[Shaykh Muḥammad ʿAwwāmah ḥafiẓahullāh delivered a lecture at Dār al-Hilāl in Tashkent, Uzbekistan (2018). Following the lecture, there was a session where attendees posed questions to the Shaykh. In my lessons of Sunan Abī Dāwūd at Madani Madrasa London, I discussed some of those questions and their corresponding answers with my students from the book “Riḥlat Uzbekistān”, a travelogue compiled by Shaykh’s son Dr. Muḥī Uddīn ʿAwwāmah. N Basith and other students took notes during our discussion, which are now presented here – Mahfuz]
1st Question: Are there any other scholars, other than Shaykh Abū Ghuddah and Shaykh al-Kawtharī, who you are influenced by?
Answer: A student of knowledge, in reality, has been shaped by various teachers and scholars. Amongst my teachers, there are two prominent figures: Shaykh ʿAbdullāh Sirāj al-Dīn and Shaykh ʿAbdul Fattāḥ Abū Ghuddah. I had the privilege of studying under Shaykh ʿAbdullāh Sirāj al-Dīn for a remarkable span of fifty years and Shaykh Abū Ghuddah for forty. My association with Abū Ghuddah commenced five years after my time with Shaykh ʿAbdullāh Sirāj al-Dīn and unfortunately, he passed away five years prior to Shaykh ʿAbdullāh Sirāj al-Dīn’s demise. These are the two teachers that I have been greatly influenced by. Although I did not have the opportunity to meet Shaykh Zāhid al-Kawtharī in person, I extensively benefitted from his writings and gained valuable insights from his works. Additionally, Shaykh Muḥammad Salqīnī played a significant role in supporting me in my formative years while the other two teachers’ (Abū Ghuddah and Sirāj al-Dīn) ongoing guidance and assistance have been instrumental for me throughout my career.
2nd Question: What are the disciplines of knowledge that everyone must learn in Islamic scholarship?
Answer: The first area of knowledge that every individual pursuing Islamic scholarship should strive to excel in is the study of the Arabic language and the second is to acquire a sufficient understanding of fiqh (Islamic jurisprudence) which a person can worship Allāh with. For Naḥw (Arabic grammar), students should engage with Matūn (texts) such as al-Ajrūmiyyah and al-Binā wa al-Asās. For Fiqh Ḥanafī, a person must have read the book Nūr al-Īāḥ, and the Matn of Abū Shujā’ for the Shāfiʿī school.
A student’s development should progress in stages, and the Arabic language should be given priority as ʿIlm Naḥw and ʿIlm Ṣarf serve as the gateway to all other disciplines of knowledge. It is also beneficial for a student to memorise some of the manuals of each science (Ḥifz al-Mutūn). For instance, my teacher Shaykh ʿAbdullāh Sirāj al-Dīn memorised Majmūʿ Muhimmāt al-Mutūn which consists of several books compiled by scholars of al-Azhar. He also memorised Alfiyyah of Suyūṭī (a foundational text on Muṣṭalaḥ al-ḥadīth (ḥadīth terminology)), ʿUqūd al-Jumān of Suyūṭī, Tanwīr al-Abṣār (fiqh Ḥanafī), among others. This was during his student life and then he dedicated himself to memorise ḥadīth and tafsīr. His proficiency in memorising ḥadīth and Qur’anic interpretation was remarkable. Whenever I encountered a challenging masʾalah, I would turn to Shaykh Sirāj and he would provide valuable guidance.
One day a number of students of Shaykh ʿAbdullāh Sirāj were talking about him and the discussion led to the vast number of ḥadīth he related in his lessons and lectures, indicating to his extensive memorization. One student claimed he knew 10,000 ḥadīth by heart, another claimed 20,000, a third claimed 30,000 and the fourth student boldly stated that he believed his teacher memorised 100,000 ḥadīth. The others expressed disbelief, but the fourth student swore an oath, saying “Wallahi, if shaykh had not memorised 100,000 ḥadīth then my wife is divorced”. They related this incident to Shaykh and Shaykh remained silent for a few seconds before responding. He acknowledged that the Qasm (oath) was not violated but advised them never to repeat such a statement.
The fact that Shaykh ʿAbdullāh Sirāj possessed such memorization abilities during our time is a testament to the divine blessings bestowed upon him by Allah and serves as evidence of the preservation of the legacy of the Prophet Muḥammad ﷺ even many years after his departure from this world.
3rd Question: In your book Athar al-Ḥadīth al-Sharīf fi-khtilāf al-A’immat al-Fuqahā and Adab al-Ikhtilāf fī Masā’il al-Ilm wa al-Dīn you refuted some of the contemporary scholars’ ideologies but you never mentioned the names of these scholars and groups?
