Shirk, or Polytheism, in Islaam is defined as giving the Rights of Allaah Ta’ala to another object.  It literally means not singling out or adding to something [ 'Sha Ra Ka' - Mu'jam Maqaais al-Lughah Vol 3].

Allaah Ta’ala said

فلا تجعلوا لله أندادا وأنتم تعلمون

“…Then do not set up rivals (andaad) to Allaah while you know”

Therefore, it is to set up rivals, likeness or equals to Allaah Ta’ala in any way.

The Jews cunningly try to pass themselves as being followers of Ibraheem alayhis salaam, being upon the monotheistic way of life.  Allaah Ta’ala has refuted this claim of theirs over and over again in the Qur’aan.  In Surah al-Baqarah, Allaah Ta’ala said

ما كان إبراهيم يهوديّا ولا نصرانيّا ولكن كان حنيفا مسلما وما كان من المشركين

Abraham was not  a Jew nor a Christian, but he was a true Muslim Hanifa  and he was not from the polytheists

And

And they say, “Be Jews or Christians, then you will be guided.” Say, “Nay, (We follow) only the religion of Abraham, Hanifa, and he was not of the polytheists

If one looks through the Jewish scriptures, even inattentively, the numerous polytheistic, anthropomorphic and theomorphic verses become quite apparent.  In Genesis 1:26, it is said

וַיֹּאמֶר אֱלֹהִים, נַעֲשֶׂה אָדָם בְּצַלְמֵנוּ כִּדְמוּתֵנוּ; וְיִרְדּוּ בִדְגַת הַיָּם וּבְעוֹף הַשָּׁמַיִם, וּבַבְּהֵמָה וּבְכָל-הָאָרֶץ, וּבְכָל-הָרֶמֶשׂ, הָרֹמֵשׂ עַל-הָאָרֶץ.

And God said: ‘Let us make man in our image, in our likeness; and let them have dominion over the fish of the sea, and over the fowl of the air, and over the cattle, and over all the earth, and over every creeping thing that creepeth upon the earth.’

This verse in the Torah represents one of the first instances into the gross heresy of the Jewish teachings.  It states “ka shibhina” meaning “in our likeness” implying that the form of the creatures is similar to the form of the Creator.

And in Genesis 6:1-4

וַיְהִי כִּי-הֵחֵל הָאָדָם, לָרֹב עַל-פְּנֵי הָאֲדָמָה; וּבָנוֹת, יֻלְּדוּ לָהֶם.

וַיִּרְאוּ בְנֵי-הָאֱלֹהִים אֶת-בְּנוֹת הָאָדָם, כִּי טֹבֹת הֵנָּה; וַיִּקְחוּ לָהֶם נָשִׁים, מִכֹּל אֲשֶׁר בָּחָרוּ.

וַיֹּאמֶר יְהוָה, לֹא-יָדוֹן רוּחִי בָאָדָם לְעֹלָם, בְּשַׁגַּם, הוּא בָשָׂר; וְהָיוּ יָמָיו, מֵאָה וְעֶשְׂרִים שָׁנָה.

 הַנְּפִלִים הָיוּ בָאָרֶץ, בַּיָּמִים הָהֵם, וְגַם אַחֲרֵי-כֵן אֲשֶׁר יָבֹאוּ בְּנֵי הָאֱלֹהִים אֶל-בְּנוֹת הָאָדָם, וְיָלְדוּ לָהֶם:  הֵמָּה הַגִּבֹּרִים אֲשֶׁר מֵעוֹלָם, אַנְשֵׁי הַשֵּׁם.

And it came to pass, when men began to multiply on the face of the earth, and daughters were born unto them, that the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they were fair; and they took them wives, whomsoever they chose.  And the LORD said: ‘My spirit shall not abide in man for ever, for that he also is flesh; therefore shall his days be a hundred and twenty years.’ The Nephilim were in the earth in those days, and also after that, when the sons of God came in unto the daughters of men, and they bore children to them; the same were the mighty men that were of old, the men of renown.

Many may claim the language to be figurative.  Saying that the ‘sons of God’ or gods as angels and celestial bodies.  However, this does not solve the apparent heretical belief within the verse.

Again in Genesis 3:22

 וַיֹּאמֶר יְהוָה אֱלֹהִים, הֵן הָאָדָם הָיָה כְּאַחַד מִמֶּנּוּ, לָדַעַת, טוֹב וָרָע; וְעַתָּה פֶּן-יִשְׁלַח יָדוֹ, וְלָקַח גַּם מֵעֵץ הַחַיִּים, וְאָכַל, וָחַי לְעֹלָם.

And the LORD God said: ‘Behold, the man is become as one of us, to know good and evil; and now, lest he put forth his hand, and take also of the tree of life, and eat, and live for ever.’

Also, the outrageous kind of Trinity represented in Genesis 18:1-3 while discussing the three visitors to Abraham

וַיֵּרָא אֵלָיו יְהוָה, בְּאֵלֹנֵי מַמְרֵא; וְהוּא יֹשֵׁב פֶּתַח-הָאֹהֶל, כְּחֹם הַיּוֹם

And the LORD appeared unto him by the terebinths of Mamre, as he sat in the tent door in the heat of the day

This addresses three as one, as the Lord appearing, contradicting the other verses mentioning three separate angelic guests. And further

וַיִּשָּׂא עֵינָיו, וַיַּרְא, וְהִנֵּה שְׁלֹשָׁה אֲנָשִׁים, נִצָּבִים עָלָיו; וַיַּרְא, וַיָּרָץ לִקְרָאתָם מִפֶּתַח הָאֹהֶל, וַיִּשְׁתַּחוּ, אָרְצָה

 וַיֹּאמַר:  אֲדֹנָי, אִם-נָא מָצָאתִי חֵן בְּעֵינֶיךָ–אַל-נָא תַעֲבֹר, מֵעַל עַבְדֶּךָ.

and he lifted up his eyes and looked, and, lo, three men stood over against him; and when he saw them, he ran to meet them from the tent door, and bowed down to the earth, and said: ‘My lord, if now I have found favour in thy sight, pass not away, I pray thee, from thy servant.

Abrahams bowing down before them and saying ‘My lord’ is equivalent to committing polytheism.  No matter how one interprets these verses, whether they were humans, angels as humans, or one Lord appearing as three, does not clear away the polytheism.

It should be mentioned that these verses are used as support by the Christians for their doctrine of Trinity.

Genesis 18:8 states

 וַיִּקַּח חֶמְאָה וְחָלָב, וּבֶן-הַבָּקָר אֲשֶׁר עָשָׂה, וַיִּתֵּן, לִפְנֵיהֶם; וְהוּא-עֹמֵד עֲלֵיהֶם תַּחַת הָעֵץ, וַיֹּאכֵלוּ

And he took curd, and milk, and the calf which he had dressed, and set it before them; and he stood by them under the tree, and they did eat.

A practice many Rabbis see as prohibited.

Further more shocking statements also occur in Exodus 4:22-23

 וְאָמַרְתָּ, אֶל-פַּרְעֹה:  כֹּה אָמַר יְהוָה, בְּנִי בְכֹרִי יִשְׂרָאֵל

וָאֹמַר אֵלֶיךָ, שַׁלַּח אֶת-בְּנִי וְיַעַבְדֵנִי, וַתְּמָאֵן, לְשַׁלְּחוֹ–הִנֵּה אָנֹכִי הֹרֵג, אֶת-בִּנְךָ בְּכֹרֶךָ

And thou shalt say unto Pharaoh: Thus saith the LORD: Israel is My son, My first-born. And I have said unto thee: Let My son go, that he may serve Me; and thou hast refused to let him go. Behold, I will slay thy son, thy first-born.’

One wonders on what grounds do the Jews have the audacity to denounce Christians and their invention of Trinity, while the very Torah speaks of their Lord saying ‘Israel is my son’

The major crooked and gross beliefs the Christian religion consists of, were pioneered by their Jewish counterparts.

(To be continued inshAllaah)

[Mabahith fi ‘Uloom al-Qur’an Pp. 360-62 and at-Tafsir wa al-Mufassirun Pp. 81-3]

All praises are due to Allaah the Lord of all the creations, and May Allaah’s peace and Blessings be upon his honest Messenger; To proceed:

Qaadhi Aboo Yoosuf Ya’qoob bin Ibraheem bin Habeeb bin Habeesh, was the student of Imam Abu Haneefah. The Imams of Jarah wat Ta’deel have difference of opinions regarding him.

The Mu’addaleen (Admirers) and their Ta’deel (Admiration) is given as follows:

1. Al-Imam Abu Abdur Rahmaan al-Nisaa’i (rahimahullah) said =
“Aboo Yoosuf Al-Qaadhi: Thiqqaah (Trustworthy)”
[Ref: Al-Tabaqaat Aakhir Kitaab ad-Du’faa Pg 310, Published in India]

2. Ibn Hibbaan al-Bastee said =
He is a Shaikh (and) a pious (person)
[Ref: Kitaab ath-Thiqaat 645/7]

Haafidh Ibn Hibbaan (rahimahullah) (also) said:
لسنا ممن يوهم الرعاع مالا يستحله ولا ممن يحيف بالقدح في انسان وان کان لنا مخالفاً بل نعطي کل شيخ حظه مما کان فيه ونقول في کل انسان ما کان يستحقه من العدالهٓ والجرح ادخلنا زفراً وابا يوسف بين الثقات لما تبين عندنا من عدالتهما في الاخبار وادخلنا من لا يشبههما في الضعفاء مما صح عندنا مما لا يجوز الاحتجاج به
Meaning: We (Muhaddtiheen) are not as the stupid people accuse (us), which they do not consider to be Halaal (even for them). Even if someone is our enemy, we are not in favour of doing unjust criticizm on him. We say about every person reagarding Jarah wat-Ta’deel what he deserves. We have included Zafar (bin al-Hazeel) and Abu Yoosuf among the Thiqaah narrators because according to us their Adaalat in narrations has been proven, and those who are not like them (in Adaalah), we have included them in Da’eef narrators, who are not taken as Hujja.
[Kitaab ath-Thiqaat, Vol 7, Pg 646]
From this, we got to know that Imaam Ibn Hibbaan and all the other Muhadditheen used to follow the way of Adal, and Insaaf (Justice). Starting propaganda on Muhadditheen due to some exceptions and Mistakes is an act of Stupid people, according to Ibn Hibbaan (rahimahullah).
Zikriyaah Kandhalwi Deobandi Tableeghi writes: “Listen to the Zulm of Muhadditheen!” (Taqreer Bukharee, Vol 3, Pg 104)!

Note: The Tawtheeq of Hafidh Ibn Hibbaan is rejected when at least one of the following three conditions is met:
· When it goes against the Jamhoor.
· When he is alone in doing the Tawtheeq of Majhool and Mastoor narrators.
· When both Jarah and Ta’deel are contradictory. (See: Mizaan al-I’tidaal 552/2)

3. Muhammad bin As-Sabaah al-Jarjaai said =
Aboo Yoosuf was a pious man, and used to fast continuously.
[Kitaab ath-Thiqaat by Ibn Hibbaan 646/7, Chain: Hassan]

The teacher of Ibn Hibbaan, “Abdullah bin Muhammad bin Qahtabah bin Marzooq” is present in its chain, from whom Haafidh Ibn Hibbaan has narrated approximately sixty (60) narrations in his Saheeh Ibn Hibbaan. Abul-Shaikh Al-Asbahaani also narrates from him (Kitaab al-Amsaal: 298)
This narrator is among the teachers of Ibn Hibaan. Imaam Ibn Hibbaan has done the Tawtheeq of Qahtabah by narrating his ahadeeth in Saheeh Ibn Hibbaan, and this is a second level of Tawtheeq (See: Al-Tankeel by Al-Yamaani Vol 1, Pg 437]. Therefore this narrator is Hassan ul-Hadeeth.

4. ‘Amr bin Muhammad bin Bakeer Al-Naaqid said =
لا أري أن أروي عن أحد من أصحاب الرأي إلا أبو يوسف فإنه کان صاحب السنة
[Ref: Al-Kaamil by Ibn Adee 466/8, Chain: Authentic]

5. Yahyaa Ibn Ma’een said =
أبو يوسف القاضي لم يکن يعرف الحديث وهو ثقه
(Tareekh Baghdaad 259/14, Chain: Sahih)
لم يکن يعرف بالحديث
(Tareekh Baghdaad 259/14, Chain: Hassan)
أنبل من أن يکذب
(Taareekh Baghdaad 259/14, Chain: Saheeh)
کتبت عن أبي يوسف وأنا أحدث عنه
(Taareekh Baghdaad 259/14, Chain: Saheeh)
ليس في أصحاب الرأي أحد أکثر حديثاً ولا أثبت من أبي يوسف
(Al-Kaamil 466/8, Chain: Saheeh)

6. Ibn Adee Al-Jarjaani said =
وإذا روى عنه ثقه ويروي هو عن ثقه فلا بأس به وبرواياته
(Al-Kaamil 468/8)
* Ahmed bin Kaamil Al-Qaadhi said =
ولم يختلف يحيى بن معين وأحمد بن حنبل وعلي بن المديني فى ثقته فى النقل
(Akhbaar Abi Hanifah wa Ashabah by Hussain bin Ali Al-Saimri Pg 90, and Taareekh Baghdaad 243/14)

Ahmed bin Kaamil Al-Qaadhi himself is Da’eef. His tawtheeq is not proven from any trustworthy Muhaddith. See: Al-Hadith 2 Pg 25.

