay will appear in my Ummah. The people will turn to their scholars while they will be (like) monkeys and pigs.” (Nawadir al-Usool 2/609 Narration 860, Makteba al-Imam al-Bukhari, Cairo 2008)

With reference to Nawadir al-Usool it is quoted in Kanzul ‘Ummal (Hadith 38727), al-‘Ayni’s ‘Umdatul Qari (21/177) and al-Tadhkirah (1/1256) of al-Qurtubi.

The chain of narrators for this narration is;

Hakim al-Tirmidhi – ‘Umar bin Abi ‘Umar – Hisham bin Khalid al-Damishqi – Isma’il bin ‘Ayyash – Laith [bin Abi Salim] – Ibn Sabit – Abu Umamah – the Messenger of Allah, may the peace and blessings of Allah.

This chain is full of problems.

In this report Ibn Sabit is reporting from Abu Umamah, while we find al-Mizi (d. 742 A.H.) quoting ‘Abbas al-Douri who said: Yahya [bin Ma’in] was asked, if ‘Abdul Rahman bin Sabit heard anything from Abu Umamah? He replied, “No!” (Tahdhib al-Kamal 17/125 No. 3822, Mo’assas al-Risalah, Beirut 1980)

About the other narrator Laith bin Abi Salim, it is to be noted that Imam Ahmad, Yahya bin Ma’in, Muhammad ibn Sa’d , Ibn Abi Shayba etc. all have mentioned that he is weak and not reliable. (Tahdhib al-Tahdhib 8/468 No. 835, Da’ira al-Ma’arif al-Nizamiya, Hyderabad Deccan, 1326 A.H.)

As to the narrator ‘Umar bin Abi ‘Umar [al-‘Abdi al-Balkhi] al-Suyuti mentions that he is majhool.i.e. unknown. (al-La’ali al-Masnu’a 1/89, Dar al-Kutab al-‘Ilmiyya, Beirut 1996)

So clearly the chain is interrupted and weak.

And in the first place the fact that report actually comes from Hakim al-Tirmidhi’s Nawadir al-Usool only is enough to maintain that it does not deserve a serious consideration.

al-Suyuti in his introduction to Jami’ al-Kabir writes that whatever comes from Nawadir al-Usool (alone) is Da’if and this knowledge suffices to speak of its weakness. See Jami’ al-Ahadith 1/6 Makteba al-Shamela ed.

Let’s not forget Ahmadiyya have themselves recognized al-Suyuti as a Mujaddid of his century.

So we see the reality of the narrations they use. But still see, how brave these people are and with what audacity they attribute these reports to the Messenger of Allah, may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him!

Status of ‘Ulama in Islam:

Much can be said about the high status that scholars (‘ulama) have in the House of Islam. But to keep the thing brief I will just quote one Hadith.

The Messenger of Allah, may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, said:

إِنَّ الْعُلَمَاءَ وَرَثَةُ الْأَنْبِيَاءِ

“Verily the ‘ulama are the successors of the prophets.” (Sunan Abu Dawud, Hadith 3641)

This report has been classified as Sahih by Ibn Mulaqqan (d. 804 A.H.) in Badr al-Munir 7/587. Al-‘Ayni also authenticated in ‘Umdatul Qari 2/40. Albani and Shu’aib Arna’ut too authenticated it.

Scholars, vis-à-vis Ahmadiyya-Muslim dialogue:

Now we come to the real issue. Where do, according to the Hadith, the Muslim scholars stand in the debate between Muslims and the Ahmadiyya? And if at all the two narrations discussed at length are to be accepted, who is their prime subject?

Now the situation is, while the Muslim scholars stand for the ideas established for last 1400 plus years, Ahmadiyya claim that through Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani “new truth” has dawned upon them which was somehow hidden from the Muslims of the past centuries. To the Muslims this “new truth” is the real strife (fitna) and Muslims scholars are trying to defend their faith against this fitna.

In this backdrop, the following narration says a lot;

قَالَ رَسُولُ اللهِ صَلَّى اللهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ: ” يَرِثُ هَذَا الْعِلْمَ مِنْ كُلِّ خَلَفٍ عُدُولُهُ , يَنْفُونَ عَنْهُ تَأْوِيلَ الْجَاهِلِينَ , وَانْتِحَالَ الْمُبْطِلِينَ , وَتَحْرِيفَ الْغَالِينَ

The Messenger of Allah –may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him- said: “In every successive century those who are reliable authorities will preserve this knowledge, rejecting the interpretations of the ignorant, lies of the treacherous and the corruption of the extremists.” (Sunan al-Kubra, Hadith 20911)

It is also quoted in Mishkat al-Masabih (Hadith 248). It has been classified as Sahih by Imam Ahmad, See al-‘Alai’s (d. 761 A.H.) Bughyah al-Multamis 1/35, ‘Alam al-Kutb, Beirut 1985
Shaykh Albani also classified it as Sahih in his research on Mishkat al-Masabih

The two narrations, if accepted, refer to the Murabbis:

This Hadith plainly established that in “every successive century” people with sound knowledge will protect it against all kinds of attacks. So who defends the truth now? Those who stick to and speak for the established beliefs that have been defended in “every successive century” or those who stand for the “newly dawned truth”?

