The Delusional Ramblings of the Obstinate Boy Against the Colossal Madhab of Ahl al-Hadith
Posted: Wed Sep 20, 2017 11:47 pm
Some Ahle Hadees boast about the early muhaddith Ibn Shahin being one of the early "Ahle Hadees scholars", which supposedly rivalled the Four Schools. This is because he said أنا محمدي المذهب.
If you actually analyse the context in which scholars relate this from him, they were actually saying that he was an absolute average in Fiqh - not some specialist capable of rivalling the Four Imams. Al-Dhahabi says in his Siyar:
قال الخطيب : وسمعت محمد بن عمر الداوودي ، يقول : ابن شاهين ثقة يشبه الشيوخ إلا أنه كان لحانا ، وكان أيضا لا يعرف من الفقه لا قليلا ولا كثيرا ، وإذا ذكر له مذاهب الفقهاء كالشافعي وغيره ، يقول : أنا محمدي المذهب
So this was no praise. In fact, in Talbis Iblis, Ibn 'l-Jawzi said he had no knowledge of Fiqh whatsoever:
وكان ابن شاهين قد صنف في الحديث مصنفات كثيرة أقلها جزء وأكثرها التفسير وهو ألف جزء وما كان يعرف من الفقه شيئا
Compare these two giants' statements to what some say today:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J8ATWY-3efQ&t=1h31m40s
Seriously? Please.
As for the rest of that list which he was passing off as some sort of "Tabaqat", some were independents, some were Shafi`is, some were Hanbalis, some were Hanafis, and some are the Ahle Hadees independents of the Sub-Continent. Whatever the case, there is absolutely no chain of teachership/studentship between any of these scholars, unlike a standard book on Tabaqat.
And even uttering Ibn Shahin's name next to the Shafi`i Mujtahid, Ibn 'l-Mundhir, is a joke in its own right. This is the sorry result of fabricating an Ahle Hadees narrative that simply is not there in Islamic history.
The Ahle Hadees School of Fiqh will forever remain a fake school. It has not Usul, no Tabaqat, no structure and no historical precedence.
Via ismail
ANSWER
This perfidy is the direct result of a confused, delusional mind which undoubtedly filled with anti Hadith hatred and animosity, this is first and foremost evident in the juvenile demeanour portrayed by the puzzled writer when he says ‘Ahle hadees’ as if his dummy is still stuck in his mouth. There are other similar such emotional outbursts and rants by this isolated rambler which will be overlooked due to them being nothing but reckless desperation.
Furthermore, such pitiful brazen outcomes are the fruits of the jursum of the Hanafi Deobandi’s which are still concurrent and firing quite wildly in this individual. This diatribe is shoddy, pathetic and outright sheer desperation to vent anger at the Ahl al-Hadith, thus when all else fails resorts to tit bits to established a delusional points.
The first point is that no one even claimed the Madhab of Ahl al-Hadith rivalled the four schools, this is his hideous deduction, the four madhabs he thoughtlessly defends, were all categorically formulated much later, post 4th-5th century. When it is clearly established the Madhab of Ahl al-Hadith existed during the time of the Sahabah and continued thereafter, just because he chooses to be intellectually ignorant and blind, that is not our problem, regardless the number of times he utters his rubbish in despair and despondency.
If we actually look at the statement and the context it was related from him we find that it is exactly as the statement suggests and means, not how the emotional writer fails to present. It clearly says when a madhab would be mentioned in the presence of Imam Ibn Shahin, he would say I am upon the Muhammadi Madhab, meaning that he was a Muhammadi which is the Madhab of Ahl al-Hadith and not on the madhabs of others. What other context is there to this, that’s it and nothing else, what was the commotion and emotional rant about? The reality is this statement burns away at them and this is the best shoddy response they could come with. Oh yes on more thing, im sure you have read the same statement from Imam Malik right? No! thought so, run along…
Also remember Imam Dhahabi apart from citing this in his Siyar, he also brings it under Imam Ibn Shahin’s entry in the Tazkirratul Huffaz, and even the basic student of knowledge knows what this means. One only has to read through a few biographical entries in the Tazkirrah and one will surely get the idea, I suppose the reckless desperate writer was too busy fuming with anger and animosity to even think straight when he came across this statement in the Siyar or elsewhere for that matter.
