AHYA Multi-Media - QSEP

asked to do so and by way of testing, he himself used to ask for
the translations of Hadeeth. It was a crime for any student to look
up translations in Mazahir-Haqq (the school). But it was necessary
to look up Tahawi and Hidaya, and to take out the Hadeeth
appearing in Mishkat from the Sihaah Kitabs. It was also necessary
to judge the Hadeeth and indicate whether they were in favor of
the Hanafee Madhhab or against. Should a Hadeeth appear to be
against the Hanafees, it was my duty to provide the argument of
the Hanafees as well as the answer to that specific Hadeeth. I
cannot remember not providing any Hanafee arguments for any
mas’alah because I had the opportunity of checking Hidaya and its
commentaries...” 645
Here we see the attitude of the author of Fazaail-e-Aamaal that
instead of checking whether the “Deobandi version of the Hanafee
Madhhab” is in accordance with the saying, actions and approvals
of Allah’s Messenger , he scrutinizes which Hadeeth opposes
his Madhhab. Furthermore, he shamelessly admits that he is good
at refuting the words of the most truthful Messenger that
oppose his Madhhab.
3: Adhering to Weaker Proofs
Moulana Mahmoodul-Hasan Deobandi says in a Risalah called,
“Taqreer-e-Tirmidhi”, on a Fiqh issue related to transactions,
“…justice in this issue is that the opinion of Imam Shafi’ee carries
greater weight, but we are the Muqallids, it is obligatory upon us
to follow Imam Abu Haneefah.” 646 This example is a general rule
for the bigot blind-followers that even if they realize that the
645 Aap Beti, Moulana Zakariyah (p.29) This is similar to what Abu
al-Hasan al-Karkhi said, ‘Every Ayah, which is in disagreement
with what our people say (followers of the Hanafee Madhhab) is
either under Naskh (overruled) or must be altered in meaning (to
satisfy what Hanafees say). The same is for every Hadeeth (in
opposition of what Hanafees say); it is either under Naskh or must
be altered.’ [al-Karkhi, Risalah al-Karkhi , Cairo; al-Maktaba al-
Arabiya, p.84-85]
646 Taqreer-e-Tirmizi p.39-40.
232