By Abu Tariq Hijazi

Edited by IlmGate

Mawlana Hifz al-Rahmān Seohārvi is a prominent name on the religio-political horizon of the Asian subcontinent for the last several decades. He was a multifaceted personality who lived mainly during the first half of the last century.

The shaykh was not only a freedom fighter but an Islamic scholar, a historian, a prolific writer and a religious and political leader of repute commanding respect from within India as well as Pakistan. He fought against British rule for a quarter century (1922-1947) and spent eight years in jail.

In post-Independent India, Mawlana Seohārvi played a crucial role in charting a road map for the Muslims in India. As a member of the Constituent Assembly, he played his part in claiming a rightful place for Muslims in the constitution of India, making the country a secular one, and thus rendering a dignified status to the Muslim community in the country that had suffered partition in the name of Islam.

Mawlana Hifz al-Rahmān Seohārvi served on several community organizations in different capacities like the Nadwat al-Musannifīn as patron, and Jamīat al-Ulama as its national secretary.

His Monumental Work

The Mawlana was known for his prolific writing through which he primarily aimed to reform the Muslim society by inculcating the values and ethics of Islam inspired by the Qur’an and Hadith.

His Qasas al-Qur’an, which is mainly based on the stories from the Holy Qur’an, in this respect comes first in mind to mention about as this ultimately proved to be his most popular and monumental work.
The author’s main aim is to draw the attention of the readers toward the moral of the stories, so as to enable Muslims to adopt a right path (Islamic way of life) for the great success in both the worlds.
These stories of the Qur’an were mentioned in the old scriptures too, but were adulterated by their communities with vested interest. They defamed Virgin Mary, blamed Prophet David and raised Prophet Jesus Christ (peace be upon both of them) to divinity.

The Holy Qur’an defied all these corruptions and reinstated the original and authentic versions. The Orientalists in the later period of the 19th century again tried to cast doubts about the truth revealed in the Holy Qur’an.

In this backdrop the Mawlana took it upon himself as an essential duty to refute these allegations and purify the minds of readers. Thus accepting the challenge Mawlana Hifz al-Rahmān Seohārvi engaged into bringing forth his marvelous monumental work that ran into staggering 1784 pages.

An effort in this direction was earlier made by ‘Allāmah Abd al-Wahhāb Najjār of Egypt who published a book with the same title – Qasas al-Qur’an – in Arabic, which were based on a series of his lectures that he had delivered at Al-Azhar University, Cairo, in 1930. But Allāmah Najjār confined himself to mainly dealing with the stories of the Prophets. He did not touch upon the Qur’an in citing similar many other stories. Mawlana Hifz al-Rahmān covered all important stories establishing them in the true form.

It is very heartening to note that this huge work of Mawlana Hifz al-Rahmān Seohārvi has been translated into English by Shakir Rizwani and Khalid Mahmood and was published in 2006 in two volumes by Idara Islamiat Lahore, Pakistan. The work, covering 1360 pages, has been divided into four parts that are basically based on the three main subjects that the Holy Qur’an deals with: Tawhīd (Oneness of Allah), Risālah (Prophethood), and Ākhirah (the Hereafter).

These subjects have been well elucidated and supported by narratives of various stories of the past Prophets (peace be upon them all) who were all preaching the Oneness of Almighty Allah and the promised gifts of the Hereafter.

• Part 1, containing 410 pages, covers the stories of 13 Prophets including Adam, Nūh, Idrīs, Hūd, Sālih, Ibrāhīm, Ismāīl, Ishāq, Lūt, Ya’qūb, Yūsuf, Shu’aib and Mūsa (peace be upon them all).

• Part 2, 204 pages, has 12 Prophets: Yūsha’, Hizkīl, Ilyās, al-Yasa’a, Shamwīl, Dawūd, Sulaimān, Ayyūb, Yūnus, Dhu al-Kifl, Uzair and Zakariyya (peace be upon them all).

• Part 3, 348 pages, covers 12 different stories from the Holy Qur’an about Ashāb al-Kahf, Ashāb al-Fīl, Ashāb al-Sabt, Ashāb al-Rass, Ashāb al-Ukhdūd, Flood of Iram, Hakīm Luqmān, Dhu al-Qarnain and Al-Quds.