This brings us to the simple plain conclusion that the so-called “newly dawned truth” is only a fitna. Therefore if by any means either of the above discussed two reports is to be considered- especially with reference Muslim-Ahmadiyya dialogue- they apply to the Ahmadiyya and not the Muslims. The murabbis are the subject of these narrations and not the Muslim ‘ulama.

One has to say; even if we agree with the Ahmadiyya interpretation how do they conclude  does it not fall upon the murabbis as well?

Ahmadis basking upon these false narrations and running away from the real points of discussion, remind me of a narration attributed to the Holy Prophet, may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him. Although it’s manifestly weak but aptly fits the murabbis narrative. It says:

“Soon you will see the devils from amongst the men. One of them would listen to a hadith and apply it to other than himself. And will thus delude people away from listening about the person about whom it is actually said.” (Kanzul ‘Ummal, No. 29125)

Indeed Allah knows the best!-

Be Sociable, Share!

26 thoughts on “‘Ulama, Murabbis and two extremely weak hadiths

  1. @ Waqar

    Nice work Akhi!! Your references are amazing!!

    You see, Ahmadis believe out of religious sincerity that all the info that they are given is authentic. I dont blame the rank and file Ahmadis because of the sincerity in their heart.

    However, the Mirza family are the ones that have turned this punjabbee-ponzi-scheme into a global thrust . Insha Allah, Ahmadis will see the light thru the darkness of their lenses.

    • I agree 100% with Rationalist above. The family of this delusional man has made this into a ponzi scheme, were blind followers think its Islam. Really sad…

  2. Though I appreciate the level of technical rigor Waqar brings to the table, I sometimes ask myself why is this important when the vast majority of readers (Muslim or Ahmadi) will simply not understand the majority of this article.

    However, I think its important that we not only appeal to the masses, but to the Intelligentsia. This kind of detail is important.

    • This simple answer to your question, would be ‘because he can’.
      If you look at the ahmadi murabi rebutals (as you have done) you can see they are full of huge holes, based on fabricated hadith and quotes of mystics, it is a laughable at best. This article, a superb one might I add, demonstrates the sheer weight of argument against the cult lie. This article is almost like a tsnumai wave againt a tiny little pebble (cult defence), no match.
      well done to the author, dont dumb down your work for clueless murabbis.
      Your argument is very sound, if the hadith is speaking about mosques and scholars, and the cult regards muslims as kafirs, which it does, then the hadith must be applicable only to them, lol

  3. I am a rank and file Ahmadi. I am not blind.

    The author says, “But still see, how brave these people are and with what audacity they attribute these reports to the Messenger of Allah, may the peace and blessings of Allah be upon him!”. This article attributes the status of dha’eef (weak) to both ahadith, and not mawdu’ (fabricated). Therefore by their very nature, if the author’s perspective is to be accepted, there is a small chance they are true. What then of the audacity of the author to deny a report of the Messenger of Allah (saw) which MAY be true?

    Either label the ahadith as fully fabricated, or be very careful of asking people to reject them fully. Fair, neutral advice to any Muslim.

    Also, at the end the author uses an admittedly weak hadith to make a point. The very thing the majority of his article was arguing against.

    • “If you make a mistake in Fiqh, you get laughed at. If you make a mistake in ‘Aqidah, you send people to hell.”
      – Imam Zaid

      Because of this, the rule is you only use Sahih Hadith in matters of ‘Aqidah.

  4. Found,

    Firstly a word about authenticity thing;
    This is our (i.e. Muslims’) tradition to be extra cautious when it comes to attributing anything to the Prophet (saaw). Should I share with you evidences when the senior most of the Tabi’un would admittedly speak out a Hadith of the Prophet (saaw) as their own words for the fear of wrongly attributing something to the Prophet (saaw). And these reports have terrible issues. Why your religious elite sticks to these, why they keep quoting these narrations? Sometimes try questioning them

    About me using a weak hadith … If I were to make you swallow it as a saying of the Prophet (saaw), you wouldn’t have known it ever. But that’s not the authentic Muslim way. So that statement, whatever its origins, fits your people as explained. How many times have you found murabbis using a report and telling you about its weakness? I am sure, they cannot afford it for the fear of losing their sheep. This will lead to the collapse of the whole theology of the cult.