Answer: The essence of such discussions lies not in the individuals who expressed the ideas, but rather in the ideas themselves. The focus is on rectifying and refining concepts rather than attributing them to specific individuals. Therefore, I have deliberately concealed the names of the people involved.
4th Question: I experienced deep sorrow upon the passing of Shaykh Muḥammad Ṣādiq, the founder of Dār al-Hilāl, as he had been a guiding mentor for us in Uzbekistan. Approximately three months after his demise, I had a dream in which I saw my Shaykh approaching me swiftly. In the dream, I asked him about our course of action after his departure, to which he replied, “Continue reading Shaykh ʿAwwāmah’s book.” Encountering you today reaffirms the truth of that dream, and I am genuinely delighted to be in your presence. Consequently, I have two questions for you. In our culture, when a baby boy is born, parents often supplicate, envisioning him to become like Imām Bukhārī. What is your perspective on this custom and concept? Additionally, I am curious to know if you hold any opinions regarding Shaykh Abū Zahrah.
Answer: As for the dream you related, it is a duty upon me to gift something back to Shaykh Muḥammad Ṣādiq for his advice to you to look at my books. So I ask you all to recite Sūrah Fatiḥa for him as Īṣāl-e Thawāb.
As for the first question I want to give you a glad tidying through the Qurān that Allah will grant you whatever you ask (0000). We ask Allah in different ways e.g O Allāh forgive me and the other way we show Allah, without speaking, of our needs. As the parents make dua for their son to become like Imām Bukhārī, Allah will listen. However, the child will become like Imām Bukhārī according to the needs of the century if not like Imām Bukhārī of the past.
As for the second question, Shaykh Abū Zahrah is a great theologian in Egyptian Muslim history. He passed away in 1974. He was a teacher of Uṣūl al-Fiqh at al-Azhar University. I attended only three Majlis delivered by him. He came to our city Halab (Aleppo) and he delivered two lectures there. One was a public lecture and the topic was on the regulation of war and peace deals in Islam. In that lecture, he spoke without having a presentation slide, or pen or paper. He had nothing in front of him and he delivered the whole lecture from his memory. After one hour and forty minutes of the lecture, he drank some water and then said my habit is that I drink water in one-quarter of my lecture. He finished his bayān in 2 hours and 20 minutes. In an impressive display of intellectual prowess, he delivered an extensive discourse on a weighty subject without the aid of any writing materials, showcasing his remarkable calibre. The second one; he was invited to our Madrasah and the attendees were fewer because it was not a publicised event and it was a general topic about the Sunnah of the Prophet ﷺ.
My 3rd meeting with him was in Cairo. There was a magazine, Liwāʿ al-Islam published by Ustādh Aḥmad Ḥamza. In that magazine, every month there would be a lecture event. In that month we attended Shaykh Abū Zahrah’s lecture. After the program, we approached Shaykh Abū Zahrah and expressed our desire to visit him at his residence to benefit from his company. He kindly agreed and scheduled the meeting for the following day at 4:00 PM, after Asr prayer. We were staying in the old city of Cairo and Shaykh was a resident of the new city of Cairo and we were just travellers. When the appointed time arrived, we made our way to his house, but unfortunately, we were slightly delayed. By the time we reached his door, it was approximately 4:03 or 4:04 PM, just three to four minutes past the scheduled time. Upon knocking on the door, Shaykh informed us that he could not meet with us as we had not arrived punctually. This adherence to punctuality was a practice followed by the esteemed scholars of Egypt, where everything was expected to occur at its designated time. Some scholars even set specific times to respond to phone calls. This incident highlights the significance of discipline in managing time, as it is an essential factor in achieving success in life.
Shaykh Abū Zahrah is deserving of the title “Imām of his time” but there are two objections that arise. Shaykh Abū Zahrah used to teach at the College of Law in Egypt, in terms of religious topics and modules. Those lectures used to be transcribed, compiled, and subsequently published. While this practice in itself is commendable, the issue arises from the fact that the Shaykh did not have sufficient time to thoroughly review and examine the students’ notes. Consequently, numerous errors and inaccuracies would find their way into the published materials.
