Abu Khuzaimah Ansari
ʿAudhu Billāhi min ash-Shayṭān al-Rajīm
Bismillāh al-Raḥmān al-Raḥīm
Alḥamdullilāhi Rabbil ʿAlamīn, Waṣalatu Wassalām ʿAla Rasūlillahil Karīm, Wa ʿAla Alihī Wa Aṣḥābī Wa Man Tabiāhum Bi-Eḥsan Ilaʾ Yaum al-Dīn; Wa Baʿd
All Praise belongs and is directed to the Rabb of everything
that exists, Praise and Salutations be upon His
Final beloved Messenger, his revered family
and his noble Companions and upon
those who follow them in good
until the end of times,
There are no introductions, InshaAllah straight to the answers. This is an answer to the video of the deranged Sururi Neo-Khariji Bro Hajji.
We learn neo-Khariji Bro Hajji accused me of using a weak and Jahmi narrator. In this response I have shown Bro Hajji is a disgraceful failure and an embarrassment to his brain, his followers and the human race. In this response I have shown Bro Hajji,
- Used a forgetful, confused and weak narrator, who was abandoned by the scholars of hadith for having JAHMI views. He was further a ‘subservient bootlicker’ a ‘Madkhali’ according to the terminology of Bro Hajji. There was disconnection in the chain, yes despite all this Bro Hajji uses this narration. Absolutely embarrassing.
- He accuses me of using a weak narrator but he uses a narrator who was weak and accused of being a fabricator of hadith.
- Bro Hajji in the past used the statement of Imam Ibn Hazm and since Bro Hajji’s principle is that a Jahmi is a weak narrator, he contradicts his own principle, that in his reply to me he refutes a Jahmi weak narrator.
- Bro Hajji declared Abu Hanifah a weak narrator and a Jahmi.
- He distorts the words of Imam Abd al-Barr in his al-Istizkar.
- He distorts and manipulates the words of Imam Ahmad and Imam Ali b. al-Madini.
- The narration he attempted to refute and weaken was authenticated by some researchers.
- Bro Hajji uses the report from Tarikh Baghdad that says Ismail was a Jahmi but yet Bro Hajji cannot authenticate Muhammad b. Ali al-Muqri.
- Bro Hajji uses al-Jassas who was a Mu’tazili with Rafidi, how disgusting, using a Mu’tazili to defend his position who were known to rebel due one of their ‘Usul al-Khamsa’ with the one they rebel and cause harm to Muslims being commanding the good and forbidding the evil – Al-Amr bil-Maruf Wa Nahya Anil Munkar.
Apply the principle of slave of KSA to the vast Deobandi clergy and their “Madkhali Super Salafi” views because they hold the same view as us. For instance, you need to watch the statements of the late Deobandi scholar, Mufti Zarwali Khan. This is the first wake up call.
He says he cannot respond to every dog that barks, yet he records a video lasting 1h10mins, that is an exceptionally long time barking because only a dog barks back in reply. I did not bark, I wrote, Bro Hajji barked for that long, and since Khariji’s are dogs and his constant reference to bootlickers, all explain his need to bark and eventually bad rabid dogs are put down.
He claims I was hiding behind a troll account. Pathetic and dumb to even assume, just to convince his retarded ego. EVERYBODY knows I am not a troll account. They can check 20 years of my footprint on the internet. This explains Bro Hajji (BH) is a new kid.
He talks about our technicalities, but InshaAllah I will show you some of his catastrophic, pathetic and utterly humiliating technicalities, which even the most incompetent deviants do not commit.
The reason he responds to me is not because of my ego but because I damaged his psyche and dented his impeded deviancy, just like his pea sized brain which ultimately damaged his manhood amongst his followers.
He says no one reads! Well that is a polytheistic principle right there, saying one thing while practising something different. One only needs to look at his twitter and they will see all the screenshots of the books HE READS to fool the people with his Judaic distortions but does not want you to read my reply!
Of course, I am a layman, but Bro Hajji needs to cast his mind back to his little irrelevant self. He has no qualifications, he has only studied some nominal Arabic, the stomach bursting chuckles we have from his calamitous errors by watching the plethora of embarrassing videos on social media, Shadid Alal Jahmiyyah being latest violation of the Muslim mind. Bro Hajji has not even studied a single book in any discipline, I mean the guy cannot even read basic English properly and in his deluded mind he thinks he refutes people!
He burst onto the scene a few years ago while getting piggybacks with his Deobandi cohorts. His disgusting desire to make money and seek fame through his vile videos is evident. When he emerged from his Rafidic hole and labelled Imam al-Barbahari’s Sharh al-Sunnah, the Talmud, that is when the need to defend the honour of our Ulama motivated me. I called BH out for this reason and in defence of the great scholars of this Ummah and since that day, he ran and hid like a meek mouse in his hole, following the footsteps of his Rafidi influencers.
8:33 – Imam Ibn Abd al-Barr and al-Istizkar
I mentioned pro Khuruj because BH used his statement as EVIDENCE and understanding.
Remember his words, he says Imam Ibn Abd al-Barr is an Alim of the Din, agreed. Thereafter, you can see the circus, the numerous edits, and retakes due to his ignorance. I at least tried to veil Abu Hanifah, but Bro Hajji exposes Abu Hanifah, his family and that all of them were weak. So, what does everyone do including the Deobandis? They like and share his material and defame their own Imam.
I will show BH “too deep right” now. Bro Hajji makes yet again another error, TWICE in reading the name Amir and calls the narrator Ammar. Let me show you now, how incompetent, deceptive, and embarrassing Bro Hajji really is, which show us that he has no idea what he is talking about, watch this embarrassing moment of Bro Hajji’s life.
