Posted By. Notify Admin about this post. Member Posts: 43 Joined: Sep Some brother is passing out this horrific book against our Sh. Albani Raheemullah. I need to know if there is a book in english written in defence of the Shaikh, defending him against this book and it's lies???????

Author:Kajimi Kazradal
Language:English (Spanish)
Published (Last):5 August 2019
PDF File Size:17.21 Mb
ePub File Size:16.28 Mb
Price:Free* [*Free Regsitration Required]

Posted By. Notify Admin about this post. Member Posts: 43 Joined: Sep Some brother is passing out this horrific book against our Sh. Albani Raheemullah. I need to know if there is a book in english written in defence of the Shaikh, defending him against this book and it's lies??????? Or if there isn't who will stand up for the shaikh and write a piece in defence of him, and make Jihad against the people of desires and deceptions. I need to distribute this is in my community ASAP!!!

Member Posts: 50 Joined: Aug This is an old article floating around from a few years back. Truly All Praise belongs to Allah: we praise Him; we seek His aid; we seek His forgiveness; we seek refuge with Allah from the evils of our souls and from our wicked actions.

He whom Allah guides, no-one can misguide him; he whom Allah misguides, no-one can guide. I bear witness that there is no true god except Allah, and I bear witness that Muhammad is His slave and Messenger. Allah says translation of the meaning of : "Why do you mix the Truth with Falsehood, and conceal the Truth, knowingly?

He, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, also said, "He who defends his brother in his absence, Allah will defend him in this world and in the Hereafter. This is due to progressive research and further insight into the evidences - but does this mean that they "contradict themselves"?! Are we to say that they contradict themselves?!! No, rather it is due to progressive research! Indeed a single memorising scholar may change his opinion ijtihaad about a single hadeeth, so one day he declares it saheeh and one day hasan and perhaps even declares it to have weakness - and this is true since the hasan hadeeth is declared by the scholar to have a weakness which prevents its rising to the level of saheeh, so in this sense it does have weakness and so the hasan will not be free from some weakness - and if it were not free from it then it would be saheeh by agreement.

PRINCIPLE THREE: The saying of a scholar, "Its isnaad is weak" is not a contradiction of his saying elsewhere, "The hadeeth is hasan" or "The hadeeth is saheeh", since the isnaad may be weak, but the hadeeth itself is saheeh or hasan due to further supporting chains, or other narrations supporting it or attesting to its authenticity. A tiny proportion of Saqqaaf's criticisms are correct and agree with the principle given by the Prophet, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, "He has spoken the truth, but is a very great liar" [Sahih al-Bukhaari from Abu Hurairah, in the hadeeth about the devil stealing from the sadaqah], since we find that Saqqaaf's usual currency is merely misguidance, deliberate distortions, twisting of words, lies and falsification.

Nor does it appear that the few occasions on which Saqqaaf is correct are due to any knowledgre or study, and it is clear that he himself has not done much work in composing the book, but rather transcribed from elsewhere. Further, the ideas in the book and the real author of these attacks are i one man who is a Shaafi'i in fiqh and Ash'ari in 'aqidah and ii one who is a Hanafi Maatureedi, who are united only in their opposition to the Manhaj of the Salaf and in enmity to those who oppose blind-following.

A certain scholar whom Saqqaaf respects and still visits wrote upon a copy of Saqqaaf's work "Contradictions of al-Albaani" , "Your errors would only deceive a fool, an ignorant person or a malicious one like yourself, and you O O Allaah! Do not take us to account for what the fools amongst us have done. Saqqaaf attempts to attack Shaykh al-Albaani for what he falsely claims - due to his own ignorance of the Arabic language - are mistakes in the language: i He says p.

Al-Albaani Slandered, p. He again quotes the reference as only Da'eef al-Jaami', and avoids mentioning where shaykh al-Albaani speaks about it in detail, i.

Aadaab az-Zifaaf p. Next, comes the heading, "His self-contradiction in declaring a hadeeth to be saheeh in one place but hasan elsewhere"! This itself indicates that Saqqaaf does not even understand the most basic principles, not to mention its finer points, since as we have mentioned, the level of hasan is one so fine that opinions will vary, even from the same scholar.

