(ہک بیت وچ چار ماہ دا ذکر)
چڑھے چیتر اداسیاں آگیاں
وسوں گئی، وساکھ مرجھا گئیاں
جیٹھ جند مصیبتاں کھا گئیاں
ہاڑ، ہاڑے گھت کرلا گئیاں
ساون ساہ دا یار وساہ کی اے
بھادوں بھاہ لگی، کیہڑی، واہ کی اے
اسو آس دا پھل تباہ کی اے
کتیں کئی لٹے، عشق پھاہ کی اے
مگھر مار کے مینوں لتاڑیا ای
پوہ پاس کلیجہ ساڑیا ای
ماگھ ماہی دا ورقہ پاڑیا ای
پھگن پھاہی حنیف نوں چاہڑیا ای
Abstract By preserving and narrating hadīth, a chain of narrators was started to maintain its authenticity. When the experts of hadīth realized that some unreliable transmitters might try to fabricate Hadīth, this work started more systematically. Even the chain gradually attained such importance that every Muhaddīth was concerned much about it. In the second century of Hijra, when the teaching and learning of hadīth became the standard of honor and great respect, some people devoted their lives to this work. They travelled to many countries of world and obtained the knowledge of Hadīth from prominent scholars of their time. Experts of Asmā-ul-Rijāl awarded them the certificate of holding the highest position of trust and credibility. The chains having such trustworthy transmitters are considered to be of higher rank than others. Among such traditions there is also one "Mālik-an-Nāfi'-an-Ibn-e-Umar". Due to the reliability of its narrators, Imām Bukhāri and many other Muhaddithīn considered it as "golden chain". When some of the Orientalists started raising objections to the Prophetic Hadīth, they criticized the narrators of the Hadīth as well. Especially the narrators who were declared trustworthy and reliable by Muslim scholars. For this, they especially criticized Abu Hūraira from among the companions and Imām Zuhri among the Successors. The chain of hadīth, (Mālik an-Nāfi' an-Ibn e Umar) “golden chain” was also seriously criticized by Joseph Schacht and Juynboll etc. In this article, a comparative study of the viewpoints of the Muhaddithīn and the Orientalists regarding the chain “Mālik an-Nāfi' an-Ibn eUmar” is presented.
The study examines the impact of systematic (proper) dairy farm management on milk production with reference to analysis of dairy farming patterns in Sindh. In this context, the approach of Micro Dairy Farm Environment (MDFE) and Macro Dairy Farm Environment (MDFE) was developed and on the basis of that loom the Cattle Feeding Management (CFM), Cattle Housing Management (CHM), Milk Marketing Management (MMM), Dairy Farm Human Resource Management (DFHM), Cattle Health Management (CHM), Cattle Record Keeping Management (KRKM), and Breeding Management (BR), Government Control on Milk Price (GCMP), Financial and Institutional Support to Farmers (FISF) such as Veterinary Services (VS), Regular Farmers Awareness Programs (RFAP), Cattle Breeding Centers (CBR), Milk Marketing Facility (MMF), Mitigating Monopoly of Middleman (MMM), Dairy Investment Policy (DIP) Dairy Farmers Union (EDFU) were selected as a research parameter. Moreover, the standards of dairy farm management were divided into systematic (proper) and unsystematic (improper) dairy farm management. In the last stage the impact of systematic and unsystematic dairy farm management on milk production is measured. In this questionnaire, field notes and observational method base study the data was collected from 500 dairy farmers of upper, central and lower Sindh province of Pakistan, whereas milk collectors (middleman), milk wholesalers, milk retailers, livestock directorate, and veterinary staff was also sampling subject. The data has been analyzed through wilcoxin sign rank, wilcoxin sum rank, one way ANOVA and Pearson correlation tests. It is concluded that Micro and Macro Dairy Farm Institutions in Sindh are very poor which effects on milk production, market value of milk and damages precious dairy resources which worth approximately more than 3 billion dollars. The mismanagement prevails in various forms in dairy farming; farmers are unaware from cattle housing management; about 91% farmers fed their livestock at low nutritional value (LNV) such as 37% low protein, 42.3% low level of minerals and carbohydrates, 19% less quantity of balance ration which illustrates to Poor cattle Feeding Management (CFM). The limited space for cattle, filthy milk collection lay, nominal or no use of disinfectants, poor sanitation, unavailability of separate milking room are common problems on each dairy farm in Sindh. The prevalence of Endo and Ecto parasitic diseases is widespread, 99.8% dairy farmers are unaware from Cattle Health Management (CHM), Vaccination, Deworming, Cattle Record (CR) keeping, and Calf Rearing Techniques (CRT). The dairy farmers of Sindh has drastic problem in Milk Marketing. This phenomenon highlights that dairy farming patterns are traditional in Sindh. Accordingly, per cattle milk yield in unsystematic dairy farm management is about 3.9 liters Per Milking Time (PTM) where as in systematic dairy farm management per cattle milk yield is 5.8 liters PTM in same age and milking cycle of cattle. Hence, the systematic dairy farm management has significant positive impact on milk yield. Thus, the traditional farming can be converted into systematic dairy farming through application of “management functions” in all components of dairy farming mainly farmers training, financial support, easy access to veterinary services, establishment of cattle breeding centers and importantly developing an organize milk marketing channels in Sindh.