• Part 4, 396 pages, is fully devoted to the detailed study of Prophet Jesus Christ and Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon both of them).

This removes all doubts and allegations about Virgin Mary and her son Prophet Jesus, proving that they were both true worshippers of Almighty Allah like Prophet Mohammad (peace be upon him them all).
Commenting about the colossal book, Bahjat Najmi, the secretary of the Mawlana Hifz al-Rahmān Academy, which is active in Jeddah, Saudi Arabia, for many years, said, “Qasas al-Qur’an is the only authentic work on stories on the Prophets of Islam in the Asian subcontinent. Even those, who might differ with the ideology of the Mawlana, agree that this work of his is a truly genuine and worth reading.”

Najmi was all praise for the Idara Islamiyat of Lahore for consistently publishing these works of cultural importance, mainly the Qasas al-Qur’an, all these years.

“This is significant given the backdrop of a persistent indifference toward such rare works of our past ulema that has become customary of the Muslim society in general, and which is unfortunate,” he said.

The academy secretary also mentioned about other works of Mawlana on various subjects in Urdu: Islam ka Iqtisādi Nizām (The Economic System of Islam), Akhlāq & Falsafa-i-Akhlāq (Morality and its Philosophy); Balāgh Al-Mubīn (Evident Approach); and Nūr al-Bashar fi Sīrat Khair al-Bashar (Sīrah of Holy Prophet). Out of these, a research work on his Islam ka Iqtisādi Nizām is going on in the King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah, he said.

Courtesy of Arab News (February 22, 2013)

Note: This article was edited for spelling, style, and grammar, in addition to a new title.

By Shaykh Abu ‘l-Hasan ‘Ali al-Nadwi, edited by Faraz Abdul Moid

11th Rabi al-Awwal, 1378 AH

Preface

Towards the end of December 1957, and in the beginning of January 1958, an International Islamic Colloquium was held in Lahore under the auspices of the Punjab University in which a large- number of distinguished and noted scholars of the Muslim world and Western countries took part. Quite a few outstanding `Ulama representing Middle Eastern countries were there. Despite having received an invitation to participate, the writer was unable to reach Lahore until after the colloquium had ended. The points that had been raised during the colloquium continued to be debated by many people.

The scholars who had come from Egypt, Syria and Iraq to participate in the conference showed considerable keenness to collect correct information about the fundamental beliefs and doctrines of Qadianism, the well-known religious movement of India and Pakistan. This curiosity on their part was justified and natural. For, it was in this part of the world that Qadianism was born and developed. Hence, from here alone authentic material and information could be procured. The Pakistani and Indian friends of these guests felt the existence of a serious lacuna: the absence of any book on the subject in present-day Arabic which could be presented to them. It was owing to this feeling that, when the writer reached Lahore, he was ordered by his spiritual teacher and guide, Hazrat Mawlana ‘Abd al-Qadir Raipuri, to write a book on this subject in Arabic.

During his trips to the Middle East and his stay in Egypt and Syria, the writer had himself felt the need of such a work, but the subject had failed to capture his imagination. The subject was on the whole out of tune with his temperament. Despite his repeated efforts the writer did not succeed in forcing himself to study any of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani’s writings. Hence, when he undertook the task, he had little familiarity with the subject. But the demand had been made from a personage the compliance of whose wish was a matter of deepest spiritual satisfaction to the writer and this enabled him to devote himself to a thorough study of Qadianism. Within a few days the room where the writer was staying at Lahore changed into a full-fledged library on Qadianism. The work then started in earnest and for one month the writer remained so deeply immersed in the subject that he lost almost all touch with the outside world and had his mind free for no other subject.

The writer’s mental framework being that of a student of history, he launched upon his intellectual journey from the very beginning of the movement surveying every stage in its progress and development. The writer’s observations, therefore, moved along the lines through which Qadianism had passed during its course of development. This approach helped the writer to grasp the real nature of the Qadiani movement, its gradual evolution, and its motivating factors. This approach uncovered a number of aspects which might have remained hidden otherwise. The writer delved deep into the writings of the founder of this movement, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani, and it is through this first hand source that he has tried to arrive at unprejudiced conclusions, trying to maintain the detachment of a historian in respect of the message, the movement, and the practical achievements of Qadianism. The result of this study has been published in the form of al-Qadiyani wa al-Qadiyaniyyah in Arabic.

