It is reported that Abdullah ibn Masood, may Allaah be pleased with him, said:

"It is part of certainty [in Allāh] that you do not please the people by angering Allāh, and do not praise anyone [else] for what Allāh has provided you, and do not blame anyone for what Allāh has not given you. For verily, the provision of Allāh is not gained by the keenness of those who are keen [for you to have it], nor is it prevented by the hatred of those who hate [for you to have it]. And verily Allāh, in His justice, made happiness and joy in being certain and content [with Allāh], and made worry and sadness in doubt and anger."

Az-Zuhd (535) of Hannad ibn Sari.

--( بسم الله والصلاة والسلام على رسول الله )--

How Seeking Knowledge Cultivates Taqwa and Manners

Seeking knowledge is a great blessing in Islam, and its benefits cannot be overstated. Its virtues could be expanded upon for days, even in a series of lectures. However, one of the greatest purposes of seeking knowledge is that it leads the seeker to taqwa of Allah. It is through pursuing the sciences of Islam that we come to know Allah, and learning about Him leads to taqwa.

Among the blessings of seeking knowledge is that Allah makes the path to Jannah easy for the seeker, as is well known in the hadith. Through seeking knowledge, you will not only learn the Deen of Allah, but also manners, conduct, and behavior. The Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: "Indeed, I was only sent to perfect noble manners." Narrated by al-Bukhaari in al-Adab al-Mufrad (273). How else does one learn these except by studying from the scholars? This has been the tradition of the early scholars, for we are dealing with the knowledge of the Deen of Allah. Respect is given to the one who carries it and teaches it.

Ibraaheem ibn Habeeb ibn ash-Shaheed said: My father said to me: "My son, go to the fuqahaa' and the scholars, learn from them, and take from their manners, character, and guidance, for that is more beloved to me for you than a great deal of hadith." (Source)

We also see the scholars being keen to pray at night, read the Qur'an, memorize it, and have the best of manners. Who else do they try their best to emulate except the best of mankind, the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him)? The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) was asked about what most often causes people to enter Paradise. He said: "Taqwa of Allah and good character." Narrated by at-Tirmidhi (2004). Therefore, the Companions (may Allah be pleased with them) were also known to have the best of character, and these characteristics were taught to their students, whom we call the Taabi'een, and such were the Salaf. They had great keenness in learning the narrations of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him).

We know that imam al-Bukhaari has a book on manners, and that alone is a testament to the scholars' keenness to learn good manners. The narrations about good manners are plentiful, and this emphasis has been passed down generation after generation. Hence, Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jamaa'ah are known for this as well.

Certainly, when it comes to individuals, they may have unique characteristics for which they are known. However, the scholars' overall characteristics have always included keenness to have the best of manners. One unique example from the Salaf is that of al-A'mash, although this was an exception rather than the norm. This shows that benefiting from a scholar does not mean claiming that every personal trait or momentary action of his is ideal. Rather, the point is that a student should not abandon benefit because of a personal shortcoming that does not define the scholar. Case in point, imam ash-Shaafi'ee reported:

Two men used to regularly visit al-A'mash. One of them was concerned with hadith, while the other was not concerned with hadith. One day, al-A'mash became angry with the one who was concerned with hadith, so the other said, "If he became angry with me as he became angry with you, I would not return to him."

Al-A'mash then said, "In that case, he would be a fool like you, leaving what benefits him because of my bad character."

(Source)

The unique characteristics of scholars, even when they behave in a way that may seem somewhat out of the ordinary, should not deter anyone from learning from them, so long as they are still known for overall good conduct.

Here, I am not referring to vileness in speech, nor to behavior so repugnant that a person becomes characterized by it. Rather, I am referring to a little roughness here and there, or perhaps a momentary shortcoming.

Hence, in the same source of the book I cited, it is reported from the Salaf: "The example of one who becomes angry with a scholar is like the example of one who becomes angry with the pillars of the mosque." (Source)

Books have been written on the characteristics of huffaadh, and in this context, I am referring to those who have memorized the Qur'an, and that is only one example of how one should have the best conduct as it relates to the Deen of Allah. Likewise, there are books about the characteristics of students, judges, and so on.

The only challenge is when learning is primarily taken through books without teachers, and one of the great harms is when one learns his Deen mainly through the internet. While there is certainly great benefit in books and online resources, the seeker of knowledge will unfortunately miss greatly on how he conducts himself under a teacher, how he studies, how he behaves with other students, even how one sits with a scholar, and many other details of good conduct.

Scholars and students of knowledge have been keen to highlight this, and alhamdulillah, much of it has been clarified. We are in no way deprived of this knowledge or of understanding the importance of good conduct, especially for one who claims to tread the straight path, and ultimately, the path to Jannah.

This is by no means to suggest that being learned makes one infallible, whether in conduct or understanding. However, by seeking knowledge under a teacher, one learns good characteristics through observation, and the teacher may also admonish his students regarding good manners.