* Talha bin Muhammad bin Ja’far said =
وأبو يوسف مشهور الأمر ظاهر الفضل وهو صاحب أبي حنيفة وأفقه أهل عصره، ولم يتقدمه أحد فى زمانه وكان النهايه فى العلم والحكم والرياسة والقدر وأول من وضع الكتب في أصول الفقه على مذهب أبي حنيفة وأملى المسائل ونشرها وبث علم أبي حنيفة فى أقطار الأرض
(Taareekh Baghdaad 245, 246/14)

Talha bin Muhammad bin Ja’far Al-Shahid himself is Da’eef according to the Majority of scholars. Azhari said: He is Da’eef in Riwayah (Narrations), and Da’eef in Madhab (Taareekh Baghdaad 351/9 T. 4908). This person was an extreme Mu’zalee, infact he used to call towards I’tizaal. See: Lisaan al-Mizaan (212/3), and Mizaan al-I’tidaal (342/2).
Therefore, According to Hafidh Dhahabi (rahimahullah) his being “Sahih ul-Samaa’” (Authentic in narrating) is not beneficial; rather this person is Mardood ur-Riwayah according to the most authentic saying. The Ta’deel (praise) of Hafidh Dhahabi automatically comes to an end after the Jarah (Criticizm) of Muhammad bin Abil Fawaris, Hassan bin Muhammad al-Khilaal, and Al-Azhari.

* Abu Ibraheem Isma’eel bin Yahya bin Isma’eel bin Amr bin Muslim al-Muzani said =
عن جعفر بن يٰس قال: كنت عند المزني، فوقف عليه رجل فسأله عن اهل العراق فقال له، ما تقول في أبي حنيفة؟ فقال: سيدهم، قال: فأبو يوسف؟ قال: أتبعهم للحديث، قال: فمحمد بن الحسن؟ قال: أكثرهم تفريعاً، قال: فزفر؟ قال: أحدهم قياساً
(Taareekh Baghdaad 246/14; Chain: Weak)

The condition of the narration Ja’far bin Yaseen is unknown. His student Muhammad bin Ibraheem bin Habeesh Al-Baghwi is untrustworthy. About him, Imam Daraqutni said: “He is not strong” [Al-Mu’talaf wal Mukhtalaf 689/2]. Ameer Abu Nasar bin Makoola has done the same Jarah on this narrator (Al-Kaamil 334/2). Therefore, this saying is not proven from Al-Muzani, “Saahib ash-Shafi’ee”.

* Ali bin Abdullah bin Ja’far Al-Madeeni said =
قدم أبو يوسف…..وكان صدوقاً إلخ
(Taareekh Baghdaad 255/14; Chain: Weak)

Its narrator Abdullah bin Ali bin Abdullah Al-Madeeni is untrustworthy and Majhool ul Haal. He is mentioned in Taareekh Baghdaad (10, 9/10 T. 5119) without any Jarah (Criticizm) or Ta’deel (Praise). One of the sayings of Imam Daraqutni points towards the weakness of this narrator. [See: Sawalat Hamza al-Sahmi: 387, and Nasb ul-Amaad fi Tahqeeq: Al-Hassan bin Ziyaad Pg 3]

* Wakee’ bin Al-Jarraah said =
كيف يقدر أبو حنيفة يخطئ ومعه مثل أبي يوسف وزفر فى قياسهما ومثال يحيى بن أبي زائده وحفص بن غياث وحبان و مندل فى حفظهم الحديث والقاسم بن معن فى معرفته بللغة والعربية وداود الطائي وفضيل بن عياض فى زهدهما وورعهما؟ من كان هؤلاء جلساءه لم يكد يخطئ لأنه إن أخطأ ردوه
(Taareekh Baghdaad 247/14; Chain: Da’eef)

It contains the narrator Najeeh bin Ibraheem. Perhaps this is the narrator, after mentioning whom in Kitaab ath-Thiqaat, Ibn Hibbaan wrote: “Yaghrib” (He narrates Ghareeb narrations) [(220/9), and Lisaan al-Mizaan (149/6)]. There is no narration of him in Sahih Ibn Hibban. Muslimah bin Qaasim (Who himself is Da’eef) said: “He is Da’eef” [Lisaan 149/6]
The summary is that, this narrator (Najeeh bin Ibraheem) is Majhool ul-Haal. If Ibn Kiraamah (in its chain) is not Muhammad bin Uthman bin Kiraamah then I don’t know who he is?

Note: Even if we accept this saying of Imam Wakee’ to be proven, then due to his other sayings this saying is Mansookh (Abrogated).

Imam Wakee’ said:
“Abu Hanifah told us that he has heard from Ataa, if he has heard!”
[Al-Jarah wal Ta’deel by Ibn Abi Haatim 449/8; Chain: Saheeh, Al-Illal al-Kabeer by Al-Tirmidhi 966/2; Chain: Saheeh, Al-Asaneed as-Sahihah fi Akhbaar Abi Hanifah Pg 293]

Imam Wakee’ said:
“And perhaps Abu Hanifah did an act of daring when he said that Emaan is (testifying) with Tongue, and not with Action”
[Al-Intiqaa by Ibn Abdul Barr Pg 138; Chain: Authentic]

Imam Wakee’ (also) said:
“We have found Abu Hanifah opposing 200 ahadeeth”
[Taareekh Baghdaad 407/13; Chain: Saheeh, Narrated Ibn al-Jawzi briefly in Al-Muntazim 37/8, and Narrated As-Saaji in Al-Illal as present in Al-Intaqa Pg 151]

It becomes very clear from these sayings that if the saying narrated by Najeeh bin Ibraheem gets proven, then it will be considered Mansookh (Abrogated).

* Shu’aib bin Ishaaq bin Abdur Rahmaan al-Dimashqi said =
لأبي يوسف أن يأخذ على الأئمة وليس على الأئمة أن يأخذوا على أبي يوسف لعلمه بالآثار
(Al-Kaamil by Ibn Adee 466/8; Chain: Da’eef)

One of the narrators in its chain is, “Hishaam bin Ammar”. He is a Siqqah and a narrator of Sahih Bukhari, but he had his memory deteriorated at the end of his age, as affirmed by Imam Abu Haatim ar-Raazi in “Al-Jarah wal-Ta’deel” (66, 67/9). All his narrations from before his Ikhtilaat (deterioration) and in Sahih Bukhari are Saheeh, but regarding Ja’far bin Ahmed bin Aasim (the narrator of this narration), no such reference was found where it says that his Samaa (hearing) from him is from before his Ikhtilaat, therefore this narration is Da’eef because of the Ikhtilaat of Hishaam bin Ammar.

7. Abu Bakr Ahmed bin Al-Hussain Al-Baihaqi said =
وأبو يوسف ثقه إذا كان يروي عن ثقه
[Al-Sunan Al-Kubra 347/1 and Ma’rifat us-Sunan wal Athaar 381/1]

8. Abu Abdullah al-Haakim =
He authenticated him in al-Mustadrak.
[377/1 H. 1395]

9. Adh-Dhahabi said =
Hassan ul-Hadeeth.
[Talkhees al-Mustadrak 377/1]

10. Muhammad bin Jareer al-Tabaree said =
Abu Yoosuf is……a Faqqeh, a Scholar, a Haafidh
[Al-Intaqa by Ibn Abdul Barr Pg 172]

[The teacher of Ibn Abdul Barr, Ahmed bin Muhammad bin Ahmed in its chain is unclarified (Ghair Mutayyan) Wallahu a’lam]

Note: The saying of Imam Daraqutni will be mentioned ahead among the sayings of Jarah (Criticizm), Inshallah. As far as my knowledge goes, apart from all these sayings of Ta’deel (praise), there is no other saying of Ta’deel either from Sahih or Hassan chain, from which the Ta’deel or praise of Abu Yoosuf is proven. Wallahu a’lam.

Now, the Jaariheen (Criticizers) and their Jarah (Criticizm) is given as follows:

1. Yahya ibn Ma’een said =
Don’t write his (Abu Yoosuf’s) narrations.
[Al-Kaamil by Ibn Adee 466/8; Chain: Saheeh and Taareekh Baghdaad 258/14]

From this saying we get to know that, the narration of Ta’deel from Ibn Ma’een is Mansookh. Wallahu a’lam

2. Abdullah bin al-Mubarak al-Marwazi said =
“I consider it Makrooh to sit in a company where Ya’qoob (Abu Yoosuf) is mentioned.”
[Kitaab al-Ma’rifah wal Taareekh by Imam Ya’qoob bin Sufyan al-Faarsi Vol 2 Pg 789; Chain: Saheeh]

Once a man asked a Mas’la (question) from Imam Abdullah bin al-Mubarak, and he answered him; that man said: Aboo Yoosuf opposes you in this Mas’la (Fatwa), so Ibn al-Mubarak said:
“If you have prayed behind Aboo Yoosuf, then look at your prayer, meaning reconsider your prayer”
[Kitaab ad-Du’afaa by Al-Ukaylee 441/4; Chain: Saheeh, Al-Haitham bin Khalf is Siqqah, and the Jarah of Al-Ismaa’eeli on him is Mardood]

Abdah bin Sulemaan Al-Marwazi said that:
I have always seen that whenever Ibn al-Mubarak used to mention Aboo Yoosuf, he would do very strong Jarah on him, and one day he said about him (Abu Yoosuf) that: Someone among the people made love with the sexually intercoursed maiden of his father (Meaning: Step Mother), then he asked this Mas’la from Aboo Yoosuf, so he said: Don’t think this Maiden as hearty (meaning you can marry her), thus that man started fixing portions for Aboo Yoosuf, and Ibn al-Mubarak started doing strong Jarah on him (Aboo Yoosuf).
[Ad-Du’afa by Al-Ukaylee 444/4; Chain: Hasan]

3. Abdullah bin Idrees al-Koofi said =
“And Aboo Yoosuf was a Faasiq (Sinner) among the Faasiqeen (Sinners)”
[Ad-Du’afa by Al-Ukaylee 440/4; Chain: Saheeh]

Abdullah bin Idrees (also) said =
I saw Aboo Yoosuf in the dream after his death; he was praying Salaah on the direction other than the Ka’bah, and (Yahya bin Muhammad bin Saabiq said) I heard a man asking a mas’la from Wakee’, that man said: “But Aboo Yoosuf says different thing!” Wakee’, while moving his head (in anger) said: “Don’t you fear Allah? Will you take Hujja from Aboo Yoosuf in front of Allah?”
[Al-Du’afa by Al-Ukaylee 442/4; Chian: Saheeh, Yahya bin Muhammad bin Saabiq has narrated from a group, Dhahabi said about him in A-Kaashif that: He is Thiqqah]

4. Yazeed bin Haroon said =
“It is not permissible to narrate from him, He used to invest the money of Orphans in Trade, and he used to keep the profit for himself.”
[Al-Du’afa by al-Ukaylee 440/4; Chain: Saheeh, Taareekh Baghdaad 258/14; Chain: Saheeh]

5. Imam Maalik bin Anas al-Madani =
“Once Imam Maalik bin Anas went to Ameer ul-Mu’mineen, Haroon ur-Rasheed, and Aboo Yoosuf was also there. He (The Khaleefah) said two times: ‘O Abu Abdullah (Maalik bin Anas)! This is (Qaadhi) Aboo Yoosuf’, I (Maalik bin Anas) said: ‘Yes O Ameerul Mu’mineen’, and I didn’t even see towards (Qaadhi) Aboo Yoosuf. He (Aboo Yoosuf) said two or three times to me that: ‘O Abu Abdullah! What do you say about this Mas’la?’, so I said to him: ‘O Fulaan! If you have seen that I sat in the company of Baatil people then come and ask me (this Mas’la) there’ ”.
[Al-Du’afa by Al-Ukaylee 441/4; Chain: Saheeh. Abdullah bin Ahmed bin Shabwiyah, is Mustaqeem ul-Hadeeth. Ibn Hibban mentioned him in Kitaab ath-Thiqaat (366/8), and his tarjamah is mentioned in Taareekh Baghdaad (371/9) and others]

From this we get to know that, According to Imam Maalik, Aboo Yoosuf is among the people of Baatil. Wallahu a’lam

6. Sufyaan ath-Thawree Al-Koofi =
Ubaidullah bin Moosa said that: Aboo Yoosuf and (…) were mentioned in front of Imam Sufyaan ath-thawree, so he said: “And who are these people? And what are these people?”
[Kitaab al-Ma’rifah wal Taareekh 791/2; Chain: Saheeh]