Al-Ma’mun was the Abbasid ruler, who attempted to destroy the Din of Islam. He pushed foreign deviant ideas and creeds in Islam, Greek Philosophy, he was a Mu’tazili and even had powerful Rafidi tendencies, so much so that he was considered to a Shi’i. He also initiated the Minha, the inquisition against the Sunni Salafi creed of the Quran being the uncreated speech of Allah and the administrative torture, oppression, and theological persecution against Imam Ahmad b. Hanbal.
What was Bishr b. al-Walid doing with Ma’mun? He was a court judge for Ma’mun and we know Ma’mun would only do that for those who ascribed to the kufr creed of the Quran being created. Ma’mun died in 218H. So not only was Bishr a Jahmi bootlicker and subservient to the ruler in his oppression and tyranny against the Muslims, but he also supported all the KUFR beliefs of Ma’mun.
Bishr was also a Hanafi Qadhi and thus gave judgements according to the Hanafi Madhhab and was thus naturally bias towards the epistemological founder of his Madhhab. (Al-Jawhar al-Mu’dhiyyah, 1:452, al-Fawa’id al-Bahiyyah, 54, from Lisan, 1: Juzz 2:316. See footnote 3 of Suwalat al-Sulami lil-Daraqutni, 132.). So, Bro Hajji the deviant shows his double standards and takes the clarifying narrative of a Jahmi subservient Bootlicker himself. Oh, the embarrassment! Wallahi shameless polytheistic Hindu Judaic double standards, but do not die just yet, I have more.
Whether Ismail was a Jahmi or not, the same principles needs to be applied to Hammad and Abu Hanifah and this was one of the reasons I presented this statement. When BH announced boastfully that he was going to refute me next, I knew which statement he would address because it was the very narration I had presented as devastating bait for him. Low and behold the novice fell hook, line, and sinker.
Bishr was also forgetful, confused, and senile. Saleh b. Muhammad Jazrah said,
“He was truthful but did not make sense because he became forgetful”. Sulaymani said, “He was munkar al-hadith rejected I hadith”. Al-A’jurri said, “I asked Abu Dawud is Bishr b. al-Walid trustworthy, He replied, No”. Al-Sulami narrated from al-Daraqutni that he said he was, Trustworthy”. (Mizan al-I’tidal, 1:327, Lisan al-Mizan, 1: Juzz 2:316, al-Sulami, Suwalat al-Sulami lil-Daraqutni, 132 no.76.)
Both Ibn al-Kayyal (d.939H) and Burhan al-Din al-Halabi (d.841H) said he was from the forgetful narrators. (al-Kawakib al-Nirat Fi Ma’rifah Min Ikhtilat Min al-Ruwat al-Thiqat, 109-110 no.10, al-Ightibat Biman Rumiya al-Ikhtilat, 72 no.16)
So, Bishr’s clarifying remarks, that this was only the opinion of Ismail cannot be taken. Furthermore, there is Inqita’ (a breakage and disconnection ins the chain) in al-Intiqa of Imam Ibn Abd al-Barr to Bishr b. al-Walid of over 100 years. Yet BH takes this, is this not weak? What would the Hanafi Muqallid know? The same Saleh al-Jazrah that BH used to criticise Ismail is the same one criticising Bishr. BH is someone ignorant of these sciences that he would not have even worked that out and I bet he still cannot as he is that stupid.
The reason for bringing this specific statement was to show, if you take Imam Ibn Abd al-Barr’s view and his opinion from his al-Istizkar, which you also distorted as we will see, then you have to take this about ABU HANIFAH THAT HE WAS A JAHMI. Did the great ALIM Ibn Abd al-Barr not know the reality of Ismail? And that only Pappu Bro Hajji, the jahil of Birmingham found out. So, the reason for bringing this specific statement was to show if you take the opinion of Imam Ibn Abd al-Barr from al-Istizkar, you have to accept this too. Not only this, Imam Ibn Abd al-Barr did not even consider Imam Ahmad a faqih, do you also take that view and opinion of his?
We say, this was Imam Ibn Abd al-Barr’s Ijtihad which he can either correct or incorrect. So, why are there these selective Rafidic Judaic principles from BH? I even said on twitter that BH would bring this point when he excitedly shared, he would be doing a video against me, because he fell right into it like a right little untrained pappu!
Bishr was further abandoned by the scholars of hadith for failing to clarify his Aqidah on the Quran and took the position of the Waqifiyyah Jahmiyyah and abstained from saying the Quran is uncreated (Mizan al-I’tidal, 1:327 no.1229, Lisan al-Mizan, 1: Juzz 2:316 no.1513). The story which the scholars of hadith mention that Bishr was imprisoned and under house arrest by other Abbasid rulers is unfounded without evidence, hence it is rejected.
Furthermore, Bishr being forgetful and confused, not knowing what he narrated was established by the scholars of hadith. So not only was he a Jahmi bootlicker but also unreliable and it is upon Bro Hajji to clarify when Bishr transmitted this clarification. So BH took this clarification from a Jahmi subservient bootlicker, according to his standards. Dear readers, you see the how they have the worst double standards when it suits their filthy Manhaj.
Bro Hajji says this is not Imam Ibn Abd al-Barr’s statement but a transmission. So, if he was weak and a Jahmi narrator why did he transmit from them? Or is BH implying Imam Ibn Abd al-Barr the great Alim did not know rijal and hadith sciences? I await his answer.
The fanatic needs to ask himself who said it was supposed to be about Khuruj, it was merely to test your brain and expose your Rafidic Judaic double principles. If you take Imam Ibn Abd al-Barr transmitting the Salaf allowed rebellion because THEY used the ayah 2:124, then you must take everything Imam Ibn Abd al-Barr says without evidence in matters of his Ijtihad, this is your principle. In this report does BH take Abu Hanifah to be Jahmi who believed the Quran was created and that Imam Ahmad was not a faqih. Let that sink in his dense pea sized brain.