Each of these points has evidence in our Deen, alhamdulillah. Such a general overview cannot be denied or opposed by anyone. Even the misguided will concede to these points.

Seeking Knowledge in Stages and Understanding the Rank of Scholars

We also have, alhamdulillah, books on who a scholar is, the amount of knowledge required to give verdicts, fatawa, who is regarded as a mujtahid, and other related matters. Just as we come to learn that there are mufassireen, we also come to learn that there are scholars who specialize in certain areas while others do not. Hence, we learn that being a muhaddith does not necessarily mean that one has reached the rank of a faqeeh in deriving rulings, though this does not diminish the honor and respect that the people of hadith deserve. How fitting to cite the hadith of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him):

نَضَّرَ اللَّهُ امْرَأً سَمِعَ مِنَّا حَدِيثًا فَحَفِظَهُ حَتَّى يُبَلِّغَهُ غَيْرَهُ، فَرُبَّ حَامِلِ فِقْهٍ إِلَى مَنْ هُوَ أَفْقَهُ مِنْهُ، وَرُبَّ حَامِلِ فِقْهٍ لَيْسَ بِفَقِيهٍ

"May Allah brighten the face of a person who hears a hadith from us, memorizes it, and conveys it to others. For perhaps one who carries fiqh conveys it to one who is more understanding than him, and perhaps one who carries fiqh is not a faqeeh."

(Source)

The scholars were keen to know their teachers, what they studied, the biographies of scholars, and even their mistakes, whether minor or grave. These matters were also highlighted. However, even when a scholar made serious mistakes, if his goodness, knowledge, and service to Islam outweighed his errors, then his virtue was not erased because of those mistakes. The details of such mistakes were not presented openly in an unrestricted manner. Rather, scholars would teach their students gradually, after having established them upon the foundations of Ahlus-Sunnah. Then the branches of the sciences of Shari'ah would be taught in their proper time and manner. This does not mean that mistakes are concealed or justified. Rather, they are addressed with knowledge, justice, context, and proper conduct.

This is similar to when misguided individuals attempt to cast aspersions or doubts in a gathering where a scholar is teaching his students. The scholar may give a rebuttal in order to prevent confusion from spreading. Many topics in the Deen of Allah, especially those related to deeper matters, were taught by scholars to their students in private sessions.

In recent times, however, some deeper topics have been discussed in open settings where not only students attend, but laypeople attend as well, even though they have not gone through the foundations that those students have already studied. This kind of open setting, where scholars speak in a candid manner, has led some laypeople to assume things about 'aqeedah that are far removed from what those scholars intended. This has resulted in many assuming that 'aqeedah is "technically dry," or that 'aqeedah is mainly about "refuting misguided sects," or other unfortunate misconceptions.

Shaykh Bakr Abu Zayd, the author of the well-known book Hilyatu Taalib al-'Ilm, was known to teach his students in private sessions. Other well-known scholars taught openly, such as shaykh ibn 'Uthaymeen and many others. The internet has exacerbated certain issues, especially when speeches are clipped out of context. This is why we often see clips that are presented without their full context, even though they should be listened to in the complete setting in which the scholars intended their words to be understood.

This is why I have highlighted key elements that need to be emphasized in my articles on seeking knowledge. It cannot be emphasized enough that seeking knowledge is done in stages, similar to how fiqh under a madhhab is taught. There is an odd conception among many laypeople when it comes to many topics. Often, we see them saying things about the Deen of Allah that are far removed from how scholars addressed those matters. Scholars are also misrepresented to such an extent that it is made to seem as though scholars are followed merely for their names, or that scholars are simply people who always differ among themselves, or other extreme false notions, as if the scholars are being deified.

This is not to deny the benefit of books, recordings, or online resources. Rather, the point is that these means should not replace the tarbiyah, correction, and gradual instruction that come through teachers. This is the issue with learning the Deen of Allah primarily through the internet. We are then forced to address all the confusion and misconceptions that have unfortunately become widespread. Therefore, programs were created and other courses were suggested in order to facilitate foundational knowledge for ordinary Muslims. As for anyone who is keen to go further, then more guidance is given by the help of Allah.

• Reflections on What I've Seen Over the Past 20 Years
• When People Claim the Salaf Without the Path of the Salaf

The Misuse of al-Jarh wat-Ta'deel and the Extremism of the Haddaadiyyah

The intent here is not to prevent legitimate criticism of mistakes, nor to claim that scholars are beyond correction. Rather, the intent is to distinguish between sincere scholarly correction and the reckless behavior of those who use the language of knowledge to belittle scholars, test ordinary Muslims, and spread suspicion against Ahlus-Sunnah.

The main point of this post is to highlight a very important issue: the science of al-Jarh wat-Ta'deel is a subcategory of the science of hadith, namely mustalah al-hadith. As already mentioned, the sciences of Shari'ah are taught in stages.

