Ghuniyat-ut-Talibeen - Abdul Qadir Jeelani
 

I was just introduced to this (urdu) book of as Sheikh (rah), but somebody said it isn't actually a book by him but is one of those that was fabricated later in his name. Does anybody have further information for more reliable sources?

http://discussworldissues.com/forums...lies/salam.gif

According to the jamhoor muhaqqiqeen and scholars, this book is rightly attributed to Shaykh Abdul Qadir Jailani [r.h], while few scholars doubt its attribution to Shaykh.

Scholars who doubt its attribution include:

1. Allamah Abdul Aziz Farharwi [r.h], saheb Nibras.
2. Shaykh Abdul Haq Muhaddith Dehlvi [r.h].
3. Allamah ibn Hajr Makki [r.h].

And scholars who are of the view that Ghuniyat al-Talibeen is the book of Shaykh Jailani are:

1. Imam Dhahbi
2. Hafiz ibn Taymiyah
3. Mullah Ali Qari
4. Mullah Katib, sahib Kashf al-Zanoon.
5. Imam ibn Rajab al-Hanbali
6. Hafiz ibn Hajr Asqalani
7. Imam Shah Waliullah Dehlawi.
8. Allamah Abdul Ghani al-Nabulusi
9. Allamah Abdul Hakim Sialkoti
10. Nawab Sadiq Hassan Khan
11. Sahib Aqida al-Muhammadiya
12. Allamah Sarfaraz Khan Safdar

and many more.

Those who doubt its attribution argue that there are fabricated ahadith in this book and some masail that are contrary to the jamhoor, like the view that it was Hadhrat Ishaq [a.h] and not Hadhrat Ismail [a.h] who was to be slaughtered by Hadhrat Ibrahim [r.h]. But these are all weak arguments. Shaykh Jailani was not an expert in the field of Asma ul-Rijaal so it's not surprising that there are some fabricted ahadith in this book.

JazakAllahkhair!

Assalam alaikum,

Isn't Ghunyah where Sheikh Abdul Qadir Jeelani (rahimahuAllah) calls ahnaf murjiyyah or something similiar along the lines and is this also why its attribution to him is doubted.

http://discussworldissues.com/forums...es/wasalam.gif

Firstly, Shaykh Abdul Qadir Jailani [r.h] referred to some Ashab Nauman bin Sabit [r.h] as Murjiya and not all of the Ahnaf. There were Murjiyah who followed the Hanafi fiqh just like many Mutazilla followed the Hanafi madhab, and Allamah Zamakhshri being one of them.

Secondly, there were two types of Murjiyah. One was the deviant group Murjiyah and the other was known as Murjiyah Ahle Sunnah. Allamah Shahrastani [r.h] has also devided Murjiyah into two groups. He refers to Imam Abu Hanifa and his ashab as Murjiyah Ahle Sunnah in al-Milal wa-Nahl vol I p 189. Other who were reffered to as Murjiyah Ahle Sunnah include Hassan bin Muhammad bin Ali [r.h], Maqatil bin Salman [r.h], Sayed bin Jubair [r.h], Hammad bin abi Salman [r.h], etc.

Jamhoor Muhaqqiqeen knew of unauthentic material in Ghunyat al-Talibeen but they still considered it the book of Shaykh Jailani.

Assalamualaykum.

I want to know , that those who accepted Ghuniya to be a work of Shaykh Abdul Qadir Jailani [r.h], did they say that a few parts /sections of this book has been tempered?

Assalamualaykom.

Is it possible to know what were the difference between the two types of Murjia with respect to Aqida?

I take your second point but "ashab" does seem to imply all or the general ahnaf and if he did want to single out the deviants then surely he would have said "ba'dh ashab" as ahnaf, as far I know, were never dominated by the murjiyyah.
Regarding the second point, it'd be interesting to know in what context it was written as it may clarify whether he meant murjiyyah ahl as-sunnah.
Also, I've heard from a teacher of mine that this part may have been tampered with.

Asalaamu 'Alaikum

This is all confusing me :/ So it is authentic from him (according to jamhoor) but there was later tahrif in it (as said by Ibn Harith)??? I want to know before I purchase my own copy :/

Maulana Sarfaraz Khan Safdar in his famous book "Maqam-e-Abu Haneefa" has written the answer to this question in detail. Give it a read.

Asslamoalykum

Where I can find this book , pls help send ,me a link or book @ mohiuddin_engineer@hotmail.com .

What this isall about atleast tell me.

jazakallah

Asslamo Allaikum Br Khanbaba,

Here is your translation:

Jazakullah Khairun

http://discussworldissues.com/forums...lies/salam.gif

Imam Abu Hanifa par Irja ki tuhmat - Mawlana Niamatullah saheb Azami, ustaad of hadith, Dar al-Uloom Deoband.

At few places in his book, Ghunyat al-Talibeen, Shaykh Jailani [r.h] refers to Imam Abu Hanifa [r.h] as:

قال الامام ابو حنيفه

while discussing the differences between various Imams of fiqh.