7. Sufyaan bin Uyainah al-Makki =
“Sufyaan ibn Uyainah said about one Hadith that: ‘Aboo Yoosuf had been asking me about this hadeeth for a period of time, but I did not consider him deserving to narrate a haddeth to’. One day, we were with (Ameerul Mu’mineen) Haroon (Ar-Rasheed), Aboo Yoosuf told him: ‘He (Sufyaan) has a good hadeeth with him, tell him to narrate it to you’, thus the Khaleefah asked me, so I told him that Hadeeth, thus Aboo Yoosuf (then) stole that hadeeth from me.”
[Al-Du’afa by Al-Ukaylee 443/4; Chain: Saheeh]

8. Abu Abdullah Muhammad bin Ismaa’eel Al-Bukhaaree said =
“Tarkooh” Meaning, Muhadditheen have abandoned him.
[Al-Taareekh Al-Kabeer 397/8]

“Yahya, Abur Rahmaan, Wakee, and others have abandoned him.”
[Al-Du’afa al-Sagheer: 425, and Tuhfa al-Aqwiya Pg 122]

9. Wakee’ bin Al-Jarraah =
See: Jarah Abdullah bin Idrees # 3.

10. Aboo Zur’aah Ar-Raazee =
He mentioned him in his book.
[Kitaab ad-Du’afa: 376 Pg 672, Vol 2]
And said:
يعقوب بن إبراهيم أبو يوسف الذي كان على القضاء يعني صاحب أبي حنيفة

Note: Aboo Zur’aah said:
وكان أبو يوسف جهمياً بين التجهم
[Al-Nisf al-Aakhir min Kitaab ad-Du’afa wal Kadhdhabeen wal matrokeen min ar-rawaat al-Hadeeth 570/2]

While it is written in Taareekh Baghdaad that Aboo Zur’aah said:
وكان أبو يوسف سليماً من التجهم
[179/2 T.593; Chain: Saheeh]

Both these sayings, due to being contradictory, become neutral. Wallahu a’lam

11. Aboo Haatim Ar-Raazee said =
يكتب حديثه وهو أحب إلى من الحسن اللؤلؤي
[Al-Jarah wal Ta’deel 202/9]

According to Ibn Abi Haatim, the narrator which is only “يكتب حديثه”, that means according to him such a narrator is not taken as evidence (Hujjah) in the matters of Halaal and Haraam. [See: Muqaddimah Al-Jarah wal Ta’deel (7/1), meaning his hadith is not Hujjah.

On the contrary Haafidh Dhahabi said:
“And Aboo Haatim said: ‘His ahadeeth are written’ this saying of Aboo Haatim is neither the saying of Tawtheeq nor of Abtaal (rejection, or extreme Jarah)” [See: Mizaan al-I’tidaal 345/4 Tarjama: Al-Waleed bin Katheer Al-Muzani]

12. Ahmed bin Hanbal said =
صدوق ولكن من أصحاب إبي حنيفة لا ينبغى أن يروي عنه شئ
[Al-Jarah wal Ta’deel 201/9, Chain: Saheeh]

وأنا لا أحدث عنه
[Taareekh Baghdaad 259/14; Chain: Saheeh]

Note: There is a saying of Imam Ahmed that:
وكان منصفاً فى الحديث
(And he was Munsif (in the middle) in Hadith)
[Taareekh Baghdaad 260/14; Chain: Saheeh]

Meaning he was on the mid way, in Hadith. In another narration it says:
وكان يعقوب أبو يوسف متصفاً فى الحديث
[Taareekh Baghdaad 260/14; Chain: Saheeh]

Haafidh Ibn Hajar has narrated with the words:
كان أبو يوسف مضعفاً فى الحديث
[Lisaan al-Mizaan 122/5, and Al-Hadith Hazro: Shumara 7 Pg15]

These contradictory and different sayings, in the light of “لا أحدث عنه” and “لا ينبغي أن يروي عنه شئ”, are Mansookh (Abrogated). Wallahu a’lam

13. Shareek bin Abdullah al-Qaadhi =
Yahya bin Aadam said that (once) Aboo Yoosuf gave witness in front of Shareek, and he rejected it. I said to him: ‘Why did you reject the witness of Aboo Yoosuf?’ He said: ‘Should I not reject the witness of one who does not consider Salaah (prayer) to be the part of Emaan?’
[Al-Du’afa by Al-Ukaylee: 441/4; Chain: Saheeh]

We got to know that according to Qaadhi Shareek al-Koofi, the Shahadah (Witness) of Aboo Yoosuf is to be rejected, meaning he was Saaqit ul-Adaalah.

Ali bin Hajar said that, one day we were with Shareek, so he said:
“If someone from among the companions of Qaadhi Aboo Yoosuf is present here, then get him out”
[Al-Du’afa by Al-Ukaylee 442/4; Chain: Saheeh]

Qaadhi Shareek is a Mukhtalif Feeh narrator (subject to difference of opinion). The Jamhoor of Muhadditheen have declared him Thiqqah (trustworthy), if he affirms his hearing and if that narration is from before his Ikhtilaat (deterioration), then he is Hasan ul-Hadeeth [See: “Fathul Mubeen fee Tahqeeq Tabaqaat al-Mudalliseen” 2/56, and he is from the third level (of Mudalliseen) according to the most authentic saying]

14. Abu Hafs Amr bin Ali al-Falaas said =
“Aboo Yoosuf is Sudooq (truthful), (but) makes a lot of Mistakes.”
[Taareekh Baghdaad 260/14; Chain: Saheeh]

15. Abu al-Hassan Ali bin Umar ad-Daraqutni said about Aboo Yoosuf that:
“A monucular among the blinds”
[Taareekh Baghdaad: 260/14; Chain: Saheeh]

“He is stronger than Muhammad bin Al-Hassan.”
[Sawalaat al-Barqaani: 567]

Note: From the saying: “A monucular among the blinds”, we get to know that according to him Muhammad bin Hassan was blind, [See: Al-Hadeeth: Shumara 7, Pg 16, 19]

16. Ibraheem bin Ya’qoob al-Juzjaani said =
“Asad bin Amr, Aboo Yoosuf, Muhammad bin Hassan, and Al-Lu’lui: Allah is finished with them”
[Ahwaal ar-Rijaal Pg 76, 77 T. 96-99]

17. Sa’eed bin Mansoor said =
“Once a man said to Aboo Yoosuf: ‘A man performed Salaah in Masjid ‘Arafah (The place of Arnaah) with the Imam, then until the return of that Imam (towards Muzdalifah), he remained standing there, what is the ruling on him?’ Aboo Yoosuf said: ‘There is nothing wrong in it.’ So that man said (in amazed): Subhanallah! Ibn Abbas has said that there is no Hajj for the one who returns from Arnaah, and Masjid Arafah is in the middle of Arnaah (Now after the recent expansion, some part of Arafah has also been added in this Masjid), Aboo Yoosuf said: ‘You know the signs (Ahkaam) and we know the Fiqh.’ That man said: ‘When you don’t even know the main part, then how can you be a Faqeeh?”
[Kitaab al-Ma’rifah wal Taareekh 790/2; Chain: Saheeh, and Taareekh Baghdaad 256/14; Chain: Saheeh]

18. Abu Ja’far Al-Ukaylee =
He has mentioned Qaadhi Aboo Yoosuf in Kitaab ad-Du’afaa, and has narrated Criticizms on him. (See: Vol 4, Pg 438-444)

19. Muhammad bin Sa’d said =
He was known for memorizing Hadeeth…… Then he became the student of Aboo Haneefah Nu’maan bin Thaabit and learned Fiqh, and (then) raa’i (opinion and Qiyaas) overcame him, and he started doing Zulm (injustice) with ahadeeth.
[Tabaqaat ibn Sa’d 330/7]

20. Adh-Dhahabee (!) =
He mentioned him in his book Diwaan ad-Du’afa wal Matrokeen
(466/2 T. 4766)

Note: Dhahabi has not defended Aboo Yoosuf in Diwaan ad-Du’afa at all, whereas he has declared him Hassan ul-Hadeeth in Talkhees ul-Mustadrak. Both these narrations, due to being contradictory become neutral.

21. The Jarah of Imam Aboo Haneefah on Qaadhi Aboo Yoosuf
Imam Aboo Haneefah Nu’maan bin Thaabit (rahimahullah) told Qaadhi Aboo Yoosuf:
“You write those things in our books which we do not say”.
[Kitaab al-Jarah wal Ta’deel 201/9; Chain: Saheeh]
In one narration it says that Imam Aboo Haneefah said:
“Don’t you be surprised on Ya’qoob (Aboo Yoosuf)?! He tells such things about me, which I have not spoken”
[Al-Taareekh al-Sagheer/ Al-Awsat by Al-Bukhari 209, 210/2; Chain: Hasan]
We got to know that Imam Aboo Haneefah (rahimahullah) used to consider Qaadhi Aboo Yoosuf, a Kadhaab (Liar).

Imam Muslim bin Al-Hajjaj al-Nisaburi, the author of As-Saheeh, said:
“Aboo Yoosuf Ya’qoob bin Ibraheem is from the people of opinion (Qiyaas), Al-Qaadhi heard from Ash-Shaybaani”
[Kitaab al-Kuni wal Asmaa Pg 122]

Summary of the Tahqeeq:
The summary of this Tahqeeq is that, Qaadhi Aboo Yoosuf is Da’eef in the narration of hadeeth, because the Jamhoor of Muhadditheen have declared him Da’eef and Majrooh (Criticized).

The Books of Qaadhi Aboo Yoosuf:

The following books are attributed to Qaadhi Aboo Yoosuf:
o Kitaab al-Athaar
o Kitaab ar-Radd ala Seer al-Awzaai
o Kitaab al-Kharraj

1. Kitaab al-Athaar:
This book is narrated by the chain: “from Yoosuf bin Abi Yoosuf, from his father” (See: Pg 1)

“Yoosuf bin Abi Yoosuf Al-Faqeeh” is mentioned in the following books without any Jarah and Ta’deel.
Taareekh Baghdaad (296/14 T. 7607), Tabaqaat Ibn Sa’d (337/7), Al-Jarah wal Ta’deel (234/9), Taareekh al-Islaam by Al-Dhahabi (488/13), Al-Jawahir al-Mudiyah by Abdul Qaadir al-Qarshi (234, 235/2)

Therefore, this narrator is Majhool ul-Haal. In the book, “Akhbaar al-Qadaat” attributed to Qaadhi Muhammad bin Khalf bin Hayaan, it is written that:

أخبرني ابراهيم بن عثمان قال، حدثني عبدالله بن عبدالكريم أبو عبالله الحواري قال، كان يوسف بن ابي يوسف عفيفاً مأموناً صدوقاً…..إلخ
[Vol 3 Pg 256, 257]

The narrators, “Ibraheem bin (Abi) Uthmaan” and “Abdullah bin Abdul Kareem”, both are unknown with regards to the Jarah and Ta’deel. Therefore, this Tawtheeq is rejected.

In the published Nuskha of Kitaab al-Athaar, the chain from below Yoosuf bin Abi Yoosuf is not given.

Result: Kitaab al-Athaar is not proven from Qaadhi Aboo Yoosuf with a Saheeh chain. There is another unproven chain attributed to Qaadhi Aboo Yoosuf, which is attributed by Khawarzimi (untrustworthy) [See: Jaami’ al-Masaneed (75/1)]. In this chain, the grandfather, Amr bin Abi Amr, attributed to Abu Aroobah is unknown, and the remaining chain is also weak.

2. Kitaab ar-Radd ala Seer Al-Awzaa’i

There is no chain mentioned for this book. It has been published from India by taking a ‘chain-less’, Majhool Nuskha. [See: Ar-Radd ala Seer Al-Awzaai Pg 2]

Result: This book is not proven from Qaadhi Aboo Yoosuf.

3. Kitaab al-Kharraj

There is no chain mentioned for this book also. However, this is a famous book attributed to Qaadhi Aboo Yoosuf. Wallahu a’lam

Some sayings of Qaadhi Aboo Yoosuf:

Now, at the end we will present some sayings of Qaadhi Aboo Yoosuf.

1. Qaadhi Aboo Yoosuf said:
The first one to say that Quraan is a Makhlooq (Creation), in Koofa, was Aboo Haneefah.
[Kitaab al-Majroheen by Ibn Hibbaan 64, 64/3; Chain: Hasan, As-Sunnah by Abdullah bin Ahmed: 236, and Taareekh Baghdaad 385/13]

2. Qaadhi Aboo Yoosuf said:
“Aboo Haneefah (to kill each other among the Muslims) was in the favour of using sword (meaning: He used to consider it permissible to rebel against the rulers). Hassan bin Moosa al-Ashaib said that I asked Aboo Yoosuf: ‘Do you hold it permissible too?’ He said: ‘Ma’adh Allah’ ”
[Kitaab as-Sunnah by Abdullah bin Ahmed: 234, Chain: Saheeh]

3. Qaadhi Aboo Yoosuf said:
“There are two groups in Kharasaan, besides whom there is no other more evil group on the face of the earth: Jahmiyah (The followers of Jahem bin Safwaan), and Maqatilyah (The followers of Maqatil bin Sulemaan)”
[Kitaab as-Sunnah by Abdullah bin Ahmed: 14; Chain: Saheeh]

4. Qaadhi Aboo Yoosuf said:
The one who wants to seek knowledge (of the deen) through Ilm al-Kalaam, becomes Zindeeq (Kaafir); and the one who wants to earn money through Ilm al-Chemiya (The knowledge of making gold), becomes Faqeer (poor), and the one who seeks for Ghareeb narrations, he lies.
[Akhbaar al-Qadaat Vol 3 Pg 258; Chain: Saheeh]

5. Qaadhi Aboo Yoosuf said:
“O the people of nation! Seek the pleasure of Allaah through your Actions, thus whenever I have sat in a company with the intention of humbling (myself), I have overcome the public; and whenever I have sat in a company with the intention of getting a high status, then I have been insulted.”
[Akhbaar al-Qadaat 258/3; Chain: Saheeh]

In conclusion; we want to say that having justice under consideration, the summary of this Tahqeeq is that Qaadhi Aboo Yoosuf is Da’eef in the narration of hadeeth according to the Jamhoor of scholars, therefore his narrations and his witess are not to be trusted upon.

