abu ja'afar hanbali (jurjis?)

so, let us learn a little about imam ibn qudama al-maqdisi.

first let us hear the history from the "authority" on qadiri tariqah, who KNOWS the khulafa of al-ghawth very well:

@8.46
the presenter says: so imam muwaffaquddin ibn qudamah spends time studying in damascus and then in baghdad; and in baghdad that is where he studies with imam abdul qadir al-jilani.

@9.00
"authority": yes in baghdad, he heads there and stays there for four years. he comes back and forth three times. now while he is in baghdad, he is present and he is preparing his first major text, which is al-mughni. and al-mughni is ten volumes. it is a commentary, a very large commentary on the mukhtasar al-khiraqi, abu umar al-khiraqi, so he is preparing this text over a four year period. and this..while he is in baghdad that he meets imam abdul qadir al-jilani rahimahullah, who dies in the year 561 hijri at 91 years of age. so he meets the imam there and begins to study with him. now, abu umar al-maqdisi, his brother, had long been there gone back and forth there, but muwaffaquddin ibn qudama, he comes in, in the middle portion of his brother's studies while there, and is sort of brought in to the presence of this great imam and begins to take knowledge from him, he ultimately before the imam's death, he and his brothers as well as a few classmates, rehearse all of the imams knowledge over a 40 to 45 day period before he dies.

@10:16
interviewer: right and one of the classmates was imam abd al-rahman ibn al-jawzi.

"authority": yes. and abd al-raHman ibn al-jawzi is a direct descendant of abu bakr al-siddiq. and his..when you look at imam abdul qadir al-jilani rahimahullah, his achievements and his scholarly accomplishments, were such that, he encompassed all the major areas. but each student that took from him, that he designated as a successor, took away a certain aspect. so, abdar Rahman ibn al-jawzi, his aspect he took away and he stayed in baghdad was his knowledge of hadith classification, tafsir and other areas.​

-----------
how many howlers there? i began ticking them off, when i first heard the above.
he has gotten everything wrong in there. but the confidence with which he tells it is admirable.

i will presently write on all of this but you need to look up biographies of the following imams:

1. muwaffaquddin ibn qudamah
2. abdu'l ghani ibn abdu'l wahid al-maqdisi
3. abu umar muhammad ibn ahmad ibn qudamah al-maqdisi
4. sayyidi abdu'l qadir jilani
5. abu'l faraj abdul raHman ibn al-jawzi

and a few others from the following main texts:

1. rawDatayn of abu shamah
2. siyar of dhahabi
3. tarikh of dhahabi
4. ibar of dhahabi
5. shadharat of ibn imad
6. dhayl tabaqat of ibn rajab
7. nujum al-zahirah
8. al-bidayah wa'l nihayah of ibn kathir
9. qala'id al-jawahir of tadifi
10. tazkiratu'l huffaz of dhahabi
11. mir'atuz zaman of sibt ibn al-jawzi

and some more works which are mostly derived from the earlier sources.


====
though i could have settled this with only one or two of the above works, i have strived to look up authorities available to me just to make sure that i have not overlooked anything. if there is something else that i have missed, which abu ja'afar has access to - then i would be interested in looking it up. it may be possible that he is citing from a source that i have not thought of looking up - or i don't know that such a source exists.

Allah ta'ala knows best.

 

i do not know why abu ja'afar is so confident that shaykh abdul razzaq is not an inheritor of the tariqah, in spite of being a scholar, the best among the shaykh's sons, and whom the shaykh trained from boyhood as noted by contemporary historians (who happen to be hadith scholars themselves).

i thought perhaps it has to do with the well known and oft-quoted statement of imam ibn qudamah al-maqdisi, that has been quoted in other places as well, but here it is from qalayid of tadifi, p6:

shams al-din abd al-Rahman ibn abu umar al-maqdisi says: "i have heard my uncle, shaykh muwaffaquddin (ibn qudamah) say: "i and hafiz abdu'l Ghani wore the cloak (khirqah) by the hand of shaykh al-islam abdu'l Qadir al-jilani at the same time; thereafter we studied fiqh under him, and heard narrations and we benefited from his company"​

---
so i thought, this explicit mention of khirqah (which is the form of bay'ah we do in our times) might have led abu ja'afar to deny khilafah for shaykh abdu'r Razzaq.

but abu ja'afar says there are more people who are the shaykh's khulafa. he says "we know their names"

so we know the cousins muwaffaquddin and abdu'l ghani wore the khirqah, and put on them by shaykh abd al-qadir jilani.

