نعمۃ الباری (مولانا غلام رسول سعیدی) میں علوم الحدیث کے مباحث

Abstract

This thesis presents Ghulam Rasool Saeedi’s works and thoughts. It introduces your teachers, students, daily routine and his literary and religious works. What is the purpose behind writing Namat ul Bari, its brief introduction, methodology, discussions about Aloom ul Hadith and individuality is also presented. In Namat ul Bari Allam Ghulam Rasool Saeedi not only discussed the meaning of disagreement and differences but also presented his thoughts about negotiation and how can we prefer something about other. He also wrote about not only about prediction but also different types of predictions and its reality. He analyzed that what type of people can predict and whose predictions can become true. He also described such people whose description cannot become true and we should not believe on those. Moulana Ghulam Rasool Saeedi has analyzed the point of view of those who reject Ahadith on the base of that these traditions are against the reason. After describing their opinion he answered to them and explained that these Ahadith are not against reason through arguments. This thesis presents the singularities of Moulana and analyzed whether these singularities are real and did not adopted by any other scholar. If these are not described by any scholar than it is taken as his singularities. In addition to that the criticism of Moulana Ghulam Rasool Saeedi about Hafiz Ibn-e-Hajar, Allama Aanie, Ibn e Batal and other annotators is also analyzed in this thesis. After critical analysis the better point of view was described through arguments. In this thesis the meaning of sanad ( the detailed account of narrator) and how disturbance in sanad happens is presented. At some points in Naima tu Bari the difference of opinion from other great scholars is presented and analyzed by Moulana. This difference of opinion is analyzed here. viii What is the difference between sanad and text, what is Moulana’s opinion about it, what is his methodology about categorization of these two, what makes his style different from other scholars; all is presented in this thesis. In addition to all these what is his criteria of accepting a tradition, how it is different from other interpreters and can we draw rules from a muztarib tradition ( a tradition which is present with different sanads but somehow different from each other) is also discussed here