Re: Is this a lie upon Imam Bukhari r.e.h ?
How about the authenticity of the below statement on Muftisays.com ?
Imam Bukhari (RH) mentions that Muammal ibn Ismaeel (RH) is amongst the munkarul hadith (denounced hadith). (Aatharus Sunan Pg. 65, Chapter: Placing the hand on the chest).
May i know who is the author of the book "Aatharus Sunan" ?
Why is this not mentioned / considered by central mosque team ?
Re: Is this a lie upon Imam Bukhari r.e.h ?
Originally Posted by mohtashims
Brother,
As mentioned previously in post 13 that central-mosque article is a reproduction of Fiqh Al-Imam authroed by Mufti Abdur-Rahman Ibn Yusuf Mangera (HA) and our dear, respected and beloved Shaykh is the Imam at Masjid Quba (London).
I'la As-Sunnan is authored by the well known Indian Hadeeth Master Shaykh Allamah Zafar Ahmed Usmani (RA) who was the nephew of Shaykh (Maulana) Ashraf Ali Thanwi (RA) and this book was authored in the last 80 years.
Mufti Abdur-Rahman Ibn Yusuf Mangera (HA) summarised the view points of many older Scholars and it is not possible to list EVERY SINGLE OPINION in a few pages so he has summarised the opinion.
What matters is that it has been CONCLUSIVELY PROVEN that Imam Bukahri (RA) did consider Muammil lbn Ismail (RA) as Munkirul-Hadeeth.
Thats the bottom line! The thread was an enquiry if a lie has been made upon Ameerul-Mumineen Fil-Hadeeth Imam Bukhari (RA) and all praise be to Allah (SWT) that it has not been the case.
Re: Is this a lie upon Imam Bukhari r.e.h ?
Brother Mohstashims,
As mentioned the weakness of Mu'ammal from Imam al-Bukhari has been mentioned by many Scholars, by a good FIVE past Scholars. It could be that they possessed certain manuscripts of his work that had this Jarh, Wallahu A'lam, but it cannot be conclusively ruled out!
As for the statement from Mufti says, the Shaykh is merely reproducing what is in Athar al-Sunan not that he is saying Imam al-Bukhari authored Athar al-Sunan.
(The Author is al-'Allamah al-Nimawi and not al-'Allamah Zafar Ahmad 'Uthmani, Colonel Sahib made a mistake thinking it was I'la al-Sunan)
آثار السنن للنيموي
http://khizana.blogspot.co.uk/2008/0...-post_908.html
Another correction i would like to make (which maybe an unintentional typo by Colonel Sahib) it is Munkarul Hadith and not Munkirul Hadith. One is rejected in Hadith and the other is Rejecter of hadith, different meanings.
Wallahu A'lam
It is reported from Abu Umamah from the Prophet (Sallallahu 'Alayhi WaSallam) that he said:
اتَّقُوا فِرَاسَةَ الْمُؤْمِنِ ، فَإِنَّهُ يَنْظُرُ بِنُورِ اللَّهِ
" Fear the Insight of the Believer, for verily he sees with the Light of God"
رقم الحديث: 3362
المعجم الأوسط للطبراني
Re: Is this a lie upon Imam Bukhari r.e.h ?
Sh. Mahir al-Fahl's al-Jami` fi 'l-`Ilal wa 'l-Fawa'id:
http://archive.org/download/123456_161/123456_161.pdf
See Volume 3, p.162-167 for an interesting discussion about the "on the chest" hadith related by Mu'ammal b. Isma`il.
Re: Is this a lie upon Imam Bukhari r.e.h ?
Can you please extract and upload the concerned pages only for the sake of ease(translation and reading).
Re: Is this a lie upon Imam Bukhari r.e.h ?
10. Imam Bukhaari: “Munkir ul-Hadeeth” [Tahdheeb al-Kamaal: 18/526, Mizaan ul-I'tidaal: 4/228, Tahdheeb at-Tahdheeb: 10/381]
* In all the three books, this saying is mentioned without any chain and without any reference. Whereas on the contrary to it, Imam Bukhaari has mentioned Mu’ammal in Al-Taareekh al-Kabeer (Vol 8 Pg 49 T. 2107) and did not criticize him. Mu’ammal is also not mentioned in Kitaab ad-Du’afa of Imam Bukhaari, and the narrations of Mu’ammal are present in Saheeh Bukhaari, See: H. 2700, 2083 with Fath ul-Bari. Imam Mizzi said: “Imam Bukhaari has narrated from him as Istish-haad” [Tahdheeb al-Kamaal: 18/527] Haafidh Muhammad Taahir al-Maqdasi has written regarding a narrator that: “In fact He (Bukhari) has taken narrations from him in many places as Istish-haad to indicate that he is Siqah” This proves that Mu’ammal is Siqah according to Imam Bukhari, not Munkir ul-Hadeeth.