After the book had been prepared, Hazrat Mawlana ‘Abd al-Qadir Raipuri ordered its translation into Urdu. Since actual excerpts in Urdu were required for the Urdu edition, an entire library of books available only in Lahore was required once again. Another trip was made, after which this book was rendered into Urdu. This Urdu edition could better be regarded as an independent work because a number of valuable additions and modifications have been made during the process of its preparation. For some time literature on controversial religious subjects has had a peculiar language and style, so much so that this language and style have come to be regarded as part and parcel of religious writings. This writer has not considered himself bound by this polemical tradition. This book has been written with historical objectivity rather than the bigoted zeal of a debater. This will perhaps disappoint those who have been used to polemical writings. For this the writer offers no apology. The class of people for whom it has been written and the purpose which actuated its writing did not warrant any other style of expression.

The writer thanks all those friends and well-wishers who have been a source of guidance in the study of the subject, who provided him with the material needed for writing this book and for facilitating the completion of the work. If this book serves Islam in any way, all such people share its reward.

The writer wishes to impress on his readers one thing: wisdom requires that a person should refrain from risking even as trivial a thing as one’s monetary savings, and one should be careful in choosing the people to whom these should be entrusted. If wisdom demands such precaution in worldly affairs, it should not be difficult to guess what a tremendous amount of precaution should be exercised in the matter of faith on which depends a person’s salvation and his felicity in the eternal life of the Hereafter. It is evident that in such a matter one should exercise extreme precaution; one should try to use one’s discretion to the utmost, and to divest oneself of all emotional predilections, worldly attachments and material interests. This book, through its authentic and systematically arranged information obtained from the statements and writings of the founder of Qadianism himself and through authentic historical information about the movement can prove of help to many a person to arrive at an intelligent appreciation of Qadianism.

Muslim India in the Nineteenth Century

The nineteenth century is a period of unique importance in modern history. It is the century in which intellectual unrest and various kinds of conflicts and tensions found in the Muslim world reached the climax. India was one of the main centers of this unrest and tension. Here, the conflicts and tensions between the Western and the Eastern cultures, between the old and the new systems of education, in fact, between the old and the new worldviews, and between Islam and Christianity were mounting. The forces concerned were locked in a fierce struggle for survival.

The movement began at a time when the well-known struggle of 1857 for the country’s independence had been suppressed. This had shocked the Muslims to the core; their hearts were bleeding, and their minds paralyzed. They were confronted with the danger of double enslavement: political as well as cultural. On the one hand, the victorious power, the British, had launched upon a vigorous campaign to spread a new culture and civilization in India. On the other hand, Christian missionaries were scattered all over India bent upon active proselytization. To be able to shake the confidence of Muslims in their own beliefs and to make them skeptical as to the bases of the shari’ah, even though they might not be converted to Christianity, was deemed by them an important enough achievement. The new generations of Muslims, which had not been thoroughly grounded in Islam, were their main target. The schools and colleges which were introduced along the foreign pattern were the main fields of their activity directed at spreading intellectual confusion. The efforts were not altogether unsuccessful and even incidents of conversion to Christianity began to take place in India. But the main danger of that period was not apostasy (in the sense of ostensible conversion from Islam to Christianity), but skepticism and atheism. Religious debates between Muslim ‘ulama and Christian missionaries took place frequently, leading in general to the victory of the ‘ulama of Islam. This established the intellectual superiority and greater vitality of Islam against Christianity. Nevertheless, intellectual unrest, skepticism, and weakness of faith grew apace.

This was one aspect of the situation: the situation vis-a-vis the external menace. Looked at internally, the situation was even worse. Mutual disagreements between Muslim sects had assumed frightful proportions. Each sect was busy denouncing the other. Sectarian polemics were the order of the day, leading often to violent clashes, even to bloodshed to litigation over controversial sectarian issues. The whole of India was in the grip of what might be termed a sectarian civil war. This too had given birth to mental confusion and created breaches in the Muslim society and disgust in the people and had considerably damaged the prestige of the Muslim ‘ulama and of Islam.

