Scholar's who slander Imams of Fiqh

This is a very deep and disturbing topic. However, over in the blogs section, questions are being asked as to who "exactly" has slandered any of the four Imams of Fiqh.

I would appreciate it if anyone could provide links to those scholars with evidence, (I would rather have recent scholars) who have been accused of this act. I had mentiond Abu Usamah adh-Dhahabi, but the response was that he is just a student of knowledge and not a scholar.

YouTube videos and lectures with exact comments and time of comments would be appreciated as we dont want to waste time listening to some of the filth that comes out of their mouths.

I do not wish to defame anyone nor create a stir, rather, I just want to show that this does happen and it is being promoted. It may not be promoted here, but it is most definately being promoted around the world.

Having said that, there are many many sincere brothers and sisters with the cleanest of hearts and purest of intentions who unfortunately are also being labelled as these so-called scholars of Islam.

Shaykh Zahir Mahmood - On Those Who Slander Imam Abu Hanifa

This is clearly not the case as can be seen here.

central-mosque.com/index.php/Hadeeth/imam-abu-hanifah-ra-...

Asslamo Allaikum,

The issue is during the past 1400+ year history of Islam there have many Scholars who have questioned other Scholars and those who knit pick opinions randomly should be ashamed of themselves so yes there are some who have questioned Imam Abu Haneefa (RA) but to report the matter without responses which have been written is Academic dishonesty.

I give you examples about Saheeh Bukhari.

1. Imam Darqutni (RA): Kitab al-Tatabbu', al-Daraqutni argues for the weakness of 78 hadiths in al-Bukhari
2. Islam-qa admits weak narrators in Saheeh Bukhari
3. Imam Ibn Haj'r Asqalani (RA) admits to weak narrators in Saheeh Bukhari (See below his introduction to Saheeh Bukhari).

If we were dishonest people with an Agenda we would simply report these things and try to create a Fitnah but Fear of Allah (SWT) demands us to report the facts and exonerate the facts about Saheeh Bukhari which consists of three kinds of reports:

1. Al-Usool: Principle matters and this is the point that Imam Bukhari (RA) is making and he uses only rigorously authenticated Ahadeeth and there is no issues with any of his narrations.
2. Ash-Sahawahid: However, once he has proved a matter with al-usool he may mention in a supplementary fashion what confirms what he narrated in his al-usool. So the fact that al-Bukhaari holds a narrator weak does not prevent him from narrating his hadith in other than al-usool.
3. Ta'leequn: Consider these like footnote and It is universally accepted that the "Ta'leeqaat" of Bukhari don't enjoy the same status of authenticity as the Musnad which are  those narrations of Rasulullah sallallahu'alaihiwasallam  that appear with a full, continuos chain)

These are the games that Ahl-e-Hadeeth of India/Pakistan and Madkhalees play when they report a Hadeeth from Saheeh Bukhari or present a proof of a Hadeeth in Saheeh Bukhari and the laymen can't tell the difference. This will be fully explained at Central-Mosque.com in this article (being translated)

Just for raw data I give two examples:

Example 1 from Saheeh Bukhari:

The narrator مُؤَمَّلُ بْنُ إِسْمَاعِيلَ who is part of the main evidence for placing hands on the chest is weak, Ahl-e-Hadeeth of India/Pakistan and Madkhalees put a youtube video in convincing laymen that he has been narrated in Saheeh Bukhari (RA) so laymen don't know any better...Here is the Hadeeth and observe their trickery and deception! Hadeeth in Blue and the mention of مُؤَمَّلُ بْنُ إِسْمَاعِيلَ in Red

مُؤَمَّلُ بْنُ إِسْمَاعِيلَ has nothing to do with the main Hadeeth and has been mentioned as a secondary matter and even if someone doesn't know Arabic can see that.

حدثنا عبد الله بن عبد الوهاب حدثنا حماد عن رجل لم يسمه عن الحسن قال خرجت بسلاحي ليالي الفتنة فاستقبلني أبو بكرة فقال أين تريد قلت أريد نصرة ابن عم رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم قال قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم إذا تواجه المسلمان بسيفيهما "" - ص 2595 - فكلاهما من أهل النار قيل فهذا القاتل فما بال المقتول قال إنه أراد قتل صاحبه قال حماد بن زيد فذكرت هذا الحديث لأيوب ويونس بن عبيد وأنا أريد أن يحدثاني به فقالا إنما روى هذا الحديث الحسن عن الأحنف بن قيس عن أبي بكرة حدثنا سليمان حدثنا حماد بهذا وقال مؤمل حدثنا حماد بن زيد حدثنا أيوب ويونس وهشام ومعلى بن زياد عن الحسن عن الأحنف عن أبي بكرة عن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم ورواه معمر عن أيوب ورواه بكار بن عبد العزيز عن أبيه عن أبي بكرة وقال غندر حدثنا شعبة عن منصور عن ربعي بن حراش عن أبي بكرة عن النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم ولم يرفعه سفيان عن منصور

Example 2 from Saheeh Bukhari:

