Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Sharh As-Sunnah of Al-Barbahari

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • Sharh As-Sunnah of Al-Barbahari

    This is a thread I posted on another Salafi forum (islamicawakening):

    Bismillah,

    Before we talk about the athar of Imam Ali (raa) which bro. Harris Hammam kept asking about.. I would like to give a little muqaddimah about a book which is prized by Neo Salafis and considered among their top books of Aqidah. This book is "Sharh As-Sunnah" by Imam Al-Barbahaaree (ra).

    This muqqadimah, is actually a summarized translation of an article written by one of our blessed mashayikh in Al-Azhar.

    How important is this book to the Salafiyyah you may ask? Well heres some information about the book to show its rank among the Neo Salafiyyah:

    The following Neo Salafi scholars have given audio or written commentaries on "Sharh As-Sunnah" by Al-Barbaharee:

    -Salih Al-Fawzan (audio)
    -Omar Al-Harkan (audio)
    -Ahmad Abdas Salam (audio)
    -Omar bin Sa'ud (audio)
    -Abdul Aziz Ar-Rajihi (audio)
    -Fahd bin Sulayman (audio)
    -Abdul Aziz Ar-Rayes (audio)
    -Falah Isma'il Mndakar (audio)
    -Ahmad An-Najmee (written - Irshad As-Sari commentary)
    -Ali Al-Halabee (written commentary)
    -Salih As-Suhaymee (audio)

    The proof that the Salafis use to attribute this book to Imam Al-Barbahari is as following (as mentioned by the book's Salafi Muhaqqiq Mohammed Sa'id Al-Qahtani):

    -There is only one manuscript from the 6th century Hijri, of this book which is kept at Ath-Thahiriyyah in Damascus, with a copy of it in Um Al-Qura University in Saudi. This obviously is the manuscript which the muhaqqiq copied from.
    -Hafidh Ibn Abu Ya'ala Al-Hanbali mentions in his Tabaqat that Imam Al-Barbahaaree authored a book which he called "Sharh As-Sunnah"( interestingly, Abu Ya'ala does not mention a sanad to Imam Barbaharis book, even though he mentions a sanad for almost all works mentioned in his tabaqat).
    -Ibn Taymiyyah, Ad-Dhahabi, Ibn Abdul Hadi, Ibn Al-Imad, Ibn Muflih mention that Barbahari authored a book named "Sharh As-Sunnah" but also did not provide an isnad, they most likely copied or took this information from Ibn Abi Ya'ala's tarjamah of Imam Barbahari (as is the norm of those who write the books of tabaqat, they copy from the books of tabaqat written before their time, especially considering the fact that almost all the above mentioned scholars met each other).

    based on the above facts, the muhaqqiq of the book concluded that "Sharh As-Sunnah" was authored by Imam Barbahari..


    However, this is not true, because of the following:

    -The single manuscript we have of "Sharh As-Sunnah", dates back to the 6th century while Barbahari lived during the 3rd and 4th century. Another interesting fact is that this manuscript does have a isnad written on it, however this isnad does not end with Barbahari, rather it ends with an individual named "Ghulam Khalil", who I'll talk about below.
    -The Arab Historian Fu'ad Sazkin mentions "Sharh As-Sunnah" as being one of the books authored by Ghulam Khalil (Tarikh At-Turath Al-Arabi, 3/231).
    -The Neo Salafi Muhaqqiq deletes the Isnad mentioned on the manuscript in his published copies of the book.
    -As we have mentioned, the lone manuscript of Sharh As-Sunnah we have has a sanad to Ahmad bin Mohammed bin Ghalib, better known as "Ghulam Khalil". Now lets see what the Ulama'a of rijal say about this individual (Ghulam Khalil):

    Al-Hakim An-Naysaburi says of him:


    روى عن جماعة من الثقات أحاديث موضوعة


    translation:
    "He narrarated fabricated hadith from a group of trustworthy transmitters"


    Al-Hafidh Ibn Hajar (raa) says of Ghulam Khalil the following (Lisan Al-Mizan):

    قال ابن عدي سمعت أبا عبد الله النهاوندي يقول قلت لغلام خليل: ما هذه الرقائق التي تحدث بها؟ قال وضعناها لنرقق بها قلوب العامة

    translation: "Ibn Uday said: I heard Aba Abdallah An-Nahawandi say: I said to Ghulam Khalil 'what are these heart softening hadiths that you are narrating?' he replied: 'we've fabricated them to soften the hearts of the laymen'.


