Mistranslation of Durr al-Mukhtar

Shiapen (previously known as answering-ansar) says:

Eighth Example of Sunni morality – The Permissibility to pay a woman for sex, without fear of Islamic punishment

We read in Dur al-Mukhthar, Volume 2, Page 474 (a compilation of the great Fatwas of Imam Abu Hanifa) as follows:

We read in Fathul Qadeer that if a man informs a woman that he is paying her for sex then he cannot be subject to any manner of Islamic penalty.
Dur al-Mukhtar, Volume 2, page 474


The right translation is as following:


فتح القدیر میں کافی سے منقول ہے اگر مرد نے عورت سے کہا کہ میں نے تجھ کو اتنا مہر دیا، میں تیرے ساتھ زنا کروں تو حد واجب نہیں

It is narrated in Fathul Qadir from kafi that if a man tells a woman that I give you such amount of dowry in return for zina, then hadd is not wajib.

First of all, here the word dowry is used, secondly translating ‘hadd wajib nahi’ as ‘he can not be subject to any manner of Islamic penalty’ is highly misleading. Because if hadd is not wajib, it doesn’t mean that tazeer can also not be given, and tazeer is also an Islamic penalty. Shiapen aka Answering-Ansar is very fond of mistranslating such important points to make its articles ‘more appealing’ to the readers.

Note : The book ‘Kafi’ mentioned here is not the famous hadith book of Shias.

Secondly after mentioning what is written in fathul qadeer, the author of the book, durr al Mukhtar, says:

ان سب صورتوں میں حق یہ ہے کہ حد واجب ہے اس واسطے کہ باعتبار معنی اور حقیقت کے کتاب اللہ اس کے معارض ہے ، حق تعالٰی فرماتا ہے  الزانية والزاني فاجلدوا

In all these cases, the right thing is that hadd is wajib because in its meaning and in its reality, it is against the Book of Allah, Almighty Allah says : The woman and the man guilty of illegal sexual intercourse, flog each of them (Quran 24:2)

Shiapen aka Answering-Ansar never bothered to mention this in its article, while it is written in the very next line. But how can a people, whose aim is to misguide others care, about these things?

Is the version of hadith thaqalayn ‘Kitabullah wa sunnati’ weak?

Answering-Ansar (which has shifted its website to shiapen.com) says:

As for Ibn al-Hashimi’s version to the ‘Quran and AhlulBayt’ version of Hadith Thaqlayn and his spontaneous citation of ‘Quran and Sunnah’ version, we would like to advance the words of present day Salafi scholar Shaykh Hassan bin Farhan al-Maliki who in his book “Qeraah fi Kutub al-Aqaed”, page 71 stated:

(…كتاب الله وسنتي) وهو حديث ضعيف عند محققي أهل السنة

“(…The book of Allah and my Sunnah) this is a weak tradition according to scholars of Ahle Sunnah”



This Shaykh Hassan bin Farhan al Maliki is an old friend of Rawafidh, and the Muslims don’t give him 1% credibility in the science of hadith. Now lets turn our attention to whether this version of hadith thaqalayn is weak or not.

The Prophet (saww) said :

خلفت فيكم شيئين لن تضلوا بعدهما; كتاب الله و سنتي, و لن يفترقا حتى يردا على الحوض

I have left among you two things after which none of you will go astray; the Book of Allah and my Sunnah, and they will never separate until they return to me at the pond.

This version of hadith thaqalayn is present in the following books.
Mustadrak al Hakim
Kinzul Ummal by Ali al Muttaqi al hindi
Mishkat al Masabih by Tibrizi
Jami al Saghir by Imam Suyuti
Sunan by Imam Darqutni
Sunan al Kubra by Imam Baihaqi (two different asnaad)
Muwatta by Imam Malik
al-aitqad  by Abul Qasim
al Targheeb by Ibn Shaheen

Imam Hakim has graded it sahih, Imam Dhahabi remained silent in talkhis so it shows his approval, and Shaikh Albani and Ibn Hazm (in al ahkam) also authenticated it.