I would never bring a Jahmi to back my statement. Bro Hajji used Bishr literally a few minutes ago!!! What substances is the unbalanced Bro Hajji taking?
Yes, yes, EVERYONE WATCH THIS. Steady on son. Firstly, it will take about a week perhaps even longer for the Sururi Ikhwani Deobandi Jahmi Bro Hajji to determine who Abu Ali Saleh b. Muhammad is, because frankly the lad is dense, thick, a charlatan and an outright deceptive liar and I have even given him a HINT. This is also when Bro Hajji reads Bi-Thiqah and Bi-ThiqAT.
Let me explain, Bro Hajji tried to expose me that I used a Jahmi (please remember this point) and that Ismail was weak, so therefore, I used a weak report to make a point. Then ensued the dramatic hissy fits and squeamish shrieks from Bro Hajji. Therefore, you would think it was important and necessary for Bro Hajji to bring a statement with an authentic chain to prove his point in refuting me, right? Bro Hajji would not bring a weak report to refute me because he accuses me of using a weak Jahmi, would he? No, seriously, there is no way he would do that right? because if he did, that would just be the most humiliating, embarrassing, and shameful thing the world has ever seen, right? No, come on bro, no you are kidding me?
You are right, the disgraced Jahil Bro Hajji used the Jahmi, bootlicker, who supported oppression, Bishr and now he used the report of a narrator Muhammad b. Ali al-Muqri to declare Ismail a Jahmi. Whether Ismail was a Jahmi, his father or grandfather, I do not really care in the slightest, but to use a report of a majhul narrator, Muhammad b. Ali al-Muqri, is just too humiliating. It is upon Bro Hajji the jahil to prove the authenticity of this report by establishing the trustworthiness of Muhammad b. Ali al-Muqri. I will give Bro Hajji £1000 If he proves the reliability of Muhammad b. Ali, who is in this chain and hence the authenticity of this report, and for good measure, I will never refute Bro Hajji ever again. This is a challenge to Bro Hajji! BH do not curl away into your Rafidic Judaic hole just yet, I have more!
Another disastrous deception by BH was that he held the Kitab al-Sunnah of Imam Abd Allah b. Ahmad b. Hanbal in his hand – showing off with it by waving it in his hand. The report from Ismail is in also in this book, and while some researcher made it weak (Kitab al-Sunnah, 1:184 no.235, al-Qahtani who said its chain is weak) others did authenticate it!!!! (Kitab al-Sunnah Wa Radd Alal Jahmiyyah, 1:119 no.244, (al-Riyashi), (Dar Ibn al-Jawzi), 1:215 no.258 (Dar al-Nasihah) and, Kitab al-Sunnah, 143 no.221, (Al-Hamdan)
BH waves the al-Qahtani edition and although he makes the chain weak, others have authenticated it. However, here is another crushing blow to the neonate. Qadhi Abu Yusuf was asked,
“Does Abu Hanifah say what al-Jahm says, he replied, yes”. (Kitab al-Sunnah 1:183 no.232 (al-Qahtani), 1:213 no.255 (al-Riyashi).
Al-Qahtani fails to make a comment on the authenticity, knowing that it is authentic and then proceeds to counteract this report through a report from Imam al-Bayhaqi in his Asma Wa’l Sifat, 251 which he said are through trustworthy narrators and al-Lalaka’i also transmits it no.470. Imam Abd Allah’s report is over a 100 years earlier with a much shorter chain.
The point is, if BH refutes Ismail because he was a Jahmi and a weak narrator, then this statement from Abu Yusuf on Abu Hanifah and the criticism of Ismail from the al-Kamil and al-Dhu’afa Wa’l Matrukin also applied to Abu Hanifah as they said all three were weak. So, DOES BRO HAJJI APPLY THE SAME RULE TO ABU HANIFAH THAT HE WAS A WEAK NARRATOR AND JAHMI AND THEREFORE WE CANNOT TAKE ANYTHING FROM THE IMAM, LET ALONE HIS MADHHAB? You see dear readers, BH refuted, repudiated the honour and status of his own Imam in tatters due to his ignorance. Where are the Hanafis at?
He says the statement in al-Intiqa was not a statement from Imam Ibn Abd al-Barr. Yet Imam Ibn Abd al-Barr still transmitted it in his book. Did Imam Ibn Abd al-Barr not know rijal, mustalah al-hadith and the situation of famous people like Ismail? Of course, he did. Furthermore, Imam Ibn Abd al-Barr also TRAMSITTS his view that a group of Salaf rebelled due to Surah al-Baqarah: 124, where is the chain for this attribution?
Hang on a minute BH, you little deceptive liar, you bark all day about our technicalities and here you are doing the dirtiest deception of them all. Where is the chain from Imam Ibn Abd al-Barr to the Salaf, name them with their statement and their ijtihad of using Baqarah:124? This is what you call a filthy Ikhwani Khariji technicality.
You are using a Jahmi, says the squeaky lad. Does the pea sized brain in BH’s skull work? Since he has demonstrated he is stupid-thick due to the aggressive Khariji Ikhwani Sururi Syndrome he suffers from and his Rafidic Judaic selectiveness has led him to forget his OWN PRINCIPLES and its application. Bro Hajji the jahil used Ibn Hazm’s al-Fisl/al-Fasl, do you remember that incident, when he was holding a book and reading it with a different name. He used Ibn Hazm’s al-Fisl to present his case on armed rebellion quoting Ibn Hazms views in his miserable attempt to refute Salafi Brothers.
