Zubair Ali Zai Books Pdf
DOWNLOAD >> https://urllie.com/2tb5Kb
How can these hadith scholars be attacked without any hadith transmission? Is it possible that Ibn Khuzaymah, Al Haakim, and other sahihs actually understood the hadiths wrongly and the transmission was faulty? I see some people are trying to cut the throats of Ibn Khuzaymah and Al Khuzaymah.Yet I see hadiths in their books which contradict and weaken their grading. How can the criticalities and contradictions of these scholars be justified? Moreover, I am not an expert in hadith but I do know that the transmission of the hadiths are not simple. I think some books are written on the basis of acceptance of unreliable sources and transmitting the hadiths from these sources and not from the Quran or authentic narrators. For example, a hadith narrated from the mother of Umar who was the first and the best narrator. It is also narrated from the mother of Umar from Umar at his death bed. I also heard a hadith from the Prophet in Bukhari and Muslim book, yet it is also narrated by Ibn Umar in Mishkat. What should be the best authentic hadith in this case?
As for me, I always state the names and the volume and the page numbers where I find something authentic. I see mistakes in the books of Ibn Taymiyyah, Ibn Khuzaymah, Al-Bukhari, Ibn Maja, Ibn Abi Hibbaan, Abdul Qadir al-Jilani and others. May God forgive me.
However, I noticed that many ahadith that I studied (and graded by the aforementioned professor) are graded as sahih in all books except the one that the professor himself wrote. I know that there are some issues with his book, but that doesn't take away from the fact that it is not the first that he has published.
All I know is that every book in my library has a number in its title, like Al-Mathani, Al-Albani, Al-'Awwam etc, yet I know that these are all graded by the same scholar.I only seen the graded ones being criticized. Is this a defect to the scholars themselves or a defect to the hadiths themselves?
In this study, the results for the MICP test showed that the MICP reaction is quite fast with a high reaction rate. Apparently, the concrete cracks filled with MICP can heal within 1 week. A previous study by our group showed that adding bacterial sludge into concrete can also trigger a rapid MICP reaction and subsequent calcium carbonate precipitation (Wang et al., 2012b). Bacterial spores are the primary form of survival for microorganisms in a natural environment, and thus they are ubiquitous in soil. These spores are dormant and survive for long periods of time. As a result, they can be an easily obtainable source of calcium carbonate (Wang et al., 2014c). The small amount of MICP used in this study (3 g/L of sludge for dry weight) was enough to trigger MICP reaction and to fill up the crack. It can be expected that the MICP reaction will be much faster if higher amount of bacterial sludge (50-100 g/L) is used. 827ec27edc