[the khirqah is some kind of clothing - a cloak or a turban - that a teacher puts on his disciple indicating that he has admitted him to his company and thus designated a disciple. among specific monographs on the subject are: bad' al-ulqah fi lubs al-khirqah by jamaluddin yusuf ibn abd al-hadi al-hanbali (d.909 AH); note that this ibn abd al-hadi is not ibn taymiyyah's student, the contumelious critic of subki].

---
does that mean that whoever is not mentioned as having worn the khirqah at the hands of the shaykh is not his murid/khalifah?

because tadifi mentions a number of khulafa, without specifying that they wore the khirqah.






----
so, the above are khulafa, even if the khirqah is not mentioned.

and the author specifies in the beginning itself that those who are disciples of the shaykh are innumerable; which means this is just a short list and if a certain name does not appear in the list, it does not mean that they are not khalifah/murid unless there is evidence to the contrary.

--

 

shadharat al-dhahab fi akhbari man dhahab, v7 p18-19
abu'l falaH abdul Hayy ibn aHmad ibn Muhammad al-akariyy al-Hanbali al-dimashqi (1032-1089).

 

in kitab al-taqyid li ma'arifati al-ruwwati wa's sunani wa'l masanid. v2 p109

by abu bakr muhammad ibn abd al-Ghani, ibn al-nuqTah, d.629 AH.

 

ibn kathir in his bidayah wa'l nihayah copied from abu shamah as well: v15, p15:

 

jamaluddin abi'l maHasin yusuf ibn taghri bardi al-atabaki (813-874 AH) copied from abu shamah in his al-nujum al-zahirah fi muluki miSr wa'l qahirah. vol.6 p.192:

 

abu shamah, shihabuddin abd al-raHman ibn ismayil ibn ibrahim ibn uthman al-maqdisi al-dimashqi al-shafiyi.
shaykh of imam al-nawawi; d. 665 AH.

in his kitab al-rawDatayn fi akhbar al-dawlatayn, vol.5 p.87

 

also in al-ibar fi khabari man ghabar, dhahabi, v3 p.134

 

dhahabi said the same in his tarikh al-islam, v43 p119-120:

 

ibn al-najjar, a hadith scholar and student of sayyidi abd al-Razzaq recollects the merits of his teacher and his prominence and describes his funeral.

but according to modern day researchers - he was not an inheritor of his father's knowledge!

sub'HanAllah!

 

of course, imam muhammad ibn yahya al-tadifi al-hanbali has mentioned his sons, in his work qala'id al-jawahir.

about shaykh abd al-Razzaq, he says:

the shaykh, the leader (qudwah), the hafiz abd al-Razzaq; he studied under his father and heard from him [narrations] and from abu'l Hasan ibn Sirmaa and others. he narrated and dictated hadith, he taught and issued fatawa, and debated [issues]; many scholars graduated under him.
...
...
hafiz ibn al-najjar said in his tarikh: 'his father made him hear narrations from a young age...
...
...
...he would write a lot for himself and for others, though his hand was illegible; i read a lot from him; he was a hafiz, an expert, trustworthy narrator (thiqah), truthful (saduq); he had a very good understanding of hadith; he was a jurist in the madh'hab of imam abu abdullah ahmad ibn hanbal; he was very abstemious and pious, very religious, who would pray a lot, and would stay away from people, aloof in his home; he would not go out of his house except for friday prayers. he loved the science of narration [i.e. hadith sciences], he was kind to students of knowledge, generous in sharing his insights, chivalrous, upright, benevolent; his financial condition was very modest; he had a very noble character, excellent manners, was very humble, polite and courteous; he led a life of spartan means and patiently endured hardship and poverty; yet he was very dignified and would not ask anyone anything. he was on the way of the salaf [earliest generation of muslims]. [end of ibn al-najjar's account].