If any Deobandi, Brailwi, or Hanafi disagrees with our Tahqeeq, then he can write its response to us after taking our Minhaaj of Tahqeeq, under consideration, On the condition that, every evidence will be followed by reference, and with a Sahih or Hassan Lidhatih Chain. It should be noted that, until now we have not received any answer to our (recent) Tahqeeq of Muhammad bin Hassan bin Farqad al-Shaybani.

Wama alaina illal balagha
Translated by: Raza Hassan

“He does not speak of his own desire. It is only an inspiration with which he is inspired” [53:3-4]

Thus, it is proved for us thereby that inspiration from Allah, the Mighty the Majestic, to His Messenger, can be divided into two categories:

one of them [being] recited inspiration compiled in a miraculous form, which is the Qur’an, and the second [being] narrated inspiration, neither compiled [into a single book] nor of miraculous composition, and that is the narrations which have come from the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), his being the explainer on behalf of Allah, the Mighty the Majestic. Allah, the Exalted, says, [translated],

“…in order that you may explain to people what has been sent down to them” [16:44]

We found [Allah] the Exalted obligating obedience to this second category as He obliged obedience to the first category, without any difference, for [Allah] the Exalted, has said, [translated],

“Obey Allah and obey the Messenger”[5:92 and others]

…

And, it is authenticated for us, by the text of the Qur’an, that the reports [from the Messenger] are one of the two sources to which reference must be made in case of dispute. [Allah], the Exalted, says, [translated],

“So, if you dispute concerning anything, then return it to Allah and the Messenger, if you should believe in Allah and the Last Day” [4:59]

…

Since Allah has clarified for us that the speech of his Prophet is nothing but total inspiration from Him, and that the Qur’an is inspiration from Him, and also He, the Mighty the Majestic, has said therein, [translated], “

“Had it been from other than Allah they would surely have found therein much contradiction”[4:82]

Hence, it is necessarily proved, by this verse, that the Qur’an and authentic hadith are in agreement; they are one [unit], with no contradiction between them nor disagreement… [Also] proved by this verse is the invalidity of the words of those who make parts of the Qur’an contradict others, or make some authentic ahadith contradict others, or make the Qur’an and authentic hadith contradict one another. If Allah should bestow upon us ample time, and assist us with assistance from Him, then we shall gather…a compilation of all that ignorant people have thought to be contradiction…and explain…that all of that is one, with no contradiction therein.

“Have you not seen those who were given a portion of the Scripture, summoned to the Book of Allah, and then a group amongst them turns away, averse”[3:23]

“And when they are told, ‘Come to what Allah has sent down, and to the Messenger,’ you see the hypocrites turning away from you in aversion”[4:61]

“Whoever obeys the Messenger has obeyed Allah”[4:80]

“We have not sent down the Book upon you except in order that you may explain to them that wherein they have differed”[16:64]

“It is not for a believing man or woman, when Allah and His Messenger have decreed a matter, that they should have choice in the matter. And whoever disobeys Allah and His Messenger has surely gone clearly astray”[33:36]

“We have not sent any messenger except to be obeyed, by the permission of Allah” [4:64]

“Whatever the Messenger gives you, take it, and whatever he prohibits you from, desist [from it]“ [59:7]

“So, let them beware who differ from his command, lest a tribulation smite them, or lest a painful punishment smite them” [24:63]

No two Muslims disagree that what has been authentically conveyed from the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), that he said it, is obligatory to follow it, and that it is an exegesis (tafseer) of the intent of Allah, the Exalted, in the Qur’an, and a specification of that of it which is unspecified. Then, Muslims differed about the manner of determining the authenticity of a narration from him (peace be upon him), after the certain, unequivocal consensus on what we have mentioned….Thereupon, we looked into this, and found that narrations can be classfied into two categories:

[1] a mass-narrated (mutawatir) narration, which is that transmitted by a multitude after multitude [in each generation, going back] until it reaches the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) in this manner. This [type of] narration, no two Muslims disagree on the obligation of accepting, and that it is true, giving certainty of the unseen [which it conveys], for by the like of this [transmission] have we come to know that the Qur’an is that which was brought by the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), and by it have we come to know the authenticity of the mission of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), and by it have we come to know the number of rak`ah in each salah, and the number of salats, as well as many things concerning the regulations of zakah and other things whose explanation has not been clarified in the Qur’an. We have talked about this [category of narration] in our book ‘al-Fisal,’ and explained that the proof is established concerning its authenticity, and have explained the manner of [this proof], and that necessity and nature oblige its acceptance, and that is by [this type of narration] that we have come to know of countries we have not seen, and of prophets, scholars, philosophers, kings, events and writings which existed before us. Whoever denies this is like someone who denies that which is perceived by the primary senses – there is no difference – and he is obliged [then] to not affirm that there was a time before him, nor that his father and mother existed before him, nor that he was born from a woman…”

[2] The second category is what has been reported by single narrators from single narrators. Now, this [category], if it is contiguously narrated by reliable narrators upto the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), is obligatory to act upon, and knowledge also becomes incumbent by it. This is the view of al-Harith ibn Asad al-Muhasibi, and Husayn ibn `Ali al-Karabisi. It was professed also by Abu Sulayman, and Ibn Khuwayz-Mandad mentioned it from Malik ibn Anas.

…. [he then goes on to discuss the reasoning behind this view, later saying of it:]

….this is [the view that] we also profess…”

Defining Knowledge

Allah aza wajjal says in Surah al-‘Alaq

عَلَّمَ الْإِنسَانَ مَا لَمْ يَعْلَمْ

Has taught man that which he knew not

And in Surah Yusuf

وَلَمَّا بَلَغَ أَشُدَّهُ آتَيْنَاهُ حُكْمًا وَعِلْمًا ۚ وَكَذَٰلِكَ نَجْزِي الْمُحْسِنِي

And when he reached maturity, We gave him judgment and knowledge. And thus We reward the doers of good

Knowledge is what Allah aza wajjal has taught us through revelation.

In Surah an-NaHl, Allah aza wajjal says

وَاللَّهُ أَخْرَجَكُم مِّن بُطُونِ أُمَّهَاتِكُمْ لَا تَعْلَمُونَ شَيْئًا وَجَعَلَ لَكُمُ السَّمْعَ وَالْأَبْصَارَ وَالْأَفْئِدَةَ ۙ لَعَلَّكُمْ تَشْكُرُونَ

And Allah has extracted you from the wombs of your mothers not knowing a thing, and He made for you hearing and vision and intellect that perhaps you would be grateful

From our senses, we understand and adhere to this knowledge of revelation (wahi).

And in Surah ar-R’Ad

أَفَمَن يَعْلَمُ أَنَّمَا أُنزِلَ إِلَيْكَ مِن رَّبِّكَ الْحَقُّ كَمَنْ هُوَ أَعْمَىٰ ۚ إِنَّمَا يَتَذَكَّرُ أُولُو الْأَلْبَابِ

Then is he who knows that what has been revealed to you from your Lord is the truth like one who is blind? They will only be reminded who are people of understanding

So the knowledge that comes from Allah aza wajjal is the only truth and holding onto it is to be guided.

In Surah al-‘Ankabut

أَوَلَمْ يَكْفِهِمْ أَنَّا أَنزَلْنَا عَلَيْكَ الْكِتَابَ يُتْلَىٰ عَلَيْهِمْ ۚ إِنَّ فِي ذَٰلِكَ لَرَحْمَةً وَذِكْرَىٰ لِقَوْمٍ يُؤْمِنُونَ

And is it not sufficient for them that We revealed to you the Book which is recited to them? Indeed in that is a mercy and reminder for a people who believe

Here, Allah aza wajjal clarifies that the Qur’aan and what Allah’s Messenger (s) recited to us is sufficient.  Those who seek other means and learn beyond these two sources are misguided and void of any mercy.

In light of these ayat, knowledge is the truth that was revealed by Allah aza wajjal to His Messengers.  It is revelation.

The Carriers of this Knowledge

In the Arabic language, an ‘Aalim (pl. ‘Ulema) is someone who possesses knowledge about a certain matter.  It is not equivalent to the word ‘scholar’ as usually translated.  A person does not need to be an expert in any field in order to hold the linguistic Arabic title of an ‘Aalim.

However, Islam defines it differently in Surah Fatir

وَمِنَ النَّاسِ وَالدَّوَابِّ وَالْأَنْعَامِ مُخْتَلِفٌ أَلْوَانُهُ كَذَٰلِكَ ۗ إِنَّمَا يَخْشَى اللَّهَ مِنْ عِبَادِهِ الْعُلَمَاءُ ۗ إِنَّ اللَّهَ عَزِيزٌ غَفُورٌ

And among people and moving creatures and grazing livestock are various colors similarly. Only those fear Allah, from among His servants, have knowledge. Indeed, Allah is Exalted in Might and Forgiving

Allah aza wajjal has identified those fearing Him as ‘Ulema.  Fear of Allah aza wajjal is the criterion that separates an ‘Aalim from a less fortunate person.  It is not the amount of years spent studying, memorizing or attaining ijazas.  Rather, the fear of Allah aza wajjal is what makes a person an ‘Aalim.

Allah aza wajjal says in Surah al-Jumu’Ah

مَثَلُ الَّذِينَ حُمِّلُوا التَّوْرَاةَ ثُمَّ لَمْ يَحْمِلُوهَا كَمَثَلِ الْحِمَارِ يَحْمِلُ أَسْفَارً

The example of those who were entrusted with the Torah and then did not take it on is like that of a donkey who carries volumes [of books]

The common misconception taught today, as a result of abandoning the Qur’aan, is that people who have ‘studied’ the Deen can only fear Allah aza wajjal.  This of course is wrong.  The mere memorization of ‘religious’ text does not automatically give a person the ranking of an ‘Aalim in Islam.  It is quite the opposite.

Allah aza wajjal says in Surah al-Baqarah

وَاتَّقُوا اللَّهَ ۖ وَيُعَلِّمُكُمُ اللَّهُ ۗ

And Fear Allah and Allah teaches you

Therefore, an ‘Aalim is anyone who fears Allah aza wajjal, despite not knowing much Qur’aan and ahadith (sing. hadith).  This also applies to the experts of Fiqh (Fuqaha), Hadith (MuHadiththeen) or any other art. They are not ‘Ulema until they reach that degree of awareness.

This means that even a layman can be from amongst the ‘Ulema if he fears Allah aza wajjal.  The greatest knowledge is to know laa ilaha illAllah.

This is how Islam defines ‘Ulema and it is the common theme throughout the Qur’aan and Sunnah.

The Truthful Ones

Today, and in the past, many people hold the title of ‘Ulema, regardless of their carelessness towards the Deen of Allah aza wajjal.  They do not refer to the Qur’aan and Sunnah when a matter arises; rather they refer to their school or sayings of a particular set of Imams.  Therefore, it is important for us to filter out these liars from the truthful ones by using the Qur’aan.

The carriers of knowledge (revelation) are those who fear Allah aza wajjal (‘Ulema).  They can be from the layman to the aristocrats of society.

Allah aza wajjal says in Surah al-Hujurat

إِنَّمَا الْمُؤْمِنُونَ الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا بِاللَّهِ وَرَسُولِهِ ثُمَّ لَمْ يَرْتَابُوا وَجَاهَدُوا بِأَمْوَالِهِمْ وَأَنفُسِهِمْ فِي سَبِيلِ اللَّهِ ۚ أُولَٰئِكَ هُمُ الصَّادِقُونَ

The believers are only those ones who have believed in Allah and His Messenger and then doubt not but strive with their properties and their lives in the cause of Allah. It is those who are the truthful

The truthful people are those who believe in Allah aza wajjal and His Messenger (s) with certainty and they fight and sacrifice in the cause of Allah aza wajjal.