There is a narrator called إبراهيم بن إسماعيل بن مجمع  whom Imam Bukhari (RA) declares to have memory problems as follows:

And then he places him in Saheeh Bukhari. Here is the Hadeeth and observe their trickery and deception! Hadeeth in Blue and the mention of إبراهيم بن إسماعيل بن مجمع in Red

حَدَّثَنَا عَبْدُ اللَّهِ بْنُ مُحَمَّدٍ حَدَّثَنَا هِشَامُ بْنُ يُوسُفَ حَدَّثَنَا مَعْمَرٌ عَنْ الزُّهْرِيِّ عَنْ سَالِمٍ عَنْ ابْنِ عُمَرَ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُمَا
أَنَّه سَمِعَ النَّبِيَّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ يَخْطُبُ عَلَى الْمِنْبَرِ يَقُولُ اقْتُلُوا الْحَيَّاتِ وَاقْتُلُوا ذَا الطُّفْيَتَيْنِ وَالْأَبْتَرَ فَإِنَّهُمَا يَطْمِسَانِ الْبَصَرَ وَيَسْتَسْقِطَانِ الْحَبَلَ قَالَ عَبْدُ اللَّهِ فَبَيْنَا أَنَا أُطَارِدُ حَيَّةً لِأَقْتُلَهَا فَنَادَانِي أَبُو لُبَابَةَ لَا تَقْتُلْهَا فَقُلْتُ إِنَّ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ قَدْ أَمَرَ بِقَتْلِ الْحَيَّاتِ قَالَ إِنَّهُ نَهَى بَعْدَ ذَلِكَ عَنْ ذَوَاتِ الْبُيُوتِ وَهِيَ الْعَوَامِرُ
وَقَالَ عَبْدُ الرَّزَّاقِ عَنْ مَعْمَرٍ فَرَآنِي أَبُو لُبَابَةَ أَوْ زَيْدُ بْنُ الْخَطَّابِ وَتَابَعَهُ يُونُسُ وَابْنُ عُيَيْنَةَ وَإِسْحَاقُ الْكَلْبِيُّ وَالزُّبَيْدِيُّ وَقَالَ صَالِحٌ وَابْنُ أَبِي حَفْصَةَ وَابْنُ مُجَمِّعٍ عَنْ الزُّهْرِيِّ عَنْ سَالِمٍ عَنْ ابْنِ عُمَرَ رَآنِي أَبُو لُبَابَةَ وَزَيْدُ بْنُ الْخَطَّابِ
baab
بَاب قَوْلِ اللَّهِ تَعَالَى

وَبَثَّ فِيهَا مِنْ كُلِّ دَابَّةٍ

ينبغي لكل منصف أن يعلم أن تخريج صاحب الصحيح لأي راوٍ كان مقتض لعدالته عنده وصحة ضبطه وعدم غفلته ولا سيما ما انضاف إلى ذلك من إطباق جمهور الأئمة على تسمية الكتابين بالصحيحين، وهذا معنى لم يحصل لغير من خرج عنه في الصحيح فهو بمثابة إطباق الجمهور على تعديل من ذكر فيهما هذا إذا خرج له في الأصول، أما إن خرج له في المتابعات والشواهد والتعاليق فهذا يتفاوت درجات من أخرج له منهم في الضبط وغيره مع حصول اسم الصدق لهم، وحينئذٍ إذا وجدنا لغيره في أحد منهم طعناً فذلك الطعن مقابل لتعديل هذا الامام لا يقبل إلا مبين السبب مفسراً بقادح يقدح في عدالة هذا الراوي وفي ضبطه مطلقاً أو في ضبطه لخبر بعينه لأن الأسباب الحاملة للأئمة على الجرح متفاوتة منها ما يقدح ومنها مالا يقدح

Asslamo Allaikum,

So I 100% agree that they are twisting isolated opinions about Imam Abu Haneefa (RA) and making him (RA) appear weak just like Modernists & Rafidhees (Shias) are twisting opinions to make Ameerul-Mumineen Imam Bukhari (RA) and his Saheeh look weak.

GM and Madkhalees hide the fact that there are indeed weak narrators in Saheeh Bukhari and that's why you need to go to a Scholar. I have lost the link to an Urdu GM forum where a Shia came and posted narrator after narrator from Saheeh Bukhari who were Shia and someone who is part of the Administrator replied that these are Ta'leeqs of Saheeh Bukhari.

The same GM's won't admit it when discussing with Hanafees if the narration is Musnad or Ta'leeq in Saheeh Bukhari and as part of their grand deception merely just say its narrated in Saheeh Bukhari.

Subhaana Allah.....Its a shame how some play with the deen... fitnah fitnah fitnsh

central-mosque.com/index.php/Acts-of-Worship/investigatin...

Waiting for 2 references to be translated and then it will be added to the page above...

You gotta Thank the Ahl-e-Hadeeth for making us (laymen) dig into Saheeh Bukhari and counter their deception otherwise we wouldn't have imagined have weak narrators in Saheeh Bukhari!

Its ironic!