Part One of a detailed analysis of the errors of Quraysha Ismail Sooliman (5 years studies at Darul Uloom Pretoria, Freelance Journalist and Political Science Honour’s Student, University of Pretoria)

The following article is in response to a paper “compiled” by a “scholar” who has concerned herself with championing the rights for women to be able to choose whether they would like to perform salaah at masaajid or perform eid salaah at the Eid Gah. The purpose of the said paper was to “give all who choose to learn the opportunity to be exposed to as many an opinion as possible from some of the most renowned scholars.

The compiler puts forth certain statements which to the untrained eye (and mind), appear quite convincing and most authentic. However, in our article, we wish to clearly distinguish between the truth and the statements of the writer. It is unfortunate that we have discovered the writer’s affinity for plagiarism as well as an ardent copy and paste frenzy. We urge the reader to follow the links provided and verify where the writer has plagiarised. The writer has failed to check up any references, has even copied the footnote numbers and has not researched a single scholarly work.  Where she could not find references to copy, she has merely made statements without any academic proof.

However blatant misquoting, quoting out of context as well as gross inaccuracies in translation are glaringly apparent. These are all aspects which serve to greatly weaken and insult what is supposed to be an academic article written by a self-confessed “scholar”.

The writer states the following:

Abdullah ibn Umar (May Allah be pleased with him) narrated that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) was asked, “Which people are the best? “ He (peace and blessings be upon him) said,” The best people are those whose tongues are truthful and their hearts are” Makhmun”. They said, “We know the meaning of a truthful tongue, but what is a heart that is Makhmun?” He said, “It’s a heart that is pious and pure with no sin. This heart has no unfairness, no envy and doesn’t hold malice.”

Our response:

The writer has failed to provide the actual Arabic as well as the reference for the opening hadith she uses and upon which she is basing this entire article. We have sourced the hadith and reproduced it hereunder in the original Arabic.

حدثنا هشام بن عمار حدثنا يحيى بن حمزة حدثنا زيد بن واقد حدثنا مغيث بن سمي عن عبد الله بن عمرو قال قيل لرسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم أي الناس أفضل قال كل مخموم القلب صدوق اللسان قالوا صدوق اللسان نعرفه فما مخموم القلب قال هو التقي النقي لا إثم فيه ولا بغي ولا غل ولا حسد

(Sunan ibn Majah Juz 12  Pg 261 – Hadith 4206; Musnad-ush-Shamieen Juz 8 Pg 69)

It must firstly be noted that the writer has displayed her gross lack of academic knowledge by stating the narrator to be “Abdullah ibn Umar radhiAllahu anhu, however the narrator is actually Abdullah bin Amr radhiAllahu anhu who are two distinctly different personalities.

Any student of Hadith who actually bothers to check up the actual Arabic would note this glaring discrepancy proven by the actual text which we have placed above.

Such is the result of regurgitating anything and everything one may come across. We must -state at this juncture that “Google” is by no means an academic resource when it comes to Shari’ah. The writer has copied this incorrect translation verbatim from:

http://maktabasalafiya.blogspot.com/2010/10/do-you-have-these-two-traits.html

This is one of many such websites which carry the exact same incorrect translation. The site above also offers a reference, albeit incorrect. This is indicative of the fact that they have merely copied these details from someone else. Why then has not a single one of these “scholars” bothered to correct the incorrect translation and reference? Are these “Google” & “Wikipedia” scholars?

Whilst we are all prone to error, a “scholar” makes an effort to check the source as well as translations of all proofs being quoted.

Abdullah bin Umar and Abdullah bin Amr RadiAllahu anhum are two distinctly different personalities. We say to the writer,please read Siyar A’laam in Nubalaa, Juz 3 Pg 79 for a little insight into and proof of this fact.

The writer is also advised to read Al Bidaayah wan Nihaayah, Al Isaabah fi Tamyeez As Sahaabah, Usdul Ghaabah for proof of the fact that ibn Umar and ibn Amr are two distinctly different personalities.

Secondly, the writer cannot offer the excuse that the same hadith appears in a different collection with the narration of ibn Umar. The following works have no record of ibn Umar narrating the hadith she claims he narrated. Should anybody find this hadith with the narration of ibn Umar, please do inform us of the reference and we will gladly review our stance on this issue.

The works which do not have any mention of ibn Umar narrating this hadith are:

  1. Saheeh Bukhari
  2. Saheeh Muslim
  3. Sunan Abi Dawud
  4. Sunan Tirmidhi
  5. Nasa’i
  6. Muatta Imaam Maalik
  7. Musnad Imaam Ahmad bin Hambal
  8. Musannaf ibn Abi Shaibah
  9. Sunan Al Kubraa – Baihaqi
  10. Musannaf Abdir Razzaaq
  11. Sunan Al Kubraa – Nasa’i
  12. Mustadrak of Haakim
  13. Sunan of Daarimi
  14. Musnad of Humaidi
  15. Sunan of Darqutni
  16. Saheeh ibn Hibbaan
  17. Saheeh ibn Khuzaimah
  18. Musnad Ash Shafi’i
  19. Musnad Abdillah ibn Mubaarak
  20. Ma’rifatus Sunan

ERROR NO.1 : THE WRITER HAS BLATANTLY MIS-QUOTED A HADITH BY ATTRIBUTING THE NARRATION TO A SAHAABI NOT MENTIONED IN THE CHAIN OF NARRATION AT ALL.

