and

One of these is related by Ibn Hibban in his Sahih with a well-authenticated (hasan) chain of transmission, in which the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) asked the slave girl, “‘Who is your Lord?’ and she said, ‘Allah’; whereupon he asked her, ‘Who am I?’ and she said, ‘You are the Messenger of Allah’; at which he said, ‘Free her, for she is a believer’” (al-Ihsan fi taqrib Sahih Ibn Hibban, 18 vols. Beirut: Muassasa al-Risala, 1408/1988, 1.419: 189).

The above is a portion of an email sent out by Br. Navaid Aziz to some brothers who questioned him about what took place with the translators blog.

Zubair on October 28, 2007 at 11:06 pm said:

Here is thetranslator’s response to why the comments were deleted:

Asalamu alaykum,

We are not interested in getting into the latest Net war. We’ve been through enough and have enough battle scars to know that it leads to no end. We are very appreciative of advice and the rigor brought by our teachers to this blog. However, we would like to remind everyone that we are very busy, post when we can and have no real time to edit things in a timely manner. Thus, we ask for sabar and ‘uthur from our fellows. We are not equal to any of you in ‘ilm nor hilm. However, relax, take a deep breath and exercise more sabar in dealing with your brothers. Let’s take a few steps back, clean our hearts and relax. All comments were removed that we felt could be used to create strife and difficulties amongst the Muslims. If there is any offense taking we are truly sorry and hope for greater understanding and maturity from each other when dealing with each other.

thetranslators

JazakAllah khair for the clarification!

I knew they had good intentions!

Asalamu alaykum,

We are not interested in getting into the latest Net war. We’ve been through enough and have enough battle scars to know that it leads to no end. We are very appreciative of advice and the rigor brought by our teachers to this blog. However, we would like to remind everyone that we are very busy, post when we can and have no real time to edit things in a timely manner. Thus, we ask for sabar and ‘uthur from our fellows. We are not equal to any of you in ‘ilm nor hilm. However, relax, take a deep breath and exercise more sabar in dealing with your brothers. Let’s take a few steps back, clean our hearts and relax. All comments were removed that we felt could be used to create strife and difficulties amongst the Muslims. If there is any offense taking we are truly sorry and hope for greater understanding and maturity from each other when dealing with each other.

thetranslators

I read what Shaykh Navaid said, and all I see are some corrections as you have stated and a suggestion. I don’t know why the brothers of TheTranslators blog took it down, but they must have a reason.

Allah knows best.

Mujahideen Ryder on October 28, 2007 at 6:28 pm said:

Rasheed, welcome to my blog. I’m not sure if you have been here before, but somehow or the other Muslims can turn anything into a fiqh/aqeedah issue. And it does happen on my blog leading to a post talking about hanbali fiqh resources to 100+ comments talking about ashari vs. salafi aqeedah.

That’s why I said we should all try to stick to the pledge, inshaAllah.

Jazâkallah khaira, brother MR, for the welcoming.

What you mention is all fine and dandy. The thing I was asking about, however, is that in the comment brother Navaid (who happens to be a dear friend of mine) posted to the Translators’ blog, there was nothing that could really be refuted. 1. He stated a fact (that some of the scholars of Hadîth mention that there were at least two slave girls asked “Where is Allah?”, not just one), 2. he suggested a book that they could refer to in order to verify what he said, 3. he pointed out an error in the definition they gave for what constitutes a lone (âhâd) hadîth (which can be verified by checking any book on Hadîth terminology, such as those written by Ibn as-Salâh, Ibn Hajar, Ibn Kathîr, etc.), and 4. he pointed out a mistake in the spelling of a person’s name.

While I agree, there are those (genuinely wicked people) who can turn just about anything into fight under the pretenses of jurisprudential or credal differences, I fail to see how the post he made violates the pledge that some of you have agreed to uphold.

Rasheed Gonzales on October 28, 2007 at 12:41 pm said:

as-Salâm ‘alaikum wa rahmatullah to everyone,

With all due respect to the brothers who have posted comments thus far, I wonder what in brother Navaid’s comment to the Translators’ translation can be “refuted”? As well as what possible differences one can have with his “contentions”? I mean, he pointed out a couple of mistakes mentioning facts to support his observations, suggested a book, and corrected an error in spelling one of Imam al-Bukhârî’s great grandfathers’ name. What’s there to refute in that?

Rasheed, welcome to my blog. I’m not sure if you have been here before, but somehow or the other Muslims can turn anything into a fiqh/aqeedah issue. And it does happen on my blog leading to a post talking about hanbali fiqh resources to 100+ comments talking about ashari vs. salafi aqeedah.

That’s why I said we should all try to stick to the pledge, inshaAllah.

With all due respect to the brothers who have posted comments thus far, I wonder what in brother Navaid’s comment to the Translators’ translation can be “refuted”? As well as what possible differences one can have with his “contentions”? I mean, he pointed out a couple of mistakes mentioning facts to support his observations, suggested a book, and corrected an error in spelling one of Imam al-Bukhârî’s great grandfathers’ name. What’s there to refute in that?

But for a simplified bit on aqeedah (we all agree on) see: http://muslimology.wordpress.com/2007/10/03/dawah-literature-review-where-is-allah/