However, Muslim cites three different wordings for this hadith, each with a different chain. Only one out of the three contains the words “My father” and its chain contains (a) Thabit al-Bunani from whom Ayyub al-Sakhtyani did not narrate – as mentioned by al-Dhahabi in his Mizan – and whom Ibn `Adi mentioned in his compendium of weak narrators because of some denounced narrations imputed not to him, but by weak narrators from him; and (b) Hammad ibn Salama because of whose memory lapses al-Bukhari did not retain his narrations, as mentioned by Ibn Hajar in his introduction to Fath al-Bari and by other Imams of hadith such as al-Bayhaqi and Ibn Rajab.4

 Also in affirmation of the salvation of the two Noble Parents and in refutation of al-Qari there is the book by Imam al-Barzanji (d. 1103), Sadad al-Din, perhaps the most complete reference-work on the topic. Al-Barzanji states (p. 108-109) the same as al-Haytami, but in reference to al-Fiqh al-Absat. He cites (p. 80) from Ibn `Asakir’s Tarikh Dimashq the report that the rightly-guided Caliph, `Umar ibn `Abd al-`Aziz ordered that a certain man be put to death for saying that the father of the Prophet – Allah bless and greet him – was a mushrik.

 Al-Shawkani (d. 1250) in al-Badr al-Tali` defended al-Qari whom he characterized as a mujtahid persecuted for his independent views – an unmistakable reference to himself! The only school that still defends al-Qari’s hapless stand on the question today is the “Salafi”/Wahhabi school in the person of Mashhur Salman who recirculated al-Qari’s Mu`taqad, and the late Abu Bakr al-Jaza’iri.

 Al-Jaza’iri’s books achieved fame as they are heavily marketed by his Wahhabi sponsors, and he was thus able to spread far and wide the usual anti-Ash`arism of the Wahhabi school as well as the type of deviant doctrine and dubious ethics illustrated by the following excerpts:

1. “Supplicating the saints (du`â’ al-sâlihîn) [sic], seeking their help (al-istighâtha bihim), and seeking means through their status (al-tawassul bi jâhihim) never ever constituted an act of drawing near to Allah in the Religion of Allah Most High nor a righteous deed which one might use as a means, but are only prohibited polytheism (shirk) in the worship of Allah, due to which their perpetrator leaves the Religion and must endure in Hellfire forever.”5

2. “And who is `Abd al-Salam ibn Mashish [al-Shadhili’s teacher]?? … if the import of his words were not pure disbelief, it is absurd and meaningless elucubration. … They [Sufis] take as their lead … the practice of the people of all misguidances (ahl al-dalâlât) and their sayings such as al-Nabahani, al-Sha`rani, Dahlan” etc.6

 He attacked Sufis and tasawwuf as the reason why the Muslims lost in their struggle against European colonialism, although he himself took to his heels and did not lift a finger to fight it alongside his Algerian countrymen at the time of Algeria’s struggle for independence from the French! As for the worn out lie of anti-Sufis that tasawwuf is antithetical to Jihad, it has been once and for all disproved in the current resistance of Sufi Chechen fighters to the savage Russian offensive against Chechnya, the self-sacrificing resistance of the Sufi Shaykhs of Turkey to the arch-enemy of Islam, Mustafa Kamal, as well as countless books on the Sufi mujahidin of North and Central Africa, Central Asia and the Soviet Union as chronicled in As`ad al-Khatib’s al-Butula wa al-Fida’ `inda al-Sufiyya B.G. Martin’s Muslim Brotherhoods in Nineteenth Century Africa, Benningsen’s Mystics and Commissars for the role of Sufis in preserving Islam in the Soviet Union, and Lion of Daghestan.

Page 2 of 3 | Previous page | Next page