Kifayat al-Talib
Yanabi` al-Mawaddah
October 1, 2015Tadhkirat al-Khawas
October 1, 2015BACK⇒ Return to Table of contents
Kifayat al Talib
The author is Sheikh Abu ‘Abdullah Muhammad ibn Yusuf al Kanji (d. 655 A.H).
The author of ‘Abaqat states (vol. 1 pg. 120, 311) that this Sheikh al Kanji narrated this hadith of Thaqalayn in his book Kifayat al Talib fi Manaqib ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib. He states:
اخرجه مسلم فى صحيحه كما اخرجناه و رواه ابو داود و ابن ماجه فى كتابيهما
Muslim narrated it in his Sahih as quoted by us, and Abu Dawood, as well as Ibn Majah have narrated it in their books.
We wish to enlighten the readers on a few points at this juncture:
1. The author of ‘Abaqat did not mention the complete isnad of Sheikh al Kanji by means of which the status of the narration (whether it is sahih or not) could be learnt. The book Kifayat al Talib is not available. However, whilst researching the personality of Sheikh al Kanji, we found a few details which exposes his stance. If it is studied with fairness, there will be no need for another answer. Since the author of ‘Abaqat relied upon the book Kifayat al Talib for many of his narrations, we thus felt it necessary to reveal the stance of Sheikh al Kanji. We will present that which is available to us at the moment. This will expose his stance.
It is stated in Nur al Absar of Sheikh al Mu’min al Shablanji:
قال الشيخ ابو عبدالله محمد بن يوسفالكنجى فى كتابه “البيان فى اخبار صاحب الزمان” من الادلة على كون المهدى حيا باقيا بعد غيبوبته الى الان انه لا امتناع فى بقائه بقاء عيسى بن مريم والخضلر و الياس من اولياء الله تعالى و بقاء الاعور الدجال به و ابليس اللعين من اعداء الله تعالى
Al Sheikh Abu ‘Abdullah Muhammad ibn Yusuf al Kanji says in his book Al Bayan fi Akbar Sahib al Zaman, “Amongst the proofs that al Mahdi is still alive despite his disappearance is that there is nothing preventing him from being alive, just as ‘Isa ibn Maryam, al Khidr, and Ilyas are alive from the friends of Allah, and Iblis and Dajjal are alive from amongst the enemies of Allah.[1]
Note:-
- The author of Nur al Absar, after quoting the opinions of Sheikh al Kanji, thoroughly refuted them. Nevertheless, the views of Sheikh al Kanji have become evident. They are in complete contrast to the views of the Ahlus Sunnah and are exactly like the views of the Shia.
- Similarly, Yanabi’ al Mawaddah quotes from the book of al Kanji, al Bayan:
, قال الشيخ الكنجى ان المهدى ولد الحسن العسكرى فهو حى موجود باق منذغيبته الى الان
Sheikh al Kanji states, “Indeed al Mahdi, who is the son of Hassan al ‘Askari, is alive, and he has been alive from the time that he disappeared up until now.”[2]
- Abu Shammah al Maqdisi states in his book, Rijal al Qarnayn al Sadis wa al Sabi’, (pg. 208), whilst mentioning the details of this Sheikh al Kanji:
و فى التاسع و العشرين من رمضان سنة 658 قتل بالجامع الفخر محمد بن يوسف الكنجى و كان من اهل العلم بالفقه والحديث و لكنه كان فيه كثرة الكلام و ميل الى مذهب الرافضة جمع لهم كتبا توافق اغراضهم يقرب بها الى الرؤساء منهم فى الدولتين الاسلامية والتاتارخانية
He was killed on the twenty-ninth of Ramadan in the year 658 A.H at the al Fakhr Masjid. He was a scholar of fiqh and hadith, but he indulged excessively in philosophy and he was also inclined toward the views of the Rawafid. He authored a few books, which support their views, with the object of getting closer to the rulers amongst them from the two dynasties, whether the Islamic or the Tatar dynasty.
After presenting the above clarification, there is no need to give any further replies to ‘Abaqat. This individual, al Kanji held views that were against the views of the Ahlus Sunnah, and he supported the views of the Shia, how can his writings be a proof against us?
- The author of ‘Abaqat quoted al Kanji, who claims that this version of hadith al Thaqalayn also appears in Abu Dawood and Ibn Majah. In light of our research, this is incorrect. As far as we are concerned, we understand that this was only included to add to the list of references. From amongst the al Kutub al Sittah (the six most common hadith books of the Ahlus Sunnah), the hadith of Thaqalayn can only be found in sahih Muslim and Jami’ al Tirmidhi. Despite, searching for it, we could not find it in any of the other books. The isnad of sahih Muslim was one hundred percent sahih in light of the principles. The isnad of al Tirmidhi is not sahih, as explained under the discussion of that isnad. You may refer to it for further satisfaction.
If the Shia scholars, who claim to love the Ahlul Bayt, can take the trouble of finding these narrations in Abu Dawood and Ibn Majah and show them to us, then it will greatly appreciated. Further, if they bring forward a sahih isnad, then we will have no reason not to accept the narration. In other words, the Shia ‘Ulama need to answer the objection that stands against some of their most reputable and famous scholars, i.e. they cannot avoid forgery and deception in their works and use them to enlarge their books.
[1] Nur al Absar pg.186 – Chapter regarding Muhammad ibn al Hassan al Mahdi, Egyptian print, new edition.