Imam Ibn Abd al-Hadi refers to Ibn Hazm as an ardent JAHMI after reading his al-Fasl Fi al-Milal Wa’l Nahal (Tabaqat Ulama al-Hadith 3:350, 2nd edition (Damascus, Mu’assisah al-Risalah, 1435H/2014CE) ed. Akram al-Bushi and Ibrahim al-Zaybaq). This is the same book Bro Hajji heavily relied on to refute Salafis. Whether Ibn Hazm was an ardent Jahmi or not is not the discussion, the point was to show the two faced contradictory selective application of Bro Hajji’s fabricated principles. So, it was acceptable to take from Ibn Hazm but not from Ismail? So, either you to take from Jahmi’s, in which case the statement on Abu Hanifah and family being Jahmi is acceptable which you also need to accept. Who just got slapped so bad? Bro Hajji did and when I’ve finished with you, your life will not be the same, you jahil train wreck.
And who transmitted the Ismail’s statement, the same Imam Ibn Abd al-Barr, if he was weak and a Jahmi apply the principle to Imam Ibn Abd al-Barr first, yes what a joke, the biggest joke deception to beguile the listeners, but you got caught badly and how the world has seen you choke in your humiliation.
This is the worst part, even I feel embarrassed of his jahl. Bro Hajji then actually confirms that Imam Khatib al-Baghdadi proceeded to quote the report of Ismail, knowing well that he was a JAHMI and WEAK. (see, Tarikh Baghdad, 5:183 no.3279. 1st edition (Beirut: Dar al-Fikr, 1424H2004CE) ed. Sidqi Jamil al-al-A’ttar). Can Bro Hajji claim Imam Ibn Abd al-Barr was unaware of the Jahmi tendencies and weakness of Ismail? Bro Hajji, the pea brain is so badly stuck. Yet again another slap on his face. Khatib al-Baghdadi brings this report 2 times in his book, Tarikh Baghdad, 5:183 and 11:267. (Beirut: Dar al-Fikr, 1432H/2011CE). The first citation the only problem is Ismail and in the second citation al-Hussayn is weak. However, researchers have authenticated this report.
Right about now the whole world is gob smacked at Bro Hajji’s horrendous humiliation and his ignorance in his wretched attempt to hide behind his Judaic technicalities.
Note that Bro Hajji uses al-Kamil to refute me. Bro Hajji declared his own Imam weak. We cannot take from Ismail because he is weak narrator and a Jahmi, yet Bro Hajji and others can take the reports of Abu Hanifah, but Bro Hajji just declared Abu Hanifah weak as well. Bro Hajji then shows us Imam Abdullah b. Ahmad b. Hanbal’s Kitab al-Sunnah in which he criticised Abu Hanifah’s creed and practically declared him to be a Murji and Jahmi.
So according to this jahils logic, he declared Abu Hanifah weak while he admits and accepts Imam Abdullah declared him to be Murji and Jahmi (according to Bro Hajjis logic) then he is the same as Ismail. So, this means Abu Hanifah is a weak Jahmi just like his grandson, yet Bro Hajji takes his whole religion and fiqh from him?
Then to add insult to his own injury, the jahil says its Jarh Mubham! What! He accused others of smoking things or taking things but seriously what kind of substance abuse is this? If the Jarh on Abu Hanifah is mubham then it is also mubham on Ismail, so why did you take the Jarh? And again, the biggest slap any jahil could ever get. Oh, the pain, and no Bro Hajji, you cannot jump of a cliff just yet! I am not even halfway.
Remember that he uses Kitab al-Dhu’afa wal-Matrukin to criticise Ismail. So, Abu Hanifah and his clan are weak, and Bro Hajji says NO PROBLEM. What happened to the Deobandis, their Imam is being attacked and they are too busy having tea and biscuits with the very jahil who declared him weak, Honestly no virility.
Everyone has seen the real fraud from Bro Hajji as I have answered everything in detail.
He continues to squeak, you cannot use a Jahmi, but he used Jahmis himself according to his own standards, this is what you called exposing, exposing Bro Hajji from his own fraud. The schoolboy error Bro Hajji makes here, and we will educate him, that a narrator having a deviant Aqidah does not render him to be weak. His own ragdoll deviant posse (the ones he bromances with) argued the point, that Sunni scholars of hadith used narrators who had innovations with them (innovations of beliefs). Perhaps they should sit and educate each other and alleviate each other’s diabolical ignorance.
Watch this dear readers, this one will hurt Bro Hajji and his lemmings so bad that they will fall away like diseased flies. Page 319 of the al-Intiqa, and by the way this jahil does not even have the book!!! (al-Intiqa Fi Fadhail al-Aimah al-Thalatha al-Fuqaha, 318-319 2nd edition (Beirut: Dar al-Basha’ir al-Islamiyyah, 1431H/2010CE) ed. Abd al-Fattah Abu Ghuddah.
After having the most feminine rant ever on Youtube, with his hair out and make up messed up, at this point of the video you would expect the deranged individual not to bring weak reports to defend his view, all the while attempting to refute me for approximately 25 minutes for allegedly using weak narrators, would you? No way did Bro Hajji do that, there is no way he would ever do that after squeaking for so long, you are gasping and wondering can anyone be so stupid, dumb and retarded to do this? You are thinking, not even shaytan would be so dumb and thick to do that. Well, I am sorry, Bro Hajji is that dumb, an utterly deceptive and treacherous jahil that in his rage of hissy fits, he fell into the very things he accused me off.
Dear readers the narrator Abu Muqatil Hafs b. Salam is an overwhelmingly weak abandoned narrator and a FABRICATOR OF HADITH. So, just as Bro Hajji attempted to weaken the report of Ismail, why did he use the report of an established weak and fabricator of hadith? Because he is an outright ignorant Ikhwani Sururi who likes to humiliate himself for people’s entertainment.
He does not even know whose son asked who. It was Hafs b. Salam’s son asked who him. So, this report is also rejected due to the weakness of Hafs. What is even worse and disturbing about the Rafidic Judaic polytheistic principle of Bro Hajji is that he was ranting on me using a Jahmi against Imam Ibn Abd al-Barr but here, he himself is using a fabricator of hadith and we know the fabricator of hadith are the worst liars. They attribute things to the beloved Nabi Sallalahu Alayhi Sallam and whoever does so, will take their place in Hell.