---
... it is said about him that for thirty years, he did not raise his head towards the skies out of modesty and shame in the presence of Allah ta'ala [Haya'a].

... ibn al-Najjar has said: after his passing, his funeral prayer was announced in the morning in the localities of baghdad; a humongous crowd assembled for the prayer and therefore his funeral prayer was held on the outskirts of the city; then his bier was carried upon the heads of people to rasafah mosque where they prayed once again; and then they took him to bab turbatu'l khulafa, and then to the banks of euphrates and then to the west side of baghdad and prayed upon him near the huraym gate; and then they took the bier to kharbiyyah and they prayed there; and then he was carried to the mausoleum of imam ahmad and prayed there; thereafter he was buried.​

p. 43:



p: 44

 

then we have ibn rajab al-hanbali [736-795 AH] in his dhayl tabaqat al-hanabilah, v3 p77:

shaykh abd al-Razzaq ibn abd al-Qadir ibn abi Salih al-jili al-baghdadi al-Halabi [a reference to the locality in baghdad, not the syrian city]; the muhaddith, the hafiz - abu bakr, the son of the great ascetic abu Muhammad [shaykh abd al-Qadir]. we have previously mentioned his father and his brother, abd al-Wahhab.

shaykh abd al-Razzaq was born on monday, the 18th dhu'l qa'adah, in the year 528 AH in baghdad. he heard plenty, in the company of his father; and thereafter, on his own from abu'l Husayn muhammad ibn ahmad ibn Sirma, abu'l FaDl al-urmuwi, ibn naSir the hafiz, abu bakr al-zaghuni, abu'l karam al-shahrazuri, ahmad ibn tahir al-mayhani, sa'yid ibn al-banna'a, abu'l waqt and others in their rank. he dedicated himself to this science; he learned the uSul and learned fiqh from his father; he had good knowledge of the madh'hab - but his expertise in hadith overshadowed his knowledge of fiqh.

ibn nuqTah said: he was a hafiz, trustworthy narrator (thiqah), reliable (ma'mun).

hafiz Diya'a said: i have not seen in baghdad anyone more sharper or capable in research than him;

ibn al-dubaythi and others have also praised him.​

==============

in the same work, he quotes abu shamah

abu shamah said in his tarikh: he was an ascetic, a diligent worshipper, a scrupulous and abstemious person. he was the best among all of the shaykh's sons. he was content with very little of this world and he did not enter into things what some of his brothers did.​

====
ibn uthaymin (yes, the wahabi) notes that ten of shaykh abd al-qadir's sons who were outstanding ulama. see the notice on shaykh abd al-qadir, v2/p187. [though the wahabi cannot withhold his jealousy and antipathy to sufis, and comments negatively throughout. la Hawla wa la quwwata illa billah].

anyway, ibn uthaymin lists the following ten sons of the ghawth who were luminaries (in the order of their demise):

1. yisa ibn abd al-Qadir, d.573 AH.

2. abdu'l Jabbar ibn abd al-Qadir, d.575 AH.

3. abdullah ibn abd al-Qadir, d. 578 AH.

4. ibrahim ibn abd al-Qadir, d. 592 AH.

5. abd al-wahhab ibn abd al-Qadir, d. 593 AH.

6. muhammad ibn abd al-Qadir, d. 600 AH.

7. yahya ibn abd al-Qadir, d. 600 AH.

8. abd al-Aziz ibn abd al-Qadir, d. 602 AH.

9. abd al-Razzaq ibn abd al-Qadir, d. 603 AH.