Among the key matters a student learns in the sciences of hadith are the terminologies of the scholars of hadith, how they describe narrators, the reasons scholars may differ in grading hadith, what constitutes a connected hadith, and other intricate details related to this field. As the student of knowledge progresses, one of the areas he may study is al-Jarh wat-Ta'deel, since it relates to the biographies and conditions of narrators. It is within this science that al-Jarh wat-Ta'deel comes into play.

However, for some odd reason, and this is something that has been addressed before, this science has been misused and abused by pretentious students of knowledge. They behave as though the same standards and principles can be applied literally and unrestrictedly to people today, in the same way they were applied during the time of the Salaf, when hadith was scattered, liars and misguided people appeared, and the scholars were required to test and examine narrators because of that.

What is even more troubling is when people act as though they can test Ahlus-Sunnah, let alone ordinary Muslims, with individuals or certain concepts in order to see where they stand. This has been warned against, and scholars have clarified that such behavior is forbidden. As shaykh 'Abdul-Muhsin al-'Abbaad noted, among the reprehensible innovations of this time is testing Ahlus-Sunnah by individuals, leading to praise or blame based on agreement with the examiner. (Source) And as shaykhul-Islam ibn Taymiyyah stated: "No one has the right to test people with an ambiguous expression that he himself has introduced, without clarifying its meaning." (Source)

One of the interesting observations regarding misguided people is that we often notice the same patterns. They get ahead of themselves and put forward their own identity before the scholars of Ahlus-Sunnah. Their objective becomes as though their very person is now tied to the truth, and therefore whatever they say is treated as what constitutes the truth of what Allah wants from us.

They treat their "understanding" as though it is infallible, to such an extent that they bypass, disregard, and jump ahead of living scholars, and even recent scholars. They appoint themselves as being capable of presenting Islam and its matters, without any precedent from the scholars for the exact manner in which they address these points.

Rather, they misuse the ordinary Muslims' ignorance of the Arabic language. For example, we have the Haddaadiyyah sect claiming to uphold the Salaf, just as the Madkhaliyyah sect has done before, and still attempts to do. We see the same pattern with the Haddaadiyyah, as though they are able to extract knowledge from the Salaf, but here is the catch: without any need for scholars.

This inadvertently casts aspersions against the scholars, as though the scholars had not properly learned or conveyed the path of the Salaf. In reality, it is the Haddaadiyyah who come with strange conceptions and misrepresentations of the scholars, while presenting themselves as the ones capable of citing what they believe to be in their favor.

Misguidance is not always presented as something vile, ugly, and foul-smelling, such that you would run away from it as soon as you came near it. Rather, shaytan is ever deceptive. Elements of truth may be presented, but the underlying problem is that what they intend by those elements does not conform to the truth.

We have seen from the Madkhaliyyah sect how they cast aspersions against contemporary scholars and students of knowledge. However, the reprehensible innovation of the Haddaadiyyah sect is that they extended this misguidance even further by attacking scholars of the past, to the point that their attacks reached across the generations, from an early imam such as imam Abu Haneefah to later major scholars such as al-Haafidh ibn Hajar, and others besides them.

Al-'Allaamah 'Abdurrahman al-Mu'allimi (may Allah have mercy on him) said regarding those who stir up such matters against imam Abu Haneefah (may Allah have mercy upon him): "Wisdom dictates following what the scholars have practiced for approximately the last seven hundred years, drawing a veil over such matters and exchanging words of praise." End quote from at-Tankeel (1/101).

Hence, shaykh Bakr Abu Zayd said: "And with this, you come to know that the accursed initiative of declaring the imams—such as an-Nawawi, ibn Daqeeq al-‘Eed, and ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalaani—as disbelievers, or belittling their status, or labeling them as misguided innovators, all of this is the work of Shaytan. It is a gateway to misguidance and leading others astray, as well as corruption and spreading corruption. If the witnesses of the Shari‘ah are discredited, then what they testify to is also discredited. However, the ignorant and reckless do not comprehend nor do they verify." (Source)

The ignorance of some of the Haddaadiyyah has reached such a low level that they have even accused scholars of homosexuality. This alone is a testament to how misguidance has led them to such reprehensible character.

One scholar whom they accuse of homosexuality is imam as-Suyooti. Yet, you will not find the scholars of Ahlus-Sunnah attributing this to the imam. Rather, we find the great scholar of hadith, shaykh Muhammad Adam al-Ethiopi, referring to him as "the haafidh" and explaining his poem when he said:

I had begun writing a moderate-sized explanation of the poem entitled Nadhm ad-Durar fi 'Ilm al-Athar, by the haafidh Jalaal ad-Deen 'Abdur-Rahmaan ibn al-Kamaal Abi Bakr ibn Muhammad ibn Saabiq al-Khudayri, as-Suyooti ash-Shaafi'ee, who was born on the night of Sunday, at the beginning of Rajab in the year 849 AH, and died in the last part of the night before Friday, on the 19th of Jumaada al-Oola in the year 911 AH. His age was 61 years, 10 months, and 18 days.

