Kya Muawiya (RA) Ne Bughz-E-Ali (Ra) Me Talbiya Se Roka | Nasai 3009
بسم الله والحمد لله والصلاة والسلام على رسول الله
Sayyidna Muawiya (RA) ke mukhalifeen unpar ye etraz bhi karte hain ke unhone logo ko buland awaz se talbiya (Labbaik Allahumma Labbaik) kahne se rok diya tha, bughz-e-Ali (RA) me aakar. Jaise ke Mirza sahab apne pamphlet P5-b Waqia-e-KARBLA me H# 46 ke tahat ek zaeef riwayat ka sahara le kar is baat ki taraf ishara kiya hai (Sunan Nasai 3009). Pahle hadees dekhiye phir us par tabsira.
أَخْبَرَنَا أَحْمَدُ بْنُ عُثْمَانَ بْنِ حَكِيمٍ الْأَوْدِيُّ، قَالَ: حَدَّثَنَا خَالِدُ بْنُ مَخْلَدٍ، قَالَ: حَدَّثَنَا عَلِيُّ بْنُ صَالِحٍ، عَنْ مَيْسَرَةَ بْنِ حَبِيبٍ، عَنْ الْمِنْهَالِ بْنِ عَمْرٍو، عَنْ سَعِيدِ بْنِ جُبَيْرٍ، قَالَ: كُنْتُ مَعَ ابْنِ عَبَّاسٍ بِعَرَفَاتٍ، فَقَالَ: مَا لِي لَا أَسْمَعُ النَّاسَ يُلَبُّونَ ؟ قُلْتُ: يَخَافُونَ مِنْ مُعَاوِيَةَ، فَخَرَجَ ابْنُ عَبَّاسٍ مِنْ فُسْطَاطِهِ، فَقَالَ: لَبَّيْكَ اللَّهُمَّ لَبَّيْكَ، لَبَّيْكَ، فَإِنَّهُمْ قَدْ تَرَكُوا السُّنَّةَ مِنْ بُغْضِ عَلِيٍّ
Tarjuma: Saeed bin Jubair (rh) bayan karte hain ke main Sayyidna Abdullah bin Abbas (RA) ke humrah maidan-e-Arafat me tha, to aapne mujhse daryaft farmaya: “Kya wajah hai ke logo se talbiyah (Labbaik Allahumma Labbaik) ki awaz sunai nahin de rahi?” Maine arz kiya ke log Hazrat Muawiya bin Abi Sufyan (RA) (ke mana karne ki wajah) se darte hain. (Isliye buland awaz se talbiya kahne ki bajaye ahista awaz me he kehte hain). Chunanche Sayyidna Abdullah bin Abbas (RA) (ghusse ki halat me) apne kheme se bahar tashreef laye aur buland awaz se pukarna shuru kar diya: Labbaik Allahumma Labbaik, Labbaik Allahumma Labbaik, (aur sath he farmaya), “Beshak in logo ne Sayyidna Ali bin Abi Talib (RA) se bughz rakhne ki wajah se (buland awaz se talbiya kahne ki) Sunnat Mubaraka (ko) chhod diya hai.” (Sunan Nasaai: H# 3009)
Note: Tarjuma Ali Mirza sahab ke pamphlet se liya gaya hai.
Jawab
Iski sanad usool-e-Muhaddiseen par zaeef hai. Isme ek rawi Khalid bin Makhlad hai, jo waise to Bukhari aur Muslim ka rawi hai aur moatbar hai lekin iske bare me Imam Ibn Rajab Hanbali (rh) ek usool zikr farmate hain:
ذكر الغلابي في تاريخ قال القطواني يوخذ عنه مشيخه المدينه وابن بلال قط. يريد سليمان بن بلال۔ و يعني بهذا لايؤ خذ عنه الا حديثه عن اهل المدينة وسليمان ابن بلال منهم
Tarjuma: Imam Jarh wa Ta’deel, Muhaddis, Mufazzal bin Ghassan al-Ghalabi (rh) ne apni Tareekh me zikr kiya hai ke Khalid bin Makhalad al-Qitwani se wo riwayat qubool ki jayengi jo usne apne Madani ustad aur Ibn Bilal yani Sulaiman bin Bilal se bayan ki hain. Aage iski wazahat me Imam Ibn Rajab (rh)ne farmaya: Iska matlab ye hai ke usse riwayat nahin li jayegi magar wo jo Ahl-e-Madina se aur Sulaiman bin Bilal se (bayan kare). (Sharh Ilal al-Tirmizi li Ibn Rajab Hanbali 2/775)
Is tarah ki jarh (criticism) ko usool-e-hadees me Jarh Mufassar kaha jata hai, jo Ta’deel par muqaddam hoti hai. Sunan Nasaai wali ye riwayat Khalid bin Mukhallad ne Ali bin Salih se bayan ki hai. Aur Ali bin Salih unke Madani ustad nahin hain balke Kufi ustad hain. Lihaza unki Kufiyon se bayan kardah riwayat rad samjhi jayegi.
