I did not receive that email in which Mubascher Inayet sahib asked me for evidence from the writings of Ghulam Ahmed Pervez that he made grievous errors in his understanding of Hadith. Now I find it at the tail end of your communiction with each other.
Perhaps Inayet sahib thinks that I would be criticizing Allama Pervez in the same clueless way in which Mr. Shahid Mahmud and Bashir Abid attack Maulana Maudoodi (may Allah fill his grave with light).
Dear Muslims, Pervez sahib's errors were grievous and most of his attacks on Hadith go against him. (It seems that Mr. Shahid Mahmud has not given full credit to his source for his 'lists' of 'bad' hadith and attacks on Maulana Maudoodi: this 'credit' should go to Pervez sahib. Or did Mr. Mahmud get these indirectly from Dr. Shabbir who did not admit that he got them from GAP?)
(I am using the world 'maulana' deliberately because I think it is a correct Islamic term.)
Let us go to IDARA-e-TOLU-e-ISLAM's magnum opus titled MAQAME HADITH which has the writings both of GAP and Jayrajpuri, Ubaidullah Sindhi, etc. It was published, we are told on the info page, by this group in 1953, 1965, 1975 and 1986 without any change. Thus it signifies an authentic expression of Pervezi attack on Hadith.

I could destroy this whole book page by page but let's look at one important segment for now. Allama Pervez (may Allah forgive his sins) thought that Imam Abu Hanifa gave very little credence to Hadith and in fact was against Hadith. Pervez sahib uses a couple of quotes from the critics of Abu Hanifa to create this impression. Then he makes this interesting point about Imam Abu Hanifa:

"He put together FIQH in the light of the book of Allah with his ijtihad and thru consultation with ahl ar-ray (opinion makers).After that if someone said that your decision is against the hadith of the messenger of Allah, he would reply as hazrat 'Umar used to reply that the messenger of Allah's decision was for that time - now conditions have changed - hence that decision must be changed, or he (Abu Hanifa)
following hazrat 'Ayesha and other sahaba would say: who knows what the messenger of Allah said and what the listener thought he said. In the presence of the book of Allah, we cannot make such things which lack surety part of religion, because he (Abu Hanifa) wanted to make this fact very clear that the hadith of the messenger of Allah are neither based on surety nor are they unchanged. Hence sometimes he would, in his rejection of Hadith, adopt severe attitudes." (Maqame Hadith, p.159)

It seems to me that Allama Pervez knew very little about Imam Abu Hanifa. Also, he was for some reason ignoring the fact that there is a difference between CRITICISM OF HADITH and REJECTION OF HADITH. All those scholars who see Hadith as essential to Qur'anic understanding have looked critically at Hadith. Hazrat 'Umar and hazrat 'Ayesha did not criticize Hadith to condemn Hadith as such but TO MAKE SURE THAT THE HADITH WAS AUTHENTIC NARRATION OF THE PROPET (pbuh).
Allama Pervez does not let his readers know that Imam Abu Hanifa, being a very influential scholar, was also criticized by his contemporaries who wanted to discredit him by saying that he did not accept Hadith as source of law. Pervez sahib should have pointed out what Abu Hanifa said in response to his critics: {Notice how Abu Hanifa puts his own analogical reasoning way beyond the Prophet's teachings and even those of the khulafa-e-rashidoon.) Caliph Mansoor had written to Abu Hanifa: "I have heard that you prefer QIYAS (analogical reasoning) to Hadith." Here is his reply:

"The information which has reached you is not correct. I first take the Book of Allah, then the Sunnah of the messenger of Allah, pbuh, then the decisions of Abu Bakr, 'Umar, Usman and Ali, then of those of the rest of the sahaba. But if there is difference of opinion among the sahaba, then I use QIYAS." (Mizane Shairani vol.1, p.62)

In his TARIKH (History) of Baghdad, Khatib, quotes Imam Abu Hanifa as follows: "When I find a command in the Book of Allah, I grasp it. If I do not find it there, I take the Sunnah of the messenger of Allah and those of his narrations which have been transmitted by reliable people to reliable people. If I do not find a command in either the Book of Allah or the Sunnah of the messenger of Allah, then I follow the words of the companions (sahaba) of the messenger of Allah, and in those matters where they differ, I accept the words of the sahabi I want to and reject the one I don't want. But I do not accept the words of anyone other than these as decisive. As for other people, I have as much of a right to ijtihad as they have." (Tarikhe Baghdad, vol.13, p.368)

{These classical writings are now available in the Urdu language in full or in part.}

Notice how way OFF Pervez sahib was? Where Abu Hanifa has Qur'an and authentic sunnah, Abu Hanifa sticks to it.

A wider study of the great work and scholarship of Imam Abu Hanifa indicates that the Pervezi idea of Imam Abu Hanifa just sticking to a handful of Hadith and rejecting Hadith by and large is simply ABSURD.
Not only did Abu Hanifa cherish and value hadith, he taught them to his numerous students. Take his outstanding student, Imam Abu Yousuf: He collected more than 1000 Hadith which Imam Abu Hanifa had taught him and compiled them in a book titled KITAB al-ATHAR. There are other collections of Hadith which Abu Hanifa collected with great care. I have one of these in my library. It is titled MUSNAD Abi Hanifa.

Abu Hanifa's collections of Hadith are a serious blow for the attack by Jewish writers (Goldziher, Schact, etc.) that Hadith was collected (invented?) in the third century! Imam Abu Hanifa was born in 80 Hijri and died in Hijri 150.

I wonder why Allama Pervez did not read Egyptian scholar Muhammad Abu Zahra's famous book on Imam Abu Hanifa titled Hayat Imam Abu Hanifa. Or at least Pervez sahib's followers should have revised MAQAME HADITH in the light of Abu Zahra's book whose Urdu translation by Prof. Ghulam Ahmed Hariri reached its THIRD EDITION in 1983.

Abu Zahra shows in detail that Imam Abu Hanifa not only decided by Hadith (above QIYAS) but even took NUMEROUS MURSAL Hadith. Mursal Hadith are considered WEAK by strict scholars of Hadith, such as Imam Bukhari, because they leave out the name of the sahabi through whom the hadith reached the Tabai (generation after the sahaba). Abu Zahra quotes a number of these MURSAL hadith which are found in Imam Abu Hanifa's works. Thus Abu Hanifa used mursal Hadith in his fiqhi decisions!
(The Tabai scholars were meticulous in collection of hadith but even they do not compare with Imam Bukhari. If a hadith is mursal, it does not mean that it is unauthentic or fabricated. It simply is not as carefully documented as those with complete chains of narration.)
{Here we are dealing with a level of scholarship which if applied to modern research works and narrations of other religions would empty out the world's libraries as UNRELIABLE.)

I have much more info on Imam Abu Hanifa and hadith and Pervez sahib's errors but I will say to Mubascher sahib and Abid sahib, etc: A word to the wise is enough.

Kaukab Siddique
a humble servant of Allah in the caravan of those who love the words of Muhammad (pbuh) as the best commentary on the Qur'an.

2002-03-08 Fri 16:41ct