A Mallam came out yesterday to add his voice (as he always likes adding voice to matters which most often he would not first master) to the issue at hand - that there were big scholars of Sunnah in history which some other big scholars of Sunnah disagreed over their being people of bid'ah and otherwise, and that no party forced their opinion on the other. That is the issue.
Also take note that, we are not saying the individuals the Author of Ibraaz mentioned were mubtadiah, kalla alfa kalla. Rather the point is that scholars differed about them.
It is the method of the people of logic, people given to argumentation, to derail from an issue and hold to irrelevances where they think they can hit their opponents below the belt.
The two Ustaadhs that have spoken so far, from the Ilorin bloc, are exhibiting this trait of mantiq or jidaal. I am not saying they are mantiqiyoon. Get that right.
For instance the first Ustaadh, from Ilorin, who actually came out to refute al-Ibraaz exhibited this trait so copiously in his approach. This is not ilmee.
He almost ventured into faulting the title of the initial compilation thinking it was 'at-Tabreez' the author wrote not knowing it was 'al-Ibraaz'. He corrected himself though.
If it had been at-Tabreez the author wrote, he would have used some valuable part of his talk to address the grammatical incorrectness of that, and at the end of the day he would not have addressed the main issue.
That was why he was hammering on the personalities of Qataadah and Qays more than the real issue.
So the other mallam, on the same manhaj, picked it from where he stopped. He made a short release doing tajheel of the Author of Ibraaz, and he followed it with a video in his characteristic 'esi á»Ì€rá»Ì€ ranpe' shenanigans.
In his own case, he was just beating around the bush.
So let me join you to address the sub-issue of Qays then we would go back to the main issue.
Don't run away from that main issue. We are very much awaiting the 'Adwaa I'jaaz that would probably expose your brothers whom you are giving a sincere advice.'
Inshaa Allaah we will be expecting that. A wá náà o ni ise méjì, isẹ keu yìà naani.
So on Qays...
Qays bn Abee Haazim, Abu Abdillaah al-Bajalee, a resident of Kuufah, was a big scholar of the Sunnah. He embraced Islam while the Prophet - sallallahu alayhi wa sallam - was still alive, and was on his way to Madeenah to give bay'ah to the Messenger of Allaah - sallallahu alayhi wa sallam - when he heard he had died.
For that reason, he was not regarded a Sahabi rather a Taabi'ee. He belonged to the Mukhadramoon - those who witnessed the period of Jaahiliyyah and the period of Islam but never met the Prophet - sallallahu alayhi wa sallam - though they had belief in him. Abu Uthman an-Nahdee, Abu Amree ash-Shaybaanee, Abu Muslim al-Khawlaanee (who arrived in Madeenah during the time of Abu Bakr as-Siddeeq), and etc, belonged here.
Qays narrated Hadeeth from many of the Shahabah and was regarded trustworthy.
Al-Imaam Yahya b. Maeen opined that he was trustworthy than Al-Imaam Az-Zuhree and Saaaib bn Yazeed. (As-Siyar 5/110)
Al-Imaam adh-Dhahabi said he almost became a Sahabi.
The issue is that many people of knowledge praised him while some others attacked him for his school-of-thought. What was his school-of-thought? You will find out shortly Inshaa Allaah.
Al-Imaam adh-Dhahabi said in As-Siyar (5/109) quoting Yaquub bn Shaybah:
... تكلم أصØابنا Ùيه ØŒ Ùمنهم من رÙع قدره وعظمه ØŒ وجعل الØديث عنه من Ø£ØµØ Ø§Ù„Ø£Ø³Ø§Ù†ÙŠØ¯ .
'...some of our people spoke about him, some raised his status and held him in a high esteem such that they say the hadeeth from him are from the best of isnaad
ومنهم من Øمل عليه وقال : له Ø£Øاديث مناكير . والذين أطروه Øملوا عنه هذه الأØاديث على أنها عندهم غير مناكير ØŒ وقالوا : هي غرائب .
Some others attacked him and said he had reprehensible hadeeth. Those who accepted him also accepted those hadeeth from him and said they found no issue with them, the rather said they are gharaaib (not meeting up better conditions)
ومنهم من لم ÙŠØمل عليه ÙÙŠ شيء من الØديث ØŒ ÙˆØمل عليه ÙÙŠ مذهبه ØŒ وقالوا : كان ÙŠØمل على علي . والمشهور أنه كان يقدم عثمان . ولذلك تجنب كثير من قدماء الكوÙيين الرواية عنه...
Some others didn't even attack him from the perspective of his hadeeths rather from the perspective of his school-of-thought (manhaj).
They said HE USED TO ATTACK ALEE (BN ABEE TAALIB). Though what is more popular is that HE USED TO RATE UTHMAN (B. AFFAN) OVER ALEE (B. ABEE TAALIB), it was for that (first reason) many big scholars of Kuufah (in his time) avoided reporting hadeeth from him.'
End of quote.
The two Ustaadhs should read that part again, now very slowly and intently.
That part establishes the fact that he was a naasibi (the attacker of Alee and his family), and this was what those scholars of Kuufah considered a Jarh on basis of manhaj, in other words it was an heresy.
Al-Imaam Adh-Dhahabi referred to him too as an Uthmanee (a lover of Uthmaan) just as Ibn abdilbarr did in al-Isti'aab, as cited by the Author of Ibraaz, hafidhahullaah.
Adh-Dhahabi said in Taarikh Al-Islam
كان كوÙيا عثمانيا وذلك نادر
'He was a kufah resident and lover of Uthman, and that was strange.'
It was strange in the sense that the people of kufah used to be lovers of Alee.
Truly, that is not a Jar'h but it is a Jar'h to attack Alee (because of Uthmaan) or to attack Uthman (because of Alee). Many scholars fell into either side. The first side is nasbiy while the other is tasha'yyu'u.
(Al-Imaam An-Nasaai was highly persecuted in Shaam for his tashayyu'u which Al-Imaam Adh-Dhahabi confirmed as a little one).
So Al-Imaam adh-Dhahabi absolved Qays - rahimahullah - of all that in Meezaan al-Itidaal (not As-Siyar, that was an obvious sabq qalam from the Author of Ibraaz, hafidhahullaah) by saying:
أجمعوا على الاØتجاج به ومن تكلم Ùيه Ùقد آذى Ù†Ùسه
'(The latter scholars) agreed as to using his hadeeth, whoever speaks ill of him only harms his soul'.
Even in the statement above it is implicit that some people spoke ill of him (by calling him an heretic or whatever), but they were wrong.
Evidently there was a khilaaf around him but the subject of the khilaaf was not enough to throw him out.
So let's go back to the real issue. The scholars of Sunnah in the past used to differ about other scholars of Sunnah but that never made them to throw away one another from the Sunnah.
That is the issue, remain there. Don't go the philosophy way.
Baarakallahu feekum.
Click here for first part
