Silsilat al-Ahadith al-Sahihah - Nasir al-Din al-Albani - (6/921)

Silsilat al-Ahadith al-SahihahNasir al-Din al-Albani

and Muslim, his sole purpose in doing so was to give readers the impression that he had reviewed their wording and compared them with the hadiths in his Riyad, whereas he did none of this at all—like a cat puffing itself up in imitation of a lion’s onslaught!

Third: As for the proprietor of al-Maktab al-Islami, he too republished Riyad this year, 1412 AH—the very same year in which the edition of the man mentioned before him appeared. I do not know which of the two was jealous of the other and thus published his edition in competition with him. The point is that the aforementioned proprietor appended the following note to the hadith: “Shaykh Nasir remained silent concerning this hadith. The words, ‘So look, O son of Adam,’ are not found in Muslim’s versions (1/454). Muslim’s versions contain an additional wording to the effect that: ‘Then it catches up with him and throws him into the Fire of Hell.’”

I say: There are several points to note:

First: The “silence” he attributed to me—and which he repeated several times!—contains a malicious insinuation. I do not think it came from anyone but him, not from the “group of scholars” whom he claimed in the introduction to his new edition had critically edited it. Would scholars resort to such an insinuation, whose only purpose is spiteful gratification and which is wholly unjustified? For he wishes to make readers feel that I was deficient in my earlier editing of Riyad—a work for which I had not intended a comprehensive critical edition in every respect, but only what was feasible. Moreover, there was no commitment in it to collate its hadiths with their original sources; nor would the aforementioned proprietor be content to undertake this. Were he to do so, he would go bankrupt, for rewriting the book from scratch would be easier than such critical editing. The turns of fate come back upon the transgressor, and the following confirms this:

Second: He noticed that this additional wording is not found in Muslim, yet he neither attributed it to any source nor explained its weakness, despite claiming in the introduction to his new edition that it was the work of “a group of scholars” who had critically edited it!

و " مسلم " إلا إيهام القراء أنه راجع ألفاظها، وقابلها بأحاديث " الرياض "، وهو لم يصنع من ذلك شيئا ( كالهر يحكي انتفاخا صولة الأسد) ! ثالثا: وأما صاحب (المكتب الإسلامي) ، فإنه أيضا أعاد طبع " الرياض " في هذه السنة (١٤١٢) ، وهي نفسها التي صدرت فيها طبعة المذكور قبله، ولا أدري أيهما غار من الآخر فطبع طبعته منافسا له! والشاهد أن الصاحب المشار إليه علق على الحديث بقوله: " سكت الشيخ ناصر عن هذا الحديث، وليس في روايات مسلم ١ / ٤٥٤: " فانظر يا ابن آدم "، وفي روايات مسلم زيادة مفادها: فيدركه فيكبه في نار جهنم ". قلت: وفيه ملاحظات عديدة: الأولى: السكوت الذي نسبه إلي - وقد كرره مرارا! فيه غمز خبيث ما أظنه إلا منه، وليس من " جماعة العلماء " الذين ادعى في مقدمة طبعته الجديدة أنها من تحقيقهم، فهل يقع العلماء في مثل هذا الغمز الذي لا فائدة منه إلا التشفي، وبغير حق! لأنه يريد أن يشعر القراء بإخلالي في تحقيقي السابق للكتاب: " الرياض " الذي لم يكن هو قد أراد له كل جوانب التحقيق، وإنما على ما تيسر، فضلا عن أنه لم يكن فيه التزام مقابلة أحاديثه بأصولها، ولا الصاحب المذكور يرضى بذلك، ولو فعل لأفلس، لأن تأليف الكتاب من جديد أيسر من ذلك التحقيق. وعلى الباغي تدور الدوائر، ويؤكد ذلك ما يلي: الثانية: لقد انتبه لتلك الزيادة أنها ليست في مسلم، ولكنه لم يعزها لمصدر، ولا بين ضعفها، مع أنه زعم في مقدمة طبعته الجديدة أنها من " تحقيق جماعة من العلماء " !