Its Sunnah to love the Arabs

[Qeelbax]

Sometimes I wonder if @Hamzza follows Islam or Arabism.

You yourself are a rather shady character. Why do you push Arab superiority down our throats even though it’s completely haram? Don’t be a munafiq.

 

[Qeelbax]

Superiority in Lineage only

We all come from Adam and Eve. There is no superior lineage. Not even Prophet Muhammed saws lineage is superior, we don’t worship lineages. You think the Moroccan and Jordanian royal family full of fitnah and haram are better than a pious Indonesian family because the royals are related to the prophet? The only superiority in Islam is through piety and only Allah swt can determine that.

 

[AMusee]

Racism is so bad for your iman. And with arab hate, I've seen people use it as a stepping stone into hating islam, parts of islam. Because a lot of people still associate islam with arabs. It can be something like associating somali culture with clothes that expose awrah like the guntiino, and arabs with the jilbab. and then prefering somali women to uncover themselves to distance themselves from the "arab way". Or leaving islam because they're mad about Allah choosing an arab Prophet and Quran.

You are right. It is the number one tactic used by people trying to attack Islam indirectly they try to hide under hating arabs and their "culture" and really they mean Islam but know they can not say it directly.

It has given me a new perspective/understanding on the Hadith in OP.



And if We had made it a foreign [i.e., non-Arabic] Qur’ān, they would have said, "Why are its verses not explained in detail [in our language]? Is it a foreign [recitation] and an Arab [messenger]?" Say, "It is, for those who believe, a guidance and cure." And those who do not believe - in their ears is deafness, and it is upon them blindness. Those are being called from a distant place.

Surah Fussilat 44

 

[Yaraye]

goodness, 6pgs of this shit

 

[AMusee]

Lol as if the modern day arabs are anything like the messenger...majority of arabs have caused so much suffering towards other muslims arabs and dont give any help even though they build one skyscraper after the other. Also The quran belongs to allah and not arabs...islam doesnt belong to arabs which is basically how ur coming off. I can dislike arabs and it wouldnt be about my faith

You dislike Arabs because of their corrupt rulers who have destroyed the Arab people as well? How does that make sense? How as a Muslim can you wholesale "dislike" millions of fellow Muslims based off their ethnicity?

Indeed Islam has nothing to do with any race but your arguments are ridiculous. Would it make sense for people to dislike you based off a criminal or corrupt person who shares your ethnicity?

There are good and bad found within all groups. "Disliking" any group whether from a ethnicity, country, town or even a family is small minded to put it gently.



The believers are but brothers, so make settlement between your brothers. And fear Allāh that you may receive mercy.

O you who have believed, let not a people ridicule [another] people; perhaps they may be better than them; nor let women ridicule [other] women; perhaps they may be better than them. And do not insult one another and do not call each other by [offensive] nicknames. Wretched is the name [i.e., mention] of disobedience after [one's] faith. And whoever does not repent - then it is those who are the wrongdoers.

O you who have believed, avoid much [negative] assumption. Indeed, some assumption is sin. And do not spy or backbite each other. Would one of you like to eat the flesh of his brother when dead? You would detest it. And fear Allāh; indeed, Allāh is Accepting of Repentance and Merciful.

O mankind, indeed We have created you from male and female and made you peoples and tribes that you may know one another. Indeed, the most noble of you in the sight of Allāh is the most righteous of you. Indeed, Allāh is Knowing and Aware.

Surah Al-Hujurat 10-13

 

[AMusee]

No way do I trust the viewpoint on Islam of someone who was just yesterday saying

Honest question @Araabi are you Muslim? If yes, why are you inventing lies against the Awliya of Allah and a mountain of Ilm like Ibn Hajr? What's your agenda here?

He also gets personally offended when Muslim's criticize the degenerate West and its War on Islam. He was upset Muslim's were speaking out against liberalism and said they should go home if they dont like it. lol it is telling.

Yet all of these detractors and pro Islam activists who hate having any sort of engagement with non Muslims freely choose to live in the West. When are they going to lead the way and go and live in a Muslim country and completely disassociate with the West which they claim to despise?

How can anyone reconcile between hating everything the West stands and choosing to live in the West?

They're nothing more than grifters who simply fool the unwise and those lacking in any intelligence.

 

[Hamzza]

This is Ibn Taymiyya's own words giving credence to what I said. I chose him because you probably won't accept anyone else. This is form his Majmu'. Please double check it yourself.