So here are examples where Saqqaaf accuses the shaykh of error when in fact it is he who is in error: i Shaykh al-Albaani says in Sifat-us-Salaah that the hadeeth for moving the finger reported by Waa'il bin Hujr is reported by Abu Daawood.

Saqqaaf says pp. Under the heading, "Shortcomings of al-Albaani in his research in innumerable places and examples of this", he attacks shaykh al-Albaani's saying concerning the narration of Ibn Mas'ood in marfoo' form, "The Qur'aan was sent down upon seven modes, each verse of them having an inner and an outer meaning Al-Albaani Slandered, pp.

Thus spoke this ignorant person, making it seem as if he has come up with valuable research, and hiding the truth: i He gives the impression that when the shaykh referred to Sharh-us-Sunnah, it was in printed form, but this is not the case for it was still in manuscript form then, as shown by a number of his quotes from it in the footnotes.

As for the chapter and page no. The shaykh, may Allaah protect him, said, " Exactly the same is the case with Muhammad bin 'Umaarah. So would Saqqaaf say that al-Dhahabi was guilty of distorting the words of the scholars and cutting them up to remove what did not suit him?! Another alleged contradiction: Shaykh al-Albaani placed a footnote regarding a hadeeth in Mukhtasar al-'Uluww p.

Later, when the shaykh came across its isnaad himself and commented upon an additional wording in it, he declared in ad-Da'eefah no.

Saqqaaf tries to use this as a grave example of contradiction although al-Albaani clearly never declared it saheeh himself, only quoted other scholars' verdicts , and himself declares the hadeeth to be fabricated. However, all its narrators are indeed those of Saheeh al- Bukhaari as stated by al-Dhahabi , and the reason for its weakness is just Fulaih bin Sulaimaan, about whom the scholars differ, some authenticating him, others disparaging him, with al-Bukhaari and Muslim relying upon him.

Hence al-Albaani concludes that he is truthful with mistakes, so the isnad has some slight weakness; however, the unacceptability of an additional wording of the hadeeth leads to the verdict of munkar.

About criticism that shaykh al-Albaani sometimes praises a person and yet elsewhere attacks them, e. Habeeb-ur- Rahmaan al-A'zami al-Hanafi Saqqaaf, p. Al- Albaani Slandered, p. The shaykh had previously spoken in his favour due to his work in the field of Hadeeth and based upon the principle of assuming good about one's brother until one knows otherwise.

Later, when it became clear that this person was a blind- follower who distorts and plays with texts, the shaykh criticised him, so where is the contradiction?! However, the people of innovation ignore each other's errors and flatter one another so that the tie of innovation remains between them! Next p. Why does he not consider the scholars of the past who did the same thing with Hadeeth books compiled by previous scholars, e.

After explaining two principles, one which we have already referred to regarding the science of Hadeeth, the second about our shaykh's works, I will give some examples of the distortions and deceptions of Saqqaaf.

So Saqqaaf is either ignorant of these facts and does not know what he is talking about, or he knows but is a liar who conceals the truth! The sweeter of these two possibilities is bitter, the better of the two is evil! So how about when he combines the pair of them?! It is not permissible to use these as examples in the first place since the shaykh, as any scholar or student of knowledge should know, due to various circumstances and well-known reasons, did only a small amount of checking and footnotes upon these books.

That was done in the first part of the book, but then his time, which is filled with other necessary services to the Sunnah of Allaah's Messenger, may Allaah bless him and grant him peace, became restricted and he excused himself from its continuation, except that we requested that he should provide whatever benefit he was able from his vast knowledge and examine the rest of the book quickly, and add any notes that he found to be necessary and had time to do; he did this, and this was the cause of many points of benefit Muhammad Mustafaa al-A'zami, who then requested that shaykh Naasir have a general look at his checking and do a general revision, adding anything necessary - such that it would not be a new checking.

Therefore, many of the shaykh's notes are extremely abbreviated, or merely the completion of something unfinished by al-A'zami..