[2] vol. 3 pg. 130 – Chapter eighty six.
BACK⇒ Return to Table of contents
Kifayat al Talib
The author is Sheikh Abu ‘Abdullah Muhammad ibn Yusuf al Kanji (d. 655 A.H).
The author of ‘Abaqat states (vol. 1 pg. 120, 311) that this Sheikh al Kanji narrated this hadith of Thaqalayn in his book Kifayat al Talib fi Manaqib ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib. He states:
اخرجه مسلم فى صحيحه كما اخرجناه و رواه ابو داود و ابن ماجه فى كتابيهما
Muslim narrated it in his Sahih as quoted by us, and Abu Dawood, as well as Ibn Majah have narrated it in their books.
We wish to enlighten the readers on a few points at this juncture:
1. The author of ‘Abaqat did not mention the complete isnad of Sheikh al Kanji by means of which the status of the narration (whether it is sahih or not) could be learnt. The book Kifayat al Talib is not available. However, whilst researching the personality of Sheikh al Kanji, we found a few details which exposes his stance. If it is studied with fairness, there will be no need for another answer. Since the author of ‘Abaqat relied upon the book Kifayat al Talib for many of his narrations, we thus felt it necessary to reveal the stance of Sheikh al Kanji. We will present that which is available to us at the moment. This will expose his stance.
It is stated in Nur al Absar of Sheikh al Mu’min al Shablanji:
قال الشيخ ابو عبدالله محمد بن يوسفالكنجى فى كتابه “البيان فى اخبار صاحب الزمان” من الادلة على كون المهدى حيا باقيا بعد غيبوبته الى الان انه لا امتناع فى بقائه بقاء عيسى بن مريم والخضلر و الياس من اولياء الله تعالى و بقاء الاعور الدجال به و ابليس اللعين من اعداء الله تعالى
Al Sheikh Abu ‘Abdullah Muhammad ibn Yusuf al Kanji says in his book Al Bayan fi Akbar Sahib al Zaman, “Amongst the proofs that al Mahdi is still alive despite his disappearance is that there is nothing preventing him from being alive, just as ‘Isa ibn Maryam, al Khidr, and Ilyas are alive from the friends of Allah, and Iblis and Dajjal are alive from amongst the enemies of Allah.[1]
Note:-
- The author of Nur al Absar, after quoting the opinions of Sheikh al Kanji, thoroughly refuted them. Nevertheless, the views of Sheikh al Kanji have become evident. They are in complete contrast to the views of the Ahlus Sunnah and are exactly like the views of the Shia.
- Similarly, Yanabi’ al Mawaddah quotes from the book of al Kanji, al Bayan:
, قال الشيخ الكنجى ان المهدى ولد الحسن العسكرى فهو حى موجود باق منذغيبته الى الان
Sheikh al Kanji states, “Indeed al Mahdi, who is the son of Hassan al ‘Askari, is alive, and he has been alive from the time that he disappeared up until now.”[2]
- Abu Shammah al Maqdisi states in his book, Rijal al Qarnayn al Sadis wa al Sabi’, (pg. 208), whilst mentioning the details of this Sheikh al Kanji:
و فى التاسع و العشرين من رمضان سنة 658 قتل بالجامع الفخر محمد بن يوسف الكنجى و كان من اهل العلم بالفقه والحديث و لكنه كان فيه كثرة الكلام و ميل الى مذهب الرافضة جمع لهم كتبا توافق اغراضهم يقرب بها الى الرؤساء منهم فى الدولتين الاسلامية والتاتارخانية
He was killed on the twenty-ninth of Ramadan in the year 658 A.H at the al Fakhr Masjid. He was a scholar of fiqh and hadith, but he indulged excessively in philosophy and he was also inclined toward the views of the Rawafid. He authored a few books, which support their views, with the object of getting closer to the rulers amongst them from the two dynasties, whether the Islamic or the Tatar dynasty.
After presenting the above clarification, there is no need to give any further replies to ‘Abaqat. This individual, al Kanji held views that were against the views of the Ahlus Sunnah, and he supported the views of the Shia, how can his writings be a proof against us?
- The author of ‘Abaqat quoted al Kanji, who claims that this version of hadith al Thaqalayn also appears in Abu Dawood and Ibn Majah. In light of our research, this is incorrect. As far as we are concerned, we understand that this was only included to add to the list of references. From amongst the al Kutub al Sittah (the six most common hadith books of the Ahlus Sunnah), the hadith of Thaqalayn can only be found in sahih Muslim and Jami’ al Tirmidhi. Despite, searching for it, we could not find it in any of the other books. The isnad of sahih Muslim was one hundred percent sahih in light of the principles. The isnad of al Tirmidhi is not sahih, as explained under the discussion of that isnad. You may refer to it for further satisfaction.
If the Shia scholars, who claim to love the Ahlul Bayt, can take the trouble of finding these narrations in Abu Dawood and Ibn Majah and show them to us, then it will greatly appreciated. Further, if they bring forward a sahih isnad, then we will have no reason not to accept the narration. In other words, the Shia ‘Ulama need to answer the objection that stands against some of their most reputable and famous scholars, i.e. they cannot avoid forgery and deception in their works and use them to enlarge their books.
[1] Nur al Absar pg.186 – Chapter regarding Muhammad ibn al Hassan al Mahdi, Egyptian print, new edition.
[2] vol. 3 pg. 130 – Chapter eighty six.