This could be true because just after Mu’ammal bin Isma’eel, in at-Tarikh al-Kabeer, Imam Bukhari listed Mu’ammal bin Sa’eed and declared him Munkar al-Hadith. It may be that some scholar mistakenly took it for Mu’ammal bin Isma’eel. However, on the other hand it also seems difficult because more than one scholars had attributed this to Bukhari, some have attributed the statement “Munkar al-Hadith” while some have attributed mere weakening without specifying any term. This includes the likes of Imam al-Mizzi, al-Dhahabi, al-Haythami, Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani and al-Buqa’i. It is necessary, before reaching to a conclusion, that different manuscript of Tarikh Kabeer and other books on Rijal by al-Bukhari should be analyzed carefully. WAllahu A’alam.
With regards to the claim of Shaykh Zai that Imam Bukhari has included his narrations in his “Saheeh” in support and hence he was Thiqah, this is again a false analogy. Imam Bukhari intentionally avoiding Mu’ammal and not taking him as hujjah, indicates that there was some reason for which he avoided him. Similarly Imam Muslim completely avoided him. Hafiz Abu Umar Ibn As-Salah said in his famous Muqaddimah on ‘ilmul hadeeth (pg.84), “Know that the narrations of those who is not Hujjah (as a narrator) and rather he is among weak narrators, is sometimes cited in case of Mutabi’ah and Shawahid. And in the book of Bukhari and Muslim there are several weak narrators cited as Mutabi’ah and Shawahid.”
Inclusion of some weak narrators in Ta’aaleeq of Saheeh is a fact which cannot be denied. The following are narrators in Ta’aleeq of Saheeh: 1. Ibrahim bin Isma’eel bin Mujamma’: Imam Bukhari said, “he was the person with a lot of doubts (Kathir al-Wahm)”. 2. Huraith bin Abi Matar: Bukhari said, “feehi nazr”. 3. Ubaidulla bin Sa’eed bin Muslim al-Ju’fi, Abu Muslim: Bukhari said,”feehi nazar”. 4. Umar Abu Salamah bin Abdur-Rahman: Bukhari said,”Sadooq, except that he was opposed (by scholars) in some of narrations”. 5. Imran bin Dawar: Bukhari, “truthful, he used to fall in doubts (yahim)”. 6. Mu’awiyah bin Abdul Kareem: Ibn Abi Hatim said, “Bukhari listed him amongst weak narrators”. 7. Yahya al-Kindi: Bukhari said, “He was not known and no one back (support) him (lam Yutaba’ alaih)”. One can refer to entries of these narrators in Tahdheeb at-Tahdheeb by Ibn Hajar.
Sh Zubair quoted from Muhammad bin Tahir al-Maqdisi that he said regarding a narrator, “In fact He (Bukhari) has taken narrations from him in many places as Istish-haad to indicate that he is Thiqah”, and then he (Sh Zai) himself concluded, “This proves that Mu’ammal is Thiqah according to Imam Bukhari, not Munkir ul-Hadeeth”.
I say: The statement of al-Maqdisi is regarding some narrators of Sahihayn who were well famous scholars but still Shaykhain avoided them, except in Mutabi’ah or Shawahid. This doesn’t mean for every single narrators mentioned by Shaykhain in support or for back up. Even if we accept that al-Maqdisi meant it for every single narrator, then also there is no reason to blindly follow him and leave the facts described above. Therefore, I could not understand the basis for the statement of Shaykh Zubair Ali Zai that Mu’ammal was Thiqah according to Imam Bukhari.
In conclusion, Imam Bukhari only mentioned Mu’ammal in Ta’aleeq, not in the main Ahadeeth of Sahih Bukhari. WAllahu A’alam.
http://alsonnah.wordpress.com/2012/0...regarding-him/
Imaam Abu Hanifah (rahimahullâh) said: "Stick to the narrations and the way of the salaf, and beware of the newly invented matters for all of it is innovation" (Sawnul Muntaq of as-Suyuti pg.32)
Re: Is this a lie upon Imam Bukhari r.e.h ?
Brother Khali,
Can you please provide the hadith along with reference number for the above mentioned narrators ? Are they all from the Sahi Bukhari ?
Re: Is this a lie upon Imam Bukhari r.e.h ?
Do we have the book Zuhafa'ye Kabeer of Imam Bukhari? Maybe Muammal bin Isma'eel is declared weak in that book ? And that is the book from which Imam Mizzi and others would have attributed Muammal bin Isma'eel being weak to Imam Bukhari r.h. ?
Last edited by mohtashims; 30-04-2013 at 05:45 AM.
Posting Permissions
Reply With Quote
Bookmarks