On the other hand, immature sufis and ignorant pretenders of spiritual excellence had reduced the sufi orders to a plaything. They gave wide publicity to their trance utterances and inspired pronouncements. One found people everywhere making overly extravagant claims and going about proclaiming their ability to perform astounding miracles and to receive messages from the High. The result of all this was that the Muslim masses had developed an uncommon relish for things esoteric, for miracles, for supernatural performances, for inspired dreams and prophesies. The more a person had to offer people by way of these things, the greater was his popularity. Such people became the center of popular veneration. Hypocritical dervishes and cunning traders of religion took full advantage of the situation. People had developed such a liking for esoterics that they were readily prepared to accept every new fantasy, to support every new movement, and to believe in every esoteric claim however baseless and imaginary.

Muslims were generally in the grip of frustration and had fallen prey to defeatism. The failure of the struggle of 1857 and of a number of other recent religious and militant movements was fresh in their memory. Many of them had despaired, therefore, of bringing about any change and reform through normal processes and a large number of people had begun to await the advent of some charismatic personality, some divinely appointed leader. At places one heard that at the turn of the century the Promised Messiah would make his appearance. In religious gatherings people commonly referred to the numerous forms of misguidance and evil which were to appear on the eve of the Doomsday. Prophesies and esoteric statements such as those of Shah Ni’mat Allah Kashmiri helped people to forget the bitterness of the current situation and strengthened their morale. Dreams, prophesies, and other esoteric pronouncements had magnetic appeal and kept their spirits high.

The province of Punjab, in particular, was the center of mental confusion and unrest, superstitions and religious ignorance. This province had suffered for eighty years under the yoke of the Sikh Raj, an overbearing military tyranny. During this period the religious belief and devotion of Muslims had weakened considerably. True Islamic education had been almost non-existent for long. The foundations of Islamic life and Islamic society had been shaken. Their minds were seriously in the grip of confusion and perplexity. In brief, to borrow the words of Iqbal:

The Khalsa (Sikhs) took away both the Qur’an and the sword,

In their realm, Islam was just dead.

This situation had paved the ground in the Punjab for the rise of a new religious movement based on novel interpretations and esoteric doctrines. The temperament of a good number of people of the region where this movement arose has been portrayed by Iqbal in these words:

In religion, he is fond of the latest,

He stays not for long at a place; he keeps on moving;

In learning and research he does not participate,

But to the game of Mentors and Disciples, he readily succumbs;

If the trap of explanation anyone lays,

He walks into it quickly from the branch of his nest.

It was towards the end of the nineteenth century that Mirza Ghulam Ahmad appeared on the scene with his unique message and movement. For the spread of his message and for the fulfillment of his ambitions, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad found a fertile ground and a congenial period of time. He had numerous factors to his advantage: the general unrest in the minds of people, the exotic-loving temperament of the people, the general despair with regard to the efficacy of moderate and normal means of reform and revolution, the decline in the prestige of and confidence in the ‘ulama, the popularity of religious debates which had vulgarized the religious curiosities and propensities of the people and made them, to a large extent, free-thinkers. Furthermore, the British rulers (who had a bitter experience with the mujahidin movement and felt, therefore, considerable consternation for the spirit of jihad and the religious enthusiasm of Muslims), warmly welcomed this new religious movement which pledged loyalty to the British government and even made this loyalty an article of faith, and whose founder had a long and close association with the government. All these factors provided the congenial atmosphere in which Qadianism came into existence, won converts, and developed into an independent sect and religion.

Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani

(This chapter, purporting to lay down the biographical outlines of the founder’s life, is based chiefly on the statements and writings of the Mirza himself, supplemented by the work of his son Mirza Bashir Ahmad, Sirat al-Mahdi, and other standard works of the Qadianis.)

Family Background

Genealogically Mirza Ghulam Ahmad belonged to the Barlas branch of the Moghuls. (Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, Kitab al-Bariyah, p. 134 n.) But after some time, he came to know by means of “inspiration” that he was, in fact, of Persian origin. To quote his own words:

“The revelation (ilham) about me is that: Were it that faith was hanging from the Pleiades it would still have been seized by the man from Persia. (This tradition occurs in the Sihah hadith works with a little variation of words. In some reports there occurs the phrase ‘rijal min faris‘ [men from Persia] instead of rajul [a man]. The ‘ulama interpret this hadith to refer to Salman al-Farisi and other ‘ulama and holy men of Persia famous for their devotion and service to the cause of faith, including the Imam Abu Hanifah, who was also of Persian origin.) And then, there is also a third revelation about me: Verily, those who disbelieved in the man from Persia disproved their religions. God is thankful for his endeavor. All these “revelations” show that our forefathers were Persian. And the truth is what Allah has made manifest.” (Kitab at-Bariyah, p. 135 n.)