This lone rambler, who has no precedence for anything that he says except his formal days amongst the Deobandi Hanafi circles, I mean seriously what else would the ardent hanafi deobandi say to the Ahl al-Hadith except the idiotic brazen claims, “The Ahle Hadees School of Fiqh will forever remain a fake school’ says the one while sitting on his red sofa in dewbsury, who are you trying to kid with your ludicrous disjointed lines of arguments? Is this the best you can come up with? Seriously do not waste our time.
As for Imam Ibn al-Jawzi’s statement, its funny how he cannot bring any context now. This shield they usually hide behind when all avenues in answering fail is, “Oh we need to look at the context.” The typical jahil muqallid argument as if they were still trying to figure out who is going to the toilet first. Ibn al-Jawzi is way after the time of Ibn Shahin and It has very little value based on the overwhelming praise by the Nuqad of hadith and Imams of Ahl al-Hadith for Imam Ibn Shahin. Furthermore, this statement is rejected if not highly debateable due to the sheer number of writings and books accredited to Imam Ibn Shahin which range on many subjects especially hadith. He was an Imam of Rijal, did he not write Kitab Tarikh Asma al-Thiqat and Kitāb al-Tārīkh Asmāʾ al-Ḍuʿafāʾ Waʾl Kazzābīn amongst others, the likes of Hafiz Ibn Hajr, Imam Dhahabi and even Hafiz Ibn al-Jawzi referred back to, especially in the latters Du’afa wal Matrukin. It is stated he wrote volumes upon volumes and was titled as Kathir al-Tasanif yet he had very little knowledge of fiqh! As I have mentioned before, the disease and bacteria of bigoted taqlid and submissive reverence to their hanafi deobandi tablighi churchfathers has not gone away, these people may have learnt to copy and paste but have a long way before they reach the level of actually using their intellects based on justice, fairness and basic comprehension before being trigger happy.
It is also brazenly treacherous to use such statements for earlier Imams because he and they fail to apply these rules to other Imams, who are perhaps higher in regards than Imam Ibn Shahin, according to them. Have not the later scholars criticised and disparaged the earlier scholars to the extent of attributing deviant and heretical beliefs to some of them, we presume he accepts and takes all of them too. This fatwa shopping they levy on others is exactly what they do while pretending they fall within he remit of the four madhabs. Read for example what Hafiz Ibn Hajr says about Imam Ibn Hibban on his take on Sayf bin Umar just as example etc.
This poor chap, needs to take his head of the sand and try to get past his own delusional issues and perhaps then he might begin to understand the stark and clear reality of the existence of the madhab of Ahl al-Hadith. Go and read the statement of the illustrious companion Abu Sa’id al-Khudri RadiAllahu Anhu and what he said to the tabieen, go and read what Abu Hurairah RadiAllahu Anhu refered to himself as, go and read what Abdullah Ibn Abbas RadiAllahu Anhuma was referred to as in the books of the same Imam Khatib Baghdadi he quotes
And the biggest joke of the century is this epically failed statement, “The Ahle Hadees School of Fiqh will forever remain a fake school. It has not Usul, no Tabaqat, no structure and no historical precedence.”
Just because a person adopts a toilet nickname it does not necessitate he has to actually regurgitate in that way, surely there is law against that, No! let me break this one down for you, what tabaqat are you talking about, the ones in which one Imam is listed as a Maliki and in the other has a hanafi, the tabaqat where an Imam is listed has a Shafi and also has a hanbali, exactly and when were these tabaqat written, oh yes much later post 4th-5th century. You say Usul, what sheer stupidity, when were your usul written, let me remind him in case he suffers a brain block, way after buddy.
Just because someone is still shackled in that deobandi hanafi quagmire, it is not our problem that we should continue to spoon feed you, just read and research the books of the Scholars of Ahl al-Hadith and you will know, but before you do that be honest and sincere to yourself.