10. musa ibn abd al-Qadir, d. 618 AH.​

and then ibn uthaymin says:

"...and then he had grandsons - a great number of them who were all scholars and it is difficult to mention all of them, because they are so many; the author [i.e. ibn rajab] mentioned some of them and omitted some others. we will mention those whom he omitted in our addendum according to their dates of demise."​

even a wahabi acknowledges that the shaykhs sons and grandsons were ulama.

 

but no! shaykh abd al-razzaq did not inherit knowledge from his father, according to the foremost authority on qadiri tariqat in our time, abu ja'afar.

it is a pity hafiz diya'a and dhahabi couldn't learn from abu ja'afar al-hanbali of the 15th century.

 

in siyar al-a'alam, v21 p.426 onward

Shaykh Abd al-Razzaq ibn Shaykh al-Islam Abd al-Qadir ibn Abi SaliH;
the shaykh, the imam, the muHaddith, Abu Bakr al-Jili (thereafter Baghdadi) al-Hanbali; the great ascetic. He was born in the year, 528 AH.

He heard [i.e. reports from] QaDi Abu'l FaDl al-Urmuwi, Muhammad ibn Ahmad ibn Sirma, Ibn Nasir, Abu'l Karam ibn al-Shahrazuri; he was dedicated himself to this science [of narration], and has written plenty.

... He passed away in the year, 601 AH.​

===
In Tazkirah al-Huffaz, imam dhahabi says: v4/p 1385, #1116; the 17th Rank of Hadith Scholars.

Abd al-Razzaq, the son of the great shaykh, the leader, Abu Muhammad Abd al-Qadir ibn Abu Salih al-Jili; the imam, the muHaddith, the Hafiz, the ascetic, Abu Bakr al-Hanbali - the muhaddith of Baghdad. He was born in the year, 528 AH and heard plenty, in the company of his father; thereafter, he strived on his own, and excelled in this field.
...
Hafiz Muhammad ibn Abd al-Wahid [Diya al-maqdisi] said: I have not seen in Baghdad anyone more perceptive, sharp and expert in research and inquiry than him.

Ibn Abi Shamah mentioned him in his tarikh and said: "he was an ascetic; a diligent worshipper, a trustworthy narrator, content with very little in this world."

i [dhahabi] say: among those who have reported [or narrate from] him are: Abu Abdullah ibn al-Dubaythi, who praised him; Majduddin ibn al-Najjar, Diya'a al-Maqdisi, Najib Abd al-Latif, Taqi al-Yaldani and his own son, Qadi Abu Salih [ibn Abd al-Razzaq al-Jili] and many others.

He has granted ijazah to Shaykh Shamsuddin Abd al-Rahman ibn Abu Umar, Al-Fakhr Ali, [Ahmad] Ibn Shayban and a group of scholars. He passed away in Shawwal, 603 AH.
​

----
these are views of contemporaries or those who came soon after them. hafiz muhammad ibn abd al-wahid, that dhahabi mentions is Diya'a al-maqdisi, the author of al-mukhtarah. 568-643 AH. he was a student of shaykh abd al-razzaq.

 

now who was sayyidi abdul razzaq al-jilani? and how true is the allegation:

----
first, we checked imam dhahabi's siyar:

siyar al-a'alam, dhahabi, 20/439:

#286. Shaykh Abd al_Qadir (raDi'Allahu anhu)

The shaykh, the imam, the scholar, the ascetic, the gnostic, the leader, Shaykh al-Islam, the Standard of the Friends of Allah, the reviver of religion (Muhiyuddin), Abu Muhammad, Abdul Qadir ibn Abi Salih Abdullah ibn Janki Duust, al-Jili, al-Hanbali; the Shaykh of Baghdad.

He was born in Jilan in the year, 471 AH. He entered Baghdad as a young man, and studied under Abu Sa'yid al-Mukharrimi.​

NOTE: in tadifi's qala'id and other biographies, sayyidi al-ghawth's father is mentioned as musa janki dost, which is supposed to be jangi-dost in farsi. wAllahu a'alam.