Another concern arises regarding Shaykh Abū Zahrah in relation to his predecessor, Shaykh Muḥammad Abduh. Initially, Shaykh Muḥammad Abduh held the esteemed position of the grand Mufti of Egypt and was known for his commendable efforts. However, over time, his views and ideas began to deviate, resulting in the inclusion of erroneous concepts within the educational framework of Azhar and even in his fatwas. Despite these deviations, many individuals were influenced by his teachings. It became a rare occurrence for anyone to openly criticise or challenge Shaykh Muḥammad Abduh’s ideas, except for two courageous scholars. One is shaykh Yūsuf Nabhāni who had two poetry books, al-Rāiyah al-Kubrā fi al-Radd ʿalā al-Naṣā, al-Rāiyah al-Ṣughrā fī al-Radd ʿalā baʿḍ al-Ṭawāif al-Islāmiyyah. The second ʿĀlim was Shaykh al-Islām Muṣṭafā Ṣabrī, in his book Mawqif al-ʿAql wa al-ʿIlm wa al-Dīn min Rabb al-Ālamīn wa ibādihi al-Mursalīn. Within those four volumes of the book, he meticulously brought to light and emphasised the errors of Muḥammad Abduh. Unfortunately, despite the valuable insights presented in this work, it did not receive significant attention, and Shaykh Abduh continued to be highly esteemed by the masses. However, after the passage of forty years, the realities regarding Shaykh Abduh’s ideology started becoming evident to the Muslim community. It became apparent that although many had been captivated by Shaykh Abduh, he harboured numerous issues within his beliefs. It is worth noting that Shaykh Abū Zahrah himself was influenced by Shaykh Abduh at a certain point in time.
When examining his book Uṣūl al-Fiqh, one may observe the inaccuracies in the ʿIbārah (syntax) used. Just general sentences are written. The sentences written are often general in nature, lacking precision. Furthermore, within that particular book, one may encounter ideas that are either completely isolated or outright incorrect.E.g He explained that the beard (liḥyah) is not an act of worship (ʿIbādah) but it is just a habit (ʿĀdah). This is wrong because there are hadith in which the Prophet ﷺ encouraged the men to keep a beard.
Shaykh Abū Zahrah had the same opinion as Muḥammad Abduh that there is no Nāsikh and Mansūkh (i.e. the whole concept of abrogation) in the Qurān. Muḥammad al-Khidr has a book called Uṣūl al-Fiqh and he had the same opinion as Muḥammad Abduh about Nāsikh and Mansūkh. However, he said it is not about Nāsikh and Mansūkh, it is about the incremental development of Sharʿī rulings.
You may wonder how these great shuyūkh (Abū Zahrah et al.) did not look at the actual wording of the Quran “ما ننسخ” where the word “naskh” is used explicitly by Allah (Baqarah:106)?
It is clear that Allah mentioned the word naskh in the āyah, however, these shuyūkh understand the concept of naskh but interpreted Naskh (abrogation) as abrogating the sharīʿah of previous prophets as opposed to abrogating the verse prior.
You may also wonder where the evidence for naskh is in the Quran, he said that there is a clear ayah in Surah al-Naḥl: 101. There is no way the naskh of this ayah can be misunderstood.
Shaykh Abū Zahrah was also hesitant in accepting some of the ṣaḥīḥ ḥadīth (authentic), and there are others who also support this idea. However, we do not blame them in the same manner that we blame the deniers of the Sunnah. This is because these shuyūkh are not denying the general concept of the Sunnah, rather they have doubts about the authenticity of the Sunnah as they were unable to fully comprehend the meaning of the hadith. As for the deniers of the Sunnah, they hold no respect for the hadith and reject it completely.
5th Question: What are the contemporary books you recommend us to read?
Answer: Uzbekistan, this blessed land, has been a fertile ground that has nurtured numerous exceptional scholars, whose influence has extended globally. When contemplating the ninety-nine names of Allah, we should understand that these names that Allah has are all connected with the quality of Ḥikmah (wisdom).
In the land of Uzbekistan, you should start preparing to revive the legacy of your ʿUlamāʾ. Especially the books that are considered to be lost or unprinted books, write biographies to introduce to the people the legacy of the ʿUlamāʾ of your land.
[Rather than responding with contemporary works, shaykh decided to focus on the importance of unearthing the rich history of ʿUlamāʾ in Uzbekistan.]
6th Question: Shaykh, can you recommend some duʿās (wird) for us to read?
Answer: I am a student of knowledge myself but if I was to give you advice to read duʿās I will advise you to read the book al-Adhkār of Imām Nawawī.
7th Question: In our country, this book ‘Taysīr Muṣṭalaḥ al-ḥadīth’ is primarily studied as part of ʿUlūm al-Ḥadīth. Is this book reliable for its topic, if not what book would you recommend and what are the steps of progressing in ʿUlūm al-ḥadīth?