And in Surah al-Hashr

لِلْفُقَرَاءِ الْمُهَاجِرِينَ الَّذِينَ أُخْرِجُوا مِن دِيَارِهِمْ وَأَمْوَالِهِمْ يَبْتَغُونَ فَضْلًا مِّنَ اللَّهِ وَرِضْوَانًا وَيَنصُرُونَ اللَّهَ وَرَسُولَهُ ۚ أُولَٰئِكَ هُمُ الصَّادِقُونَ

For the poor emigrants who were expelled from their homes and their properties, seeking bounty from Allah and [His] approval and supporting Allah and His Messenger, [there is also a share in booty]. Those are the truthful

Once again, fighting and sacrificing has been mentioned as truthful characteristics along with migration. No one can claim to be from amongst the truthful until they adopt the manners expressed in these ayat, especially if one is looked up to be an ‘Aalim. The fact is they are not from amongst the ‘Ulema as their actions contradict their words.

Imams of Opinion and Analogy Are Not ‘Ulema

An opinion is a belief or judgment based upon uncertainty.  It falls short of the truth (revelation).

Analogy is the process of reasoning based on partial similarity between two compared things. It too falls short of the truth as it is not based upon revelation.

Allah aza wajjal says in Surah al-Ma’idah

الْيَوْمَ أَكْمَلْتُ لَكُمْ دِينَكُمْ وَأَتْمَمْتُ عَلَيْكُمْ نِعْمَتِي وَرَضِيتُ لَكُمُ الْإِسْلَامَ دِينًا

This day I have perfected for you your Deen and completed My favor upon you and have chosen for you Islam as your Deen

He aza wajjal has fully completed and perfected our Deen.  Therefore, nothing needs to be added, subtracted or updated.  Islam is flawless as it is from Allah aza wajjal.

In Surah al-An’am

أَفَغَيْرَ اللَّهِ أَبْتَغِي حَكَمًا وَهُوَ الَّذِي أَنزَلَ إِلَيْكُمُ الْكِتَابَ مُفَصَّلًا

Shall I seek a judge other than Allah while it is He Who has revealed to you the Book explained in detail?

Allah aza wajjal has explained everything in detail. There is nothing in Islam that has been left out without Allah’s Messenger (s) clarifying it.

Allah aza wajjal says in Surah an-Najm

وَمَا لَهُم بِهِ مِنْ عِلْمٍ ۖ إِن يَتَّبِعُونَ إِلَّا الظَّنَّ ۖ وَإِنَّ الظَّنَّ لَا يُغْنِي مِنَ الْحَقِّ شَيْئًا

And they have thereof no knowledge. They follow not except assumption, and indeed, assumption avails not against the truth at all

Hence, opinions and analogies have no authority in Islam and are not considered knowledge.  They are forbidden and misguidance.

In Surah al-’An’am

قُلْ هَلْ عِندَكُم مِّنْ عِلْمٍ فَتُخْرِجُوهُ لَنَا ۖ إِن تَتَّبِعُونَ إِلَّا الظَّنَّ وَإِنْ أَنتُمْ إِلَّا تَخْرُصُونَ

Say, “Do you have any knowledge that you can produce for us? You follow not except assumption, and you do nothing but lie”

Opinions and analogies in Deen are equal to lying.

In Surah Yunus

قُلْ أَرَأَيْتُم مَّا أَنزَلَ اللَّهُ لَكُم مِّن رِّزْقٍ فَجَعَلْتُم مِّنْهُ حَرَامًا وَحَلَالًا قُلْ آللَّهُ أَذِنَ لَكُمْ ۖ أَمْ عَلَى اللَّهِ تَفْتَرُونَ

Say, “Tell me, what provision Allah has sent down to you! And you have made of it lawful and unlawful.” Say, “Has Allah permitted you, or do you invent a lie against Allah?”

To give an analogy or an opinion is to invent lies against Allah aza wajjal.

And in Surah an-NaHl

وَلَا تَقُولُوا لِمَا تَصِفُ أَلْسِنَتُكُمُ الْكَذِبَ هَٰذَا حَلَالٌ وَهَٰذَا حَرَامٌ لِّتَفْتَرُوا عَلَى اللَّهِ الْكَذِبَ ۚ إِنَّ الَّذِينَ يَفْتَرُونَ عَلَى اللَّهِ الْكَذِبَ لَا يُفْلِحُونَ

And say not concerning that which your tongues put forth falsely, “This is lawful and this is forbidden,” so as to invent lies against Allah. Indeed, those who invent lies against Allah will never prosper

This is the meaning of speaking without knowledge; it is to speak about Islam without evidence from the Qur’aan and Sunnah.  And to make things lawful and unlawful is the sole Right of Allah aza wajjal.  He aza wajjal has not authorized anyone to make things lawful and unlawful based upon their own personal reasoning.

Recorded in Sahih al-Bukhaari, narrated ‘Abdullah bin ‘Amr (r), I heard the Prophet (s) saying

إنَّ اللَّهَ لَا يَنْزِعُ الْعِلْمَ بَعْدَ أَنْ أَعْطَاكُمُوهُ انْتِزَاعًا وَلَكِنْ يَنْتَزِعُهُ مِنْهُمْ مَعَ قَبْضِ الْعُلَمَاءِ بِعِلْمِهِمْ فَيَبْقَى نَاسٌ جُهَّالٌ يُسْتَفْتَوْنَ فَيُفْتُونَ بِرَأْيِهِمْ فَيُضِلُّونَ وَيَضِلُّونَ

“Indeed Allah will not deprive you of knowledge after he has given it to you, but it will be taken away through the death of the religious learned men with their knowledge. Then there will remain ignorant people who, when consulted, will give verdicts according to their opinions whereby they will mislead others and go astray”

This hadith is direct evidence demonstrating the misguidance of the people of opinion and analogy.  They are the same people who have split into schools, sects and restricted ijtihad to certain individuals.  They make blind following men besides Allah’s Messenger (s) as mandatory. They are deprived of any fear of Allah aza wajjal, thus giving verdicts from other sources besides the revelation, resulting in misleading themselves along with their followers.

‘Ulema are not People of Authority 

Allah aza wajjal says in Surah an-Nisa’

يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا أَطِيعُوا اللَّهَ وَأَطِيعُوا الرَّسُولَ وَأُولِي الْأَمْرِ مِنكُمْ ۖ فَإِن تَنَازَعْتُمْ فِي شَيْءٍ فَرُدُّوهُ إِلَى اللَّهِ وَالرَّسُولِ إِن كُنتُمْ تُؤْمِنُونَ بِاللَّهِ وَالْيَوْمِ الْآخِرِ ۚ ذَٰلِكَ خَيْرٌ وَأَحْسَنُ تَأْوِيلًا

O you who have believed, obey Allah and obey the Messenger and those in authority among you. And if you disagree over anything, refer it to Allah and the Messenger, if you should believe in Allah and the Last Day. That is the best [path] and best in result

Recorded in Sahih al-Bukhaari, narrated Anas (r) that Allah’s Messenger (s) said

اسْمَعُوا وَأَطِيعُوا، وَإِنْ أُمِّرَ عَلَيْكُمْ عَبْدٌحَبَشِيٌّ كَأَنَّ رَأْسَهُ زَبِيبَة

Hear and obey even if an Ethiopian slave whose head is like a raisin, is made your authority

And in Sahih Muslim, narrated Umm ul-Husayn (r), she heard Allah’s Messenger say in his Farwell Hajj sermon

وَلَوِ اسْتُعْمِلَ عَلَيْكُمْ عَبْدٌيَقُودُكُمْ بِكِتَابِ اللهِ، اسْمَعُوا لَهُ وَأَطِيعُوا

Even if a slave was appointed over you, and he rules you with Allah’s Book, then listen to him and obey him

Allah’s Messenger (s) himself clarified who ‘those in authorities’ are amongst us.  He (s) never distinctly mentioned the ‘Ulema. He (s) had also restricted obeying authority only in regards to good. This cancels out any form of blind obedience to them.

Blind Obedience to ‘Ulema is Haraam

In Surah al-‘A’raf, Allah aza wajal says

اتَّبِعُوا مَا أُنزِلَ إِلَيْكُم مِّن رَّبِّكُمْ وَلَا تَتَّبِعُوا مِن دُونِهِ أَوْلِيَاءَ ۗ قَلِيلًا مَّا تَذَكَّرُونَ

Follow what has been revealed to you from your Lord and do not follow other than Him any allies. Little do you remember!

To follow anything other than what has been revealed from Allah aza wajjal is equal to polytheism.

In Surah al-Israa’

وَلَا تَقْفُ مَا لَيْسَ لَكَ بِهِ عِلْمٌ ۚ إِنَّ السَّمْعَ وَالْبَصَرَ وَالْفُؤَادَ كُلُّ أُولَٰئِكَ كَانَ عَنْهُ مَسْئُولًا

And do not follow that of which you have no knowledge. Indeed, the hearing, the sight and the heart, of each of those you will be questioned

Here, Allah aza wajjal prohibits following and spreading things that we have no knowledge about. To follow something attributed to  Islam while it has not basis in the Qur’aan and Sunnah is also Haraam.

In the beginning we had discussed what is knowledge and conclude that it was revelation. Therefore, Islam is what was revealed and not what it is believed to be by some.

Inshallah more will come in the future, Wa Allaho Alim

The matter of seeking help from the Kuffār, its ruling differs with the difference of the people from whom help is sought, and upon whom the help is being used and the type of the help sought. Sometimes the people from whom the help is sought maybe a Kāfir country or some people of it or in the means of weapons or wealth. And sometimes the ones upon whom the help is sought maybe another Kāfir country or a Muslim state or a Muslim group like rebels, so their rulings differ with these differences[1].

There is a famous difference of opinion amongst the trusted scholars in the regard, thus I am to quote –Inshā Allāh- their sayings in order of first of those who says it is permissible and their proofs and then of those of who prohibits it, and then come to a conclusion.

First of all, from the allowed kinds of help which can be sought, with the Ijmā of the Muslims are:

Taking the help of the Kuffār in the matters in which they can be not given any status, like them being used as guides and ship crew who cleans the boat or as servants who are kept away from the acts of war. ..Etc.

Al Imām Abū Mu’hammad Ibn ‘Hazm رحمه الله said in Al Mu’hallā 12/112, after he mentions the prohibitions of seeking help from the Kuffār be them ‘Harbiyyīn[2]or Dhimmiyyīn[3], he said:

And this is a general prohibition in seeking their help in any authority or fighting or in any matter, except that the Ijmā is correct upon the permissibility of seeking their help in matters like serving the animals[4] or employment or to fulfill a need or others of its like which doesn’t take them out of the state of humiliation”

Ibn Abdul Barr رحمه الله said in Al Tamhīd (12/35) from Imām Mālik رحمه الله : “I do not see [the permissibility] of seeking help from the Mushrikīn[5]upon fighting the Mushrikīn except that they be servants or as boat crew”

(both quotes from AlQawl Al Mukhtār)

So from above Ijmā which Imām Ibn ‘Hazm رحمه الله quoted, it is known that the Kuffār can be used as guides and servants and as employees in works which doesn’t evaluate their status of humiliation.

As for those who said that it is allowed to seek help from the Kuffār, only allowed it when it is necessary and with the condition that the supremacy should belong to the Muslims and the they must be under the flags of the Muslims, and the rule must be that of the Muslims and they must not be harming a Muslim in anywhere and they are thought to be harmless.[6]

Imām San’ānī رحمه الله said in Subul us Salām (4/49-50) after bringing the Hadīth of Aisha رضي الله عنها regarding the Mushrik who followed him in the day of Badr “Return, I will never seek help from a Mushrik”: he said : “and the Hadīth is from the proofs of those who say that it is not allowed to seek help from the Mushrikīn in fighting, and it is the saying of a group from the people of knowledge. And the Al Hādwiyyah and Abū ‘Hanīfa and his companions went to the [opinion] of allowing it. They say because He صلى الله عليه وسلم took help from Safwān bin Umayyah in the day of ‘Hunein and sought help from the Jews of Banū Qeinaqā and gave them some of the booty[7]it was narrated by Abū Dāwūd in Al Marāsīl and Tirmizī narrated it from Az Zuhurī as Mursal[8] and the Mursals of Az Zuhurī is weak. Adh Dhahabī said ‘because he was a person who makes many mistakes, thus in his Mural there is a doubt of Tadlīs. And Al Beihaqī declared authentic from the Hadīth of Abu ‘Humeid As Sā’idī that verily he صلى الله عليه وسلم returned them (the jews of Banū Qeinqā)

The author said: and the way to reconcile between the narrations is that verily the one whom he rejected on the day of Badr, it was understood that he had an desire for Islām, thus he rejected him hoping that he may embrace Islām, thus his thought was correct, OR seeking help was forbidden, thus he gave permission in it and this is nearer. And verily he has sought help from a group of Mushriks on the day of ‘Hunein and he joined their hearts through booty.

And the Al Hādiwiyyah made a condition that there be Muslims whom with them the rulings must be from them.

And in the explanation of Muslim, [it is narrated that] verily Ash Shāfi’ī رحمه الله said: “if the kāfir is thinks good about the Muslim and if there is need to seek help, then help is sought and if not, then it is disliked and it is allowed to take help from the Munāfiqīn due to his صلى الله عليه وسلم taking help from Abdullāh bin Ubeiyy and his group.