Let me explain this in another basic way, because obviously obstinacy has taken its toll
Look at this, it is the letter ‘T’
The Ahlul Hadith are above the letter T which filers down to current times, you and your cohorts, my friend are the horizontal line on the letter T, and this horizontal line represents the the 4th and 5th Islamic century and you cannot beyond it. On the other hand buddy we existed above this line during the time of the companions. Despite all this he has the treacherous cheek to say to us we are fake and have no history. Tut tut
Why don’t you run along and play marbles or something with your litter pals or something…and next time you behave like that with the Ahl al-Hadith with your despicable trash and gutter language you will be put into your place with your anti hadith playmates whether that’s awni or the other rejects, you obstinate little boy!!!! And yeah tell the others too…
If you actually analyse the context in which scholars relate this from him, they were actually saying that he was an absolute average in Fiqh - not some specialist capable of rivalling the Four Imams. Al-Dhahabi says in his Siyar:
قال الخطيب : وسمعت محمد بن عمر الداوودي ، يقول : ابن شاهين ثقة يشبه الشيوخ إلا أنه كان لحانا ، وكان أيضا لا يعرف من الفقه لا قليلا ولا كثيرا ، وإذا ذكر له مذاهب الفقهاء كالشافعي وغيره ، يقول : أنا محمدي المذهب
So this was no praise. In fact, in Talbis Iblis, Ibn 'l-Jawzi said he had no knowledge of Fiqh whatsoever:
وكان ابن شاهين قد صنف في الحديث مصنفات كثيرة أقلها جزء وأكثرها التفسير وهو ألف جزء وما كان يعرف من الفقه شيئا
Compare these two giants' statements to what some say today:
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=J8ATWY-3efQ&t=1h31m40s
Seriously? Please.
As for the rest of that list which he was passing off as some sort of "Tabaqat", some were independents, some were Shafi`is, some were Hanbalis, some were Hanafis, and some are the Ahle Hadees independents of the Sub-Continent. Whatever the case, there is absolutely no chain of teachership/studentship between any of these scholars, unlike a standard book on Tabaqat.
And even uttering Ibn Shahin's name next to the Shafi`i Mujtahid, Ibn 'l-Mundhir, is a joke in its own right. This is the sorry result of fabricating an Ahle Hadees narrative that simply is not there in Islamic history.
The Ahle Hadees School of Fiqh will forever remain a fake school. It has not Usul, no Tabaqat, no structure and no historical precedence.
Via ismail
ANSWER
This perfidy is the direct result of a confused, delusional mind which undoubtedly filled with anti Hadith hatred and animosity, this is first and foremost evident in the juvenile demeanour portrayed by the puzzled writer when he says ‘Ahle hadees’ as if his dummy is still stuck in his mouth. There are other similar such emotional outbursts and rants by this isolated rambler which will be overlooked due to them being nothing but reckless desperation.
Furthermore, such pitiful brazen outcomes are the fruits of the jursum of the Hanafi Deobandi’s which are still concurrent and firing quite wildly in this individual. This diatribe is shoddy, pathetic and outright sheer desperation to vent anger at the Ahl al-Hadith, thus when all else fails resorts to tit bits to established a delusional points.
The first point is that no one even claimed the Madhab of Ahl al-Hadith rivalled the four schools, this is his hideous deduction, the four madhabs he thoughtlessly defends, were all categorically formulated much later, post 4th-5th century. When it is clearly established the Madhab of Ahl al-Hadith existed during the time of the Sahabah and continued thereafter, just because he chooses to be intellectually ignorant and blind, that is not our problem, regardless the number of times he utters his rubbish in despair and despondency.
If we actually look at the statement and the context it was related from him we find that it is exactly as the statement suggests and means, not how the emotional writer fails to present. It clearly says when a madhab would be mentioned in the presence of Imam Ibn Shahin, he would say I am upon the Muhammadi Madhab, meaning that he was a Muhammadi which is the Madhab of Ahl al-Hadith and not on the madhabs of others. What other context is there to this, that’s it and nothing else, what was the commotion and emotional rant about? The reality is this statement burns away at them and this is the best shoddy response they could come with. Oh yes on more thing, im sure you have read the same statement from Imam Malik right? No! thought so, run along…
Also remember Imam Dhahabi apart from citing this in his Siyar, he also brings it under Imam Ibn Shahin’s entry in the Tazkirratul Huffaz, and even the basic student of knowledge knows what this means. One only has to read through a few biographical entries in the Tazkirrah and one will surely get the idea, I suppose the reckless desperate writer was too busy fuming with anger and animosity to even think straight when he came across this statement in the Siyar or elsewhere for that matter.
This lone rambler, who has no precedence for anything that he says except his formal days amongst the Deobandi Hanafi circles, I mean seriously what else would the ardent hanafi deobandi say to the Ahl al-Hadith except the idiotic brazen claims, “The Ahle Hadees School of Fiqh will forever remain a fake school’ says the one while sitting on his red sofa in dewbsury, who are you trying to kid with your ludicrous disjointed lines of arguments? Is this the best you can come up with? Seriously do not waste our time.