Answer: I will express complete candour with you. I generally do not peruse the books of contemporary scholars so I am unable to give a definitive response regarding this book. Though I have heard positive reviews from others, I myself have not read it. The author of this book [Dr Maḥmūd al-Ṭaḥḥān] hails from the same city as I do. May Allah grant him an immense reward for his endeavours. As for whether he has succeeded in presenting the topic in a comprehensible manner, as suggested by the book’s title, I cannot offer an opinion since I have not read it.
If you are asking for an alternative, I can give you one which I have been teaching for forty years, my teacher Shaykh ʿAbdullāh Sirāj al-Dīn’s commentary on ‘al-Bayqūniyyah’. His book is a blessed and beneficial book and it summarises the important points of Tadrīb al-Rāwī of Imām Suyūṭī.
Let me tell you a principle. The syllabus books should be simple, clear and should provide examples. For the books which require the teacher to explain the text first before the topic, these books are for the specialist to read. It surprises me that some institutions in Turkey, India, Pakistan, and here in Uzbekistan teach Nuzhat al-Naẓar Sharḥ Nukhbat al-Fikar for the subject of Muṣṭalaḥ al-Ḥadīth. Ibn Ḥajar in his later life said, ‘I wrote many books but I am happy with a few amongst which are Fatḥ al-Barī and Nuzhat al-Naẓar’. It is not the case that the book itself is of no benefit rather it is more appropriate for those specialising in the field.
If you start with my teacher’s book “Sharḥ of ‘al-Bayqūniyyah’” and the students study it thoroughly, then they should be able to transition to the “Muqaddimah ibn al-Ṣalāḥ” directly. However, if they haven’t done so, they should study “al-Taqrīb” of Imām Nawawī or “Irshād Ṭullāb al-Ḥaqāʾiq” after which they can move on to “Muqaddimah ibn al-Ṣalah”.
Some traditional madāris teach Tafsīr al-Nasafī and then they move on to Tafsīr al-Bayḍāwī. The problem in this is that Tafsir al-Nasafī focuses heavily on analysing the grammatical syntax of the verses and delves into the different ways verses can be recited. As for Tafsīr al-Bayḍāwī, students get lost in discussions pertaining to theology and philosophy and teachers spend more time explaining Bayḍāwī’s ʿibārah than teaching tafsir of the qurʾān. Therefore, I believe that madāris should reconsider having bayḍāwī as part of their curriculum. I can say that to a certain extent, Tafsir al-Jalālayn is a good book to have in the syllabus, however, I would recommend teachers and students alike to be vigilant when reading the text and to understand the points made by the authors. If we look at Surah Baqarah some may be confused as to why ʿAllāmah Jalāluddīn Suyūṭī proceeded to write “هذا الكتاب” following “ذلك الكتاب”. Allāh uses Ism al Ishārah lil Ba’īd to indicate the high status of the Qurʾān, ʿAllāmah Jalaluddin Suyūṭī did tafsir like in this manner to mean “this exalted book which is in front of you”. This exemplifies that students and teachers must be careful when approaching the text and understanding what the authors
After this text, students should move on to studying Tafsir al-Khazīn for it is an excellent tafsir. There is only one objection people have which is that it consists of some isrāʾiliyyāt, however, there is no issue with this as we may still benefit from everything else the book offers. The reason I recommend this is that it is an abridged version of Tafsīr Baghawī and based primarily on tafsir maʾthūr. The author discusses the derived fiqhī masāʾil pertaining to all four madhāhib in detail and quotes ḥadīth from their original sources.
To conclude, whatever we teach our students should be simple, clear and easy to understand.
8th Question: Is there any book regarding the ḥadīth of aḥkām which is dedicated to the Hanafi madhab? We are aware of ʿAllāmah Badr al-Dīn al-ʿAynī’s book, but we were not able to find it. Do you have any information on it?
Answer: I am not familiar with his book specifically, however, there is one called al-Dur al-Manẓūm’ written by ʿAllāmah Mughlaṭāī, a Ḥanafī scholar. Within the book, he compiled the hadith of aḥkām recorded in all six books, which amounted to 202 hadith [ṣaḥīh] in total, and thereafter he added 159 ḍaʿīf hadith.
9th Question: Our age is beyond forty, so we think we have missed the opportunity to memorise the Mutūn (manuals of different disciplines of Islamic sciences) ?
Answer: ‘No, you have not missed the opportunity. In fact, your opportunity is now. If a young child memorises something, they may recall the word, but they will not actually comprehend what they have memorised. However, for you students, at this stage, you will be able to memorise and understand what you are memorising.’