(End of quote from Subul)

Siddīq bin ‘Hasan رحمه الله said in Rawdhatul Nadiyyah (2/335): “And they are not taken help from in it, it means in Jihād from Mushrikīn except for necessity. Due to the saying of him صلى الله عليه وسلم for the one who wanted to make jihād with him “return I will never seek help from a Mushrik” [and after bringing other narrations of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم seeking help from the Jews on the day of Kheibar and the ‘Hadīth “you shall make peace with the Romans and you both would fight an enemy who would come after you”, then he said]

A group went –from the scholars- towards the impermissibility of taking help from the Mushrikīn and others went to its permissibility. The prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم took help from the Munāfiqs on the day of U’hud and Abdullāh bin Ubeiyy returned with his group. And likewise he took help from them in the day of ‘Hunein. And it is proven in the siyar[9]that verily a person named Qazmān went with the prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم on the day of U’hud while he was a Mushrik [until he said]and Khuzā’ah came out against Qureish with the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم in the year of conquest while they are Mushrikīn. So the reconcilement between the narrations are that taking help from the Mushrikīn is not allowed except for a necessity and not when there is no necessity.

(Quote narrated in summary)

Imām Ibn ‘Hazm رحمه الله said in Mu’hallā (11/113): This is with us, as long as the people of justice has a protection- if they fear annihilation and are forced and if they have no other way out then it is not a problem that they take protection from the people of ‘harb or they take protection from the people of Dhimmah as long as they are sure that they, in their seeking help: does not harm a Muslim or neither a Dhimmi- in blood or wealth or anything forbidden. And its proof is Allāh’s saying {and He has explained to you what has been prohibited upon you except to what you have been forced to} and this is general towards anyone who is forced, except to what it forbidden with a text [from Quran and Sunnah] or Ijmā. And if a Muslim knows, be him one or a group, that; those from whom they have sought help from the people of ‘Harb or the people of Dhimmah harms a Muslim or a Dhimmi in what is not permissible, thus [then] it is prohibited to seek help from them, even if he is annihilated. But rather he must be patient upon the decree of Allāh, even if his self, family and wealth is destroyed- or he fight until he is killed as a noble martyr. Thus there will be a death in certain and none can transgress due to it. And the proof of this is: verily it is not allowed for anybody to defend an oppression from himself with an oppression which would reach another, and this is where there is no dispute.

(end of quote).

Sheikh Abdullāh ‘Azzām رحمه الله said in his book “Ad Difā’u ‘an Arādhil Muslimīn”:

Verily the four jurists upon the permissibility of seeking help from the Kuffār with some condtions:

1- The ruling of Islām should be supreme. And the Muslims should be stronger than the group of Mushrikīn from who they sought help and those whom they are fighting with as if they got together they would defeat the Muslims.

2- The kāfir must be good with the Muslims and his betrayal must not be feared and this is known from his dealings.

3- The Muslims must be in need of the Kāfir or the Kuffār from whom help is sought.

Then ‘Azzām رحمه الله brings the sayings of the scholars to support this. And this can be refered to in his book “In the defense of Muslim lands”.

So it is known from the above sayings that the scholars allowed seeking help from the kuffār with some conditions. And now I shall try to bring you a summary of the book of Sheikh ‘Hamūd so we can come to conclusion in the matter Inshā Allāh.

First of it: The Muslims seeking help from a Kāfir State upon a Kāfir state:

The majority of the scholars have agreed upon its prohibition in a general way that nothing is exceptional from it, and the people of this school of thought has taken proof from some matters:

The Qurān:

The strict sayings of Allāh against allying with the Kuffār are inclining towards them.

And incline not to those who do wrong, or the Fire will seize you; and ye have no protectors other than Allah, nor shall ye be helped.[10]

O ye who believe! take not the Jews and the Christians for your friends and protectors: They are but friends and protectors to each other. And he amongst you that turns to them (for friendship) is of them. Verily Allah guideth not a people unjust.[11]

O you who believe! Take not as (your) Bitanah (advisors, consultants, protectors, helpers, friends, etc.) those outside your religion (pagans, Jews, Christians, and hypocrites) since they will not fail to do their best to corrupt you.[12]

O you who believe! Take not My enemies and your enemies (i.e. disbelievers and polytheists, etc.) as friends, showing affection towards them[13]

So these are the verses which prevents us from taking the kuffār as helpers and advisors and taking help from the Kuffār is not achieved but after inclining towards them and allying them.

Do you think that you shall be left alone while Allah has not yet tested those among you who have striven hard and fought and have not taken Walijah [(Batanah - helpers, advisors and consultants from disbelievers, pagans, etc.) giving openly to them their secrets] besides Allah and His Messenger, and the believers. Allah is Well-Acquainted with what you do.[14]

Secondly: the Sunnah

And from it: what is proven in Muslim[15] from Aisha رضي الله عنها verily she said: the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم said: Do you believe in Allāh and His Messenger?, he said “No”. He said “So return, I will never seek help from a Mushrik” (Quoted Shortly).

And from it: What is narrated by Ta’hāwī[16] and Al ‘Hākim[17] from Abī ‘Humeid: verily the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم went out in the day of Uhud until he reached Thaniyyatul Wadā’, when he met a well equipped troop, thus he said “who are they?”. They said : “this is Abdullāh bin Ubeiyy bin Salūl with 600 hundred of his allies from the jews of Qeinaqā’a and they are the group of Abdullāh bin Salām. He صلى الله عليه وسلم said: “have they embraced Islām?”. They said “No O Messenger of Allāh”, he said: “tell them to return. We shall not seek help from Mushriks upon Mushriks”.

And from it: what is narrated from Imām A’hmed and Al Hākim from Khubeib bin Asāf, he said: The Messenger of Allāh صلى الله عليه وسلم went out in one of his wars, thus I came to him –me and another person- before we embraced Islām and we said ‘we feel shame that our countrymen go for a war and we are not present with them’. Thus he said ‘have you become Muslims?’. We said “No”. He said: “we will not seek help from Mushrikīn against Mushrikīn”[18]

So these texts are clear that it is not allowed to seek help from the Kuffār and the who knows it should not make it permissible. And this is also what is proven from the Sa’hābah رضي الله عنهم .

From it: What is proven from ‘Umar bin Al Khattāb رضي الله عنه from his prohibiting Abū Musā when he used a Christian writer. It was mentioned by Al Beihaqī from Abū Musā رضي الله عنه: “verily he used a Christian writer, thus ‘Umar scolded him and recited: O ye who believe! take not the Jews and the Christians for your friends and protectors… ”. Thus Abū Musā said “By Allāh I have not befriended him, he merely writes’. Thus he said: “have you not found a writer within the Muslims?, He said: “Do not bring them near when Allāh has made them far and do not think them to be trustworthy when Allāh has declared them as betraying and do not honor them after Allāh has disgraced them”[19]

And from it what the Author of Al Mudhammah Fī Ist’imāl Ahli Dhimmah page 54, from ‘Umar رضي الله عنه, he said: some of his employees wrote to him so he may consult him in using the Kuffār. Thus he said: “Verily the wealth has increased and none but them can account it. So write to me with your opinion”. Thus he wrote to him: “Do not let them enter in your way and do not submit to them what Allāh has prohibited from them and do not trust them upon your wealth and know that they are men”

And he رضي الله عنه wrote to his workers:

Amma B’ad: “Whoever from you has a writer from the Mushrikīn thus he should not live with him and neither befriend him and neither sit with him and neither take consultation from him, thus the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم did not command to use them and neither his Khalīfa after him”.

And from it: A letter from Mu’āwiyah bin Abī Sufyān came to him: “Ammā B’ad, O Amīr ul Muminīn, thus from my workers is a Christian writer, the matter of kharāj[20]is not completed without him, so I disliked to give him the work without your consultation.” Thus he wrote to him: “May Allāh grant us and you goodness[21], I have read your letter about the Christian: Ammā B’ad: “The Christian has died[22]. And Peace”.[23]

And ‘Umar رضي الله عنه used to have a Christian slave, thus he said to him: embrace Islām so I can use you upon some of the matters of the Muslims, for it is not allowed for us to seek help from those who not from us, upon their matters”. Thus he denied, so he freed him and said “go wherever you wish”.

And ‘Umar رضي الله عنه wrote to Abū Hureirah رضي الله عنه: Amma B’ad: the people have their dislike upon their Sultān, thus I seek refuge from Allāh that it reach me or you. Establish the punishments even if it is for an hour in the day. And if two matters comes to you, one of it; the matter for Allāh and the other; for the world; then give priority to Allāh upon your share from the world, for thus the world is lost and the hereafter remains. Visit the sick and be present at their funerals and open your door and meet them. And keep the people of Shirk away and forbid their actions and do not seek help in any matter from the matters of the Muslims from a Mushrik. And help upon the benefits of the Muslims for yourself thus you are but a man from them except that Allāh has made you to carry their burdens”.[24]

And as it is mentioned from ‘Umar Bin ‘Abdul ‘Azīz رضي الله عنه verily he wrote to all his workers in the horizons: “Amma B’ad, thus verily ‘Umar bin ‘Abdul ‘Azīz recites upon you from the book of Allāh { O ye who believe! Truly the Pagans are unclean}[25]. He made them unclear and from the group of Satan and made them greatest losers in respect of (their) deeds those whose efforts have been wasted in this life while they thought that they were acquiring good by their deeds. And know that none before you perished except with his preventing the right and stretching the hand of the oppressor and it has reached me regarding a group from the Muslims, that when they enter any country, the people of shirk comes to them, thus they seek their help in their actions and writings due them knowing how to write and accounting and planning. And there is no good neither planning in what angers Allāh and His Messenger. And they had in this matter some time, thus Allāh has completed it. So I will not know anyone from the workers has kept in his work anyone who is not from the religion of Islām, except that I will make an example of him in punishment. Thus removing your workers is like erasing their religion. And bring them down to their position which Allāh has specified for them from humiliation and degradation.”[26]

And if it is said that: these texts which you brought are his صلى الله عليه وسلم rejection of using individuals and as for not using a Kāfir state, there is nothing in its prohibition. So the answer is given thus:

Firstly: His saying صلى الله عليه وسلم “I will never seek help from a Mushrik”, the work ‘Mushrik’ here is a Nakirah[27]in a negative sentence. So the Scholars of Usūl has agreed that it such a place the work ‘pagan/Mushrik’ would be used in general meaning so it can used upon an individual or a state.

Secondly: the expected harm and the possible danger from seeking help from one kāfir is much lower than the harm which comes upon seeking help from a kāfir state. Because there would be control and surveillance on the individual, as for the state, thus its power and capability to harm the Muslims is much larger than the expected harm from an individual. So upon this seeking help from a state would be prohibited for greater reason.

So with this it becomes clear that it is not allowed to seek help from the Kuffār be them individuals or states.

As for the ones who permitted to seek help from the Kuffār from the scholars, they sought help from weak narrations which are either Dha’īf or not clear in its presentation or contradicting and these are those proofs:

1- From Abū Hureirah رضي الله عنه he said: “we witnessed ‘Hunein with the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم , thus he said to a person who claims to be a Muslim: “This man is from the people of fire”, thus when we attended the fighting, the person fought a fierce fighting, thus he got wounds. Thus it was said to him: “O Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم the person whom you said is from the people of fire, he fought a fierce fighting today and he died”. Thus the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم said “to the fire”. Thus it was near that some of the Muslims may doubt. And while they were in this status when it was said “He did not die but he has many wounds” and when it was night he was not patient over his wounds, thus he killed himself. The Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم was informed about it, so he said “Allāh Akbar, I bear witness that I am slave of Allāh and His Messenger”, then he commanded Bilāl and he announced to the people: “Verily none but a Muslim soul would enter Jannah and verily Allāh would support this religion with a fājir person”[28]

2- It is famous that Safwān bin Umayyah witnessed ‘Hunein with the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم , while he was aMushrik. And Ibn ‘Hajar said his story is famous in the narrations of wars.[29]

3- It is narrated in Sunan Tirmizī, , that the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم sought help from the Jews and he did not give them a share. And Imām Tirmizī said that verily the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم gave share to some people of the jews who fought with him.[30]

4- Abū Dāwūd narrated with his chain, Jubeir رحمه الله said: lets go with us to Zī Mikhbar-a companion of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم –thus we came to him and Jubeir asked him regarding peace treaties. So he said: I heard the Messenger of Allāh صلى الله عليه وسلم saying “you will make a peace treaty with the romans, a peaceful treaty. And you and they will fight an enemy from behind”.[31]

5- And it is narrated by Al Beihaqī that S’ad bin Mālik fought with the Jews, thus he gave some of the booty to them.[32]

And these proofs, as you see, don’t reach the grade of making the proven fundamental from not seeking help to be permissible. As for the ‘Hadīth of Abū Hureirah رضي الله عنه;it is not clear that the man who fought was a kāfir, rather opposite is proven as he “claimed to be a Muslim” and there is nothing about seeking help, rather he gave permission for him to attend and fight. And likewise the story of the Safwān, thus the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم did not ask him to fight, but he was present by himself and it is not proven that he fought and he came out just to see what is happening. That is the reason that when the Muslims first started to flee Abū Sufyān رضي الله عنه said “the sea cannot return their defeat by Allāh!” So Safwān said to him “Shut up, may Allāh seal your mouth, by Allāh that a person of Qureish take care of me is better than a person from Hawzān take care of me”[33]

And what is proven from the news of Safwān, let aside the fact that it is not proven that he fought alongside the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم or he asked for his help in fighting, the proofs have a lot of variation in its chain and wordings. Ibn Adbul Barr narrated from Abdul Azīz bin Rafī’u and later after saying that Abū Dāwūd said that Safwān gave the armors before becoming a Muslim and then he became a Muslim, and said “The Hadīth of Safwān has become disputable upon Abdul Azīz bin Rafī’u to an extent that it would become long to mention it” [and further said] the variations are many and the Hadīth of Safwān is no proof for me to keep a guarantee when lending things and Allāh knows best.[34]

Imām Ibn ‘Hazm said after narrating this with his chain through Sharīk bin Abdullāh Al Qādhī, he said Sharīk is a Mudallis and narrated lies and tribulations from trustworthy people.[35]and said after narrating it from another chain, ‘this is from people who were not named’. And then he brought the narration from the path of Isrāīl and said ‘Isrāīl is weak’. And then brought from the path of Abdul Azīz bin Rafī’u and in that ‘Hadīth there are the words “The Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم said we have lost some of your armors, so shall we pay for it?, so he said ‘No O Messenger of Allāh, there is my heart today, what was not there’. And then said “This Hadīth is Mursal”.