Bro Hajji and his ignorant followers can have a mothers meeting or drugs anonymous meeting and work that out for themselves.
Bro Hajji says, “THIS IS WHAT THIS SCHOLAR SAID”. Bro Hajji the lying deceiver calls this lying fabricator of hadith who lied on our beloved Nabi Sallalahu Alayhi Wasallam a SCHOLAR! Why don’t you die in your embarrassment already? Not just yet son, I have still have not finished!!! Wallahil A’dhim BH has been violated Islamically.
Remember Bro Hajji used al-Kamil at timestamp 20:00 and Kitab al-Dhu’afa Wa’l Matrukin at timestamp 21:29 to bring criticism on Ismail. Well both books also show criticism on Hafs b. Salam. This is what you call Judaic deception. Imam Ibn Adiyy said under the entry of the liar and fabricator, Hafs b. Salam Abu Muqatil al-Samarqandi that,
“He is not from the narrators whose narrations are relied upon”. (Ibn Adiyy, al-Kamil Fi Dhu’afa al-Rijal, 3:331 no.517. 1st Edn. (Damascus: al-Risalah al-Alamiyyah, 1433H/2012H). ed. Muhammad Anas Mustafa al-Khin. Another Edn. al-Kamil Fi Dhu’afa al-Rijal 4:87 no.516. 2nd Edn. (Riyadh, Maktabah al-Rushd, 1435H/2014H) ed. Mazin b. Muhammad al-Sarsawi. Tahdhib al-Tahdhib 1:449).
Taqi al-Din Ahmad b. Ali Maqrizi in his summary of Ibn Adiyy’s al-Kamil said, Al-Sa’di, said he would fabricate a chain for something good he heard. Ibn Adiyy said, he was not from those who’s narrations were relied on. (Al-Maqrizi, Muktasar al-Kamil Fi al-Dhu’afa wa I’llal al-Hadith, 227 no.515)
Burhan al-Din al-Halabi (d.841H) authored a work on all those accused and attributed with fabricating or forging ahadith. In this work, Burhan al-Din al-Halabi brings an entry for Hafs b. Salam and thereby enumerates him from those who was a forger and fabricator of hadith i.e. wadeh al-hadith. He says,
Hafs b. Salam Abu Muqatil al-Samarqandi. Sulaymani said Hafs b. Salam al-Fazari, the author of al-Alim Wa’l Mu’tallim, he is classified from amongst those who fabricated hadith. (Burhan al-Din Halabi, al-Kashf al-Hathith Amman Rumiya Bi-Wadheh al-Hadith, 101 no.249).
Imam Waki b. al-Jarrah, Imam Abd al-Rahman b. Mahdi both declared him to be a liar. Ibn Mahdi further said, I swear by Allah it is not halal to narrate from him. (Kitab al-Majruhin Minal Muhaddithin, 1:475; Sharh I’llal al-Tirmidhi 1:99, Tahdhib al-Tahdhib 1:449. Abu Nu’aym, Kitab al-Dhu’afa, no.52m, 73; Ibn Rajab, Sharh I’llal al-Tirmidhi 1:100; al-Hakim, al-Madkhal Ilas Sahih, 131, Ibn al-Jawzi, Kitab al-Dhu’afa Wa’l Matrukin, 1:221. Al-Dhahabi, Mizan al-I’tidal Fi Nqad al-Rijal, 1:557 no.2120 Ibn Hajr, Lisan al-Mizan, 1: Juzz 3:225 no.2644, Tahdhib al-Tahdhib 1:449).
Imam Qutaybah b. Sa’id transmits that one day he said to Hafs b. Salam about a hadith,
Oh, Abu Muqatil that hadith is fabricated. He (Hafs) replied, ‘Baba, it is in my book and you’re saying its fabricated’? So, I said to him, ‘Yes, they fabricated it into your book’. (al-Kamil Fi Dhu’afa al-Rijal, 3:230; Lisan al-Mizan, 1: Juzz 3:225-226; Tahdhib al-Tahdhib 1:449, Sharh I’llal al-Tirmidhi 1:100).
Imam Ibn al-Jawzi brings an entry for Hafs b. Salam Abu Muqatil al-Samarqandi in his book on weak and condemned narrators. He says,
He narrated on Ayub, Ubaydullah b. Umar and Ibn Abi Ruwad. Qutaybah weakened him once and said, ‘he does not know what he narrated’. Abd al-Rahman al-Mahdi said, ‘I swear by Allah it is not lawful to narrate from him’. Ibn Hibban said, ‘he narrated rejected reports which had no basis’. Ibn Adiyy said, ‘His narrations are not replied upon’. (Ibn al-Jawzi, Kitab al-Dhu’afa Wa’l Matrukin, 1:221, no.932)
Imam al-Tirmidhi, Imam Abu Fadhal Ahmad Sulaymani, Imam Ibrahim b. Yaqub al-Sa’di Abu Ishaq al-Juzjani, Imam al-Daraqutni, Imam Ibn Hibban, Imam al-Hakim, Imam Abu Nu’aym Asbahani, Hafiz Ibn Rajab, Imam al-Dhahabi, Hafiz Ibn Hajr al-Asqalani and others all weakened him.
Bro Hajji showed what he needed to and hid what he needed to conceal, just like the Jews. This renders BH to be an ignorant retard and schoolboy in rijal sciences. Now look, he has shown the world how stupid and incompetent he really is. If only BH had kept his brain in his skull, it would have stopped him from pouring it out and frothing his rabid mouth!! Now all his deviant’s supporters and lemmings will need therapy.
