Is "Man Qunto Mawla" a statement of succession?

Given modern distractions, the need to understand Islam better has never been more urgent. Through this forum we can share ideas and hopefully promote the true spirit of Islam which calls for peace, justice, tolerance, inclusiveness and diversity.
sumi
Posts: 32
Joined: Mon Nov 18, 2013 9:27 am

Is "Man Qunto Mawla" a statement of succession?

#1

Unread post by sumi » Sun Feb 02, 2014 2:18 pm

Hazrat Ali himself in his nahjul balagha never made any argument that he was made successor of the prophet. "Man kunto mawla.." is a sahih hadith in Bukhari we all accept it .
But hazrat ali himself never used it as an argument for his succession. If you ask an ARAB ABOUT THE word "mawla" then it does not mean a successor. It was very commonly used word for many people.The prophet pbuh never said "a person xyz " after me will be my successor.

Bukhari Also has this hadith:
وقال لزيد: أنت أخونا ومولانا
Prophet: said to zaid, “You are our brother and our Mawla.” [sahi bukhari, 3:863]

Does that mean zaid is the succesor?


It is narrated in Ibn Saad’s “Al-Tabaqat Al-Kubra”:
A Rafidhi (a person who rejects the Caliphate of Abu Bakr and Umar) said to him (Al Hasan ibn Hasan), “Did not the Messenger of Allah say to Ali: ‘If i am Mawla of someone, Ali is his Mawla?’”

He (Al Hasan) replied, “By Allah, if he meant by that Amirate and rulership, he would have been more explicit to you in expressing that, just as he was explicit to you about the Salah, Zakat and Hajj to the House. He would have said to you, ‘Oh people! This is your leader after me.’ The Messenger of Allah gave the best good counsel to the people (i.e. clear in meaning).”

(Source: Al-Tabaqat Al-Kubra, Volume 5)

The crux of the issue :The meaning of mawla has many meanings. mawla comes from the root wala. It can have many meanings and it depends on how it is used. It could mean master or it could mean friend or someone associated with, or even a servant or a slave. It has many other meanings too and it all can be known from the context. the crux is that if Ali a.s himself had known this meaning as caliph then how dare Abu bakr \ umar etc declare another caliph , when the shere khuda is present? Haz Ali a.s gave bayt to them and hence patronized them, loved them to the extent Haz Ali gave his own daughter to Umar and also named their sons after the caliphs, in exact chronological order!
Haz Abu Bakr Also is not the divinely appointed caliph and caliphate is like amirate . The prophet pbuh has told us to chose an amir whenever we are in groups. Ali a.s was not chosen by divine appointment , had he been chosen we would find clear mentions of it in Quran as all fundamentals are mentioned in Quran. The Crux of the matter is that prophet pbuh is the final divinely appointed figure. No one can take his place.He is the seal of Prophethood and there is no extension offices of prophethood.

_____________
Some more details:
http://web.archive.org/web/200906120526 ... adir-khumm

Copying Important points:
It is impossible to discuss the Hadith of Ghadir Khumm without first understanding the specific context in which the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) said what he said. This is a general rule of thumb pertaining to the Islamic canon as a whole: it is important to know the background in which a Quranic verse was revealed or a certain Hadith was said.

For example, the Quranic verse “slay them wherever you find them” is often used by Orientalists to wrongfully make it appear as if Islam advocates the slaying of people wherever you find them all the time. Of course, if we look at when this verse was revealed, we find that it was specifically revealed during a battle between the Muslims and the Quraish Mushriks; this makes us realize that it is not a general ruling to slay people but rather it was a verse revealed in a specific situation.

Likewise, the Hadith of Ghadir Khumm can only be understood in the context in which it was said: A group of soldiers were severely criticizing Ali ibn Abi Talib (رضّى الله عنه) over a certain matter, and this news reached the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم), who then said what he said in the Hadith of Ghadir Khumm. Like the Orientalists, the Shia propagandists attempt to remove this background context in which the Hadith was said in order to paint a totally different (and misleading) picture.