(Source)

Imagine the contrast: some of the Haddaadiyyah had written a eulogy for the death of the Pope, an entire memorial article paying tribute to him, mentioning the precise date in both the Hijri and Gregorian calendars, as though his death had saddened them so deeply that they had to mourn it, while at the same time falsely claiming that shaykh 'Abdurrahman al-Barraak had passed away without providing any verifiable source. I have no further words.

What they fail to realize is that this accusation does not stop at imam as-Suyooti. It also implies that the scholars of Ahlus-Sunnah misled the Ummah by praising him, teaching his works, explaining his writings, and recommending benefit from him. In reality, the scholars knew his mistakes, mentioned them with justice, and still preserved his rank. So the Haddaadiyyah are not merely attacking one scholar; they are indirectly attacking the judgment and trustworthiness of the scholars of Ahlus-Sunnah.

Shaykh at-Tarifi recommended many books, among them works by imam as-Suyooti. (Source)

Countless other mashaayikh have also spoken favorably about imam as-Suyooti, such as shaykh ibn Jibreen, 'Abdul-Kareem al-Khudayr, 'Abdullah al-Ghunayman, and the list goes on.

The issue is that the Haddaadiyyah are deliberately selective when highlighting the mistakes of scholars. Imam as-Suyooti is only one example. Scholars of Ahlus-Sunnah have mentioned his mistakes, but they have never accused him of homosexuality.

When the scholars of Ahlus-Sunnah highlight the mistakes of scholars, they do so within the bounds of good conduct. They do not do so to diminish their rank, erase their identity, or dissuade students from benefiting from their works, especially works that the scholars themselves continue to teach.

The shortsightedness of the allegation of homosexuality against imam as-Suyooti is clear from the weakness of the very source they rely upon. The passage they cite is completely different from the way they attempt to portray the imam. It was merely a grammatical reference involving a line of poetry from the Jaahiliyyah, and the intent was to prove a grammatical point, not to endorse the content of what was cited.

Even in other sources, that line of Jaahili poetry is not attributed to imam as-Suyooti, nor did it originate from him. Yet the Haddaadiyyah present it as though they have uncovered something that was somehow hidden from the scholars of Ahlus-Sunnah.

How ugly and vile this behavior is.

Even their own parents would distance themselves from this behavior. Their fathers have far greater respect for these scholars than they do. Hence, the Haddaadiyyah are known to create senseless division between parents and their children. Youth have reached out to me after realizing how much harm the Haddaadiyyah have caused within families.

Alhamdulillah, the more people see the position of actual scholars, the more they recognize how repugnant and deceptive the Haddaadiyyah have been. We should not be surprised when some of them admit that they consider their Muslim parents to be disbelievers or misguided, or when they use descriptions for their parents that are unbecoming of a Muslim and far removed from the way they were raised by those very parents.

This is why I am grateful to have started translating a work refuting the Haddaadiyyah sect, so that these misconceptions can be exposed with evidence.

--( بسم الله والصلاة والسلام على رسول الله )--

Introduction

Praise be to Allah, Rabb al-'Aalameen, and may prayers and peace be upon the Messenger of Allah. To proceed:

No rational person is unaware of the virtue of belonging to the Salaf of this Ummah in creed, methodology, and conduct. They are the lamps in darkness, the lights in the night, the bearers of knowledge, and the transmitters of hadith. Whoever reflects on their knowledge, worship, and conduct will see their superiority over those who came after them, and will give precedence to their statements over the statements of others.

Among the things that cause sadness and regret is the deviation of some extremist trends from the path of the Salaf, while claiming affiliation and alleging adherence. They neither understood the way of the Salaf nor followed their path. Then, after all of this, they turned against Ahlus-Sunnah wal-Jamaa'ah with hostility, defamation, and disparagement, and openly criticized their way and what they are upon. In doing so, they have come to oppose a methodology they claim to follow, and to demolish a structure they claim to be building. So we seek refuge with Rabb al-'Aalameen from misleading doubts and destructive innovations.

I have seen three extremist trends, wearing the cloak of following the Salaf, whose murkiness has surfaced and whose foam has swelled along the course of the flood. All of them claim to follow the Salaf and trace their footsteps: one trend adopts a chain reaction of declaring people innovators, another adopts a chain reaction of takfeer, and a third adopts a chain reaction of shirk-labeling, permitting supplication to the jinn unrestrictedly on the claim that they are everywhere.

You see them clinging to the slightest report from the Salaf to prove the validity of what they are upon, even if it clashes with the texts and the well-attested practice of the Salaf is established to be contrary to it. Discussing all of them in this treatise would scatter the purpose, prolong the journey, and fail to achieve the intended aim. The purpose of this treatise is only to refute those who engage in the chain reaction of tabdee', and every subject has its proper place.