So the conclusion is that: it is not known that the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم asked for his help to fight or that he fought. And the narrations in the matter are not strong to take proof from, and if even they are, then there is no proof that he asked for his help.

As for the Jews of Qainaqā coming out with the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم and he gave them a share or gave them something is weak due to reasons:

Firstly: The proof is from the Mursals of Az Zuhrī and it is known that the Mursals of Az Zuhrī is weak.

Secondly: there is a sound proof which is against it and that is: What is narrated by Ta’hāwī[36] and Al ‘Hākim[37] from Abī ‘Humeid: verily the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم went out in the day of Uhud until he reached Thaniyyatul Wadā’, when he met a well equipped troop, thus he said “who are they?”. They said : “this is Abdullāh bin Ubeiyy bin Salūl with 600 hundred of his allies from the jews of Qeinaqā’a and they are the group of Abdullāh bin Salām. He صلى الله عليه وسلم said: “have they embraced Islām?”. They said “No O Messenger of Allāh”, he said: “tell them to return. We shall not seek help from Mushriks upon Mushriks”.

Hamūd رحمه الله said: the amazement is for those scholars who went to the opinion of the permissibility of taking help from the Kuffār while depending on these weak and contridacting Mursals, and turn away from what is narrated soundly from Muslim and Sunan and Musnad Ahmed and others from his صلى الله عليه وسلم denial to seek help from the pagans. And if we are to go on to the path of preferring, then we know that the Hadīth of ‘Aisha رضي الله عنها which is narrated in Muslim what are in agreement to it are better than those Mursals which has contridacting chains and narrations, as we have presented.

Ibn Abdul Barr said: “As for the witnessing of Safwān bin Umeiyyah with the Messenger of Allāh صلى الله عليه وسلم , to ‘Hunein and Tāif, while he was a kāfir, Mālik said ‘it was not due to an order from the Messenger of Allāh صلى الله عليه وسلم ‘, Mālik said ‘and I do not see that help be sought from Mushriks except they be servants or boat crew.’[38]

Sheikh Abdul Latīf bin Abdur Ra’hmān bin ‘Hasan رحمهم الله having talked about the proofs of the people who permitted then talked about the Mursal of AzZuhrī and explained its invalidity in the matter, then he said: “As for the matter of seeking their help, it is a matter of dispute. And the correct way is upon what the people who researched the matter say that it is not allowed at all. And their proof is the ‘Hadīth of ‘Aisha and it is agreed upon. And the one who says it is permissible, took proof from the Mursal of Az Zuhrī, and you know what is regarding Mursals, when it contradicts with Qurān or Sunnah. Then even its holder [the opinion of permitting], made a condition that there be a goodness and benefit for the Muslims, and this matter, in it is their destruction and demolition. And made a condition that the pagans have no power or state from which it is feared, and this nullifies his saying in this matter and likewise made a condition that there be no place for them in consulting and opinion which is against what is here [until he said] and this is regarding the fighting of a Mushrik against a Mushrik with the people of Islām”[39]

And he also said: “the doubt with which the ones who said with its permissibility of seeking help held unto, was what some of the jurists mentioned from seeking help from a Mushrik in the times of necessity and it is a rejected weak saying which is based upon Mursal narrations which the Qurānic text refutes, and the clear sound A’hadīth. And then the saying –with its weakness- is made conditioned by some conditions upon which the explainers of ‘hadīths mentioned and Shawkānī narrated a part of it in Al Muntaqā: feeling secure from harm and corruption and there be no power or influence for them and they are entered in to opinion and consultation and also made it in the case of seeking help from a Mushrik upon a Mushrik. And as for seeking help from a Mushrik against rebels in the times of necessity, then it is a corrupt saying and there in no proof upon it except mere analogy. And its invalidity is what is most clear in differentiating between the fundamental and the branches and it not gathering in the reson of the ruling.”[40]

As for the ‘Necessity’, which is mentioned in the sayings of the Jurists who permits to seek help from the Kuffār, it is the Necessity which is related to the religion and which has a benefit for Islām and the Muslims, and as for the Necessity which is related to the order of the Ruler and defending his throne and power, then even those who permitted it doesn’t permit it if that is the case.

Sheikh Suleimān bin Sa’hmān رحمه الله said “the person of the treatise is mistaken in knowing the necessity, thus he thought it returns to the benefit of the Walī Amr from his presidency and authority and the matter is not like that as he thought but it is the necessity of the religion and its needs to the who would help upon it and with it, it would be benefitted, as it is clearly stated by those who permitted it and what is mentioned about that has passed and Allāh knows best”[41]

And from the great Imāms who said it is not permissible is Sheikh Ibn Mufli’h in Al Adāb Ash Shar’iyyah, he said: “A chapter regarding seeking help from the Dhimmīs”, some of our companions say : and it is disliked that a Muslim seeks help from a Dhimmi in any matter from the matters of the Muslims like writing and employment or accounting kharāj and the distribution of Fei and booty and securing it or carrying it except for necessity. He said in Ari’āyatul Kubrā and he should not be a gatekeeper nor an executioner or its likes. [end]

O you who believe! Take not as (your) Bitanah (advisors, consultants, protectors, helpers, friends, etc.) those outside your religion (pagans, Jews, Christians, and hypocrites) since they will not fail to do their best to corrupt you. They desire to harm you severely. Hatred has already appeared from their mouths, but what their breasts conceal is far worse. Indeed We have made plain to you the Ayat (proofs, evidences, verses) if you understand.[42]

Al Qādhī Abū Y’alā from the Imām’s said: and in this verse there is proof that it is not allowed to seek the help of the people of Dhimmah in any matter of the Muslims from the works and writing and that is why Imām Ahmed رضي الله عنه said ‘the Imām should not seek help from the People of Dhimmah to fight the people of war’. And Sheikh MuwaffiqudDīn رحمه الله made this matter a fundamental to make a condition that the one who works of Zakāt be a Muslim, thus it is proved that the matter is a place of agreement.

And Imām Ahmed said in the narration of Abū Tālib, he was asked about using a Jew or Christian in the works of Muslims like kharāj? He said ‘their help is not sought in any matter’,

And Ibn Taimiyah رحمه الله said in Iqtidhā Sirāt ul Mustaqīm: “that is why the salaf takes proof from this verse upon leaving to take help from them in the matters of authority. Imām A’hmed narrated with a sound chain from Abū Mūsā رضي الله عنه he said; I said to ‘Umar رضي الله عنه ‘I have a christian writer’, he said ‘what is wrong with you? May Allāh fight you! Did not hear the saying of Allāh { O you who believe! Take not the Jews and the Christians as Auliya’ (friends, protectors, helpers, etc.), they are but Auliya’ to one another.}? why did you not take a Hanīfiyya[43]? I said ‘O Amīr ul Muminīn, for me is his writing and for him is his religion’, he said ‘I will not honor them when Allāh disgraced them and I will not respect them when Allāh humiliated them and I will not make them near when Allāh has made them to be far”[44]

And Imām A’hmed narrated from ‘Umar رضي الله عنه that verily he said: Do not use jews and christians for they legalize bribery in their religion and bribery is not permissible.[45]

‘Hamūd then brings some sayings of Ibn taimiyah رحمه الله in which he explains that kāfirs cannot be used for places of authority as it evaluates their status from being humiliated and Islām cannot be made to go down. And that the buildings of the kāfirs must not be built higher than that of Muslims, so how can they be used above Muslims? And that Allāh will be sufficient for us and will provide Muslims for these works. And the Messenger صلى الله عليه وسلم ordered us to not to greet them first and move them to the narrow path of the road, and said that Sultān Salāh u Dīn Al Ayyūbī رحمه الله did not use kāfirs and the sultans after him used them and Allāh tested them when they went against His orders, [quoted very shortly].

Ibn Abdul Barr said Ibn AlQāsim said Mālik was asked about a christian to be used as a writer? He said “I do not see it [permissible] and that is because the writer is consulted, so a christian is to be consulted in the matters of the Muslims? It doesn’t please me that they be used as writers.

And Ibn Abdul Barr mentioned that one of the Jurists asked permission to enter upon Al Mamūn, thus he was granted permission. And when he entered upon him he saw a jew as a writer and the jew had a position and closeness due to the work he was doing. So when the Jurist saw him, and Al Mamūn has signaled him to sit. He said “do you permit me O Amīr ul Muminīn to recite a poem which came?’ he said yes. So he recited:

Verily the one due to him you are honored This one thinks he is a liar.

And he indicated to the jew. So Al Mamūn was embarrassed and became dumbfounded due to sadness and then he ordered his gate keeper to drag him on his face and vowed to throw him and to keep him away and not to seek help from any one from the people of Dhimmah in his works. Ibn Abdul Barr said: “how can they be trusted upon a secret or be trusted in a matter when they lied upon the Quran and said the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم is a liar?

And An Nāsir Li Dīnillāh ordered that none from the people of Dhimmah be used on the accounts. So it was written regarding Abī Mansūr bin Ratīna the christian that ‘we do not find a writer who would take his place’, so he said ‘if we are to say that Ratīnā died then would the accounts be delayed?’ so then he embraced Islām and his Islām was good.[46]

Secondly: The ruling of Seeking help from the Kuffār against a Muslim state or a Muslim group like rebels.

First of all, they cannot be labeled as Kuffār due to their coming out against the Imām with an acceptable reason and neither are they termed as Fāsiqs near some scholars. And from them Ibn Taimiyah رحمه الله who said: “as for the rebel while making an Ijtihād or tawīl and does not believe that he has rebelled but rather believed that he is upon truth, then even if he is mistaken in his belief, so naming him a rebel is not what obligates his sin let alone obligating his fisq…”[47]

And it has been agreed upon by those who count the sayings of the Scholars of the Ummah and its Jurists that it is not permissible to for the ruler to seek help from the Kāfir state against the Muslims in any condition, due to some reasons:

1- What we presented from the texts of Quran and Sunnah and the sayings of the Salaf from using kāfirs against kāfirs, so if this is the correct way, so it is more appropriate that their help not be sought against Muslims.

2- The Kāfirs are enemies of the Muslims, their enmity is that of creed and religion and it is known that verily the Kuffār, if they are given a chance fight Muslims, then they would avenge from them and try to cool their anger by killing.

3- As for the rebels, the reason to fight them is to stop them and return them to obedience and not their killing or annihilation or banishment and with this it is known that there is no need for the kuffār and it is not allowed to take help from them.

4- And taking help in this state is to ally with them and to incline towards them and Allāh has said { And incline not toward those who do wrong, lest the Fire should touch you}[48]

5- And seeking help from the Kuffār leads to empower them and destroying the power of the Muslims which may lead to the Muslims be annihilated totally and the history is a witness. See spain, when the Muslims sought help from the christians upon each other, it led to the total banishment and annihilation of the Muslims there.

6- And seeking help from them is likewise a peace treaty for them to come and interfere in the matters of the Muslims in the name of peace and this leads to them finding out the weaknesses and them coming to our lands in the name maintaining peace as it is now seen in many lands.[49]

And from there are from the scholars who had the opinion that some of the scenarios of seeking help from the kuffār against the rebels would be disbelief. And this is when the rulings of the Kuffār are to imposed against whom the help is sought from the Muslims and this is exactly what happened between Saudi and Iraq as the rulings of the kuffār were what was implemented upon the Iraqi people after the war.

Al Imām Abū Mu’hammad Ibn ‘Hazm رحمه الله said: “and as for those who are driven by emotion from the people of borders from the Muslims, thus they seek help from the ‘Harbī Mushrikīn and leave them to kill those who are against them from the Muslims and to seize their money and captivate them, so if they have the upper hand and the kuffār are to them like followers then he is in destruction and in the utmost levels or fusūq and he will not become a kāfir due to that, because he did not do anything which the Quran or Ijma states that it would make him a Kāfir and if the ruling of the Kuffār are implemented upon him then he becomes a kāfir due to this upon what we mentioned…”[50]

And Ibn ‘Hazm said that AshShāfi’ī رحمه الله doesn’t allow that kuffār be used against rebels.