قال الإمام ابن تيمية في مجموع الفتاوى (18|17): «ومما قد يُسمّى صحيحاً، ما يصحّحه بعض علماء الحديث، وآخرون يخالفونهم في تصحيحه. فيقولون هو ضَعفٌ ليس بصحيح. مثل ألفاظٍ رواها مسلم في صحيحه، ونازعه في صِحتها غيره من أهل العلم: إما مِثلهُ أو دونه أو فوقه. فهذا لا يُجزم بصدقه إلا بدليل. مثل حديث ابن وعلة عن ابن عباس أن رسول الله r قال: «أيما إهابٍ دبغُ، فقد طهر». فإن هذا انفرد به مسلم عن البخاري، وقد ضعفه الإمام أحمد وغيره، وقد رواه مسلم.

ومثل ما روى مسلم أن النبي صلى الكسوف ثلاث ركعات وأربع ركعات. انفرد بذلك عن البخاري. فإن هذا ضعّفه حُذّاق أهل العلم. وقالوا أن النبي لم يصل الكسوف إلا مرةً واحدةً يوم مات ابنه إبراهيم. وفي نفس هذه الأحاديث التي فيها الصلاة بثلاث ركعات وأربع ركعات، أنه إنما صلى ذلك يوم مات إبراهيم. ومعلوم أن إبراهيم لم يمت مرتين، ولا كان له إبراهيمان. وقد تواتر عنه أنه صلى الكسوف يومئذ ركوعين في كل ركعة، كما روى ذلك عنه عائشة وابن عباس وابن عمرو وغيرهم. فلهذا لم يرو البخاري إلا هذه الأحاديث. وهذا حذف من مسلم. ولهذا ضعف الشافعي وغيره أحاديث الثلاثة والأربعة، ولم يستحبوا ذلك. وهذا أصح الروايتين عن أحمد.

ورُوِيَ عنه أنه كان يجوّز ذلك قبل أن يتبين له ضعف هذه الأحاديث. ومثله حديث مسلم: "إن الله خلق التربة يوم السبت، وخلق الجبال يوم الأحد، وخلق الشجر يوم الإثنين، وخلق المكروه يوم الثلاثاء، وخلق النور يوم الأربعاء، وبث فيها الدواب يوم الخميس، وخلق آدم يوم الجمعة". فإن هذا طَعَنَ فيه من هو أعلم من مسلم، مثل يحيى بن معين ومثل البخاري وغيرهما. وذكر البخاري أن هذا من كلام كعب الأحبار. وطائفةٌ اعتبرت صِحته مثل أبي بكر بن الأنباري وأبى الفرج ابن الجوزي وغيرهما. والبيهقي وغيره، وافقوا الذين ضعفوه. وهذا هو الصواب، لأنه قد ثبت بالتواتر أن الله خلق السماوات والأرض وما بينهما في ستة أيام. وثبت أن آخر الخلق كان يوم الجمعة. فيلزم أن يكون أول الخلق يوم الأحد. وهكذا هو عند أهل الكتاب. وعلى ذلك تدل أسماء الأيام. وهذا هو المنقول الثابت في أحاديثَ وآثار أُخَر.

ولو كان أول الخلق يوم السبت وآخره يوم الجمعة لكان قد خَلَقَ في الأيام السبعة. وهو خلاف ما أخبر به القرآن. مع أن حُذّاقَ أهل الحديث يثبتون عِلّة هذا الحديث من غير هذه الجهة، وأن رواية فلان غَلِطَ فيه لأمورٍ يذكرونها. وهذا الذي يُسَمّى معرفة علل الحديث. بكون الحديث إسناده في الظاهر جيداً ولكن عُرِفَ من طريقٍ آخر أن راوية غلط فرفَعَهُ، وهو موقوف. أو أسنده وهو مرسَل. أو دخل عليه (أي على الرواي) حديثٌ في حديث. وهذا فنٌّ شريفٌ. وكان يحيى بن سعيد الأنصاري ثم صاحبه علي بن المديني ثم البخاري من أعلم الناس به. وكذلك الإمام أحمد وأبو حاتم. وكذلك النسائي والدارقطني وغيرهم. وفيه مصنفات معروفة. وفي البخاري نفسه ثلاثة أحاديث نازعه بعض الناس في صِحّتها. مثل حديث أبي بكرة عن النبي أنه قال عن الحسن «إن إبني هذا سيدٌ، وسيصلح الله به بين فئتين عظيمتين من المسلمين». فقد نازعه طائفةٌ منهم أبو الوليد الباجي (والدارقطني)، وزعموا أن الحسن لم يسمعه من أبي بكرة. لكن الصواب مع البخاري وأن الحسن سمعه من أبي بكرة، كما قد بَيَّن ذلك في غير هذا الموضع. وقد ثبت ذلك في غير هذا الموضع


Have a good read of that. I take it you understand Arabic. This is in his Majmu' where he showcases real examples of Hadith scholars weakening hadith found in Bukhari and Muslim.