    Al-Hafidh also says:


    قال أبو داود أخشى أن يكون دجال بغداد
    وقال الدارقطني متروك
    سمعت الشيخ أبا بكر بن إسحاق يقول: أحمد بن محمد بن غالب ممن لا أشك في كذبه
    قال أبو داود قد عرض علي من حديثه فنظرت في أربعمائة حديث أسانيدها ومتونها كذب كلها

    Translation:
    "Hafidh Abu Dawud said about Ghulam Khalil: 'I suspect he is the Dajjal of Baghdad"
    "Ad-Daraqutni said about him: 'Matruk' (meaning his hadith is not accepted)"
    "I heard Abu Bakr bin Ishaq say: "Ahmad bin Mohammed bin Ghalib (Ghulam Khalil) is a liar without any doubt"
    "Abu Dawud said: 'his hadith was shown to me, and I saw of them only 400, and ALL of their isnads and texts were lies"


    (notice that the Imams of Ar-Rijal all call Ghulam Khalil a liar, fabricator)

    Conclusion:
    The book Sharh As-Sunnah, which is considered a book of much value to the Salafis, was not authored by Imam Barbahari, rather it was authored by a fabricator of Hadith named Ghulam Khalil. Its sanad clearly ends at Ghulam Khalil and was transmitted sama'an (by hearing directly from Ghulam). attached to this post is a copy of the first page of the manuscript, which you will see ends with Ahmad bin Mohammed bin Ghalib (Ghulam Khalil), and nowhere is Barbahari even mentioned.

    So you must be asking why I would post this under the title of "Regarding the Imam Ali (raa) Athar". Well, because I want to prove to the Neo Salafis that they rely on a book which was authored by a liar and fabricator of hadith, with no sanad at all to Imam Barbahari, yet they criticize us for using on the athar of Imam Ali (raa) ( 'Allah was without a place and He is now as He was...') even though this athar was mentioned by Hafidh Abu Nu'aym in 'Hilyat Al-Awliya'a' and Imam Isfirayini in AlFarqu bayna Al-Firaq, mursalan to Ali bin Abi Talib. we do not rely on it, but use because its meaning is true. We admit that it does not have a sanad, but use it in the same sense the fuqaha'a say about similar athar without sanad (Yusta'anasu Bihi).

    if someone has doubts about what Ive posted about Sharh As-Sunnah, then I have this to say: I DARE YOU TO SHOW ME A SANAD FOR THIS BOOK TO AL-BARBAHARI.. which is a completely reasonable question since it is an important resource for your madhab.
    Attached Files

  • #2
    You posted this on Islamic Awakening about 2 hours ago. I will wait just a few hours and recheck that thread. Probably by that time Abuz Zubair will have replied and annihilated your post. That is one thing that Abuz Zubair excels at, Masha-Allah. May Allah [swt] reward him for his good work.

    Comment


    • #3
      Originally posted by Hanbali View Post
      You posted this on Islamic Awakening about 2 hours ago. I will wait just a few hours and recheck that thread. Probably by that time Abuz Zubair will have replied and annihilated your post. That is one thing that Abuz Zubair excels at, Masha-Allah. May Allah [swt] reward him for his good work.

      Ahlan wa Sahlan wa Marhaban bi Abiz Zubair! the brother who wrote all the "Responses to Heretics" articles? those articles are nothing but tadlees and misinformation.. I see no substance in his arguements at all, no logical structure whatsoever.. the Salafis at IslamicAwakening seem to love him though

      Comment


      • #4
        Lets say, for the sake of argument, that it is not authentically attributed to Imam al Barbahari, then what?

        There are lots of books by the Righteous Salaf and ones after who wrote about the aqeedah of the Salaf, with authentic athar from them.

        So even if this book is not his, we have lots of other books.

        so I don't get the point of this topic.
        .

        Comment


        • #5
          Originally posted by Um Abdullah M. View Post
          Lets say, for the sake of argument, that it is not authentically attributed to Imam al Barbahari, then what?

          There are lots of books by the Righteous Salaf and ones after who wrote about the aqeedah of the Salaf, with authentic athar from them.

          So even if this book is not his, we have lots of other books.

          so I don't get the point of this topic.
          1) dont attribute the book to Imam Barbahari
          2) dont use the book since it is written by a fabricator
          3) you call yourselves 'Ahlul Hadith', yet rely on a book which is written by a liar
          4) use other books and drop this book, since you have other sources
          5) chill out with all the bashing of Ash'aris because some of them mention the Athar of Sayyiduna Ali (raa).
          6) chill out with all the Ashari/Sufi bashing threads you have

          Comment


          • #6
            Originally posted by chitownmuslim View Post
            5) chill out with all the bashing of Ash'aris because some of them mention the Athar of Sayyiduna Ali (raa).
            why should we?
            Just because some salafis use unauthentic athar in their istidlal in some matters of aqeedah, doesn't mean we are going to accept an athar that has no chain at all.

            I personally do not agree with using unauthentic narrations or athar in matters of aqeedah, and try my best to only use authentic ones.

