Government scholars and Sharḥ al-Sunnah

Yasir Qadhi Library Chat #4

A thousand years ago, someone wrote a book. Virtually nobody read this book, similar to how no one reads this substack. Outside of some obscure references, this book is never cited.

Out of nowhere, this book was revived 30 years ago, and is now a favorite of some Salafi circles. It was first re-published in 1988 in Makkah. In 1995, it was translated to English. Qadhi studied this book cover-to-cover in 1997. He studied it several times, with scholars and by himself.

This book is Sharh al-Sunnah, incorrectly assumed to be authored by Imam Al-Barbahari (867 CE - 941 CE).

The actual author is Ghulam Khalil, who came a hundred years before Barbahari. Khalil was a popular preacher, and funded by the Abbasid royal family. And his credibility is doubtful to say the least. Abu Dawud, Hakim, Ibn Jawzi, and other scholars called him a liar. Abu Dawud attributes 400 fabricated hadith to Khalil.

Fueling witch-hunts was Khalil’s method of choice. He was Joseph McCarthy before Joseph McCarthy. He gave a list of 70 Sufis to the royal court. He told the caliphate “Go ahead and execute them, their blood is on my shoulders”. Fortunately, no one was killed. But unfortunately, many lives were ruined. Ibn Taymiyyah describes his actions “Khalil was a worshiper who displayed simplicity but he had no knowledge, and would fabricate hadith to the masses.” Ibn Taymiyyah goes on to describe how innocent people were oppressed through Khalil’s Machiavellian maneuvers.

A fanatic at heart, Khalil writes, “If you see a person with a deviant, then warn him, and if he continues to sit with the deviant, then leave him because that person is also an innovator.” He writes, “If you see a zalim, fasiq, fajir, but from Ahl-us-Sunnah, then associate with him. If you see a pious person from Ahl-ul-Bidaa, then leave him.” Zalim means oppressor, fasiq means vile sinner, and fajir means wicked evil-doer. Obviously, these teachings contradict with common sense and Islam.

Khalil even goes on to describe his own book as “this book is the deen of Allah and the deen of His Messenger, and whoever considers anything permissible that this book does not allow, then that person should be rejected in entirety”. Talk about unhinged self-promotion!

Qadhi laments, “Books like these popularized this notion that abstract theology is far more imporant than actual lived piety.” This book is a classic example of ‘my teacher defines orthodoxy, and anybody who disagrees is a deviant’. Unfortunately, this book does not stop there. Qadhi cites several more examples showing the absurdity the book. Qadhi says “this book teaches a servile obedience to rulers that is just atypical”. Is it any wonder why this book was revived?

How do we know who the actual author of this book was?

Only one manuscript exists for this book. Right in the front, it says the author’s name as Ghulam Khalil. All in the same handwriting.

So how did this book get attributed to Imam Al-Barbahari? The first attribution to Barbahari is from a citation written by Ibn Abu Yala. The Ibn Abu Yala citation is a weak chain, with a person in the chain who is a known liar. And this misinformation snowballed throughout the centuries. And because the book was almost never cited otherwise, the misinformation stood the test of time.

You will find the smoking gun in the book itself. The writing of the book does not resemble the style of Barbahari. The book is filled with fabricated hadith. It mentions Khalil’s contemporaries but none of Barbahari’s contemporaries. And the ideas within the book are against Barbahari’s beliefs. Barbahari and his friends would talk about “love for Allah”, whereas the writing in Sharh al-Sunnah talks about ‘love for Allah’ as deviant. Yes, the book is that bizarre. Barbahari was not against Sufis. But Sharh al-Sunnah is anti-Sufi. The book’s servile attitude towards kings is in striking contrast with Barbahari’s own life choices. Barbahari died in hiding, with an arrest warrant out for him. The list goes on and on.

Interestingly, the book uses a phrase prolific among Shia, not Sunni scholars. This phrase is “the riser from the Family of Muhammad” (al-qaimo-min-al-muhammad) as a title of the Mehdi. The phrase was historically used to cater toward Shia constituents. It is well-established that the Abbasid caliphate allied with Shias to defeat the Ummayad dynasty. And that shows more of a link to Khalil, than to Barbahari.

Guess which Abbasid caliph gets praised extensively in this book? You guessed it, the same ruling family that happens to be paying Khalil’s salary. No surprises, here.

References