Make of it what you will.

It seems you're trolling us now. This was all in the Islamqa article you claimed to have read and was too apologetic for your liking.

Shaykh al-Islam said:

Among that which may be called saheeh is reports that have been classed as saheeh by some scholars of hadith, but others disagreed with that, and said that it is da‘eef, not saheeh, such as some phrases that were narrated by Muslim in his Saheeh, but other scholars disputed their soundness, who were either his equals or a lower or higher standing than him. Such material cannot be deemed as definitively saheeh except on the basis of evidence. One example is the reports which say that the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) offered the eclipse prayer (salaat al-kusoof) with three bows [in each rak‘ah] and four bows, and his report differs from what is in al-Bukhaari. This was classed as da‘eef by the well-versed of scholars, who said that the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) only offered the eclipse prayer once, on the day that his son Ibraaheem died.

Another example is the hadith in Muslim which says: “Allah created the land on Saturday, He created the mountains on Sunday, He created the trees on Monday, He created hardship on Tuesday, He created light on Wednesday, He created the animals on Thursday, and He created Adam on Friday.”

This was criticized by scholars who were more knowledgeable than Muslim, such as Yahya ibn Ma‘een, al-Bukhaari and others. Al-Bukhaari stated that these were the words of Ka‘b al-Ahbaar.

A number of others regarded this hadith as sound, such as Abu Bakr ibn al-Anbaari, Abu’l-Faraj ibn al-Jawzi, and others. Al-Bayhaqi and others agreed with those who classed it as da‘eef.

In Saheeh al-Bukhaari itself there are three hadiths concerning the soundness of which some of the scholars disagreed.

Al-Bukhaari was more skilled and more knowledgeable in the field than Muslim. Moreover, in Saheeh Muslim there are some phrases narrated only by Muslim, which al-Bukhaari refrained from narrating, and which some of the hadith scholars say are da‘eef. Furthermore, those who say that they are da‘eef may be correct, such as the report about the eclipse prayer having three or four bows. Or the version narrated by Muslim may be correct, and this is more often the case.

End quote. Majmoo‘ al-Fataawa (18/17-20).

https://islamqa.info/amp/en/answers/119516

Bring something new.

 

[Nilotic]

So people are meant to place another group of humans above themselves?

 

[Zak12]

It's from the Sunnah to love the Arabs and hating them is from the way of Shu'ubiyyah and Ahlul Bid'ah.

Imam Ahmed said:

"We acknowledge the rights of the Arabs and their superiority and we also love them for the Hadith of the prophet ﷺ {love for the Arabs is Iman and hating them is hypocrisy}. And we do not say the words of the populists and the meanest of the people who do not love the Arabs and do not acknowledge their merit, for their saying is Bid'ah and Khilaaf.

Note: The Hadith in this wording is Daef but the meaning is Sahih as it is backed by many other Hadiths.

This is akin to those Christian evangelists who place Jews on a high pedestal. Arabs are not anymore or less special than other Muslims and speaking as a Somali, I will obviously place my own people above Arabs, it is the natural thing to do.

 

[Hamzza]