            And a question to you: why do Asharis use the non-chained athar attributed to Ali radiyallahu anhu in a matter of belief while rejecting using hadith ahad in matters of aqeedah?


            6) chill out with all the Ashari/Sufi bashing threads you have
            We aren't going to stop making inkar of munkar, especially in matters of belief, just because you don't like it.

            And if you see anything said about Asharis or sufis that is false, then you can bring proof showing that what was said isn't true.
            Last edited by Um Abdullah M.; 03-26-2009, 04:22 AM. Reason: correcting a typo
            .

            Comment


            • #7
              For the full picture, visit:

              http://forums.islamicawakening.com/s...d.php?p=221942
              And what indicates to the religiosity and trustworthiness of Nu`aym [bin Hammad] is his returning to the truth whenever
              he was told of his inadvertence and made aware of his mistake, as he never considered accepting the truth beneath himself

              because returning to the truth is better than remaining in falsehood,
              and the one who remains in falsehood will increase only in remoteness from the truth

              (29/471, Tadheeb 'l-Kamal)

              Comment


              • #8
                Originally posted by chitownmuslim View Post
                1) dont attribute the book to Imam Barbahari
                2) dont use the book since it is written by a fabricator
                3) you call yourselves 'Ahlul Hadith', yet rely on a book which is written by a liar
                4) use other books and drop this book, since you have other sources
                5) chill out with all the bashing of Ash'aris because some of them mention the Athar of Sayyiduna Ali (raa).
                6) chill out with all the Ashari/Sufi bashing threads you have
                I hope you realize that points 5 and 6 are completely unrelated to whether or not this turns out to actually be a forgery. And points 1-4 are essentially one point "don't use it, use others". But I suppose some people do love to talk. InshaAllah this will result in some enlightening tehqeeq. What I found totally absurd though is that you insist that since this may possibly be a false book, it justifies the incorrect nature of using that athar from 'Alee (ra). If it wasn't for the insistence on this rather illogical point, I'd think this is useful to be brought up. I mean, it sounds like "well sure we use baatil narrations - but so do you!"...

                Comment


                • #9
                  As-Salamu 'Alaykum

                  hey chit, why do you have introduce the same gult all over the internet? Did you even read before writing down your points in post # 5? This shows that you people need to study some common sense before studying ilmul kalam. Would it matter to you which book we use to debunk your heretical beliefs because at the end of the day you reject them anyway?

                  I'm amazed by these people, they'll go crazy about ijazah issue and reject the saheeh ahad ahadeeth but then they'll use isnaandless narrations to prove their unprovable aqeedah. This sums up where you people stand and yet you claim to be among Ahlus Sunnah!
                  Fi Amanillah
                  Wa As-Salāmu 'Alaykum
                  Islamic-Life
                  Bringing Da'wah back..to life!

                  Alee bin al-Madini (rahimahullah) said: "When someone says so and so is an anthropomorphist we come to know he is a Jahmi". [Sharh Usool ul-I'tiqaad (no.306)]

                  Comment


                  • #10
                    Originally posted by Um Abdullah M. View Post
                    why should we?
                    Just because some salafis use unauthentic athar in their istidlal in some matters of aqeedah, doesn't mean we are going to accept an athar that has no chain at all.

                    I personally do not agree with using unauthentic narrations or athar in matters of aqeedah, and try my best to only use authentic ones.

                    And a question to you: why do Asharis use the non-chained athar attributed to Ali radiyallahu anhu in a matter of belief while rejecting using hadith ahad in matters of aqeedah?

                    I havent really seen that many Ash'aris use it honestly.. like i said before we DONT rely on this athar, a few have used it because it does not conflict with any Usul.. we admit that this athar of Imam Ali (raa) cannot be used alone because it has no sanad.

                    As far as the issue of accepting Ahad Hadith in matters of aqidah is concerned, then this is a seperate issue we can discuss on a seperate thread.

                    We aren't going to stop making inkar of munkar, especially in matters of belief, just because you don't like it.

                    And if you see anything said about Asharis or sufis that is false, then you can bring proof showing that what was said isn't true.
                    Ok

                    Comment


                    • #11
                      Originally posted by chitownmuslim View Post

                      I DARE YOU TO SHOW ME A SANAD FOR THIS BOOK TO AL-BARBAHARI.. which is a completely reasonable question since it is an important resource for your madhab.
                      Nameless Heretic,

                      Have you yourself verified or did takhreej of any of the points in Sharh us-Sunnah...?

                      Are you aware that it is not presented as a book of narrations....?

                      How can you engage the science of hadeeth on a text that does not contain hadeeth...?

                      Are you even aware of the principle involving allowing the weak narration in texts related to Tareekh and Seerah....?

                      Can you give us one example where the statements in Sharh us-Sunnah are untraceable or rejected by the historians, Muhadditheen, or biographers....?