Now lets look at Shia books

We read in al Kafi
عدة من أصحابنا، عن أحمد بن محمد بن خالد، عن أبيه، عن النضر بن سويد، عن يحيى الحلبي، عن أيوب بن الحر قال: سمعت أبا عبد الله عليه السلام يقول: كل شئ مردود إلى الكتاب والسنة
A number of our people has narrated from Ahmad ibn Muhammad ibn Khalid from his father  from al-Nadr ibn Suwayd from Yahya al-Halab from Ayyub ibn al-Hurr who has said the  following.  “Abu ‘Abdallah (a.s.) has said, ‘Everything must be referred to the holy Quran and the  Sunnah”

al Kafi, Vol. 1, p. 69

Majlisi has graded it sahih

This sahih tradition from al-kafi shows that even the traditions of ahlelbayt should be referred to Quran and Sunnah, so from this,we learn that sunnah is the primary thing, and ahlelbayt’s narration is to be verified with the sunnah. If it is in agreement with the sunnah, we should accept it, otherwise, we should discard the sayings of ahlelbayt as well since the primary thing is Quran and Sunnah.

Double Standards of Answering-Ansar

Answering-Ansar made a hue and cry when Ahlelbayt website presented a chainless narration.

Taken from Madaarijun Nubuwwah, Kitaabul Wafaa, Baihaqi and in the commentaries of Mishkaat.

Kitaabul Muwaafiqah narrates that Anaani said:
“Abu Bakr came to the door of Fatima in the midday sun and said: ‘I shall not leave from here as long as the daughter of Rasool-Allah remains displeased with me. Ali came to Fatima and giving her an oath urged her to become pleased. Then she became pleased (with Abu Bakr)

Answering-Ansar said:

The book Madaarijun Nubuwwah is a compilation of narrations from other books, without any chains of narration. It is interesting that Ibn al Hashimi presents this text as fact when it contains no chain. How can a chainless narration be presented as fact, when we have a Sahih narration leading up to Ayesha who confirmed that Sayyida Fatima (as) never forgave Abu Bakr! If we are wrong and a Sahih chain narration of the above tradition does indeed exist then we invite Ibn al Hashimi to present it.

If I try to publish all the chainless and mursal narrations which Answering-Ansar has mentioned in its website, it would take huge space. I am just giving the reference of a few books which have no asnad and Answering-Ansar heavily relied on it.

1. Iqd al Fareed

There is hardly any article of Answering-Ansar in which it has not used this book and it has no chain for the narrations. Get a glimpse of it



2. Al Imama wal Siyasa
You can only imagine how much chainless narrations are present in Answering-Ansar’s own website after citing only these two books which Answering-Ansar heavily relied upon. One can only laugh at Answering-Ansar’s statement “How can a chainless narration be presented as fact“, after seeing that Answering-Ansar itself heavily relied on chainless narrations for its articles.

Similarly when another Sunni website put forth a mursal tradition

al-Hafidh Ibn Katheer mentions in his al bidayaah 6/333 that: When Fatima (alayhas salaam) was experiencing her sickness [before death], Abu Bakr as Sideeq came to her and sought to please her, and she became pleased. ”
The exact narration has originally been reported by Imaam al-Baihaqi through Ismaeel ibn Abee Khaalid who narrated from Ash-Sh’ubi, and the isnaad (chain) of this report is sahih (authentic).