Here it is, it is from his introductory الهدي الساري

وقال في آخره فزاد ونقص وقدم وأخر وتكلم ابن حزم والقاضي عياض وغيرهما على حديث شريك وانتصر له جماعة منهم أبو الفضل بن طاهر فصنف فيه جزأ وسنذكر ما يتعلق به مستوفى عند الكلام عليه إن شاء الله تعالى في موضعه هذا جميع ما تعقبه الحفاظ النقاد العارفون بعلل الأسانيد المطلعون على خفايا الطرق وليست كلها من أفراد البخاري بل شاركه مسلم في كثير منها كما تراه واضحا ومرقوما عليه رقم مسلم وهو صورة م وعدة ذلك اثنان وثلاثون حديثا فأفراده منها ثمانية وسبعون فقط وليست كلها قادحة بل أكثرها الجواب عنه ظاهر والقدح فيه مندفع وبعضها الجواب عنه محتمل واليسير منه في الجواب عنه تعسف كما شرحته مجملا في أول الفصل وأوضحته مبينا أثر كل حديث منها فإذا تأمل المصنف ما حررته من ذلك عظم مقدار هذا المصنف في نفسه وجل تصنيفه في عينه وعذر الأئمة من أهل العلم في تلقيه بالقبول والتسليم وتقديمهم له على كل مصنف في الحديث والقديم وليسا سواء من يدفع بالصدر فلا يأمن دعوى العصبية ومن يدفع بيد الإنصاف على القواعد المرضية والضوابط المرعية فلله الحمد الذي هدانا لهذا وما كنا لنهتدي لولا أن هدانا الله والله المستعان وعليه التكلان وأما سياق الأحاديث التي لم يتتبعها الدارقطني وهي على شرطه في تتبعه من هذا الكتاب فقد أوردتها في أماكنها من الشرح لتكمل الفائدة مع التنبيه على مواقع الأجوبة المستقيمة كما تقدم لئلا يستدركها من لا يفهم وإنما اقتصرت على ما ذكرته عن الدارقطني عن الاستيعاب فإني أردت أن يكون عنوانا لغيره لأنه الإمام المقدم في هذا الفن وكتابه في هذه النوع أوسع وأوعب وقد ذكرت في أثناء ما ذكره عن غيره قليلا على سبيل الأمثلة والله أعلم

Firstly Ibn Hajr only attempts to answer 110 hadith that Daraqutni critiqued. Daraqutni originally critiqued 200 hadith in Bukhari. So you have 90 hadith which is unaccounted for.

Do you read Arabic? Ibn Hajr said the questioned Hadiths are 100 in total of which 32 were shared with Muslim(the consensus of the Ummah is to accept whatever the Sheikheyn have agreed on) as for the remaining 78 Ibn Hajr said: the criticism is forced القدح فيه مندفع and most of the Hadiths are free from any weaknesses.

Here is an approximate translation of the first part of the Arabic text you shared:

Ibn Hazm and Qadi Iyyad spoke about the Hadith of Sharik; a group including Abu Fadl supported them on this, so he complied them a part and we will mention what is related to it fully when talking about it, God willing, in its place. This is all that was critiqued by the Hufad the critics who are experts on the weaknesses of Isnad, who know the secrets of the chains of the transmission. And not all of them(i.e. criticized Hadiths) are specific to Bukhari's Sahih, but Muslim shared with him many of them, as you can see clearly written and numbered in his book and their number is thirty two Hadiths.

As for the Hadiths weakened by Al Daraqutni, Ibn Hajr said "Al Daraqutis reservations are based on the conditions and guidelines he set which were not agreed upon by most of the experts in the science of Hadith.

He admits here that some of the answers given in defense of some of these hadith are weak and simplistic.

Nowhere in this text did Ibn Hajr Al Asqalani say that. Stop making lies about the Ulema in our presence.

 

[hippy60]

It's Sunnah to love Somalis as well for we are 99 percent Muslim and the first Muslims .

 

[NordicSomali]

He wants platinum thread

It’s a bronze this time.

 

[Qeelbax]

It’s so funny how none of these pseudo-sheikhs are refuting the ill-intended purpose of this thread but are instead defending Arabs like their life depends on it.

 

[al-Mu'tamid المعتمد]

It’s so funny how none of these pseudo-sheikhs are refuting the ill-intended purpose of this thread but are instead defending Arabs like their life depends on it.

The purpose of this thread was intended to demonstrate that harboring hatred towards Arabs, is a bad practise. This extends beyond just Arabs and encompasses individuals from regions spanning from al-Maghreb all the way to Indonesia. As it seems to be a comment trend to just hate on Arabs for no reason.

“Indeed this, your religion (ummah), is one religion (ummah), and I am your Lord, so worship Me” [Quran, 21:92]

 

[Awd]

Do you read Arabic? Ibn Hajr said the questioned Hadiths are 100 in total of which 32 were shared with Muslim(the consensus of the Ummah is to accept whatever the Sheikheyn have agreed on) as for the remaining 78 Ibn Hajr said: the criticism is forced القدح فيه مندفع and most of the Hadiths are free from any weaknesses.

Here is an approximate translation of the first part of the Arabic text you shared:



As for the Hadiths weakened by Al Daraqutni, Ibn Hajr said "Al Daraqutis reservations are based on the conditions and guidelines he set which were not agreed upon by most of the experts in the science of Hadith.



