On Abu Ghuddah’s annotations and marginalia on some of the books of the people of hadith, and what is your advice to students of knowledge regarding Abu Ghuddah’s annotations?

The questioner : Currently, books edited by Abu Ghuddah have become widespread, especially those dealing with books of hadith; such as "Qawa'id al-Tahrir" and "al-Takmil" by al-Kanwi, and others. There is no doubt that students of knowledge, when they see such books, buy them. So what are your comments regarding Abu Ghuddah’s annotations and marginalia with which he annotates such books? And what is your advice to students of knowledge regarding Abu Ghuddah’s annotations?

The Shaykh : I advise students of knowledge to choose their shaykhs to be from the people of the Sunnah and knowledge of the Book and the hadith. The relationship of student to teacher today is different from what it was in the past, such as complete apprenticeship. In the past, apprenticeship or seeking knowledge from shaykhs was done directly by attending their sessions, their circles of lessons, and the like. Today, this method of seeking knowledge has become rare due to the ease of means of spreading knowledge through the printing of books. So the works have taken the place of the authors. Just as it was obligatory in the old method for the student of knowledge to chooseThe Shaykh : one known for the soundness of his creed first, free from deviation and influence by some of the misguided Islamic sects. And just as it was obligatory for him, after this choice, to choose a scholar, a scholar in the true sense of the word, in the correct scientific sense; that is, by the Book and the Sunnah, and not a scholar of the sayings of some of the imams, or of some of their followers. This is not a scholar! The scholar is, as Ibn al-Qayyim (may Allah have mercy on him) said in describing knowledge:
“Knowledge: Allah said, His Messenger said, / The Companions said; it is not deception.
Knowledge is not: you setting up foolish disagreement *** Between the Messenger and the opinion of a jurist
No, nor denial of the attributes and their negation, *** out of fear of denial of the divine attributes and likening Allah to creation.
So knowledge, then, is saying "Allah said" and "The Messenger of Allah said." And the scholar is the one whom you hear, in most of his times, saying in his answers and in his fatwas: "Allah said" and "The Messenger of Allah said." He is not the one who says: "So-and-so said such and such," and "So-and-so said such and such." In the Syrian expression, this is a "hakawati"; meaning he recounts what so-and-so and so-and-so said. There is no difference between him and a recording device; it recounts what it was taught. If it is correct, it is correct, and if it is wrong, it is wrong. But... our companion mentioned this now; it may record correctly, and it may record incorrectly, correctly mixed with incorrectly. Does it distinguish the correct from the incorrect? Nothing of the sort. So it is the case of the follower of taqlid completely; he is merely a hakawati, recounting what he heard, but he does not distinguish between the correct and the incorrect, between the truth and misguidance. Thus, the student of knowledge must—may Allah have mercy on you—chooseThe Shaykh : one in whom the correct creed and beneficial knowledge are present. And beneficial knowledge is nothing but knowledge drawn from the Book and from the Sunnah, and the authentic Sunnah.
In my opinion, students of knowledge like you know that Abu Ghuddah, in reality, in what concerns knowledge, is like a camel’s gland. Do you know what a gland is? Yes, you do. So you know that he does not have a sound creed, and he does not have knowledge of the Book and the authentic Sunnah. And I say now, the authentic Sunnah; because he is a night woodcutter. He transmits in some of his annotations what suits his own desires, and not because he has verified that what he annotated is correct in reality. No, rather he is, as Imam al-Shafi'i said when he gave an example of the scholar who follows taqlid: "His likeness is like that of a night woodcutter, who gathers firewood, then throws it on his back, and in it is a viper that stings him while he is unaware." This is the case of the followers of taqlid. And how excellent is the saying of Imam Abu Ja'far al-Tahawi, the Hanafi, whose example is rare among the Hanafis in his knowledge, especially regarding the Sunnah and the hadith and its routes and chains. He said: "There is no difference between a follower of taqlid and a beast that is led." This is a very wonderful example. So the follower of taqlid has no knowledge. And from the rare jurisprudence, and from its rarity, is that it springs from the followers of taqlid. Where it came in the book "al-Hidayah": "It is not permissible to appoint the ignorant to the judiciary." It is not permissible for the judge to be ignorant. The matter is very clear. But what needs clarification or elucidation is what the commentator of "al-Hidayah" did; that is, Ibn al-Humam al-Misri, the author of the commentary on "al-Hidayah," which he named "Fath al-Qadir." He said, explaining "the ignorant": "That is, the follower of taqlid. It is not permissible to appoint the ignorant to the judiciary. He said: That is, the follower of taqlid." Meaning that the follower of taqlid is not a scholar. And this is a matter on which there is consensus, as transmitted by Abu al-Hasan al-Sindi, who is one of the eminent scholars of the Hanafis, and one of those influenced by the Sunnah to a great extent, contrary to the majority of the Hanafis. He transmits from al-Hafiz al-Suyuti that the scholars agreed that the follower of taqlid is not a scholar. For that reason, Ibn al-Humam said, in explaining "the ignorant," that is, the follower of taqlid.
So whoever is a follower of taqlid—and especially in creed; like the Maturidiyyah and the Asha'irah—is not a scholar. So what do our students hope for when they turn to this book of Abu Ghuddah to gain from his knowledge? He who lacks a thing cannot give it! This is what I advise our students of knowledge: to know how the shoulder is eaten, to know from which author they take the sound knowledge. And Abu Ghuddah, we know him in Aleppo. And although my residence was in Damascus at that time, I used to visit it once a month, in the path of da'wah on one hand, and in the path of studying manuscripts in the library of Islamic endowments there in Aleppo. And our brothers used to ask him to meet with us, but he refused and insisted. We had gathered a session with him before that and discussed an issue; which is that the Hanafis permit treatment with wine, and he is a Hanafi, as is well known. So when I mentioned to him his saying (peace and blessings be upon him) that is in "Sahih Muslim": He said: "The hadith needs to be reviewed"!! We said to him: Review it! And the hadith is in "Sahih Muslim." What does he want to review?!
This is an escape from the argument out of partisanship for the madhhab. After that, with the persistence of some of our brothers in agreeing to a meeting with me to discuss with him what concerns the differences between the callers to the Sunnah and the callers to the narrow madhhabism, he refused and was arrogant! And I stop here at the completion of the verse.