Translation of the Hadith

The writer has again displayed her penchant for copying and pasting by copying the translation offered by these websites verbatim. A scholar does not merely accept translations from all & sundry, a scholar checks up the meaning of the word if he/she does not know it.

We draw your attention to the Arabic word بغي which the writer has translated (albeit copied the translation) as “unfairness”. The writer wishes to play on the emotions of the reader by inferring that the Ulama who are propagating the ruling that women not attend the Eid Salaah, are being unfair. In her plagiarised attempt at convincing the public that the Ulama are hiding facts from them, she cannot even prove the translation of the Hadith in her distorted aim to justify her own objectives. She offers no proof for this translation nor the view of any accepted authority of Hadith that unfairness is being implied by this word. Unfairness may be implied by this word in certain circumstances only. The writer in using the translation “unfairness” has departed from the opinion of master linguists of the Arabic language. We will only engage in discussion with the writer on this issue of inaccurate translation once she is able to apprise us of the explanations offered by leading scholars of Arabic. Whilst we do not wish to explain the correct explanation of this word and thereby do the work of the writer for her, we refer her to:

  1. Al Qaamoosul Muheet

a.       Juz 1 Pg 190

b.      Juz 2 Pg 236

c.       Juz 2 Pg 119

d.      Juz 2 Pg 192

e.       Juz 3 Pg 75

f.        Juz 3 Pg 397

  1. Lisaanul Arab

a.       Juz 2 Pg 12

b.      Juz 2 Pg 534

c.       Juz 3 Pg 307

d.      Juz 4 Pg 545

e.      Juz 4 Pg 539

f.        Juz 5 Pg 144

g.       Juz 6 Pg 230

h.      Juz 6 Pg 322

i.         Juz 7 Pg 165

j.        Juz 7 Pg 188

k.       Juz 7 Pg 349

l.         Juz 7 Pg 412

m.    Juz 8 Pg 84

n.      Juz  10 Pg 334

o.      Juz  10 Pg 409

p.      Juz  11 Pg 250

q.      Juz  11 Pg  265

r.        Juz  14 Pg 75

s.       Juz  14 Pg 325

  1. Tahzeebul Lughaa

a.       Juz 1 Pg 142

b.      Juz 1 Pg 227

c.       Juz 1 Pg 265

d.      Juz 1 Pg 363

e.      Juz 2 Pg 67

f.        Juz 3 Pg 104

g.       Juz 3 Pg 105

h.      Juz 3 Pg 210

i.         Juz 5 Pg 17

THE TRUE ULAMA DO NOT NEED TO HIDE ANYTHING FROM ANYONE.IT IS YOU, SISTER IN ISLAM, WHO IS GUILTY OF BEING UNFAIR BY BLATANTLY PLAGIARISING THESE “PROOFS” AND ATTEMPTING TO DECEIVE THE PUBLIC BY PASSING IT OFF AS YOUR OWN RESEARCH.

This concludes Part One of the refutation of “The Conclusion: Now each has the knowledge to decide

Advertisements
Comments
  1. Zaid says:

    Assalaamualykum

    I am by no means a “Scholar” nor consider myself knowledgeable in Islam.

    I just find the tone harsh, and the mention of the sisters name and the public “lashing” leaves a sour taste in the mouth. I dont know the sister, but i would imagine that there would be better ways to correct her mistakes than this ,and i guess the words of the prophet where he asked the sahaaba if they had “opened his chest and seen what was in his heart” come to mind in this situation.

    slms

    • Muslimah says:

      Wa Alaikumus Salaam

      The reason for the perceived harshness of tone is due to the fact that this is an issue which is being severely misrepresented by many many unqualified individuals. Thereby insulting not only Islam but also the Fuqaaha, Muhadditheen etc.

      It should be noted that many unwary members of the Muslim public are merely reading articles such as the one in question and thereafter wishing to deduce laws of SHari’ah, comment on principles of Fiqh etc. There is no problem with an individual commenting on a matter of Shari’ah as long as that individual possesses the necessary academic qualifications.

      The reason for mentioning the sister’s name is due to the fact that we are merely reproducing verbatim what she herself has already made public. The article we are quoting has been circulated by the sister herself and many others who agree with her on a variety of public forums and other media.

      It should also be noted that the sister has committed an act which is against the Shari’ah PUBLICLY by appending her name to the article and qualifications as well as by placing it on public forums. It is a well known principle that an act against Shari’ah or contrary to the Shari’ah which is done publicly is to be addressed publicly. Were this a private matter, the sister would have been advised in private. Lastly, no Muslim or any other individual, scholar or otherwise, has the authority to misrepresent the statements of Shari’ah, misquote the words of the Fuqaaha and/ or otherwise feed the public a warped view of any Islamic matter.

      The incident of the hadeeth which you mention refers to an incident where the Imaan itself of a person was under question. The matter under discussion here is not one of Imaan itself but rather one of jurisprudence. Therefore, we will apply the juristic principle of ‘judging’ upon what is apparent.

      The sister still has and always will have the opportunity to retract the incorrect statements and remedy this gross injustice to Islamic Law. It must be borne in mind that a Muslim loves for the sake of Allah and also displays anger for the sake of Allah. Therefore, harshness for the sake of Allah and in matters where the SHari’ah is being misrepresented is necessary.