Bro Hajji asks me a question as to why I never quoted the passage above. Well, do you really want me to answer that again, scroll up and have a look, then run along in the corner and have a little cry son and I promise I will not look! I never quoted it because the narrator was a fabricator. So, you ‘Super Sururi Jahmi Khariji Deobandi freak’ now you know why I presented this report? Who is the most ignorant person on earth right now, Bro Hajji. The earth will not even give BH sanctuary, due to his intellectual crimes against Muslims.
The deviants always act sly and deceive the people. I was in a Twitter group with these juhal. I was added without permission by a brother. I observed for a while and realised they are all burnt Sururis and Qutubis. In the group they shared Bro Hajji’s screenshots from his videos against another Salafi brother and one them was al-Istizkar. I realised most of the guys were yes sir boys and copied and pasted his shoddy research. So while conversing with this guy I wanted to draw them and their evidences out and I found out they have nothing other than Imam Ibn Abd al-Barr attributing a view to the Salaf and this ayah they used for their Ijtihad, but all of this is without any chains.
My points stand, show us where the Salaf used this ayah for evidence, it is merely a case of Imam Ibn Abd al-Barr attributing this to the Salaf without an authentic chain and without any of the names of the Salaf mentioned. If Bro Hajji and the ragdoll gang say al-Hussayn and Abd Allah b. Zubayr did rebel, then it is upon them to provide the evidence. This same ragdoll lemming Abu Abdullah (erudite hand) deceives the people that he is with Shaykh Zubayr Ali Za’i, when we clearly know the Shaykh refuted these barking Kharijis.
Bro Hajji accuses me of not having read or consulted al-Istizkar. He thinks the Salafis do not know their books. Watch this for catching this disgraced fraud. In the video BH shows and holds the DKI edition of al-Istizkar yet shows scans of the Dar Qutaybah and Dar al-Wa’i which was edited by Dr. Abd al-Mu’ti Amin Qil’aji and the 1st edition was printed in 1414H/1993CE. I have the al-Faruq al-Hadithiyyah edition. 1st edition, Cairo 1437H/2017H. It was edited by Abi Muhammad Usamah b. Ibrahim b. Muhammad who used more than 10 handwritten manuscripts to verify the text of al-Istizkar. A new edition of al-Istizkar is due to be released from Dar Eloollaa, Egypt in 11 volumes with the hadith verification of Anwar Baz and Sulayman al-Qatuni.
This is Bro Hajji’s salvation statement for defending his warped understanding of Khuruj. Disputing or differing does not entail Khuruj, except in the mind of a pea sized Khariji brain. Imam Ibn Abd al-Barr says the group of people who did not uphold the first view and thought it was permissible to dispute with those in authority over them used al-Baqarah: 124 as evidence
TO DISPUTE, DISAGREE not KHURUJ. Bro Hajji lies and adds the word Khuruj to explain those who believed it was acceptable to dispute. Tanaz’a does not mean Khuruj. A group of the Salaf holding this view is Mubham without any names. As for Ibn Abd al-Barr saying “Kharaja Ibn al-Zubayr and al-Hussayn (RadhiAllahu Anhuma) Ala Yazid…” here means they disputed Yazid’s authority, this was the not Khuruj of rebellion, why did not BH bring the context here?
Even the beginner of Islamic history knows, Mu’awiyyah RadhiAllahu Anhu went to potential claimants of the Caliphate and asked them to give their oath of allegiance to Yazid when he would assume power. Al-Hussayn and Ibn Zubayr Radhiallahu Anhuma did not even give their allegiance to Yazid because they felt they were worthy of the Khaliphate because they were “Ahluhu,” i.e. they were worthy candidates of the Khaliphate due to their standing in the Muslim Ummah. So, when they never even gave the Ba’yah, how did they make Khuruj? The Muslims were not united on the appointment of Yazid, despite a great number of authorities having given him their pledges.
The wording of the hadith which Imam Ibn Abd al-Barr explains is restricted and specific to the pledge of allegiance i.e. “Baya’na” and since we know al-Hussayn Radhiallahu Anhu did not offer Yazid his allegiance, it is not the Khuruj of rebellion. Therefore, when he saw the deception of the accursed Rawafid, he wanted to return to Yazid to offer his pledge of allegiance. I will further expand on this in a separate response, InshaAllah. Once again, this is Imam Ibn Abd al-Barr asserting the Salaf used this ayah, but where is the statement of the actual Salaf using this ayah? Nowhere.
No.19331. Yet another Judaic sleight of hand. I have explained the intended meaning of Kharaja, and we also know how the companions had advised and reminded al-Hussayn Radhiallahu Anhu of the treacherous nature of the Rafidi Kufi’s. Imam Ibn Abd al-Barr clearly saying about the Mu’tazilites and the Khawarij said similar things, which indicated they are the ones who held this belief system. We do not say the Khawarij and the Mu’tazilites were like the Sahabah, only a person who has been knee bouncing with the Rawafid in Hyde Park would say this. We say Imam Ibn Abd al-Barr made a distinction and we don’t say the Companions rebelled. BH has been lying through his teeth to his gullible yes sir fanbase.
No.19932. More deception from BH. Who is he trying to fool? Imam Ibn Abd al-Barr makes a distinction and clarifies the view of al-Hussayn and Ibn Zubayr Radhiallahu Anhuma. According to his disastrous logic BH takes al-Hussayn and Ibn Zubayr Radhiallahu Anhuma and a whole group people out of Ahl al-Sunnah. So, is he making tabdi’ of the Companions?
Imam Al-Qurtubi was from the 6th century and he quotes and uses Imam Ibn Abd al-Barr’s statement pretty much verbatim, so it is indifferent. This is common amongst authors of the same science, more so, due to both hailing from the Maghrib. The same response applies to Imam al-Qurtubi, and that is where are the names with them directly using this ayah for evidence. About 20 minutes ago BH was having verbal diarrhoea because I presented a weak chain, while BH himself, the two-faced Judaic manipulator cannot even present a chain, let alone a weak one!