                      Or are you just going to come here with your incessant barking and noise-making....?

                      Are you calling into question the authorship in order to admit al-Barbahaaree back into the fold of Islam....?

                      Or if this book is still proven to be from him, is he still a heretic in your opinion....?


                      Comment


                      • #12
                        Would you like a sanad for what I just said, and do I need one of your confetti 'Ijaazah for it, in your opinion....?

                        Less talk about the sanad for the book and more about what you dispute from its' contents....

                        Any charges you would like to make about what is found in it....?


                        Comment


                        • #13
                          Perhaps what makes this heretic so angry about al-Barbahaaree is that according to ath-Thahabee in his Siyar:

                          فقيل: إن الاشعري (5) لما قدم بغداد جاء إلى أبي محمد البربهاري، فجعل يقول: رددت على الجبائي، رددت على المجوس، وعلى النصارى. فقال أبو محمد: لا أدري ما تقول، ولا نعرف إلا ما قاله الامام أحمد

                          'Indeed al-'Ash'aree when he settled in Baghdaad, he went to 'Abu Muhammad al-Barbahaaree and said: 'Do you reject as error (what comes from) al-Jubbaa'ee (the Mu'tazilee), the Majuus, and the Christians?'. And 'Abu Muhammad: 'I do not understand what you are saying, and I do not recognized but what 'Imaam 'Ahmad said'...

                          Why would the 'great' al-'Asharee GO TO 'Abu Muhammad, except in recognizing who this affair and the People of Knolwedge are...?

                          This is the 'Imaam of the Hanaabilah of his time, snuffing al-'Ashaaree, and refusing to engage in the baatil debates and discussions, affirming what 'Imaam 'Ahmad said in the face of those who wish to complicate matters for their own benefit and fame...

                          In fact there are transmissions from some of the Salaf, preferring the statements of the Christians and Jews to what the Jahmeeyah say, and the false argumentation in the Attributes of Allah...

                          Or perhaps it's because after this meeting with al-Barbahaaree, al-'Asharee writes al-'Ibaanah.....?

                          فخرج (6) وصنف " الابانة " (7) فلم يقبل منه.

                          Is that why you go after al-Barbahaaree, heretic...?


                          Comment


                          • #14
                            authenticity of sharhus sunnah

                            this issue was dealt in pages 15-20 of the English translation of sharhus sunnah, published under the title "EXPLANATION OF THE CREED". This translation is based on the arabic edition of sharhus sunnah produced by Khaalid ar-Radaadee.

                            Khaalid ar-Radaadee says:

                            (quoted from pages 19-20 of the English translation)

                            START QUOTE

                            A number of the scholars came across this book and quoted from it agreeing to its ascription to Imaam al-Barbahaaree, as is seen by what follows:

                            (i) Ibn Abee Ya'laa in Tabaqaat ul_Hanaabilah (2/18-43) quotes the whole text of the book except for a very small number of lines and quotes everything found in the manuscript except for the first two sheets and he says before it, "al-Barbahaaree wrote a number of works, from them Sharh Kitaab is-Sunnah in which he mentioned: Beware of smaller innovations..." to the end of the book.
                            ...
                            ...

                            (iv) A large section or a portion is quoted, in the same way as Ibn Abee Ya'laa, by Abul-Yaman al-'Aleemee in al-Manhaj al- Ahmad (2/27-37) and by Ibn ul-'Imaad al-Hanbalee in ash-Shudharaat (2/319-322) and by adh-Dhahabee in Taareekh ul-Islaam (p.258) and by him in Siyar A'laamin- Nubalaa' (15/91).

                            In conclusion these are definite proofs of the correctness of ascription of the book to Imaam al-Barbahaaree. All praise and thanks are for Allaah.

                            Manuscripts of the book
                            There is a photocopy of the manuscript in the main library of Ummul-Quraa University, Makkah, bearing the collection number thirteen. It is written in legible writing and aws written in the year 506, or just after. This manuscript is the one having the chain of narration from Ghulaam Khaleel written upon it.

                            As regards the other copy, it is that which has been printed within Tabaqaat ul-Hanaabilah (vol.2, pp.18-45) of Ibn Abee Ya'laa.

                            END QUOTE.

                            Comment


                            • #15
                              Bro Abu Najm quit this Chit-Chat Dude,he's just an upstart!
                              The Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم said:
                              Verily,Allaah veils the tawbah from every innovator until he leaves his innovation'' [As Sunnah#37 and Shaykh Al Albaani رحمه الله said, Saheeh ]
                              Shaykh al Islam Ibn Taymiyyah رحمه الله commented,'' This indicates that the innovator will not repent from his Bid'ah,because he thinks that he is rightly guided.''
                              [ Majmu al Fataawa 11/685]

                              Comment

                              Working...
                              X