    Come back home!

    • You are right. We as Muslims are extra cautious when it comes to attributing anything to the Prophet (saw). The point I am making is that you have not been extra cautious in taking something away from the Prophet (saw). Dha’eef, by its definition, leaves room for a hadith to be genuine. All I’m saying is at least stick to your own principles and don’t throw these ahadith out when they might (in your own eyes) be true.

      For an ordinary Muslim, it is simple. As a general rule, any hadith that does not go against the Holy Quran and is for the purpose of good, should be accepted. That may not sound very sceintific, but the Holy Quran and the capacity of sincerity of heart are really the first two tools we have all been blessed with.

      As a Muslim, if a scholar incites me to terrorist activity, I will reject him. And these ahadith you denounce here will come to my mind. At that point I have the option to either say:
      a) The Prophet (saw) in all his wisdom knew this day would come and warned me against it.
      b) The Prophet (saw) did not say anything but he taught me enough other things to know to avoid this.

      Call me simple, but I would pick (a) every time. (b) still works, but (a) is better!

      I picked terrorism as an example here as I hope it is something we mutually condemn. For somebody born and bred in those circles, these two ahadith could open their eyes and remove them from a life that is against the teachings of Islam. Are you still willing to reject these ahadith?

  5. Found,

    //For an ordinary Muslim, it is simple. As a general rule, any hadith that does not go against the Holy Quran and is for the purpose of good, should be accepted. That may not sound very sceintific, but the Holy Quran and the capacity of sincerity of heart are really the first two tools we have all been blessed with.//

    Sincerity of heart? Too subjective to become a source of collective guidance at least in the House of Islam. May be it works in Ahmadiyyat where your prophet even made “ilham” a source of interpretation of Quran and Sunnah … it is tantamount to making Islamic sources a child’s play

    comment seriously and I’ll respond else good bye

    rest of your chatter is irrelevant …

    • The principle of questioning a hadith that goes against the Qur’an is valid. But, the reason why they invoke it a lot more than with regular Islam is because Ahmadi-specific interpretations of the Qur’an conflict with numerous ahadith, so they end up rejecting/questioning more ahadith than we do.

      For Muslims, its largely theoretical that a sahih hadith would contradict with the Qur’an to such a degree that they’re irreconcilable.

      • You say Ahmadi Muslims question/reject ahadith more than non-Ahmadi Muslims. The whole point of this article was to justify that sort of action.
        The arguments are the exact same, just with a different label depending on who is presenting them. So for a neutral reader it all boils down to “Do I reject that ahadith that one group does, or reject the ahadith that the other group does?” Sorry but doesn’t help me to the Right path.

        I started by questioning the approach of the author (as a writer, not as a Muslim). I will finish with the same. I look forward to the next post.

        • Your bottom line is pretty valid and well-spoken. And we shouldn’t expect the average person to understand the details of hadith authentication.

          These types of articles are for the intelligentsia on both sides, not necessarily for the ‘awaam.

          In general, the Ahmadiyya must reject more ahadith and scholastic opinions than the Muslims. The root of this is that their positions and Ahmadi-specific interpretations are in disagreement with tons of ahadith.

          For the Muslims, the Qur’an and ahadith jive together quite well. So we don’t have this problem.

          For example, the Prophet SAAWS said in dozens of ways and instances “I am the last prophet”, and “There is no prophet after me”. This jives with our understanding of Khaatam al-Nabiyyin. But obviously doesn’t for the Ahmadiyya, hence the rejection or presenting its “True Meaning”.

          • I must disagree with your point about not expecting the average person to understand the details of hadith authentication. I do not believe it is that complicated, and even if it was, God has instilled in us all the faculties to understand Him fully. Ahadith are a big part of a Muslim’s education, and I am confident that the bits we need to know can be grasped by any Momin. If not, then that would give birth to inequality in men.

          • Do you know the differences between the methodologies of Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim? Why did Ibn al-Jawzi differ with al-Suyuti (ie, why was one Mutasaahil and the other Mutashaddid?) Do you know how people detect ‘hidden defects’ in hadith? There are many things in ahadith studies that I don’t think either of us have any knowledge of beyond the cursory.

            You might be able to, and that’s very good ma sha Allah, but not everyone is capable of understanding every area of Islamic studies. But, that’s not necessarily a bad thing. When it comes to Tawheed, the average person just needs to know Surah Ikhlaas, full-stop. Details behind why and how and arguments and logic, etc is not truly important. Allah made the Deen simple.