The Prophet’s intention behind saying what he said at Ghadir Khumm was not at all to nominate Ali (رضّى الله عنه) as Caliph but rather it was only to defend Ali (رضّى الله عنه) against the slander being said against him. It is only by removing the background context that it is possible to render a Shia understanding of the text; it is for this reason that we should always remind our Shia brothers of the background context in which the Hadith of Ghadir Khumm was said.

The Hadith of Ghadir Khumm has absolutely nothing to do with Imamah or Caliphate, and if it did, then nothing prevented the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) from clearly stating that instead of using the word “Mawla” which is known by everyone to mean “beloved friend.” Furthermore, and this point cannot be stressed enough, Ghadir Khumm is located 250 km away from Mecca: if the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) had intended on nominating Ali (رضّى الله عنه) then he would have done that at the larger gathering atop Mount Arafat during his Farewell Sermon in front of all the Muslims from every city.

The entire Shia paradigm is based on the flimsy and easily refutable idea that Ghadir Khumm was a central location in which all the Muslims would gather together in before parting ways and going to their respective homes. Indeed, only those Muslims heading towards Medinah would pass through Ghadir Khumm, not the Muslims living in Mecca, Taif, Yemen, etc. A couple hundred years ago, the Shia masses could easily have been misled because many of them would not have had the availability of a map to check where Ghadir Khumm is and they would merely have accepted the commonly held myth that it was a meeting place for Muslims before they parted ways. But today, in the age of information and technology, accurate maps are at our finger-tips and no reasonable person should be fooled by the Shia myths.

We have shown that the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) did not (and could not have) nominated Ali (رضّى الله عنه) at Ghadir Khumm as the Shia claim. This is the very foundation block of Shi’ism, without which their faith has no basis whatsoever: if the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم) did not nominate Ali (رضّى الله عنه) to be Caliph, then the Shia can no longer claim that Abu Bakr (رضّى الله عنه) or the Sunnis usurped the divinely determined designation of Ali (رضّى الله عنه). And with that, the whole of Shi’ism collapses in on itself, all because of an unaccountable 250 km separating Ghadir Khumm from Mecca and separating Shi’ism from the truth.

aliabbas_aa
Posts: 320
Joined: Mon Feb 15, 2010 2:21 am

Re: JHOOT # 2 "Man Qunto Mawla " is a statement of successio

#2

Unread post by aliabbas_aa » Tue Apr 01, 2014 1:39 am

good one

shehzaada
Posts: 163
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2014 3:04 pm

Re: JHOOT # 2 "Man Qunto Mawla " is a statement of successio

#3

Unread post by shehzaada » Tue Apr 22, 2014 9:37 pm

here is the reply to chocoman

humble_servant_us
Posts: 471
Joined: Fri Feb 16, 2001 5:01 am

Re: JHOOT # 2 "Man Qunto Mawla " is a statement of successio

#4

Unread post by humble_servant_us » Thu Apr 24, 2014 4:52 am

Likewise, the Hadith of Ghadir Khumm can only be understood in the context in which it was said: A group of soldiers were severely criticizing Ali ibn Abi Talib (رضّى الله عنه) over a certain matter, and this news reached the Prophet (صلّى الله عليه وآله وسلّم), who then said what he said in the Hadith of Ghadir Khumm. Like the Orientalists, the Shia propagandists attempt to remove this background context in which the Hadith was said in order to paint a totally different (and misleading) picture.

The Prophet’s intention behind saying what he said at Ghadir Khumm was not at all to nominate Ali (رضّى الله عنه) as Caliph but rather it was only to defend Ali (رضّى الله عنه) against the slander being said against him. It is only by removing the background context that it is possible to render a Shia understanding of the text; it is for this reason that we should always remind our Shia brothers of the background context in which the Hadith of Ghadir Khumm was said.
If we have to agree that there were a group of soldiers who were criticizing Imam ali(as), then what makes more sense , the Pophet(pbuh) who was the best in morals to just call that small group and remove their doubts and end the matter or make all the muslims aware of these differences between Ali(as) and that group.

anajmi
Posts: 13402
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2001 5:01 am

Re: JHOOT # 2 "Man Qunto Mawla " is a statement of successio

#5

Unread post by anajmi » Thu Apr 24, 2014 9:55 am

Actually, all muslims were in Mecca, where the announcement wasn't made. It was made later on where the number was much less.

