مفتی عبداللطیف
افسوس ہے کہ علمائے قدیم کی ایک اہم اور آخری یادگار مفتی عبداللطیف صاحب نے گزشتہ مہینہ انتقال فرمایا، مرحوم استاذ العلماء مولانا لطف اﷲ صاحب علی گڑھ کے شاگرد مولانا فضل رحمن گنج مراد آبادیؒ کے مرید اور دارالعلوم ندوۃ العلماء کے دور اول کے اساتذہ میں تھے، حضرت سید صاحب مرحوم نے ابتدائی کتابیں ان ہی سے پڑھی تھیں۔ پھر ندوہ سے اپنے خواجہ تاش مولانا محمد علی مونگیریؒ کے پاس مونگیر چلے گئے اور کچھ دنوں یہاں قیام کے بعد حجاز تشریف لے گئے اور کئی سال تک مدرسۂ صولتیہ مکہ معظمہ میں درس و تدریس کی خدمت انجام دی، اسی زمانہ میں مصر و شام و عراق وغیرہ کی سیاحت کی، پھر حجاز سے واپس آکر مونگیر میں تصنیف و تالیف کا سلسلہ شروع کیا، جامعہ عثمانیہ کے قیام کے بعد جب ان کے ہم درس مولانا حبیب الرحمن خاں شروانی اس کے وائس چانسلر مقرر ہوئے تو انھوں نے مفتی صاحب کو اس کے شعبۂ دینیات میں لکچرر مقرر کیا اور آخر میں وہ اس کی صدارت کے عہدہ سے وظیفہ یاب ہوئے۔ جامعہ عثمانیہ سے سبکدوشی کے بعد شروانی صاحب نے مسلم یونیورسٹی کے شعبۂ دینیات میں ان کا تقرر کرایا۔ مگر چند ہی سال کے بعد ضعف پیری کی وجہ سے اس خدمت سے سبکدوش ہوگئے، اور علی گڑھ میں مستقل قیام فرمایا، مگر درس و تدریس کا سلسلہ آخر عمر تک جاری رہا۔
مفتی صاحب مرحوم ہندوستان کے مشہور اساتذہ میں تھے، دینی علوم پر ان کی نظر بڑی گہری اور وسیع تھی۔ ان کے تلامذہ کی تعداد سیکڑوں سے متجاوز ہے۔ جن میں مولانا سید سلیمان ندوی مرحوم جیسے شاگرد بھی تھے۔ تالیف و تصنیف کا بھی مشغلہ رہتا تھا۔ چنانچہ ان کی کئی کتابیں تاریخ القرآن، سیرت امام ابوحنیفہ اور فقہ کے چند رسائل...
It is unique and high distinction of the Muslim Ummah that they have saved the teachings of Prophet Muhammad (PBUH). There have been high profile scholars who had dedicated their lives for the investigation of veracity and authenticity of Ḥadīths. They have been sifting the narrators of Ḥadīths through the myriad of resources to endorse or reject the authenticity of Ḥadīths. Amongst these eminent scholars, Imām Abū Ḥātim and Imām Abū Zur'ah, who made great contribution in the field of Elal Ḥadīth. Both criticized Aḥādīth some of which are quoted in Sahih Imām Bukhārī and Sahih Imām Muslim. Both books have always been taken as an authentic source for the veracity of Aḥādīth. However, they have pointed out a few such aspects which are vital for keeping the veracity and authenticity of Aḥādīth. This article is an attempt to study those Aḥādīth as quoted in the two above mentioned books and were criticized by Imām Abū Ḥātim and Abū Zur’ah in their book Elal Ḥadīths, by comprising with sayings of the concerned scholars. The most accurate aspect has been elaborated.
Traditional rice cultivation by puddling and manual transplanting is a labor intensive activity and require significant quantities of water and power. The increasing scarcity of water threatens the sustainability of transplanted rice. In many areas of Asia, transplanting of rice is being replaced by direct seeding as farmers respond to increased labor cost and decreased water availability but weed control is one of the major constraints to direct seeding. So, to control weeds in direct seeded rice studies were designed. Experiments were conducted for two years to develop sustainable and economical methods for managing weeds in aerobic rice grown by direct-seeding at Student’s Farm, Department of Agronomy, University of Agriculture, Faisalabad during the years 2008 and 2009. The first experiment was laid out in RCBD having five weed control approaches; hand weeding, hoeing (with kasula), inter row cultivation with tine cultivator, inter row cultivation with spike hoe and chemical control with Nominee 100 SC along with control (no weeding). Weed dry weight was 300 g m -2 , 257 g m -2 , 225 g m -2 and 157 g m -2 less in hand weeding, hoeing tine cultivator and Nominee 100 SC respectively than no weeding. Maximum fertile tillers were recorded in hand weeding (369.73 m -2 ) and were followed by hoeing (356.94 m -2 ) and tine cultivator (346.78 m -2 ). Hand pulling, hoeing, tine cultivator, Nominee and spike hoe gave 28, 25, 22, 12 and 6% more number of kernels per panicle respectively. Paddy yield was 221, 203, 181 and 105% more in hand weeding, hoeing tine cultivator and Nominee 100 SC respectively than no weeding. Highest net returns (Rs. 56905) were obtained by hand weeding while highest BCR (1.75) was obtained in tine cultivator. A second experiment was laid out in split plot design randomizing inter row cultivation implements in main plots and inter row cultivation frequencies in sub plots. Weed dry weight was 199.16 g m -2 less when tine cultivator was used at 15, 25, 35 and 45 DAS as compared to weed dry weight in inter row cultivation at15 days after seeding (DAS). More fertile tillers in tine cultivator and spike when used at 15, 25, 35 and 45 DAS were observed. Paddy yield was 159% more when tine cultivator was used at 15, 25, 35 and 45 as compared to paddy yield in inter row cultivation at15 DAS. Tine cultivator gave maximum net return and BCR when used at 15, 25, 35 and 45 DAS. Tine cultivator gave maximum net return and BCR when used at 15, 25, 35 and 45 DAS. Both experiments were replicated thrice. Net plot size was 3.0 m x 6.0 m in both experiments. Weed control by tine cultivator displayed excellent rice yields when repeated cultivation was done, and with the reduced labor inputs compared to hand weeding and hoeing, is a viable and economical method.