---
further below, he lists his students; (p 440)

Those who narrate from him (Shaykh Abdul Qadir Jilani RaDiAllahu Anu):

Al-Sam'ani;
Umar ibn Ali al-Qurashi;
Hafiz Abd al-Ghani;
Shaykh Muwaffaquddin ibn Qudamah;
Abdu'r Razzaq and Musa, his two sons;
Ali ibn Idris;
Ahmad ibn MuTi'y al-Bajisra'i
Abu Hurayrah
Muhammad ibn Layth al-Wastani
Akmal ibn Mas'ud al-Hashimi
Abu Talib Abdul Latif ibn Muhammad ibn al-QubayyaTi
and a great many people.​

===

 

there, i finished listening to the entire clip. there are some valid points he makes in the later part of the talk, about frauds posing as shaykhs and the tariqah business that is happening in our time. i don't disagree with that. however, the guy seems to have extrapolated his own experience and the flawed people he has seen and generalises that to a great many people.

in summary, most of the talk is nonsensical - even idiotic at times. i don't know why islamic preachers don't take time out to learn about fallacies, so they can avoid them. imam ibn Salah has said that he was not interested in logic because according to him, a jurist [faqih] is a reasonable man by default. that is, even if he doesn't know the terms and formal methods of logical, he is accustomed to thinking logically and using a sound reasoning process. when i read it long time ago, i felt that his opinion sounded reasonable. in spite of having an interest in logic and having read a few books long before entering grad-school, at times, i have also wondered why antiquated formal logic was being taught in madrasahs of our time. i now fully understand the wisdom of scholars who had inserted this in the syllabii and those ulama who passionately advocated teaching logic as an indispensable tool for a scholar.

----
if someone could transcribe the speech, or if it is available somewhere, it would save me time. [also, i do remember; nouman's speech is still due].

---
for example, take this section:

explaining the statement: 'whoever doesn't have a shaykh, his shaykh is shaytan', the most prominent living authority on the qadiri tariqah says:

@34.42:

now if someone said that regarding about the revealed law, in particular, that would be correct. but if we are talking about iHsan, we can bring examples, that is not the case. we bring examples in the first few generations where, people did not have, shaykhs... or what have you...yet they had a high level.

there is an evidence that is in riyad al-salihin.

where abu bakr and another companion are speaking and they say, 'shall we not go visit umm ayman...and benefit'. and they got...because umm ayman was seen as a source of great knowledge and ihsan and wisdom. and they used to go and visit her and take knowledge and take wisdom and benefit.
​

@35.25

so when you see that, you realise that, ok this is an example of umm ayman not necessarily having...you know...been among the scholarly companions, but none the less, having some type of repository of knowledge, some deep knowledge that the companions were also deriving and taking from.
​

----
how idiotic!

umm ayman had a teacher (what you refer as 'shaykh') and he is the greatest teacher in the creation. sub'HanAllah! the companions did not go to umm ayman because she had knowledge from somewhere else. they went there FOR the very reason that she might have knowledge from the same teacher, but possibly, which they could have missed.

there is no comparison!

ironically, this refutes a statement he makes further when he says a person cannot have knowledge of ihsan until they are complete or perfect in revealed law. i am not refuting this later statement per se, and our position articulated by our grand shaykh imam ahmad rida khan, who has explained eloquently and in detail, what this statement means; shaykh asrar has also mentioned this somewhere, if i remember; i wanted to insert this in prospects, but decided to keep it as a separate paper. in sha'Allah. [this is from fatawa afriqah].

the example of umm ayman actually weakens his own argument.

------
oh, by the way. abu ja'afar's has erroneous described this incident of umm ayman from the riyad al-salihin. in a hadith of anas ibn malik, sayyiduna abu bakr and umar visited umm ayman (raDiyAllahu anhum) because: "come let us visit her, just as RasulAllah sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam used to visit her"




---
but who will check? one can confidently dismiss the khilafat of sayyidi abdul razzaq al-jilani raDiyAllahu anhu and denying that he inherited knowledge from his father - in spite of being ignorant of a great many things.

nas'alu Allaha al-aafiyah.