And as Abdul Latīf bin Abdur Ra’hmān bin ‘Hasan said, the ones who allowed to use kāfirs against Muslim rebels are those who went out of normal and due to their misusing Qiyās and using what is allowed in necessity and leaving the constants.[51]

Using Kuffār in other than fighting.

And this has statuses:

Using them in matters like accounting and writing and its likes. So the proofs which are against this has already been mentioned and it is no need to repeat it.

So the majority of the scholars are against this and that is the correct opinion due to these causes:

1- Due to the existence of many proofs against it.

2- None from the rulers in the beginning of Islām did give a dhimmī any kinds of these works.

3- These works gives authority and the Kāfir must not have any authority over the Muslims.

4- And these works are not for Kuffār as it is important the people with Imān work on it as it carries great responsibilities due to the state being built upon the Islāmic ideology and belief and not based upon the worldly theories.

5- These jobs has secrets which must not be exposed to the kuffār,

6- As the Kuffār are the enemies of Islām, they would always dream to have authority over Muslims so they can take revenge from Muslims and harm Muslims and they believe that it is not a problem that they rob from the wealth of the Muslims. As it is mentioned in Al Mudhammah page 48.

As for seeking help from the kuffār in serving, like showing the way and employing them as servants which are far away from war and management which doesn’t take them out of humiliation and degradation.

Ibn ‘Hazm رحمه الله said: “and this is a general prohibition from taking their help in authority or fighting or in any matter except what is correct from the Ijmā upon the permissibility of taking their help in it, like serving the animals or employing fulfill a need or its likes from they do not come out of humiliation”[52]

Ibn Abdul barr said in At Tamhīd 12/35 from Imām Mālik رحمه الله: “I do not see that pagans be used against fighting pagans except they be servants or boat crew”

And as for taking money from a kāfir state as a loan or gift,

Then if it is a loan, then the general texts are upon its forbiddance. Because the reason due to which the Sharī’ah forbade us to seek help from the Kuffār is present in taking loans and because taking loans from the kuffār would come to:

1- There is humiliation and disgrace upon the state.

2- The Kāfir state would only lend loans to gain some benefit like usury or appoint some conditions from which they would benefit.

3- They will use the lending of loans for a way to conquer the Muslim state by destroying it economically thus pave a path easy to conquer it. And this has been proven in our current times.

As for accepting the money as gifts? Then the answer is; it is forbidden greatly. As it has clear humiliation in it. And the verses to forbid us to bow to the kuffār are many and doesn’t need to be mentioned.

In the end:

It is clear that it is not allowed for us to use Kuffār in warfare and in matters which gives them authority or takes them out of humiliation upon the correct opinion.

Almost all what has been taken was from the book of ‘Hamūd which was mentioned above. But it was narrated shortly and sometimes adding my comments and using my own wordings.

Al Faqīr Ilā Ra’hmatillāh

Sayyid

And All praises be to Allāh تعالى.

This is a simple, plain look into the dark world of those who exclaim themselves to be following the “Way of the Salaf” by distorting the holy texts.  We will go through some of their main arguments and dismantle them by using the very evidences that they use.

First evidence:

“And whoever opposes the Messenger after guidance has become clear to him and follows other than the way of the believers (sabeeli al-mumineen) – We will give him what he has taken and drive him into Hell, and evil it is as a destination.”  [Surah an-Nisaa’ 4:1115 – to the nearest of meanings]

They claim that the words “way of the believers” is in reference to the early Muslims.  Although this has a possibility of being true, we cannot say for surety, as there is no evidence clarifying it.  Also, the words are general in the ayah, used in a masculine plural active participate sense and can be applicable in any era.

Second evidence:

“And the first forerunners [in the faith] among the Muhajireen and the Ansar and those who followed them with good conduct – Allaah is pleased with them and they are pleased with Him, and He has prepared for them gardens beneath which rivers flow, wherein they will abide forever. That is the great attainment.” [Surah at-Tawbah 9:100 - to the nearest of meanings]

* This great ayah in no obligates a person to follow blindly the Salaf.  It clearly says  “…ittaba’owhum…” and restricts it to “…biiHsaan…”

Third evidence:

Yahya ibn Abu Muta said he heard al-‘Irbaad ibn Saariyah saying (to the nearest of meaning):

Allaah’s Messenger gave us an admonition which caused the eyes to shed tears and the hearts to fears, so we said, “Yaa Rasoolullaah, this is as if it were a farewell sermon, so what do you counsel us?” He said, “…stick to what you know from my Sunnah and the Sunnah of the Kholafaa’ ar-Rashideen al-Mahdiyeen. Cling to that with your moral teeth and pursue not the affairs of innovation for every innovation is straying from the Right Path.”

[Recorded in Musnad Ahmed (4/126), ibn Maajah (# 43), al-Haakim (1/96) and al-Madkhal of al-Bayhaqee.  In al-Khutub wal-Mawaa’iz of Abu ‘Obayd through ‘Abd ur-Rahmaan ibn ‘Amr as-Sulamee and in al-Kitaab un-Nawaawi through Hujr ibn Hujr]

* The hadeeth is reported with several different wordings, although all coming through al-‘Irbaad ibn Saariyah.  It is important to mention that none of the ahadeeth are actually Saheeh and both ‘Abd ur-Rahmaan ibn ‘Amr as-Sulamee and Hujr ibn Hujr are unknown narrators.

It is also reported from Yahya ibn Abu Muta, who again is unknown to possess the character to transmit ahadeeth.  Only one MuHadith, named Duhaym, who testified for Yahya, despite himself being not qualified.  So the chain remains weak and broken.

* None of these ahadeeth specify who exactly are the Kholafaa’ ar-Rashideen al-Mahdiyeen and this is used in an unrestricted manner.  We know only six people from amongst the Sahaabah to hold the office of rulership, while the last being a Kingship. By no means, does this apply solely to them as the apparent wording of Rasoolullaah states.

Fourth evidence:

Abu Hurayrah said (to the nearest of meanings):

Allaah’s Messenger was asked, “Which of the people are Khayr?” He replied, “Myself and those with me, then those after them, then those after them.”

[Recorded in Musnad Ahmed (2/297, 340) and al-Imaamah of Abu Nu’aim]

* This particular hadeeth is not Saheeh, although the basis of this hadeeth is found in as-Saheehayn.

* The word used by Rasoolullaah in reference to the first two, or three, generations is “Khayr” in all of the ahadeeth.  There are several meanings to the word “Khayr,” and none signify “best.”  It can mean good, it can mean fortune, it can mean charitable, yet never best. So the proper translation would be that they have “good in them” and in other narrations the later generations will have some blemish, without annulling the good in totality.

* Having khayr does not convey the obligation to follow them!  This bizarre interpretation can only be done by someone whom Allaah has not given understanding.

* Many major deviant sects and innovations began during these three generations.  In no way do the ahadeeth attribute purity to them and 100% authenticity in their beliefs.

* Allaah says in Surah al-Waaqi’ah (to the nearest of meanings) there will be a few Saabiqoon in the later times; clearly telling us that there will be people to be equal, if not better, than the early generations.

* Rasoolullaah in his Final Sermon said (to the nearest of meanings),

“…Let those of you who are present, inform those who are absent.  Perhaps, the absent will understand better than those who are present…”

[Recorded in Saheeh ul-Muslim and Saheeh ul-Bukhaari]

Fifth evidence:

Anas ibn Maalik narrated that Rasoolullaah said (to the nearest of meanings):

“This Ommah will split into seventy three sects, all of them in al-Naar except one.” They asked, “And what is that sect?” He replied, “What I and my Companions are upon.”

[Recorded in al-Mu’jamu as-Sagheer  by at-Tabaraani and in ad-Du’afaa of al-’Oqayli]

* This particular hadeeth  is not Saheeh.

* There are many other similar ahadeeth and none of them are authentic due to unknown narrators like ibn ‘Omayri and ibn Ashars and the weakness of ‘Abd ul-Allaah ibn Sufyan al-Madani.

* Hadeeth reported from Abu Hurayrah through Muhammad ibn ‘Amr with the wording,

“…stick to my Sunnah and the Jamaa’ah.”

Is also weak because of Muhammad ibn ‘Amr, who was declared weak by Imaam al-Muslim. And Imaam al-Bukhaari did not take from him either due to the same reasons.

* Another hadeeth is from ‘Awf ibn Maalik through Abaad ibn Yoosef.  This report is unanimously accepted to be weak.

* A narration from Mu’awiyah ibn ‘Abu Sufyan through Azhar ibn ‘Abd ul-Allaah al-Haarazi is also weak.

* Some may say that several weak isnad can strengthen the hadeeth. This is unacceptable as the narrators are either unknown or weak.  Many of the ahadeeth also contain different wording that contradict each other.

* We also do not know what the “Jamaa’ah” means, as several scholars gave different meanings.  Even though there is a report from the Sahaabi ‘Abd ul-Allaah ibn Mas’oud saying even one person upon the truth can be considered the Jamaa’ah.

Sixth evidence:

Hudhayfah narrated that Rasoolullaah said (to the nearest of meanings),

“Follow those after me, Abu Bakr and ‘Omar.”

[Recorded in Sunan ut-Tirmidhi (#3682), Musnad Ahmed (#23305) and Sunan ul-ibn Maajah (#97)]

* This hadeeth is not Saheeh due to Hilaal, Maola ul-Ribi’i who is unknown.

al-Humdulillaah, there is not one evidence supporting those living in darkness and their polluted call of “following the way of the Salaf.”  Their continuous war against the Deen will never be won.  Allaah obliged Rasoolullaah to proclaim (to the nearest of meanings),

“Say: “If ye do love Allaah, Follow me: Allaah will love you and forgive you your sins: For Allaah is Oft-Forgiving, Most Merciful.” [aali-‘Imraan 3:31]

The true lovers of Allaah follow Rasoolullaah solely.

The impurity of foreign religious cultures has crept into the lands of Muslims under the disguise of scholarship.  The Arabs, and in particular the Saudis, have adopted head dresses from their Jewish counterparts.

A typical Salafi man, or scholar (aka rabbi), looks like this:

In comparison to a Jewish Rabbinical dress called the “Tallit”:

One cannot help but notice the similarities between a Salafi Saudi (scholars or rabbis) head dress, called Shemagh (or Kefaiya, Ghutrah etc.) from a Jews prayer shawl.

The eery relation doesn’t only reflect on their fashion, it also shows from their Creed and the hypocritical implementation of Islaam by both the Salafi scholars and their blind followers.

It’s collected in Sunan Abu Dawood, the Prophet of Allaah (s) had said,

“Whoever imitates a people is one of them”

The following lineage has been the most popular:

Prophet Muhammad – Abdullaah – Abd ul-Muttalib – Hashim – Abd Manaf – Qusaiy -  Kilab (Ancestor of the Holy Prophet’s mother) – Murrah- Ka’b. Lu’ayy- Ghalib- Fihr- Malik- Al Nadr- Kinanah- Khuzaiymah- Mudrikah- Ilyas- Mudar- Nizar- Madd- `Adnan- Adad- Zayd- Yaqdud- Al Muqawwam- Al Yasa’- Nabt- Qaidar (Kedar)- Prophet Ismail – Prophet Ibraheem

It is a fact that neither Prophet Ibraheem, Hajar and their son, Ismail,  were Arabs.  Only Qaidar, the son of Ismail and father of ‘Adnaan, had exclusive links to the Arabs.

Allaah has already provided us the tools of following the Deen properly and deriving rulings from the Quraan.  While describing the Mu’minoon in Surah al-Baqarah, Allaah says:

وَقَالُوا سَمِعْنَا وَأَطَعْنَا

“…And they say, “We hear and we obey…”

This part of the verse is sufficient enough evidence for a believer to follow Islaam successfully.  It is the Usool ul-Fiqh of the Mu’minoon:

* Whatever Allaah has commanded us to do, “we hear and we obey”

* Whatever Allaah has forbidden upon us, “we hear and we obey”

* Whatever Allaah has kept silent upon, it is permissible

In al-Saheehayn, it is collected from Abu Hurayrah ‘Abd ur-Rahmaan bin Sakhr that Rasoolullaah said:

مَا نَهَيْتُكُمْ عَنْهُ فَاجْتَنِبُوهُ، وَمَا أَمَرْتُكُمْ بِهِ فَأْتُوا مِنْهُ مَا اسْتَطَعْتُمْ، فَإِنَّمَا أَهْلَكَ الَّذِينَ مِنْ قَبْلِكُمْ كَثْرَةُ مَسَائِلِهِمْ وَاخْتِلاَفُهُمْ عَلَى أَنْبِيَائِهِمْ

“Avoid that which I forbid you to do and do that which I command you to do to the best of your capacity. Indeed, the people before you were destroyed only because of their excessive questioning and their disagreement with their Prophets”

Islaam is as easy as that, pure and simple!

Alhumdulillaah