Now, many of the alleged contradictions quoted by Saqqaaf are to be found in these two books, their nos. These in fact constitute nearly half the book! Further, in order to increase the number of apparent errors and the size of his book, Saqqaaf has repeated a number of the ahaadeeth and his points of criticism in various places with different numbers, for example: What he quotes on p. Similarly, p. And likewise in many other places! Ghayat al-Maraam, a checking of Dr.

Qaradawi's Al-Halaal wal-Haraam, cf. Again, there is no contradiction since he begins his note in Ghaayat al-Maraam by giving it the ruling: Weak, but then he quotes a mursal narration in support of it and says that it is perhaps hasan due to this. Later, he found a further support which affirms its authenticity Silsilah as-Saheehah, ms. Then, when he found that the supporting narration was from other than Shareek, he declared it authentic.

This example let alone many others , is enough to show the fallacy of what Saqqaaf says on the final page of his book, "We have left out whatever he has indicated that he previously declared weak and then declared authentic, for example, and we have considered him to be excused with regard to those ahaadeeth, and have overlooked them.. Its continued The book,?

Dictionary of Albaanee? We have presented a separate section which discusses his infamous and revealing work? Tanaaqadaat al-Albaanee? Suffice now to deal with what Kabbani blindly quotes due to it suiting his whims and desires. Because they belong to his sect, and sectarianism is blind to justice! Kitaab al-Sunnah? Tahdib al-tahdhib?

We are reluctant to discuss this topic with regards to this great Imaam, but since Saqqaaf has made the accusation we reply by saying: that fact that he was da? Saqqaaf cuts up the words of al-Albaanee, here are his full words, "it? What confirms this was that I was able to find Saqqaaf?

In fact while searching for this quote I read pp and Suyutee was mentioned only twice pages , As for the second quote: after mentioning a hadeeth containing a narrator about which ibn Hajr said, "the Nuqqaad precise scholars are agreed that he is a liar" he says, "and it is an amazement from as-Suyutee that he is not embarrassed to blacken his book? One statement related to a specific example, the other is quoted such that it seems that al-Albaanee is giving a verdict on the very character of as-Suyutee!

As for the third quote: al-Albaanee discusses a fabricated hadeeth no. Dhail al-Mawdoo? So I ask you, is this an example of a heinous word or an insult, or a statement of fact and a clear case of exaggeration from Saqqaaf?

He blames al-Hakim, al-Mundhiri, and al-Dhahabi's "poor scholarliness and proneness to imitation" because they all declared a hadith sound and he -- Albani -- disagrees with them? And all this is from neglect in research and submitting to taqleed. And how could it be otherwise? For how is it possible for a Researching Scholar to authenticate the likes of this isnaad. For Muhammad bin al-Farraat one of it?

And Boosayree said in? Muhammad bin al-Farraat is agreed upon as being weak? Generalising a phrase which mentions a specific occurrence of error of these Imaams to one that seems to attack their scholarship.


Al Albani unveiled

Peace and blessings be on His final Messenger, Sayyidina Muhammad. Auspicious salutations be on his pure Ahl al-Bayt people of the Prophet's House and on all his just and devoted Companions may Allah be pleased with them all ; and last but not least praise be upon the glorious pious predecessors Salaf as-Salihin and their successors who are the Ahl-as-Sunnah wa'l Jama'ah People of the Sunnah and Community of the four existing schools of Sacred Law Fiqh. O you who believe! What you are about to read is of dire importance to the believer who accepts the authority of the Noble Hadith, second only to the Holy Qur'an al-Karim. Shaykh Saqqaf is a contemporary Shafi'i scholar of Hadith and Fiqh.


Little does he know that this Hadith has been narrated by Ahmad and Bukhari from Abu Hurayra Allah be pleased with him!! Shaykh Saqqaf said : "This is only anger from anguish, little from a lot and if it wasn't for the fear of lengthening and boring the reader, I would have mentioned many other examples from al-Albani's books whilst reading them. Imagine what I would have found if I had traced everything he wrote? He crowns himself as an unbeatable source and even tries to imitate the great scholars by using such terms like " Lam aqif ala sanadih ", which means "I could not find the chain of narration", or using similar phrases!



Related Articles