(Ghunyat al-Talibeen) I have read this book myself. Masha Allah one of the best works in the history of Islamic writings.

But I did myself realize during reading the book (as was also mentioned in its preface) that it has been tempered with. Some issues are discussed against the beliefs of Ahl-us-Sunnah, so scholars believe that it is tempered at some points, although the book is actually written by the Shaikh.

Alhamdo-Lillah, apart from those temperings, other contents in this book are worth reading. If anyone knows the basic beliefs of ahl-us-Sunnah, he/she can make the differences where it goes against the way of ahl-us-Sunnah. But few of its contents are worth reading, specially the Khutbat (speeches) of the shaikh, which are like the masterpiece of Sufism.

Hazrat Shaikh Muhiuddin Sayyad Abdul Qadir Jilani (rahmatullah alaih) was the greatest scholar of all Islamic sciences at that time. In my opinion, it is not right to say he was not a scholar of this and this science of Islam. Indeed, there was no one who could compete him in any of the Islamic sciences like hadith, fiqah, etc at that time, in whole Baghdad which was the center of scholars. Some scholars refuted his position in knowledge and claimed that he did not possess degrees from valid scholars. They called Hazrat Shaikh for debate over certain issues. When Hazrat Shaikh went to their program and sat quite, they all started watching him. Due to the spiritual powers of shaikh, all those scholars forgot whatever they had learnt (for that moment) and were not able even to put a simple question to Hazrat. When Shaikh asked them why were they not asking any question, they replied they had forgot everything. They begged pardon from Hazrat Shaikh and gave him full confidence in islamic sciences.

He was also the greatest among the Awliya of this Ummah, as believed by all the shuyukh of Islam after him. He himself said: "My foot is upon the necks of all Awliya." He is considered Ghaus Al-Azam by all the awliya-Allah of this Ummah, including Hazrat Imam Rabbani (rahmatullah alaih). He is the lord of all Awliya (certainly from his time, not before him), and whoever gets Waliyat in this Ummah gets through his intercession.

May Allah give us love and reverence of Hazrat Shaikh, and bless us with the spiritual bounties of the shaikh in this world and hereafter.

Ameen

What about the Aqeedah issues in al-Ghunya ? Such as Istiwa etc etc...?

For instance Allamah Kanujji says about the ahadith on the salaats attributed to the mont Shaban in his Abjadul Ulum (2/349);

"These fabricated narrations are put into the book by the people of Baghdad attributing it to Abdulqadir Jilani"

Also Ibn Hajar al Haythami says about the places where a direction to Allah is mentioned;

"Don't be fooled by what is stated in al-Ghunya, they are added by someone of whom Allah is going to take revenge." (al Fatwa Hadisiyya p.124, 210)

We know in Baghdad lived Anthro-Hanbalis....is it tampered by them?

http://discussworldissues.com/forums...lies/salam.gif

I have heard from Allamah Sarfraz Khan Safdar that Shaykh Abdul Qadir Jailani [r.h] was not strong in the field of hadith. For instance, Shaykh Jailani was of the opinion that it was Hadhrat Ishaq [a.h] who was to be sacrified by Hadhrat Ibrahim [a.h] and not Hadhrat Ismail [a.h]. Obviously, this view is against the jamhoor. He reached this conclusion because of his reliance on Israliat. Also being weak in some field doesn't degrade ones' status. We have the likes of Imam Ghazali [r.h] and Imam Razi [r.h], who being experts in almost every field, were very weak in the field of hadith.

With due respect to Allama sahib, I will say that it is our duty to keep good faith in these great people. Even we are ordered to keep good faith in each other and not allowed to follow doubts.

If there is something wrong in the book, we should not put it on the shaikh himself, rather, as it is already discussed, we should put it on some temperors who changed the contents.

And how can such a great great shaikh be weak in hadith who came in fifth century Hijrah, whereas we find many great hadith scholars today?

According to hadith, every coming era is worse than the previous one.

http://discussworldissues.com/forums...lies/salam.gif

More and more emotions. Nothing can be proven by "ifs" and "buts". I mean what does living in the 5th century has to do with being weak or strong in a certain field? Imam Ghazali [r.h] and Imam Razi [r.h] were also from the same period.

But again:

1.How can someone who is a mudabbir of this Universe be weak in hadith?
2. Sun doesn't rise without saying salam to him, so how can he be weak in hadith?
3. Skys will fall without his presence, so how can he be weak in hadith?

Mudabbir - someone who is running this Universe.

I would not hesitate to change my opinion if it can be shown from senior muhaditheen that Shaykh Jailani [r.h] was master in the field of hadith and ism al-rijaal. Otherwise don't bother replying with emotions and accusations of disrespecting a scholar and degrading his status.

This is a bit off topic, but I once heard Imam Ghazali (RA) was very strong in the fields of hadith and fiqh, so much so that he followed his own Madhab (i.e. he was a Mujtahid).

is this not true?

http://www.al-inaam.com/dhadith/qna/ihyaa.htm