🔶 Kuch hazraat iske support me Mustadrak Hakim ki doosri sanad ko pesh karte hain jiski sanad me Khalid bin Makhlad ne Ali bin Mushar (علی بن مسہر) se riwayat kiya hai.
Iska jawab ye hai ki us riwayat me Khalid ka ustad Ali bin Salih hai, Ali bin Mushar nahin. Mustadrak Hakim ke matbooa nuskhe me Ali bin Mushar ka zikr katib ki khata hai. Hafiz Ibn Hajar (rh) ne Mustadrak Hakim se Khalid ka Shaikh Ali bin Salih he zikr kiya hai. Dekhen: (Ithaf al-Maharah li-Ibn Hajar: 7/81) lihaza sanade do nahin ek hi hai.
Doosri baat ye hai ki agar yahan Ali bin Mushar he man liya jaye to bhi ye sanad saheeh nahin hogi, kyuke Ali bin Mushar bhi Madani nahin, balkih Shaami hai. Khalid bin Makhlad ki sirf Madani ustad se riwayat qabil-e-qabul hoti hain.
🔶 Mirza sahab ne taadad badhane ke liye Sunan Kubra lil Baihaqi se bhi riwayat bayan ki hai. Lekin uski sanad bhi wahi hai. Isliye ye bhi zaeef he hai.
🔶 Kuch logo ne kaha ki Imam Bukhari (rh) ne Khalid bin Makhlad ki Ali bin Mushar ki sanad se riwayat apni Bukhari me darj ki hai. Hadi-us-Sari, muqaddama Fathul Bari me likha hai ki Imam Bukhari (rh) ne is (Khalid bin Makhlad) ki tamam riwayato ko doosri sanado ke sath mutabe’at ke sath mila kar he bayan kiya hai. (Hadi-us-Sari: 1/401)
Iske alawa usooli taur par ek bat samajhna zaroori hai. Baz log mughalta dene ki koshish karte hain ki fulan riwayat ki sanad Bukhari aur Muslim ki sanad hai lihaza saheeh hai halanke “رجالہ رجال الصحیح” (Iske rawi wahi hain jo Saheeh Bukhari aur Saheeh Muslim ke rawi hain.) ya “رجالہ ثقات” (Iske rawi siqah (qabil-e-etmad aur mo’tabar) hain) se sanad ka saheeh hona lazim nahin ata kyunki tadlees, ikhtilat, inqita, shuzooz, nakaarat, kisi siqah rawi ka kisi khas ustaz me zaeef (jaisa ki Khalid bin Makhlad ka mamla hai) hone ka bhi ka maslah ho sakta hai. Al-gharaz Saheeh Bukhari me Khalid bin Makhlad ki Ali bin Mushar Kufi se riwayat ka Imam Bukhari (rh) ne chun/qubool kar liya tha lihaza Mustadrak Hakim ki riwayat ko Saheehain par qiyas karna jahalat hai.
In sabke alawa iske matn (text) me bhi nakaarat hai. Riwayat ke mutabiq Abi (RA) se bughz ki wajah se logo ne talbiya wali Sunnat ko chhod diya. Halanki Talbiya ka talluq bughz-e-Ali (RA) se kaise ho sakta hai? Na to iske alfaz ka talluq Ali (RA) se hai aur na is sunnat ko jari karne ka, to phir Ali (RA) se bughz rakhne wala shakhs Talbiya par apna bughz kyon nikaalega?
Note: Jin ulama ne is riwayat ko saheeh kaha hai unke samne ye illat zahir na ho saki. Wo bhi insan the unse bhi ghalati ho sakti hai. Lihaza is wajah se zid par ard jana ke fulana ne isko saheeh kaha hai, durust nahin hai.