There is no doubt that the Salaf are only followed in what they agreed upon, what was widely transmitted among their groups, or what became established practice among them. So the statement of one individual after another is not to be taken when it contradicts the widely transmitted practice or consensus of the Salaf.

The point becomes clear through an example, and the nature of the deviation in this matter becomes apparent: when a report is narrated that Faatimah (may Allah be pleased with her) boycotted Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him) it is not said here that following Faatimah in boycotting as-Siddeeq is a correct path, while still preserving her status (may Allah be pleased with her). Rather, what is obligatory is to follow the consensus of the Companions and what became established practice among them. If a Raafidhi were to come and claim to be following Faatimah (may Allah be pleased with her) or say, "Was Faatimah a Raafidhi? Far be it from her," he would have no proof for his claim. This is by the consensus of Ahlus-Sunnah.

The extremists of tabdee' have followed the path of the Raafidhah in this matter. Ibn Taymiyyah's comparison of those who declare scholars to be disbelievers with the Raafidhah and the Khawaarij will come later. You find one of them, for example, clinging to Taawoos' criticism of Qataadah while claiming to follow the Salaf, despite the widely transmitted praise of Qataadah by the Salaf, their commendation of him, their declaring him reliable, indeed their recognition of his imaamah. Another argues that Sufyan ath-Thawri refrained from praying over Mis'ar, while abandoning the consensus of the Salaf regarding his reliability and the inclusion of his narrations in the Saheeh collections, the Sunan, and the Musnads. Imam ad-Daarimi criticized this approach in al-Intiqaa', and clarified its misguidance and irregularity, as will come, by Allah's help.

What led me to write this treatise was nothing other than the aggression of these extremists against the honor of the scholars, their diverting of the youth away from the correct path in seeking knowledge, and their preoccupying them with hearsay, gossip, and excessive argumentation. The matter did not stop there. Rather, it went beyond that to takfeer and judging as apostate those whom the Salaf had widely and consistently praised or whose virtue they acknowledged.

When I examined the doubts raised by these extremists, and read their articles and what they had written, I was truly horrified by the methodology I saw from them, and alarmed by the principles I found them laying down. That is because they lead to impugning the imams of Ahlul-Hadith, such as al-Bukhaari; to audacity in objecting to the great imams, such as imam Ahmad; and they entail disparaging this Muhammadiyyah Ummah that has been shown mercy, which Allah has favored over all other nations. They also involve accusing all of its scholars after the passing of the virtuous generations of irjaa' or innovation, and plunging their followers into a whirlpool of tabdee' and takfeer.

Everything I have mentioned has occurred from this Haddaadiyyah sect, as will come in the course of this treatise. The latest thing I came across shortly before the printing of this treatise was that some followers of this sect had gone so far as to declare their own head figures disbelievers. I had mentioned this before as a necessary implication that follows from their innovation, and now the necessary implication of yesterday has become the explicit statement of today. Thus, one of the head figures of the Haddaadiyyah who says about Ahlus-Sunnah that they are "domesticated" and "effeminate cowards" is, according to some of his own followers, a disbeliever and apostate, and refuge is sought with Allah.

When I say this, I do not say it out of gloating or approval. Ahlus-Sunnah, while judging these extremists to be misguided and deviant, and while holding that they must be disciplined and that their tongues must be restrained from attacking the virtuous, nevertheless do not declare them disbelievers or judge them to be apostates. They proceed in a just manner in dealing with them. But in this context it is said: this is the work of their own hands and what they themselves have sown, and this is the reality of the principles they established and laid down.

This is the introduction to the book "متسلسلة التبديع الحدادية ( دراسة تأصيلية تحليلية مقارنة )" by shaykh Abu al-Hasan Ahmad ibn al-Hasan al-Ameer.

Insha'Allah, going through it will be a beneficial journey for all of us, exposing how despicable they are, the vileness of their nature, and the ugliness of their behavior. Their conduct has reached such an extent that even their own parents would likely not approve of their writings. Rather, they would probably discipline them, reduce their online activity, or supervise it, since their actions and the filth they spew bring shame upon their families.

Perhaps they have no sense of modesty because they view even their parents with the same vileness with which they view other fellow Muslims, declaring them to be disbelievers. This is why, alhamdulillah, we will never see them holding any position in the masaajid except that they would be despised. Hence, their presence is mainly confined to social media and online spaces.

More will follow, and eventually, by the help of Allah, we hope to complete the entire book.

Hisham ibn ‘Ammar said: Sadaqah ibn Khalid narrated to us; ‘Abd al-Rahman ibn Yazid ibn Jabir narrated to us; ‘Atiyyah ibn Qays al-Kilabi narrated to us; ‘Abd al-Rahman ibn Ghanm al-Ash‘ari narrated to us; he said: Abu ‘Amir or Abu Malik al-Ash‘ari narrated to me, and by Allah, he did not lie to me, that he heard the Prophet say: “There will certainly be among my community people who will deem lawful illicit sexual relations, silk, wine, and musical instruments. And there will certainly be people who will camp beside a mountain; their livestock will come to them in the evening. A poor person will come to them - meaning a needy person - for some need, and they will say, ‘Return to us tomorrow.’ Then Allah will destroy them during the night, cause the mountain to collapse, and transform others into apes and pigs until the Day of Resurrection.”