Answering-Ansar said:

The chain of the tradition may be Sahih i.e. the narrators in the chain may be authentic but Nasibi failed to point out that the tradition is Mursal (disconnected) because it is a Tabayee (Shu’bi) who is giving testimony of an incident which he did not see with his eyes and this testimony is not made by someone of that era i.e. by a Sahabi. We shall remind them, that according to Salafies, the Mursal are not acceptable as Imam Nasiruddin Albaani records in his book ‘Deefa an al-Hadith al-Nabawi’, page 82:

المرسل من أقسام الضعيف على قواعد علماء الحديث

“Mursal is a kind of weak according to hadith scholars”

Another darling of Salafies Ibn Uthaimin recorded in his book Majmo’a Fatawa ibn Uthaimin, Volume 6 page 164:

والمرسل من أقسام الضعيف، فلا تقوم به الحجة

“Mursal is a kind of weak [Hadeeth], hence its not hujja”

And most importantly, the incident which Sh’ubi claims to have witnessed, took place even before his birth as Imam Ibn Hazam records in Al-Muhala, Volume 11 page 50:

ولم يولد الشعبي إلا بعد موت عمر رضي الله عنه بسنتين

“Al-Sh’ubi was born two years after the death of Umar (ra)”

Now this is also ridiculous if one finds out that Answering-Ansar itself heavily relied upon Mursal traditions.

Answering-Ansar itself says

If the Sahaba link between a successor (i.e. Tabayee) and Prophet Muhammad [s] is missing, the hadith is called mursal, e.g., when a Tabayee says, “The Prophet said …” . Such form of hadith also becomes acceptable to our opponents provided i.e. they felt like it and the report is narrated by authentic Tabayee. Imam of Wahabies Nasiruddin Al-Baani stated n ‘Al-Maseh ala al-Jurabain’ page 29:

مقطوع الثقة ليس كغيره ولذلك قبل من المراسيل مراسيل الثقات

“The disconnected (chain) of the Thiqah is not like the others, therefore the Mursal of the Thiqah is accepted”

We read in ‘Qurat al-Ayn’ by al-Hattab al-Ru’aini, page 58:

وقال مالك وأبو حنيفة وأحمد في أشهر الروايتين عنه وجماعة من العلماء: المرسل حجة؛ لأنَّ الثقة لا يرسل الحديث إلا حيث يجزم بعدالة الراوي

“Malik, Abu Hanifa, Ahmad (bin Hanbal) and group of scholars said that Mursal is Huja, because the Thiqah do not narrate the tradition without mentioning the narrator unless they are sure that the narrator is just”

Allamah Syed Mahmood Alusi al-Baghdadi (d. 1270 H) states in Tafseer Ruh al-Ma’ani Volume 9 page 151:

أن المرسل حجة عند أكثر أهل العلم.

“Mursal is Huja according us and the majority of the scholars”

We read in ‘Hashyat al-Sindi’ by Shaykh Muhammad bin Abdulhadi al-Sindi (d. 1138 H), Volume 1 page 104:

والمرسل حجة عندنا وعند الجمهور.

“Mursal is Huja according to the majority”

Allamah Badruddin al-Aini records in ‘Umdat al-Qari Sharah Sahih Bukhari’ Volume 11 page 302:

والمرسل حجة عندنا.

“The mursal is Huja according to us”


How ridiculous it is that Answering-Ansar accuses us that we Ahlussunnah accept mursal when he feel like it, as it says “Such form of hadith also becomes acceptable to our opponents provided i.e. they felt like it and the report is narrated by authentic Tabayee.

Rather it is Answering-Ansar itself, which accepts mursal traditions when it suits their claims, and discards mursal traditions when it doesn’t suit them. There is a criteria for acceptance of mursal traditions and also, the scholars have disputed regarding it, and it is not only the case with the Sunnis but Shias as well, where some scholars accept mursal, others reject it, and still others accept it based on certain conditions.

The fact is that such double standards are widespread in Answering-Ansar’s website, they try to befool the common people with such deceptions. This is totally in accordance with the fatwa of the grand Ayatullah of Shias, Mr. Khoi, who gave a fatwa that lying is allowed if it can refute the opponents of Shias in debates and this fatwa is available online.

All praises to Allah!