humble_servant_us
Posts: 471
Joined: Fri Feb 16, 2001 5:01 am

Re: JHOOT # 2 "Man Qunto Mawla " is a statement of successio

#6

Unread post by humble_servant_us » Thu Apr 24, 2014 1:02 pm

Intresting a hundred thousand at ghadeer was a small number and more intrestingly this was the number which was unhappy with ali(as).

anajmi
Posts: 13402
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2001 5:01 am

Re: JHOOT # 2 "Man Qunto Mawla " is a statement of successio

#7

Unread post by anajmi » Thu Apr 24, 2014 1:03 pm

When did it go from 70 thousand to a hundred thousand? If every 10 years, the number increases by 30 thousand, can you imagine what it was 14 centuries ago?

humble_servant_us
Posts: 471
Joined: Fri Feb 16, 2001 5:01 am

Re: JHOOT # 2 "Man Qunto Mawla " is a statement of successio

#8

Unread post by humble_servant_us » Fri Apr 25, 2014 12:56 am

Historians and muhaddisin have recorded the numbers on the day of ghadeer.

If it is in tens of thousands than also it is a big number to be called a small group.

anajmi
Posts: 13402
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2001 5:01 am

Re: JHOOT # 2 "Man Qunto Mawla " is a statement of successio

#9

Unread post by anajmi » Fri Apr 25, 2014 9:22 am

I didn't say it was a small group. I said the number was much less than in Mecca. Understand the difference. You claimed it was all the muslims. It wasn't. If the announcement was supposed to be for all muslims, then it should've been made in Mecca.

shehzaada
Posts: 163
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2014 3:04 pm

Re: JHOOT # 2 "Man Qunto Mawla " is a statement of successio

#10

Unread post by shehzaada » Fri Apr 25, 2014 1:13 pm

to add to Anajmi, the prophet pbuh has used the word "Mawla " many a times to reconcile people , just search the word "Mawla" , http://sunnah.com/search/mawla

I was surprised to find that "mawla" as a leader\master was never used by people of that time. You have "mawla" by hundreds in hadith collection and upto what I read in every instance it was used as brother , slave, friend.. and never as meaning leader.

humble_servant_us
Posts: 471
Joined: Fri Feb 16, 2001 5:01 am

Re: JHOOT # 2 "Man Qunto Mawla " is a statement of successio

#11

Unread post by humble_servant_us » Fri Apr 25, 2014 1:21 pm

Quranic ayats were revealed in various places, so your argument that it should have been in mecca doesn't hold ground. And if ur argument is that mecca had more muslims than ghadeer, this is also flawed as mecca did not have ALL of the muslim ummah so doesn't matter whether it be mecca or gadheer because both had a subset of ummah and not ALL.

IT is allah(swt) who decides when and where what is revealed. He chose ghadeer to reveal the ayah of perfection of islam with the mssg of wilaya pf ali(as)

anajmi
Posts: 13402
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2001 5:01 am

Re: "Man Qunto Mawla " is a statement of succession

#12

Unread post by anajmi » Fri Apr 25, 2014 1:59 pm

Quranic ayats were revealed in various places, so your argument that it should have been in mecca doesn't hold ground.
Actually, there in lies the flaw in your argument. According to you, the ayah was revealed after the declaration. The declaration didn't come after the revelation. Allah was waiting for the declaration before revealing the ayah. He wasn't waiting for Ghadeer. Read up on your history and you will be revealed the fiction in it.

Muslim First
Posts: 6893
Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2001 4:01 am

Re: JHOOT # 2 "Man Qunto Mawla " is a statement of successio

#13

Unread post by Muslim First » Fri Apr 25, 2014 2:25 pm

humble_servant_us wrote:Quranic ayats were revealed in various places, so your argument that it should have been in mecca doesn't hold ground. And if ur argument is that mecca had more muslims than ghadeer, this is also flawed as mecca did not have ALL of the muslim ummah so doesn't matter whether it be mecca or gadheer because both had a subset of ummah and not ALL.