 

abu ja'afar said:

sub'HanAllah.

how ignorant!

----
according to abu ja'afar, sayyidi abdul razzaq jilani was not the successor of his father in knowledge. my question is JUST WHY? what made you to exclude him from the khulafa? and what is the criteria for being a 'successor in knowledge'? imam muwaffaq al-din ibn qudama is a great hanbali imam, and a maqdisi (from the levant). how do we know that he was a khalifah? because, historians mentioned that he travelled to baghdad and stayed there and took from the ghawth. if they did not do so, it would be easier to dispute HIS being the khalifah compared to rejecting the khilafah of shaykh abd al-razzaq al-jilani. we will have a brief look at ibn qudamah, but first, we must learn about shaykh abdul razzaq.

wa billahi't tawfiq.

 

making sweeping statements and broad generalisations is usually erroneous. just a few minutes of talk is not sufficient to judge a man's knowledge. it is quite possible that abu ja'afar is a scholar, but mistaken in this issue. but his supreme confidence is off-putting.

https://www.thoughtco.com/hasty-generalization-fallacy-1690919

---
however, he has made blunders in this speech and we are not going to spare that.

---
tasawwuf, tariqah, etc - the name, the methods have all evolved over time. one can only suggest that perhaps these were reasons, the motivations, the conditions for certain practices or methods that we now see - it is not a 2+2=4 affair. historical context is of great importance; we cannot dismiss people or a whole group as liars just because *we* have not seen any evidence. this is why, in my opinion, abu ja'afar is a jahil regardless of his phenomenal ability to recall the difference between majduddin and taqiyuddin ibn taymiyyah.

---

no. he doesn't know. he is ignorant but tries to pose as the authority on shaykh abd al-qadir jilani or his tariqah.

this implies that anyone claiming qadiri tariqah going via sayyidi abd al-Razzaq al-jilani is a liar.

an unsuspecting person may be easily misled by this deceptive claim. this (and other express statements) imply that abu ja'afar has an irrefutable method to trace them back - that he has examined all the chains and is aware of all the names of mashayikh and scholars in the chains and has robust evidence to DENY those who cannot match this 'verified list'.

notice, he says:

how exactly does he know these names? did they maintain a register in the zawiyah, that was continuously updated until the ruh pur futuh of sayyidi al-ghaws al-a'azam left this world, and then handed down to abu ja'afar so he "knows who they are" to the point that he can exclude those who are not in that list?

indeed, WE too know who they are - but how can we exclude those who are not in this list unless there is compelling evidence that such-and-such a person cannot be a khalifah?

i sat down to examine works of history and biographical compendiums to see if any reliable source has said so. in spite of browsing more than a dozen works, i couldn't find anything against sayyidi abd al-razzaq raDiyAllahu 'anhu. perhaps i have not looked in the right places.

 

but what is baffling is that he does not seem to know facts about imam muwaffaq al-din ibn qudamah, or doesn't understand (if he has read it) or is deliberately concealing those facts, for whatever reason - one would be tempted to say, perhaps, to peddle his own narrative.

we will come to this. in sha'Allah.

 

chisht is in iran, khwajah mu'inuddin chishti was actually hasan sanjari; shaykh umar suhrawardi was from baghdad, i.e. iraq, not shaam; shah baha'uddin naqshband was from bukhara (nowhere near today's turkey - unless uzbekistan is occupied by turkey now).

he doesn't even know these commonly known facts of mashayikh - but wants to retell history!

that is why you should cling to the mantles of qadiri mashayikh, one of them who said in the manqabat of ghaws e aazam:

mazra'a e chisht o bukhara o iraq o ajmer
kaun si kisht pe barsa nahin jhaala teraa