10th Question: In terms of declaring whether a hadith is ṣaḥīḥ or ḍaʿīf, amongst the contemporary scholars, whose opinion should be given preference to and can you give us an idea of the contemporary schools of hadith today?
Answer: I would not advise people to rely on the comments of contemporary scholars for the grading of ḥadīth. I love to connect people to the early salaf, it is better for me to say ‘this ḥadīth is authenticated as ṣaḥīḥ by Nawawī’ than to say ‘It is ṣaḥīḥ according to Bājūrī’ (d. 1276 AH) as Nawawī (d. 676 AH) is his senior. To say ‘this ḥadīth is verified by Bayhaqī’ is better than saying ‘it is verified according to Nawawī’ as Bayhaqī (d. 458 AH) is Imām Nawawī’s senior.
I always ask my students to refer to the works of early classical scholars. The method that is adopted by some muḥaqiqūn (manuscript-editors) – wherein they grade the ḥadīth themselves, and then they mention who narrated it i.e. Bukhārī, Muslim, and Tirmidhī, etc – is wrong. This is because in making this comment, you are referring people to your comment instead of the early muḥadithūn.
One day, thirty years ago, I was entering Masjid al Ḥarām behind my teacher Shaykh ʿAbdul Fattaḥ Abū Ghuhddah. I asked “Shaykh, it is clear from the manhaj (method) of Shaykh Aḥmad Shākir that he relies on the authentication of Ibn Ḥibbān. What is your opinion on this?”
Shaykh Abū Ghuddah replied “That method is best” as it is more convenient in the application of the Sunnah. This is more about establishing the Sunnah”
In the modern world, contemporary schools of ḥadīth focus on tamzīq al-Sunnah (destroying the Sunnah). They prefer to grade the ḥadīth as weak and mention the criticisms concerning the narrators. They prefer to nullify ḥadīth instead of maintaining it.
From that one sentence of Shaykh Abū Ghuddah, I learnt that Ibn Ḥibbān’s tawthīq should be accepted and therefore this one sentence became the basis of my research paper “lamahat fī tawthīq Ibn Ḥibbān”where I mention that Ibn Ḥibbān’s tawthīq is trustworthy and reliable. It is incorrect to claim that Ibn Ḥibbān did tawthīq of majhūl ruwāt. This is due to the fact that his manhaj was also adopted by Aḥmad, Yaḥyā Ibn Maʿīn, Bukhārī, and ʿAlī Ibn al-Madīnī where they did the tawthīq of ruwāt about whom there is no criticism.
11th Question: When we read Fatḥ al-Bārī of Ibn Ḥajar (d. 852 AH) we find a number of passages that are the exact same as ʿUmdat al-Qārī by Badr al-Dīn al-Aynī (d. 855 AH), did the scholars benefit from each other’s writing or did they refer to the same sources?
Answer: The most well-known opinion amongst the ghayr muqallid/la madhabiyyah is that Badr al-Dīn al-ʿAynī would take from Ibn Ḥajar’s work and refute his opinions. I say there is a probability of this happening. However, there is also another possibility that they both benefited from the same sources, especially the Sharḥ of their teacher Ibn Mulaqqin – a great scholar who had also written books about hadith – hence their works are quite similar. Therefore, it is unfair to say that Badr al-Dīn al-ʿAynī took from Ibn Ḥajar as they shared the same source.
Ibn Mulaqqin, a Shāfiʿī scholar, benefitted from ʿAllāmah Mughlaṭāī’s sharḥ of Ṣaḥīḥ Bukhārī, a Ḥanafī scholar. Ibn Ḥajar benefited a lot from Mughlaṭāī’s book (ikmāl tahdhīb al-Kamāl) when writing Tahdhīb al-ahdhīb and this is explicitly stated in his introduction.
You may ask me about Ibn ʿAbd al-Barr’s comment and why these scholars do not refer to each other in their books.
“من بركة العلم عزوه إلى قائله”
From the blessing of ʿilm is to refer to its source
Ibn Ḥajar does not refer to Ibn al-Mullaqin, nor does Ibn al-Mullaqin refer to Mughlaṭāī and ʿAynī does not refer to Ibn Ḥajar. My response would be that Ibn ʿAbd al-Barr’s comment is highlighted by Imām Nawawī in the context of referencing something unique or new. However, if a known or repeated point is mentioned there is no need to reference it repetitively.
Therefore, whilst it is possible that Badr al-Dīn al-ʿAynī took from Ibn Ḥajar al-ʿAsqalānī, it is more likely that they both referred to the same source.
