#483: Shaykh Muhammad Nāsiruddin Al-Albāni

QUESTION

” As salam alaikum ya admin,
I decided to find out the biography of sheikh nasrudeen albany on Wikipedia but I was taken back to learn that many of his comtemporaries refuted him and they even alleged that he tampered with shih Muslim. example below

In the early 1970s Syrian Hadith scholar Abd al-Fattah Abu Ghudda published a tract against al-Albani’s reevaluation of Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim .[28] In 1987 the Egyptian hadith scholar Mahmud Sa’id Mamduh published a work entitled Alerting the Muslim to al-Albani’s Transgression upon Sahih Muslim. [28] Can this be true?”

ANSWER

Wa alaykum Salām Warahmatullāh Wabarakātuh.
Alhamdulillāh.

Shaykh Muhammad Nāsiruddīn Al-Albānī – rahimahullāh – was an expert Scholar, a thorough researcher and a trailblazer in his field. He revitalized the science of Takhrīj in this era and worked tirelessly in reasserting the Sunnah after years and years of its dimness, but like any Ālim that has passed through our history, he had differences with his peers and disagreed vehemently with many well known Ulamā and this is not a thing of surprise for every Ālim has his battle with his contemporaries. That is if he is exerted to research.

It is normal for the likes of Shaykh Muhammad Nāsiruddīn Al-Albānī – rahimahullāh – to differ with the Ulamā of his time for his battle was against the Sufi order, the ‘Ash’arī creed, the Fiq’h methodology of the Madh’haahib and the establishment of some governmental authorities, each and every of these Authorities, methodologies and Orders have behind them other bigwig Ulamā in their defense whether on the truth or not, this is very normal. We ask Allāh for guidance, āmīn.

As regards Sahih Muslim, Shaykh Nāsir declared some of its Hadīth weak. This is true.

Some of them he means they were weak in context and not weak in chain, As for context, then he wasn’t alone in this. Most Ulamā of Hadīth and Mustalih agree with this.

And if you are a student of Mustalih, you know that weakness in Context does not mean anything aside irregularity and an explanation of why such an Hadīth is not to be practiced.

As for weakness in chain, (Isnād), then the Ulamā, as Imām Ibn Hajar Al-‘Asqalānī – rahimahullāh – has pointed out in Nuzhatu An-Nadhar, anyone that makes this claim on either of the two Sahihs has it thrown back at his face, this is because of the Ijmā of the Ulamā of Hadīth on the Authenticity of both Books.

The assertion therefore of Shaykh Nāsir to that effect is therefore unacceptable, but it does not justify the personality of ‘AbdulFattāh Abū Ghuddah himself, for he is known for his excesses in following the Hanafī Madh’hab and his aggressive support for his Shaykh and teacher Shaykh Muhammad Zāhid Al-Kawtharī – rahimahumullah in defending his excesses in the Sufi way.

But Shaykh ‘AbdulFattāh Abū Ghuddah is himself an expert Scholar in his own right.

Therefore, the situation is like Shaykh Muhammad Al-Hasan Ibn Ad-Dadduw – hafidhahullāh – mentioned, “this is to be expected in the Muslim Scholarly Community”

Everyone of these Ulamā have their right places and their wrong places.

We ask Allāh to reward them all and to forgive them all where they have erred, āmīn

Lastly, we advise you to only seek for information on such biographies next time from clearly Muslim and trustworthy sources rather than resorting to Wikipedia as it could be misleading.
We ask Allāh for guidance, āmīn

Bārakallāhu fīkum
Jazākumullāhu Khayran.

📚 IslamNode