Review Bar Mubahathah Batalvi Wa Chakrhalvi

The Review of the Debate with Batalvi and Chakrhalvi

Background

It was in November 1902 that a debate was held between Maulavi Muhammad Hussain Batalvi of Ahl-e-Hadith and Maulavi ‘Abdullah Chakrhala of Ahl-e-Qur’an. Maulavi ‘Abdullah Chakrhala of District Mianwali called himself a protagonist of Ahl-e-Qur’an and did not believe in the supremacy of hadith, whereas Maulavi Muhammad Hussain Batalvi thought hadith to be the judge on the teachings of the Holy Quran. Both the Maulavis had taken up opposite views. The details of the debate can be found in the issue no. 5, v. 19, pages 141-231, of Maulavi Muhammad Hussain Batalvi’s journal Isha‘atus-Sunnah.

The Book

The Promised Messiah’s advent had taken place precisely for the purpose of demolishing such differences, therefore, the Promised Messiah(as) wrote this book as a review on the positions taken up by the contending parties. The Promised Messiah(as) wrote very lucidly and clearly on the subject. The Promised Messiah(as) indicated1 that the Muslims have in their hands three clear directions:

1. The Holy Quran, which is the Word of Allah.

2. The Sunnah, that relates to the particular conduct of the Holy Prophet(sa) and which should have a continuity and from the very beginning corresponded with the relevant verses of the Holy Quran.

3. The Ahadith, Sayings of the Holy Prophet(sa), collected as narrated, 150 years after the demise of the Holy Prophet(sa) by various reliable authorities.

The best course and interpretation is the one which follows and shows deference to the respective positions of the three: Holy Quran, Sunnah and Ahadith. It is not proper that one should entertain the belief like the Ahl-e-Hadith (those relying solely on hadith) that these enjoy supremacy over the Holy Quran and Sunnah and nor like ‘Abdullah Chakrhala that Ahadith enjoy no position and were absurd and useless. The best course is that the Holy Quran and the Sunnah should be taken to be a judge on hadith and these Ahadith which did not go against the clear dictates of Holy Quran and Sunnah should be unquestionably accepted.

Specimen of Writing

This is the responsibility of my community that any hadith which does not go against the Holy Quran and the Sunnah, however trifle it may be, is worth acting upon. And this should always enjoy superiority over the man-made ruling. If there is some question which does not find an answer from Ahadith, the Sunnah or the Holy Quran, then in such a situation one should follow the Hanafi School of Thought and accept the majority will. But if, for one reason or the other, one does not find an answer to his problem, even from the practices of Hanafi school of thought, then the situation demands that the ulema of the time should adjudicate upon the issue exercising care, not like Maulavi ‘Abdullah Chakrhala rejecting the answer provided by Ahadith for no rhyme or reason. Wherever a hadith is found to be contradicted by the Holy Quran and the Sunnah, that hadith may be ignored. And one should not follow Maulavi Muhammad Hussain Batalvi blindly, who attaches great importance to the Ahadith, irrespective of their veracity over the Holy Quran and Sunnah.2