As for Imam Ibn al-Jawzi’s statement, its funny how he cannot bring any context now. This shield they usually hide behind when all avenues in answering fail is, “Oh we need to look at the context.” The typical jahil muqallid argument as if they were still trying to figure out who is going to the toilet first. Ibn al-Jawzi is way after the time of Ibn Shahin and It has very little value based on the overwhelming praise by the Nuqad of hadith and Imams of Ahl al-Hadith for Imam Ibn Shahin. Furthermore, this statement is rejected if not highly debateable due to the sheer number of writings and books accredited to Imam Ibn Shahin which range on many subjects especially hadith. He was an Imam of Rijal, did he not write Kitab Tarikh Asma al-Thiqat and Kitāb al-Tārīkh Asmāʾ al-Ḍuʿafāʾ Waʾl Kazzābīn amongst others, the likes of Hafiz Ibn Hajr, Imam Dhahabi and even Hafiz Ibn al-Jawzi referred back to, especially in the latters Du’afa wal Matrukin. It is stated he wrote volumes upon volumes and was titled as Kathir al-Tasanif yet he had very little knowledge of fiqh! As I have mentioned before, the disease and bacteria of bigoted taqlid and submissive reverence to their hanafi deobandi tablighi churchfathers has not gone away, these people may have learnt to copy and paste but have a long way before they reach the level of actually using their intellects based on justice, fairness and basic comprehension before being trigger happy.
It is also brazenly treacherous to use such statements for earlier Imams because he and they fail to apply these rules to other Imams, who are perhaps higher in regards than Imam Ibn Shahin, according to them. Have not the later scholars criticised and disparaged the earlier scholars to the extent of attributing deviant and heretical beliefs to some of them, we presume he accepts and takes all of them too. This fatwa shopping they levy on others is exactly what they do while pretending they fall within he remit of the four madhabs. Read for example what Hafiz Ibn Hajr says about Imam Ibn Hibban on his take on Sayf bin Umar just as example etc.
This poor chap, needs to take his head of the sand and try to get past his own delusional issues and perhaps then he might begin to understand the stark and clear reality of the existence of the madhab of Ahl al-Hadith. Go and read the statement of the illustrious companion Abu Sa’id al-Khudri RadiAllahu Anhu and what he said to the tabieen, go and read what Abu Hurairah RadiAllahu Anhu refered to himself as, go and read what Abdullah Ibn Abbas RadiAllahu Anhuma was referred to as in the books of the same Imam Khatib Baghdadi he quotes
And the biggest joke of the century is this epically failed statement, “The Ahle Hadees School of Fiqh will forever remain a fake school. It has not Usul, no Tabaqat, no structure and no historical precedence.”
Just because a person adopts a toilet nickname it does not necessitate he has to actually regurgitate in that way, surely there is law against that, No! let me break this one down for you, what tabaqat are you talking about, the ones in which one Imam is listed as a Maliki and in the other has a hanafi, the tabaqat where an Imam is listed has a Shafi and also has a hanbali, exactly and when were these tabaqat written, oh yes much later post 4th-5th century. You say Usul, what sheer stupidity, when were your usul written, let me remind him in case he suffers a brain block, way after buddy.
Just because someone is still shackled in that deobandi hanafi quagmire, it is not our problem that we should continue to spoon feed you, just read and research the books of the Scholars of Ahl al-Hadith and you will know, but before you do that be honest and sincere to yourself.
Let me explain this in another basic way, because obviously obstinacy has taken its toll
Look at this, it is the letter ‘T’
The Ahlul Hadith are above the letter T which filers down to current times, you and your cohorts, my friend are the horizontal line on the letter T, and this horizontal line represents the the 4th and 5th Islamic century and you cannot beyond it. On the other hand buddy we existed above this line during the time of the companions. Despite all this he has the treacherous cheek to say to us we are fake and have no history. Tut tut
Why don’t you run along and play marbles or something with your litter pals or something…and next time you behave like that with the Ahl al-Hadith with your despicable trash and gutter language you will be put into your place with your anti hadith playmates whether that’s awni or the other rejects, you obstinate little boy!!!! And yeah tell the others too…