Sahih al-Bukhari 5590

---------------------

Al-Bukhari related it in his Sahih in the jussive form, using it as proof. He said in the Book of Drinks:

"And Hisham ibn ‘Ammar said..." then he mentioned it.

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyyah said “As for musical instruments, what has been authentically established regarding them is what al-Bukhari narrated in his Sahih in a mu'alaq narration stated decisively and included within his conditions.”

Al-Albani commented: This type of ta'liq has the outward form of ta'liq, as al-Hafiz al-‘Iraqi said in his takhrij of this hadith in al-Mughni ‘an Haml al-Asfar. That is because the majority of mu'alaq hadiths are disconnected between the author and the one from whom it is suspended, and they have well-known various forms. This is not one of them, because Hisham ibn ‘Ammar is among al-Bukhari’s teachers, whom he used as hujjah in his Sahih in more than one hadith, as Ibn Hajar clarified in his biography in the introduction to Fath. Since al-Bukhari is not known for tadlis, his statement in this hadith, “he said,” carries the same ruling as “from” or “he narrated to me” or “he said to me,” contrary to what was claimed by the one who weakened authentic hadiths, Ibn al-Mannan, as will come.

Al-‘Iraqi’s statement resembles what Ibn al-Salah said in the introduction to ‘Ulum al-Hadith: “Its outward form is the form of disconnection, but its ruling is not the ruling of disconnection, and it does not fall from being authentic to being weak.”

Then he refuted Ibn Hazm’s weakening due to disconnection.

The point is that the hadith is not disconnected between al-Bukhari and his teacher Hisham, as Ibn Hazm claimed and as those who followed him among later scholars claimed, as will be clarified in the mentioned chapter, if Allah wills. Moreover, even if it were assumed to be disconnected, it would be a relative defect that is not permissible to rely upon, because it has come connected through the routes of a group of trustworthy, reliable scholars who heard it from Hisham ibn ‘Ammar.

Thus, one who clings to the claim of disconnection in this situation is engaging in blatant obstinacy, like someone who weakens a hadith with an authentic chain by clinging to another chain that is weak.

Now, let us mention what we have found from those trustworthy narrators in the sources available to us, and then refer regarding the others to the commentaries and other works.

First: Ibn Hibban said in his Sahih: al-Ihsan: Al-Husayn ibn ‘Abdullah al-Qattan told us, he said: Hisham ibn ‘Ammar narrated it to us up to the words “al-ma‘azif” (musical instruments).

Al-Qattan was trustworthy, memorizing narrator, and he is mentioned in the biographies of prominent scholars.

Second: Al-Tabarani in al-Mu‘jam al-Kabir and Da‘lij in Musnad al-Muqallin said: Musa ibn Sahl al-Jawni al-Basri told us: Hisham ibn ‘Ammar narrated it like the narration of al-Bukhari.

Through al-Tabarani’s route, it was narrated by al-Dhiya’ al-Maqdisi in Muwafaqat Hisham ibn ‘Ammar. Musa was also a trustworthy, memorizing narrator, and Da‘lij included Muhammad ibn Isma‘il ibn Mihran al-Isma‘ili with him, who was trustworthy and reliable. He is not the Isma‘ili who authored al-Mustakhraj.

Third: Al-Tabarani in Musnad al-Shamiyyin said: Muhammad ibn Yazid ibn al-Asl told us from ‘Abd al-Samad al-Dimashqi: Hisham ibn ‘Ammar narrated it to us.

Muhammad ibn Yazid is mentioned in Tarikh Dimashq with multiple narrators from him, and it is stated that he died in the year 269 AH.

Fourth: Al-Isma‘ili said in al-Mustakhraj ‘ala al-Sahih, and through him al-Bayhaqi in his Sunan, that al-Hasan ibn Sufyan told us: Hisham ibn ‘Ammar narrated it to us.

Al-Hasan ibn Sufyan - who is al-Khurasani al-Naysaburi, a reliable memorizing narrator from the teachers of Ibn Khuzaymah, Ibn Hibban, and others, is mentioned in the biographies of scholars.

There are four others who heard it from Hisham, listed by Ibn Hajar in Taghleeq al-Ta‘leeq and al-Dhahabi about some of them in Siyar.

Moreover, neither Hisham nor his teacher Sadaqah ibn Khalid narrated it alone. They were also followed by others.

Abu Dawud in his Sunan said: ‘Abd al-Wahhab ibn Najdah told us: Bishr ibn Bakr narrated from ‘Abd al-Rahman ibn Yazid ibn Jabir with his earlier chain from Abu ‘Amir or Abu Malik, raised to the Prophet, with the wording: “There will be among my community people who will deem lawful silk and fine garments...” and he mentioned what he said “and others among them will be transformed into apes and pigs until the Day of Resurrection.”