            There are some who, due to factors beyond their control, were not afforded the ability to develop their intellectual faculties. Surely you don’t expect them to know complexities such as this, do you?

          • Of course people are judged as per what is available to them mentally, physically, financially etc. I do not question that.

            Pardon me if I did not make my point clearly. The level of intellect presented in THIS article in terms of hadith authentication (which is the level presented quite commonly) can be understood by many, once explained to e.g. break in chain, unrealiable sources within the chain etc

          • Oh yes, you’re right. Then we agree 🙂

            Its sad that the average Muslim doesn’t know this stuff. There’s this notion that the first time ahadith were written as 200 years after the hijrah.

  6. I have concluded that Ahmadiyya theology has relied on the books of MGAQ when it comes to interpreting hadith work. MGAQ never had the ability to rigourously comb through hadith and develop his teachings as such. If he ever did, he would have needed to throw out 90% of them.

    Growing up as an Ahmadi, I never heard of any murrabbi who worked in the sciences of interpretting hadith. All Ahmadi murrabbis have a script of beliefs that they live by. They are then being trained to follow a particular script.

    A few years ago, I showed my dad Sahih Bukhari. He commented that he had never even seen the book before.

  7. I am from “awaam” – a layman on Hadith science – but I know one simple thing Ahmadis use Hadith or even a verse of Quran only to justify falsehood of their nabi’s Nabuwwat – and to do that they have to distort the image of Muslim Ulemas – let their Source of Chanda cult followers believe Muslims are worst creature on earth – strayed – and fully qualified for divine wrath – and Ahmadiyya cult is the best option for Chanda payers – to ensure them success in this world and by buying a Moussi package – a reserved place in Jannah – a fellowship of Mirza Kazab & Khalifa Zani

    Ahmadis deserve to be fooled by Murabbis – who even themselves are conscious of their “false scholarly work” – but doing it for money as job requirement.

    Great Article and great debate. Should continue such noble work for noble cause. May ALLAH and HIS Rasool Muhammad (saaw) be very pleased with you . Amen!

  8. FOUND

    Most simple point for you is:

    even if we agree with the Ahmadiyya interpretation how do they conclude does it not fall upon the murabbis as well???

    Coz there is no distinction plus it say Islam will be left by name but u Ahmadis say Islam in purest form is around.

    so Ahmadiyya Jammat get trapped in there own argument 🙂

    • yah, once someone said to me a time will come when the worst people under the sun are the ‘Ulema. I said then Mirza Masroor is the worst creature under the sun.
      He smiled uncomfortably 🙂

      Ulema is the plural of ‘Alim. An ‘Alim means one recognizes ‘Alaam (signs) – in this case, the signs of God which are the ayaat of the Qur’an and world

    • Please apply the same courtesy to our arguments as you give to your own beliefs. These two ahadith indicate a specific time. A time that necessitates the arrival of the Messiah. Have you no concept of your own awaited Messiah?

      • We believe about Return of ESA(AS)
        but as explained by Waqar we dont believe in this narration like ahmadis do… coz the way ahmadis believe it . they them self falls under there interpretation.

        May ALLAH guide us all

      • There are two factors that differentiate Islam from Ahmadiyya here:

        A) We use authentic ahadith for our “major” beliefs.
        Now, there are certainly some things that Muslims believe that are based on hasan or weak ahadith, no doubt. But those things are not core creedal aspects or even really important. For example, if someone does not believe in a particular sign of the Day of Judgment, he is no less a Muslim.

        B) Islamic beliefs are based upon the consensus of correct opinion dating back to the Prophet Muhammad صلى الله عليه و سلم.. Our beliefs aren’t new. Ahmadiyya’s beliefs are only 100 years old, dating back to Mirza. He was the genesis of the Ahmadiyya-specific beliefs.

        Those are pretty big differences.

        • What “major” beliefs do you think an Ahmadi holds which makes him/her less of a Muslim?
          Do you spend an equal amount of effort to persuade a man who ignores a few pillars of Islam (e.g. Salat, Saum) and rejects Mirza Ghulam Ahmad (as), as you do on a man who strives for all five pillars and accepts Mirza Ghulam Ahmad (as)? In short, what ‘differences’ are acceptable to you?

          That is not a rhetorical question. I would like to know. If your answer is that a person’s concept of Khataman Nabiyeen is the most defining aspect of a Muslim, please say so.

  9. I am not a scholar nor do i procalim to be one, but it does not even have to go that far for the lament. If you read mirza ghulam’s books, his talks etc you will logically deduce that this man was not wanting be Islamic. He wanted more than that. How can a man claim to be Allah!!! Please qadianis, there is no ahdaith nor anything in Quraan(yours or anyone else’s) that justifies that level of absurdity!

Comments are closed.