قاضی عبدالغفار
افسوس ہے کہ گذشتہ مہینہ ہماری پرانی علمی و تہذیبی بزم کی ایک اور روشن شمع خاموش ہوگئی، اور قاضی عبدالغفار صاحب نے موت و حیات کی طویل کشمکش کے بعد ۱۷؍ جنوری کو انتقال کیا، وہ ہماری بزم کہن کی اہم یادگار، حکیم اجمل خاں کے ندیم خاص، مولانا محمد علی کے ہمدم و ہمراز، مولانا ابوالکلام کے ہم نشین، ایک تجربہ کار صحافی اور صاحبِ طرز ادیب تھے، چمنستانِ ادب اور خارزار صحافت دونوں میں ان کے قلم کی روانی یکساں تھی اور طنز لطیف میں تو آپ اپنی مثال تھے، ہماری زبان میں ان کے ’’ہلکے ہلکے اشارے‘‘ طنز و ظرافت کے شرارے اور اردو ادب کے شہ پارے ہوتے تھے۔
وہ پرانے قوم پرست اور وطن پرور تھے، ترک موالات اور خلافت کی تحریکوں میں سرگرمی سے حصہ لیا، اس کے بعد بھی صحافت کے دائرے کے اندر ایک عر صہ تک ملکی سیاست میں حصہ لیتے رہے اور مختلف اوقات میں کلکتہ، دہلی اور حیدرآباد سے مختلف اخبارات جمہود، صباح اور پیام نکالے، ہمدرد میں مولانا محمد علی مرحوم کے دستِ راست تھے، ۱۹۲۲ء میں دوسرے وفد خلافت کے سکریٹری کی حیثیت سے لندن گئے تھے، ان کی کتاب نقش فرنگ اس سفر کا دلآویز مرقع ہے، وہ فطری ادیب تھے، ان کی کوئی تحریر ادب کی چاشنی سے خالی نہ ہو تی تھی، انجمن ترقی اردو کے دوبارہ قیام کے بعد اس کے جنرل سکریٹری ہوگئے تھے، بلکہ پہلی انجمن کے خاتمہ کے بعد دوبارہ ان ہی نے اس کو زندہ کیا تھا، اور اسکے ذریعہ آخر دم تک اردو کے لیے لڑتے رہے، اس صوبہ میں اردو کو جو حقوق بھی ملے ہیں اس میں انجمن کو بڑا دخل ہے۔
قاضی صاحب میں جدت و قدامت کا بڑا لطیف امتزاج تھا، وہ خیالات میں ترقی پسند تھے، لیکن...
Allah the elevated bestowed on prophet Muhammad SAW two basic sources of guidance for Muslim Ummah, The holy Quran and Hadith. Due to this significance of Hadith, Muslims have invented more than five hundred sciences related to Hadith. One of these sciences is Ilm Garb ul Hadith. Sheikh Moaamer bin muthana was the first scholar who has written a book on this topic. From then on Muslim scholars have researched a lot in this regard. Dozens of scholars spent their time and wealth on it. According to the author of Moaajm ul mua’ajam more than 90 books on the topic have been published but eight of them gained much publicity and famous hood among them. Abu Ubaida, Abu Adnan, Abu Ubaida Qasim bin Salam, Ibrahim bin Ishaq Al Harbi, Abu Ubaida Ahmed bin Muhammad Alhervi, Ibn Jauzi, Muhammad bin Atheer Aljazree, Zemakhsharee. The following article consists of a brief introduction of Ilm Gharib ul Hadith along with a brief history of research about it. Then the eight famous books on Gharib ul Hadith and there way of research are examined in brief along with examples. At last a comparative study of the work done by these eight scholars is given in order to explore the differences and similarities among them.
Every state adopts a policy in response to an issue or in reaction to other state’s policy. But when two states come up with a divert policy responses to the same issue, it raises many questions in the academic and intellectual community. The aim of the study is to inquire why two or more states adopt different policy responses to a similar issue. In specific, the study tried to investigate the policy responses of India, Russia and America towards CPEC. Additionally, the study is designed to answer what are the differences in their policy responses and why. Lastly, the study also probes into their channels or sources through they are communicating their policy responses over CPEC. Factor analysis method was used for answering the research questions to explore the level of variations in the policy responses of India, Russia and America to CPEC. To support the study from theoretical perspective, Decision Making Theory, articulated in the Schematic Model, was applied. In its methodology, the research designed to thoroughly analyze CPEC by investigating its origin, rationale, interests of Beijing and Islamabad, short and long term planning, challenges and opportunities and its political, economic and strategic implications for both the Iron Brothers and for the regions including, South Asia, Middle East and Central Asia. Secondly, a comparative analysis of rationale and sources of Indian, Russian and American policy responses over CPEC have been presented. It was found that the diversity in the policy responses of India, Russia and USA to CPEC shaped by multiple internal and external factors. The three states have different interests in China and Pakistan and their joint project, CPEC. For New Delhi, both states are rival and hostile since its inception and CPEC is the question of their security and integrity. For Moscow, China is a strategic partner while Pakistan is a new emerging ally in South Asia while CPEC is just another opportunity and a trade corridor that connects Eurasian region with the rest of the World. For Washington, China an economic rival that has challenged US hegemony across the globe; while Pakistan is a trustless ally throughout the Cold War and post 9/11. America considers CPEC as part of Beijing OBOR initiative and does not welcome it as it undermines its economic and strategic interests in the regions of SA, CARs and Middle East. Keeping in mind the theoretical questions, the study found that the spectrum of factors shaping the responses of the three countries are; political structure, political culture, diversity in traditions, norms and values, priorities, perception of threats, differences in capacity and skills of policy makers, political and economic dependency, geographic position, choice and time, idiosyncratic factor, leadership skills and the capacity of policy makers and their decision-making dexterity. In response to the policy responses of New Delhi, Moscow and Washington to CPEC, it was found that for India, CPEC is the issue of sovereignty as the project passes through GB which New Delhi claims an integral part of Jammu and Kashmir. Moscow’s response to CPEC is mixed, as on the one hand Moscow did not join the project but on the other hand it supported the idea of integration that ultimately supports Russian Eurasian vision. Washington response to CPEC was initialy ambiguous, but the new administration came up with a clear message and rejected both OBOR; and CPEC on the grounds of Indian rationales. From rationales and sources analysis, the study found, New Delhi never miss any platform at global, regional and national level where it could voice their response to CPEC, thus, adopting a rigid stance against both China and Pakistan about the construction of CPEC and its implications. Russia mostly used state run official sources of communications to come up with a response to CPEC through electronic and print media to count its soften attitude and balance approach. The US issues its official stance through the offices of Sectary of State, Defense Sectary and White House to show their concerns about the Chinese OBOR and, specifically, CPEC.