BH brings the statement of al-Jassas. And again, another selective deception. BH criticised me for using an alleged Jahmi narrator, but he himself now uses someone of the same level as the Jahmis. The jahil would not do that would he? Use someone who adheres to a deviant creed, who were considered innovators against me, again. We already saw him using Bishr and now he will get another blow to this dense brain. Al-Jassas was a Hanafi Mu’tazili. (Tabaqat al-Mu’tazilah, 118, Fadhal al-I’tizal Wa Tabaqat al-Mu’tazilah, 391). Imam al-Dhahabi was also of this view when he said he was inclined to the Mu’tazilites, despite his writings not showing this, more so concerning the beatific vision of Allah and other issues and we seek safety in Allah. (Siyar A’lam al-Nubala, 16:341).
Al-Jassas, the Mu’tazili also denied magic and its offshoots claiming it is mere deception without any reality. Al-Jassas is on record for making the funniest theological joke. He says if magic was real why don’t the magicians remove the kings and rulers from power, steal their wealth and rule the world!!! Now you know where BH gets it from, and how the early Mu’tazilites influenced BH and his ilk’s with Khariji tendencies. (Ahkam al-Quran, 1:41-58).
This is who BH quotes, a devious Mu’tazili who deviated from Sunni theology and known to be from the innovated sects. Al-Jassas also had some seriously warped and perverted ideas, one only needs to look at his al-Fusul Fi al-Usul to get an idea. This is the guy BH uses to refute the orthodox Sunni position of not rebelling against a Muslim ruler. I think we are pretty much done with BH and its back to potty training time for him!
Yet you used Bishr, Ibn Hazm, and al-Jassas? All according to the very principle BH fabricated and used. BH does not deny he is a hyper Youtuber. Bro Hajji had no answer for this tweet because it ripped his evil Manhaj. Jahm b. Safwan was one of the pioneers of Khuruj against the Muslims rulers in later times and aided the Pro Hanafi Murjis. It all seems like a deviant tea party.
BH says I will regret calling his name. The best joke of his video. If you have a look on social media, you will see how much I refute your Khariji ideas and principles. In fact, it was a concerted effort and a calculated plan to draw you out into these exchanges. Unfortunately, this regret you are talking about is something you suffered coupled with depression and anxiety. BH blocked me on twitter, he would sneak like a scared mouse and view my tweets and in the end begged people to stop sending him my tweets. So, you will find that BH is the one having sleepless nights and has since resorted to a lifetime of teddy bear hugging at night.
BH if you are a real man, I dare you to go through my tweets!
You know who I am. Such little minions. I was not hiding and the people who know me, know me. And don’t you remember I called you two times and you never picked up both times, what were you doing, having your nails done? BH does not remember his message to me on twitter saying to me to keep in touch and then he blocked me, the humiliated coward!
BH the deceptive deceiver distorts things in an attempt to show he has a response and what a shamble it is. The red line on the text had no bearing to the response. Note, how he cannot even pronounce Imam al-Lalaka’i’s name properly! Hang on a minute, this is what you call a vile deceptive technicality. I quoted Imam Ali b. al-Madini, BH quotes the creed of Imam Ahmad. BH should know substance abuse is illegal? Look, at this evil deceit. He proceeds to make a horrendous error in translation which is his evil lie and distortion, he translates al-Birr – piety or righteousness as arrogant!!! What a jahil man. In the translation of the pivotal part BH lies and distorts the meaning again.
The disgusting and vile deception here is that BH pretended to show the listeners that I deliberately covered a portion of the text with a red line. BH then shows a totally different Aqidah, he shows the Aqidah of Imam Ahmad instead of the Aqidah of Imam Ali b. al-Madini. He then shows a totally different line of text. Even the Jews and polytheists do not distort things this much.
He translates the highlighted part as “Whoever forcefully takes over…” another Khariji distortive technicality and lie, giving the impression of Khuruj when this is a total lie. Wa-man Ghalabahum is whoever overpowers the people with the sword and rules over them. Then the ignorant individual goes on to say whoever takes over by force rebels!!!! He will argue the version in Tabaqat al-Hanabillah says “Wa Man Kharaj” then we say this shows when Kharaja is used in this context, it means in the context of Ghalaba as both words have bene used interchangeably.
Imam Ahmad is talking about when two Muslims parties fight, this is totally different to rebelling! With one of them overpowering the other or the masses, then they are to be given the pledge of allegiance as they are Khaliph. This is the reality of this statement which BH tried to distort to save face for his debunked Manhaj, while using his Rafidic and Judaic manipulation. This ignorant Deobandi does not even know basics. This is one possible explanation of this point as the scholars have mentioned.
This Aqidah point is drawn from the ayah, “And if two parties or groups among the believers fall to fighting, then make peace between them both, but if one of them rebels against the other, then fight you (all) against the one that which rebels till it complies with the Command of Allah; then if it complies, then make reconciliation between them justly, and be equitable. Verily! Allah loves those who are equitable.” (Surah al-Hujurat: 9). This is further evidenced from the Hadith in Sahih Muslim
وَمَنْ بَايَعَ إِمَامًا فَأَعْطَاهُ صَفْقَةَ يَدِهِ وَثَمَرَةَ قَلْبِهِ فَلْيُطِعْهُ إِنِ اسْتَطَاعَ فَإِنْ جَاءَ آخَرُ يُنَازِعُهُ فَاضْرِبُوا عُنُقَ الآخَرِ
He who swears allegiance to a Khaliph should give him the pledge of his hand and the sincerity of his heart He should obey him to the best of his ability. It another man comes forward (Claiming the Khaliphate), disputing his authority, should behead the latter (Sahih Muslim, no.1844)
BH then proceeds to make himself look utterly stupid with his pathetic logic due to his inability to understand these issues, all due to his Deobandi Ash’ari background. And since BH thinks he knows rijal and wretchedly attacks others for bringing weak narrations, did he not look at the chain of this creed. You gloatingly rejected Sharh al-Sunnah of Imam al-Barbahari due to the chain while he accepted and used the chain here! I ask you, is the chain of this creed authentic for you to fully take it? As this is BH’s criteria. I know I won’t get an answer to this because its just past the level of this front room sofa bouncer!