IT is allah(swt) who decides when and where what is revealed. He chose ghadeer to reveal the ayah of perfection of islam with the mssg of wilaya pf ali(as)
Brother humble_servant_us
ASAK
We have asked you to read Sunni view of Gadhir
Like Adial tattoo you bring this up all the time

Here is link again

Hadith of Ghadir Khumm [A Sunni Perspective]
http://www.ahlelbayt.com/articles/rebut ... adir-khumm

Wasalaam

wise_guy
Posts: 700
Joined: Sat Jan 28, 2012 5:52 pm

Re: "Man Qunto Mawla " is a statement of succession

#14

Unread post by wise_guy » Fri Apr 25, 2014 4:40 pm

Whatever be the case. Look at the sunnis all over the world with their fundametalist mindset have ashamed Islam across the world whereas Shias with more liberal views are ahead of sunnis on all fronts! Think of it.

anajmi
Posts: 13402
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2001 5:01 am

Re: "Man Qunto Mawla " is a statement of succession

#15

Unread post by anajmi » Fri Apr 25, 2014 5:40 pm

And you are including the dawoodi abdes in them?


shehzaada
Posts: 163
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2014 3:04 pm

Re: "Man Qunto Mawla " is a statement of succession

#17

Unread post by shehzaada » Sat Apr 26, 2014 3:17 am

Admin,

You have changed the title of the post to make it contradictory, this is unfair , rather you can change title SIMILAR to Original:

"Man Qunto Mawla " is a NOT A statement of succession

AMAFHH
Posts: 274
Joined: Mon Jul 16, 2012 3:19 am

Re: "Man Qunto Mawla " is a statement of succession

#18

Unread post by AMAFHH » Sat Apr 26, 2014 4:22 am

The Ghadir Declaration- Spiritual Sovereignty of Imam Ali (as) (BY AHL-E-SUNNAT scholar )
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XuNvd-DTWLQ#t=559

shehzaada
Posts: 163
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2014 3:04 pm

Re: "Man Qunto Mawla " is a statement of succession

#19

Unread post by shehzaada » Sat Apr 26, 2014 5:40 am

He is not a Ahle sunnat scholar but a deviant sufi with intractable deviant heretical beliefs rejected by scholars of all sects including his own as well as Shias, if you like him than why are you selectively quoting him? follow his other bayans where he has emphasized Abu Bakr AS , Umar AS too , he is no authority even in his own barelvi sect. Last time when he came to Mumbai , his own sect people (grave worshipping barelvi) opposed him putting posters all over challenging him on aqedah.

Muslim First
Posts: 6893
Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2001 4:01 am

Re: "Man Qunto Mawla " is a statement of succession

#20

Unread post by Muslim First » Sat Apr 26, 2014 9:15 am

Somebody posted question on Ismaili.net if Gadhir event is mentioned in Quran.
In response kmaherali a respected poster responded as follows
My comments are in red
The Qur'an was revealed for the whole Ummah and not specifically for Shia Islam.
So a Quran is elementary book and elite Shia need Ahl e bait to explain Batin meaning
The notion of Walaya (devotion to a living guide) is not an easy concept to understand
Correct. It require lot of tongue twisting, hand wringing and phony Ahadith
generally. We Ismailis take it for granted because we are born and brought up in a tradition of a living guide. It is only attained by deep search and reflection and hence it is elitist by nature.
Now you see, Ismailis are elitist since they have Europian white Immam, others Shia are less since they have Gaib or hiding Imam
Since Islam was meant for all interpretations, it follows that the message has to be in a form that would not create conflict in the Umma.
Result is quite opposite, conflict happened and will go on forever ( ta quyamat )
Hence the concept of Imamat is given in symbolic manner so that those who are inclined or have the necessary background can interpret the verses to suite their background and intellectual capacity. It also leaves the door open to those who do not have that capacity.
Other prophets had Wasi so symbolically Prophet Muhammad need Wasi too. High intellectual Ismailis have white Imam, 12vers have Gaib Imam and have intellectual Ayatullas, Bohras have hiding Imam and Dai with direct line. Dumb Sunnis have Mullas to guide them

anajmi
Posts: 13402
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2001 5:01 am

