Black Turban wrote:
View original post
Tableeghi Jamaat: Fazail-e-Amaal (Virtues of Actions), Objection 10: Why has Shaykh (RA) included fabricated Ahadeeth in it at all?
Shaykh (Maulana) Muhammad Zakariyya Kandhlawi (RA) has relied on various classical books and authors for his research and there isn't a single narration which he has known to be fabricated and he has included it in his compilation. There are weak narrations but these are acceptable in matters of Fadhail as discussed by us here.
The matter is explained by Shaykh (Mufti) Hussain Kadodia (HA) that Shaykh (Maulana) Muhammad Zakariyya Kandhlawi (RA) has relied heavily upon the research of Allamah Jalauddin Suyuti (RA) who has quoted an alternative chain of a Hadeeth so the Author has included the narration in his book on the authority (and secondary chain) of Allamah Jalauddin Suyuti (RA).
It is on closer examination that secondary chain is found to be disconnected or fabricated so the inclusion (or creeping in) of fabricated narrations isn't deliberate, rather accidental. There are books upon books of actual Hadeeth compilations from Hadeeth Masters where Scholars have inadvertently included fabricated Ahadeeth and the Ummah has known about it and Scholars of Hadeeth have known about them.
So what should be done?
1 Fazail-e-Amaal is a book of virtues for laymen so they can read it and rely on the research of Shaykh (Maulana) Muhammad Zakariyya Kandhlawi (RA) and Allamah Jalauddin Suyuti (RA) . This is in line with the Qur'aanic commandment that laymen (who are not experts) should follow Scholars (who are experts) and a laymen is someone who has no ability to know that the secondary chain has a disconnect.
2 Where Scholars are reading the text to the masses and they regard a narration to be fabricated then these narations which the Scholar regards to be categorically fabricated should be not read and skipped as advised by Shaykh (Mufti) Hussain Kadodia (HA).
Its should be understood that the matter of declaring (or regarding) a narration to be fabricated can be an issue of difference of opinion amongst Scholars over a narrator. An example of such a case is the following article by Shaykh (Mufti) Taqi Usmani (HA) where the narrator Abu Bakr ibn Abi Saburah (RA) is discussed.
...When the Middle Night of Shabaan arrives, you should stand (Praying) in the night and should fast in the day following it.This Hadith is recorded by Ibn Majah in his Sunan, one of the famous six books of Hadith, and also by Baihaqi in his famous book Shu'ab-al-'iman'. Both of them have reported it without any comment about its authenticity. But after a critical analysis of its chain of narrators it is found that this tradition is mainly based on the report of Abu Bakr Ibn Abi Saburah whose narrations cannot be relied upon. That is why the scholars of Hadith have declared it as a weak (da'if) tradition. However, the allegation that the narrator of this Hadith i.e. Abu Bakr ibn Abi Saburah, is a fabricator who used to coin forged traditions does not seem correct. In fact, he was mufti of Madinah, a well-known jurist and he was appointed as a qadi (Judge) of Iraq in the days of Mansur and was succeeded in this office by Imam Abu Yousuf. He was a colleague of Imam Malik.
Once Mansur, the Abbasi Caliph, asked Imam Malik referred to three names, and one of them was that of Ibn Abi Saburah. Had he been a fabricator, Imam Malik would have never referred to his name in this context. But despite his high position among the jurists, his memory was not of the standard required for the uthenticity of a tradition. That is why most of the critics of Hadith like Imam Bukhari etc. Have held him as weak, but did not declare him a fabricator. Only Imam Ahmed is reported to have remarked about him that he fabricates Hadith. But this remark alone is not sufficient to hold him as a fabricator, for two reasons: Firstly Imam Ahmed was born long after him, and his contemporary scholars never held him as such, secondly the Arabic words used by Imam Ahmed are some times used for confusing one tradition with another, and not for deliberate fabrication.
This is the reason why the majority of the scholars of Hadith have held Abu Bakr ibn Abi Saburah as a weak reporter of Hadith, but they did not declare him as a forger or fabricator. Now, coming to his tradition about the fast of the 15th Sha'baan it is held by the scholars to be weak but i have not come across an authentic scholar who has treated it as a fabricated (Mawdu) Hadith. There are a number of books indicating the fabricated Ahadith, but this tradition is not included in these books as fabricated.
It is well-known that Ibn Majah consists of about twenty Ahadith held to be fabricated. The list of these fabricated AHadith is available, but the tradition in question is not included therein...