BH finally comes to the Imam Ali b. al-Madini statement. No context is needed since it applies to the innovators of the deviant sects like the Khawarij. BH through his innate ability to display his compulsive lying disorder proceeds to steer the listeners away from the true context of this statement. He sheepishly says this statement is linked to the proceeding statement which refers to the permissibility of killing the Khawarij. The true context of this statement is understood and is linked to the preceding lines. Which states Imam Ali b. al-Madini said,
Whoever rebels against a leader from among the Muslim leaders, who the people are united upon and affirm his Khilafah, however it was attained, whether through agreement or by forcing (the people), then the rebel has disobeyed and left [(Kharij)] from the Jama’ah]. He opposed the reports from Allah’s Messenger Sallalahu Alayhi Wasallam and if he dies in this state of Kharij (abandoning the Jama’ah) then he dies a death of jahiliyyah… (Sharh Usul al-I’tiqad Ahl al-Sunnah Wa’l Jama’ah, 1:131, Cairo: Dar al-Hadith, 1425 2005, ed. Sayyid Imran, same edition as the one BH holds in his hand in the video).
BH then using Judaic Rafidic wizardry casually slips in words, just as deceptive Ash’ari Deobandis do, “And we are not denying there were certain Salaf or Imams of the Salaf that opposed khuruj against a fasiq unjust ruler.” He knew he got refuted and he was unable to present an adequate reply. In fact, he looked utterly silly jumping to Imam Ahmad and then back to Imam Ali.
This jahil lost the plot. Imam Ahmad was the who said saying this, so if he wants to accuse us of having dumb logic then Imam Ahmad should be the first one he should label. The jahil equates taking over by force to Khuruj. It means in the context that is opposite to agreement, arrangement or happy with, i.e. they were not happy with the potential Khaliph, and he took over by force and strength, as some rulers did, this does not mean Khuruj. This is the first lie and deception. He also lied deceived the people by not bringing what Imam Ahmad wrote completely in his creed. The deceptive deceiver accuses others of allegedly covering lines and all sorts. Yet he holds a different edition and shows the scan of a different edition!
In the edition which Bro Hajji holds in his hand (Sharh Usul I’tiqad Ahl al-Sunnah wa’l Jama’ah 1:126, ed. Sayyid Imran). He also tries desperately to someone how answer this point while failing badly like a damage doll. This is some the trickery he employed.
Firstly, he used Imam Ahmad’s creed to answer Imam Ali b. Ali Madini’s point. What kind of Jewish logic is this.
Secondly, he goes a few paragraphs back and talks about the issue of a ruler forcing the people, which has nothing to do with khuruj.
Thirdly, Imam Ahmad literally nine (9) lines later, on the same page the edition BH has in his hand. says,
Whoever rebels against a Muslim leader after the people are united on him [being the leader] while affirming his Khilafah in whatever way it might have been, whether through agreement or by force, then the rebel has disobeyed the Muslims and opposed the reports from Allah’s messenger and if and died in the kharij state, then he dies the death of jahiliyyah. (Sharh Usul I’tiqad Ahl al-Sunnah Wa’l Jama’ah 1:126)
This does not mean Khuruj as Imam Ahmad clarifies that the rebel or Khariji is the who rebels after the people are UNITED and affirm his Khilafah and thus he explains a few lines later, giving context to his first statement.
Fourthly, no one from the scholars of the Hanabillah, early or late or any other scholar, scholars who support Khuruj and even the modern day Kharijis, Sururis Qutubi Harakiyin have ever used this statement of Imam Ahmad to evidence the permissibility for Khuruj or even understood this statement to mean potential Khuruj. However, an unqualified deluded pathetic untrained kid, who has not studied anything, Aqidah, Manhaj and even fiqh is making these deranged conclusions while looking at PDFs in his front room and then trying to make money from his Youtube videos!
Fifthly, Imam Ahmad equates Khuruj with the Khawarij because he clearly says whoever goes against the Ruler is Khuruj and he separates from the body of the Muslims and they are to be killed. This is further supported by authentic evidences. Citing the finer details about these issues would lengthen the discussions. One just needs to read Imam Ahmads other works on creed and what his students transmit from or what others attributed to him and cited in the Sharh Usul I’tiqad and in the Tabaqat al-Hanabillah.
Sixthly, None, of the scholars who ever explained this text, more so recently, from the dozens of explanations of this creed ever said this. Honestly the biggest Jahil I have seen in the last two decades has to be BH without contention.
The main reason for providing this particular statement of Imam Ali b. al-Madini was to corner Bro Hajji. The ignorant individual is unaware that this very creed of Imam Ali b. al-Madini is pretty much cited verbatim through the Sharh al-Sunnah of Imam al-Barbahari, and he accepts this creed by rejects the Sharh al-Sunnah. Another slap for the jahil.
Then BH unable to present anything else against me, goes off on a perverted tangent, diluting the matter to cover his ignorant comprehension of the issues and to save some face from the utter and absolute humiliating embarrassment.
Wa Sallallahu Ala Sayyidina Muhammad Wa Ala Alihi Wa Ashabihi Wa-Sallam Tasliman Kathira.
Abū Khuzaimah Anṣārī
Jumada al-Ula 1442H/ December 2020