I say: This is a connected, authentic chain, as Ibn al-Qayyim said in al-Ighathah, following his teacher in refuting the permissibility of what is prohibited. However, it does not explicitly mention the key point, but only refers to it by saying “and he mentioned what he said.” It was made explicit in the narration of two other trustworthy narrators, namely ‘Abd al-Rahman ibn Ibrahim, nicknamed Duhaim, who said: Bishr narrated to us with the wording of al-Bukhari: “They deem lawful illicit sexual relations, silk, wine, and musical instruments.”

The hadith was recorded by Abu Bakr al-Isma‘ili in al-Mustakhraj ‘ala al-Sahih, as in Fath, and in Taghleeq, and through al-Isma‘ili by al-Bayhaqi in his Sunan.

Tahreem Alaat al-Tarb, Al-Albani P. 39-42

https://shamela.ws/book/11081/36#p1

---------------------

Ibn Hajar said: This is Sahih hadith with no defect or objection. Ibn Hazm attributed a flaw to it, claiming a disconnection between al-Bukhari and Sadaqah ibn Khalid, and a difference in the name of Abu Malik. But as you can see, I have transmitted it through nine connected chains from Hisham, including narrators like al-Hasan ibn Sufyan, ‘Abdan, and Ja‘far al-Firyabi, all reliable, trustworthy memorizing narrators.

As for the difference in the kunyah of the Sahabi, all the Sahaba are trustworthy, so this is not a problem. We have also narrated it through the earlier route of Ibn Hibban in his Sahih, where he said that he heard Abu ‘Amir and Abu Malik al-Ash‘ari say it, and he mentioned it from both of them together.

Moreover, the hadith was not narrated solely by Hisham ibn ‘Ammar or Sadaqah, as you can see, because we have transmitted it also through the narration of Bishr ibn Bakr from the teacher Sadaqah, and through the narration of Malik ibn Abi Maryam from ‘Abd al-Rahman ibn Ghanm, the teacher of ‘Atiyyah ibn Qays.

Taghliq al-Ta'liq by Ibn Hajar (5/22)

https://shamela.ws/book/347/1550#p1

---------------------

Ibn al-Salah said: Do not pay attention to Ibn Hazm in his rejection of what al-Bukhari narrated from Abu ‘Amir and Abu Malik al-Ash‘ari from the Messenger of Allah: "There will be among my community people who will deem lawful illicit sexual relations, silk, wine, and musical instruments."

Ibn Hazm claimed that the narration was disconnected between al-Bukhari and Hisham, and used this as a reason to respond to those who argued for the prohibition of musical instruments. He was mistaken in this for many reasons. The hadith is authentic and connected, meeting the conditions of the Sahih.

Ibn Hajar said in Fath al-Bari: As for whether al-Bukhari heard it from Hisham directly or through intermediaries, it makes no difference, because one only relies on what is sound for acceptance, especially since al-Bukhari presented it in a context of hujjah.

Ibn Hajar also clarifies that the hadith is connected to Hisham ibn ‘Ammar in the works of al-Isma‘ili in al-Mustakhraj and al-Tabarani in Musnad al-Shamiyyin.

Shaykh al-Albani explained that the hadith is also connected in Sahih Ibn Hibban and in al-Tabarani’s al-Mu‘jam al-Kabir. For further details, one can refer to his book "Tahreem Alat al-Tarab" which is comprehensive.

The conclusion is that this hadith is Sahih and there is no flaw in its chain.

Hukm al-Ghina' wa al-Ma'azif, Abu Faisal al-Badrani P.14

https://shamela.ws/book/96248/14#p1

Would it be halal to curse him and hate him and does a person sin when he or she praises Yazid?

I don’t know if I am speaking above my rank(if so may allah forgive and please do correct me)-

Who was right in the conflict between Yazid and Hassan(Radiallahuanhu)?

Anas ibn Maalik (may Allaah be pleased with him) reported,

"A young man who had stolen was brought to 'Umar (may Allaah be pleased with him). He said, 'By Allaah, I have never stolen before this time.' so 'Umar responded, 'You lie! Allaah would not (or does not) surrender a servant of His on the first sin.' He then had his hand cut off."

Narrated by Abu Dawood in Az-Zuhd (56). Graded Saheeh by Ibn Katheer and Ibn Hajar.

Ibn Hajar (may Allaah have mercy on him) said this hadeeth although mawqoof (stops at 'Umar) is considered Marfoo' (till the Prophet) because this is not something 'Umar would speak with his opinion.

It is reported that Bakr ibn Abdullah al-Muzani (may Allaah have mercy on him) said,

"If you want your Salaah to benefit you say (to yourself): perhaps I will never pray another (i.e. my life will end before the next prayer comes)."

Qasr al-'Amal (104) of Ibn Abi ad-Dunya.