Re: "Man Qunto Mawla " is a statement of succession

#21

Unread post by anajmi » Sat Apr 26, 2014 12:11 pm

Admin,

Please change the title back to what it was originally. You do not want to be following in the footsteps of the jews and Dawoodi bohra clergy who change truths into lies by changing a word here and a word there.

anajmi
Posts: 13402
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2001 5:01 am

Re: "Man Qunto Mawla " is a statement of succession

#22

Unread post by anajmi » Sat Apr 26, 2014 12:37 pm

The Ghadir Declaration- Spiritual Sovereignty of Imam Ali (as) (BY AHL-E-SUNNAT scholar )
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XuNvd-DTWLQ#t=559
According to this guy, the declaration was Man Qunto Waliyyohu fahaza waliyyohu. So which version of Ghadeer is this? When did it change from Mawla to Wali? Is it interchangeable? Do both of them mean the same thing or similar thing?

anajmi
Posts: 13402
Joined: Wed Jan 10, 2001 5:01 am

Re: "Man Qunto Mawla " is a statement of succession

#23

Unread post by anajmi » Sat Apr 26, 2014 2:17 pm

Here is a another twist to the man qunto mawla theory. And this is just my pure imagination. Since I used to be a shia for quite a few young years of my life, I can sometimes bend my mind to think like them.

Apparently, the prophet (saw) knew the bad character of Abu Bakr, Umar and Uthman and yet he kept them close to himself. Similarly, he knew about the Ali worshippers in his group and to keep them at bay, he said this Man Qunto thing on purpose. And Allah revealed the ayah because the idol worshippers had been identified and the religion was complete. Ofcourse, this is just a figment of my imagination. I do not have anything to back it up. But, we don't need anything to back things up do we? :wink:

shehzaada
Posts: 163
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2014 3:04 pm

Re: "Man Qunto Mawla " is a statement of succession

#24

Unread post by shehzaada » Thu May 01, 2014 3:07 pm

nice twist

shapur
Posts: 138
Joined: Wed Feb 13, 2013 5:35 am

Re: Is "Man Qunto Mawla" a statement of succession?

#25

Unread post by shapur » Sun May 04, 2014 2:37 am

Two questions :-

First question to all those who dispute the Ghadeer qum declaration : The holy prophet was entrusted by God to teach mankind on every minute aspect of Imaan and amal getting into such nittie-gritties of everyday life like eating , sitting, drinking, sleeping,hygiene, greeting others, etc, etc, etc through his bayaans , quotes,statements, practice and way of life. The message and the injunctions were for all time to come and it was but natural that he put in place a system which would uphold and monitor them after him. So what were his directives to this end ? Is it believable that despite teaching us about everything, he kept mum on the crucial issue of what should be the course to be adopted after him ???
If the Ghadir declaration was'nt on the successorship of Ali, then what did the prophet say about his succession ? If he told the people to hold elections after him as they did, wheres the authentic hadees on that ? So it then follows that if the Shia belief is unfounded then so was the Sunni act of holding election without prophet's sanction.

Second question to those whose very lifeline and Imaan is Ali,the Ahle-baith,the Imams, etc. :-
If the issue of succession and the leaders to come after the prophet was so crucial an issue then why did'nt God grant the holy prophet a son ? Thereby the matter would have been unquestionable and naturally resolved and the natural leadership from father-to-son remained in the prophet's family till qayamah. When God granted every status, honour, privileges and a rewarding life to the prophet why did he deny him the joy and happiness of having a son ?

Well, my 2 cents on both the above :

To the First, it would seem in all probability that the prophet did express his will to have Hazrat Ali succeed him in the leadership of the ummah because barring the declaration of Qum theres no other record or incident when he has publicly spoken and declared in such close terms about any of his companions. But it must have so happened that because of his relatively young age, the other companions were too driven by worldly qualities of ego, etc to accept him and hence stage-managed an event to take over the mantle of leadership upon themselves. Having said that, we must then view history as it occurred and we find that Hazrat Ali gave in to the scheming of these seniors to uphold the nascent religion and the unity of the ummah. So we, as believers in Ali's successorship should follow suit and let matters rest with that in this world , leave it upon Allah to judge between them in aakherat, and instead focus on the greater importance of Imaan, message and worship of Allah as Hazrat Ali did.