Nowhere in this text did Ibn Hajr Al Asqalani say that. Stop making lies about the Ulema in our presence.

Ok, now tell me what comes after the section you selected in bold. Explain it without adding your 2 cents, I'll put it here without any additions:

والقدح فيه مُندَفع، وبعضها الجواب عنه محتمل، واليسر منه في الجواب عنه تعسّف

Explain it clearly.


Also what so you make of some these criticisms from Al Zarkashi:

قال بدر الدين الزركشي (794هـ):: «وقال بعض المتأخرين: قد تكلم جماعة من الحفاظ على بعض أحاديثهما فأين التلقي بالقبول؟! وفيهما المتعارض، والقطعي لا تعارض فيه»

وقال: «وقد اتفق البخاري ومسلم على إخراج حديث محمد بن بشار بندار وأكثرا من الاحتجاج به، وتكلم فيه غير واحد من الحفاظ وغير ذلك من رجالهما الذين تكلم فيهم، فتلك الأحاديث عند هؤلاء لا يتلقونها بالقبول»

«النُّكَت على مقدمة ابن الصلاح»



There are quite a few in fact.

 

[Awd]

It seems you're trolling us now. This was all in the Islamqa article you claimed to have read and was too apologetic for your liking.

Shaykh al-Islam said:

Among that which may be called saheeh is reports that have been classed as saheeh by some scholars of hadith, but others disagreed with that, and said that it is da‘eef, not saheeh, such as some phrases that were narrated by Muslim in his Saheeh, but other scholars disputed their soundness, who were either his equals or a lower or higher standing than him. Such material cannot be deemed as definitively saheeh except on the basis of evidence. One example is the reports which say that the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) offered the eclipse prayer (salaat al-kusoof) with three bows [in each rak‘ah] and four bows, and his report differs from what is in al-Bukhaari. This was classed as da‘eef by the well-versed of scholars, who said that the Prophet (blessings and peace of Allah be upon him) only offered the eclipse prayer once, on the day that his son Ibraaheem died.

Another example is the hadith in Muslim which says: “Allah created the land on Saturday, He created the mountains on Sunday, He created the trees on Monday, He created hardship on Tuesday, He created light on Wednesday, He created the animals on Thursday, and He created Adam on Friday.”

This was criticized by scholars who were more knowledgeable than Muslim, such as Yahya ibn Ma‘een, al-Bukhaari and others. Al-Bukhaari stated that these were the words of Ka‘b al-Ahbaar.

A number of others regarded this hadith as sound, such as Abu Bakr ibn al-Anbaari, Abu’l-Faraj ibn al-Jawzi, and others. Al-Bayhaqi and others agreed with those who classed it as da‘eef.

In Saheeh al-Bukhaari itself there are three hadiths concerning the soundness of which some of the scholars disagreed.

Al-Bukhaari was more skilled and more knowledgeable in the field than Muslim. Moreover, in Saheeh Muslim there are some phrases narrated only by Muslim, which al-Bukhaari refrained from narrating, and which some of the hadith scholars say are da‘eef. Furthermore, those who say that they are da‘eef may be correct, such as the report about the eclipse prayer having three or four bows. Or the version narrated by Muslim may be correct, and this is more often the case.

End quote. Majmoo‘ al-Fataawa (18/17-20).

https://islamqa.info/amp/en/answers/119516

Bring something new.

So you agree that not all the hadith scholars are in agreement? Thank you that was my whole point.

 

[Abdalla]

They Somali kafirs start with Arab hate, then come down to hating MJs before they full out leave the banner of Islam

 

[Yaraye]

They Somali kafirs start with Arab hate, then come down to hating MJs before they full out leave the banner of Islam

What does MJ even have to do with the discussion?

 

[Abdalla]

What does MJ even have to do with the discussion?

I thought this was the clan section

 

[Bari🐍]

Of course we should love the Arabs they are our Muslim brothers and sisters and our beloved Messenger SAW was Arab and the one who claims to hate the Arabs is knowingly or unknowingly claiming to hate him. As for their superiority, I am pretty sure at the time that had more to do with their religious knowledge and piety rather their ethnicity. There was even a belief that the caliph can only be from the Quraysh because of their status, but even some of the scholars said this was not a requirement anymore. If Allah does not distinguish among his servants in spiritual terms why should we make a distinction based on someones race. It is very odd to place someone in a higher standing purely due to their lineage.