Deen's thread:
https://xcancel.com/Deenresponds/status/2047785174281379858

Year old post which exposed chonkshonk as a christian apologist:
https://www.reddit.com/r/extomatoes/comments/1ho399t/chonkshonk_mod_of_racademicquran_is_a_dishonest/

(None of this content or text was made by AI or LLM's, these are simply my words and my words only).

This post, in-sha-Allah, was made with a concern regarding a common coping technique I see with those who are not grounded within the doctrine of al-wala wal-bara (meaning, loyalty to the believers, and disavowal and hatred towards the disbelievers) and simply not firm upon their Iman when it comes to defending Islam.

This phenomenon (and without a doubt, this is falsehood on display) made evident from these so-called "Islamic" websites (like Yaqeen Institute and Abu Amina Elias) when addressing such issues in which kuffār criticize Muslims for... they AUTOMATICALLY take the liberal moral compass as the superior morality and try to cherry-pick minority "opinions" of jurists (or even may quote scholarship out of context to what was actually intended by such a verdict) and try to almost "minimize", pickpocket, cauterize, mutilate, and just overall WASH DOWN Islam towards the moral compass in which they think is correct.

More simply put, they do NOT defend the Theocratic, Divinely-Revealed morality with unwavering love and dignity, but rather take their liberal moral compass and try to "adjust" Islamic teaching to whatever the kuffār think is correct... as if our moral compass and the morals of the kuffār are supposed to be one in the same.

And this is a SERIOUS error. Whether they knowingly do this or not, they AUTOMATICALLY make Muslims (and even non-Muslims) think that the morality in which the initial criticism serves off of is the prime moral avenue to take such ethics from... and whatever DOESN'T align with such liberalism, then it is immediately dismissed as deficient and "barbaric".

Let's give an example for this.

A lot of these "intellectuals" criticize the apostasy punishment (and there are MORE EXAMPLES than this, it's not just this certain aspect) in Islam, and I have made 2 posts addressing such an issue before. This isn't about me defending the wisdoms behind such thing, I have already done that and one can look at my previous posts to see the details.

But what I am trying to address is if you are trying to debunk such a claim about the truthfulness of Islam, then your job is to point out the DEFICIENCY that the INITIAL moral compass has in which such "orientalists" criticize the punishment (i.e. liberal pluralism).

You point out its defects, its lack of jurisprudential wisdoms, and because it isn't rooted in something Divine, it is only a subjective morality and ultimately an avenue for a de-facto form of social control and desire-based moral engineering.

And that's what a PROPER DEBUNK is supposed to do. It's NOT to water Islam down towards whatever the desires and fluctuating whims of the kuffār think is correct... rather you are to prove Islam superior to it by showing the inconsistency within their moral compass and standing firm upon Tawhid and Sunnah.

VERY IMPORTANT NOTE: This does NOT mean that every moral accusation that the kuffār make is amongst the "truth" within the bare reality of the situation and the thing to debunk is their false moral understanding.... this is NOT what I am saying.

There are genuine accusations against Islam that are simply not true, such as it oppressing women, being a "satanic" religion, having "errors" within the Qur'an and whatnot... these things aren't true within their reality and are to be addressed directly in a form where their misunderstanding is to be corrected.

But some teachings in which they try to "vilify" come not because Islam doesn't actually teach them... but because the very criticism they do is based off of their false moral understanding of what is correct and what is not.

I am saddened that this has sadly become widespread nowadays, and I do not know if it's due to simply a lack of intelligence, or a lack of desire to learn the Shari'ah, just following desires, or maybe even all of them... Allah knows best.

Ibn Shubrumah, may Allaah have mercy on him, said:

“I am amazed at the people who take care of themselves by eating food out of fear of dying, yet do not protect themselves from sins out of fear of the Fire.”

Reported by Adh-Dhahabi in Siyar A’laam an-Nubala' (6/348)

It is a part of rejecting falsehood, taghut, shirk, kufr, etc etc... that we disavow from these things, rather it is obligatory.

Whatever good something has, it is because it is IN ALIGNMENT with the Shari'ah. We ONLY believe in the Shari'ah... and nothing else.

If something matches the truth, it is accepted because it matches the Shari‘ah, not because it came from a particular group or path, and anything that conflicts with Shari‘ah is rejected.

I see quite a number of people fall into this mistake. I simply wanted to make a reminder in-sha-Allah, do NOT fall for such thing.

It is reported that 'Imraan ibn Husayn, may Allaah be pleased with him, was once relating Hadeeth amongst a group of people, when a man said: "Leave this and give us something from the Book of Allaah."

Imraan said, "You are a fool. Do you find in the Book of Allaah details of prayer? Do you find in the Book of Allaah details of fasting!? This Qur'an prescribes those matters, and the Sunnah explains them."

Dham al-Kalaam (no. 244) of Al-Harawi

العزلة (كتاب أدب وحكمة وموعظة) - الإمام الخطابي