To the second I would say that the prophet was only a messenger who carried the message of Allah -which is to worship and obey Him- and which He has sent to human beings in all parts of the Earth through His 1,24,000 messengers. Our focus as believers should be on the message and not on the messenger. It is expressly to avoid this misplaced importance getting accorded to the messenger that Allah did'nt grant him a son. Because most of the earlier messengers also got deified and worshipped instead of HIM. So we should view the Deen and Imaan and its leaders in their proper perspective and refrain from diluting the deen and shifting the focus from the Creator to the Created because it will not get us any rewards in either worlds.

shehzaada
Posts: 163
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2014 3:04 pm

Re: Is "Man Qunto Mawla" a statement of succession?

#26

Unread post by shehzaada » Sun May 04, 2014 3:37 am

SHAPUR, THERE is SAHIH hadith which clearly answers your question , that prophet pbuh did explicitly indicate that he wanted Abu Bakr ALONE to take his place:
Jubair bin Mutim Radhiallohu ‘anhu narrates that a woman came to the Prophet Sallallohu alaihi wasallam who ordered her to return to him again. She said, “What if I came and did not find you?” as if she wanted to say, “If I found you had passed away” The Prophet said, “If you should not find me, go to Abu Bakr.”
(Bukhari)

badrijanab
Posts: 809
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2012 3:19 pm

Re: Is "Man Qunto Mawla" a statement of succession?

#27

Unread post by badrijanab » Sun May 04, 2014 3:54 am

shehzaada wrote:SHAPUR, THERE is SAHIH hadith which clearly answers your question , that prophet pbuh did explicitly indicate that he wanted Abu Bakr ALONE to take his place:
Jubair bin Mutim Radhiallohu ‘anhu narrates that a woman came to the Prophet Sallallohu alaihi wasallam who ordered her to return to him again. She said, “What if I came and did not find you?” as if she wanted to say, “If I found you had passed away” The Prophet said, “If you should not find me, go to Abu Bakr.”
(Bukhari)
Is Bukhari 'masoom'? No.

What is the proof that Bukhari has not forged the hadith above? No proof, he could have forged and he has forged.

Even if we assume that above for time being is correct, which it is not, then also: In it Prophet s.a.w.w. is not formally nominating 1st as his successor to decide on religious matter or to represent Islam after Prophet s.a.w.w.

Citing such non-senses non-mumineens con and fools gullible Abde 1/2/3 and are running their cult, and brain-washing unemployed to become terrorist and so their master can rule Afghanistan and countries in Africa and other places!!!

shehzaada
Posts: 163
Joined: Mon Apr 07, 2014 3:04 pm

Re: Is "Man Qunto Mawla" a statement of succession?

#28

Unread post by shehzaada » Sun May 04, 2014 4:50 am

Yes Bukhari was preserved exactly how Quran was preserved, if you reject bukhari , prepare to reject Quran too and hence become kafir/

badrijanab
Posts: 809
Joined: Fri Jun 15, 2012 3:19 pm

Re: Is "Man Qunto Mawla" a statement of succession?

#29

Unread post by badrijanab » Sun May 04, 2014 6:17 am

shehzaada wrote:Yes Bukhari was preserved exactly how Quran was preserved, if you reject bukhari , prepare to reject Quran too and hence become kafir/
Prove above? You and alike have rejected Quran and follow your own fancies hence you all are munafiq indeed, besides being kaafir.

Muslim First
Posts: 6893
Joined: Tue Jun 19, 2001 4:01 am

Re: Is "Man Qunto Mawla" a statement of succession?

#30

Unread post by Muslim First » Sun May 04, 2014 7:19 am

What is the proof that Bukhari has not forged the hadith above? No proof, he could have forged and he has forged.
BJ
Question Hz Bukhari RA was Masoom or not does not arise at all.
Hz Bukhari was scholar who collected Ahadith from many.
He scrutinized them to best of his ability and judged them in different categories.
Even one hadith has different wording since they came from different sources. He recorded all kind of Ahadith.
No body has accused him to be forgerer except some imbecile like you.
There is still scholarly work going on scrutinizing Ahadith.
Imam Albani RA's work is good one.