Translated & Annotated
Abu Khuzaimah Ansari
[The following is an extract from a longer article of Shaikh Zubair Ali Za’i on the verification of the ḥadīth of Khilāfah for 30 years.]
The Deceit of the Ḥadīth Rejecters.
The real aim and objective of the Ḥadīth rejecters through their deceitful plots and treachery it to show the authentic Ḥadīth of the Messenger of Allāh (Sallalahu Alayhee Wasallam) are fabricated. This is to lead the general Muslims away from the fundamentals of the dīn and to create doubts so that the people begin to think the dīn as unreliable and then they eventually stray from the straight path.
With this they then want to express and impose their deficient opinions amongst the people, which will eventually lead to no one acting on the Qurān or Ḥadīth.
One person from amongst the rejecters and deniers of Ḥadīth is Tamanna Amadi Phalwārī, he writes in his fabrication of a book, ‘Intizār Mahdī Masīh’ [Awaiting The Mahdī Messiah] whilst vilifying and rebuking this very same Hadīth,
“You have seen the name of Ḥashraj bin Nabātah Al-Kūfi with regards to these narrations. He is a weak in Ḥadīth according to almost all of the Imāms of Rijāl, he is not evidence and rejected in Ḥadīth and you do not generally find any supports for his Hadīth.” [pg.57]
We would like to say regarding Hashraj bin Nabātah Imām Ahmad said, “Trustworthy.” And Ibn Ma’īn said, “Good, trustworthy and there is no harm in him.” Abū Zurʿah said, “There is no harm in him and he is grounded in Ḥadīth.” Ibn ʿAdīyy said, “There is no harm in him.” Tirmidhī graded his Ḥadīth Hasan.
On the other hand Abū Ḥatīm said, “Good write his Ḥadīth but he is not used as evidence.” as-Sājī said, “Weak.” Ibn Ḥibbān said, “He has a few Ḥadīth, his narrations are rejected and it is impermissible to use his reports as evidence when he is alone in reporting them.” Nasā‘ī said he is not strong and criticised him another time he said there is not harm in him and praised him. [Summarised from Tahdhīb at-Tahdhīb]
Ḥākim and Dhahabī authenticated one of his Ḥadīth. [Mustadrak [3/606], ʿAlī (I think Ibn Al-Madīnī) also declared him to be trustworthy [Mizān Al-‘Eitidāl [1/551]. Hāfiẓ Ibn Ḥajr said, “Truthful but errs.” [Taqrīb]
The conclusion is, this narrator is trustworthy and truthful according to the majority of the scholars of Ḥadīth. Hence, Tamanna Amadi is a liar in his claim that, ” He is a weak in Ḥadīth according to almost all of the Imāms of Rijāl”
There are so many lies in Tamanna Amadi’s book that a collation of them would result in a book. For example in the same book on [pg.54] this individual writes,
“Muʿammar bin Rashid of Yemen was a freed slave who died in the year 154H. He was active in compiling and collating Ḥadīth, he would narrate from the well known liar Ābān bin ʿAbbās. Whilst narrating from him he would put forward the name of Thābit al-Banānī instead [Tahdhīb at-Tahdhīb [1/101] yet the scholars of Ḥadīth still considered him to be trustworthy.”
We say let us look at the referenced page from Tahdhīb at-Tahdhīb and it clearly says,
“Khalīlī has transmitted in in al-Irshād with an authentic chain from Aḥmad that he said to Yaḥya ibn Maʿīn when he was copying the manuscript of ʿAbdur Razzāq from Muʿammar from Ābān, “You are writing this when you know Ābān is a liar?” He (Ibn Maʿīn) replied, “May Allāh have mercy on you Oh Abū ʿAbdullāh, I am writing it in order to memorise it so that when a liar (like Tamannā ʿĀmādī) narrates on Muʿammar from Thābit from Anas, I will say to them you have lied the chain is via Ābān (and not Thābit).” [Tahdhīb at-Tahdhīb [1/101]
We ask the readers now, why is Muʿammar to blame here and what is his fault? What he heard he narrated it in the same way, when he heard from Ābān he would say Ābān and when he heard from Thābit he would say Thābit. If he scholar of Ḥadīth do not consider him to be trustworthy what should they consider him (meaning he was honest)
The likes of Tamanna Amadi are liars whose tongues and pens are free, if they want to, they can try to prove the day as night and night as day but they must remember a day will come when there will most definitely be punishment. On that day one will be taken to account for every deed big or small.