In one of his works he writes:

“It should be remembered that apparently the family of this humble one is that of the Moghuls. No record has been seen in the history of our family, showing that the family was Persian. What has been seen in certain records is that some of our grandmothers were of noble and noted sayyid families. Now it has come to be known through the word of God that ours is a Persian family. We believe in this with all our conviction since the reality, in respect of genealogies, is known to none the way it is known to Allah the Exalted. It is His knowledge alone which is true and sure and that of all others is doubtful and conjectural.” (Arabain, vol. 11, p. 17 n.)

Mirza Gul Mohammad, the great grandfather of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, owned considerable property. In Punjab he had a good-sized estate. Mirza Ghulam Ahmad had mentioned in detail the aristocratic pomp and splendor of this ancestor of his, his habit to feed a large number of people at his table, and his religious influence. (Kitab al-Bariyah, pp. 136-42 n.)

After his death, his estate declined and the Sikhs confiscated the villages of that estate. This decline continued to such -an extent that no other land remained in the ownership of his grandfather, Mirza Ata Mohammad, except Qadian. Later on, the Sikhs occupied even that and drove the Mirza’s family out of Qadian. During the last years of Ranjit Singh’s rule, Mirza Ghulam Murtaza, the father of the Mirza, returned to Qadian and the Mirza later received five villages out of the landed property of his father. (ibid, pp. 142-44 n.)

The Mirza ‘s family maintained very loyal and cordial relations with the recently established British power in the Punjab. Several members of the family had shown great enthusiasm in consolidating the new government and had come to its rescue on several critical occasions. To cite the words of the Mirza himself:

“I come from a family which is out and out loyal to this government. My father, Murtaza, who was considered its well-wisher, used to be granted a chair in the Governor’s Durbar and has been mentioned by Mr. Griffin in his History of the Princes of Punjab. In 1857 he helped the British Government beyond his power, that is, he procured cavaliers and horses right during the time of Mutiny. He was considered by the Government to be its loyal supporter and well-wisher. A number of testimonials of appreciation received by him from the officers have unfortunately been lost. Copies of three of them, however, which had been published a long time ago, are reproduced on the margin. Then, after the death of my grandfather, my elder brother Mirza Ghulam Qadir continually occupied himself with service to the Government and when the evil-doers encountered the forces of the British Government on the highway of Tammun, he participated in the battle on the side of the British Government.”‘

Birth, Education, Upbringing

The Mirza was born during the last phase of the Sikh rule in the year 1839 or 1840 at Qadian in Gurdaspur District. His own writings show that at the time of the struggle of Independence in 1857, he was sixteen or seventeen years old.” (Kitab al-Bariyah, p. 146, n.) Mirza Bashjruddin Mahmood, in his Address to the British Crown Prince in 1922, has mentioned the year of his birth to be 1837 (p. 35). According to this, in 1857, his age would be 21. This alteration seems to have been made in order to vindicate the Mirza’s prophecy which has been mentioned by him as a Divine inspiration in the following words: “We shall cause you to live a good life for eighty years or close to that” (Arabain, Vol. 111, p. 39).

The Mirza received his education up to the middle-class at home. He studied books on grammar, logic, and philosophy under the guidance of Mawlawi Fazl-i-Ilahi, Mawlawi Fazl-i-Ahmad, and Mawlawi Gul ‘Ali Shah. He studied medicine from his father who was an experienced physician. During his student life, the Mirza was very studious. To quote his own words:

“During those days I was so thoroughly engrossed in books as if I was not present in the world. My father used to instruct me repeatedly to curtail my reading, for, out of sympathy for me he feared that this might affect my health.”

This, however, did not continue for long. Under the insistent pressure of his father, the Mirza had to engage himself in the endeavour to get back his ancestral land property which subsequently led to litigation in law courts. He writes:

“I feel sorry that a lot of my valuable time was spent in these squabbles and at the same time my respected father made me supervise the affair of landlordship. I was not a man of this nature and temperament.”

The Mirza later took employment with the Deputy Commissioner of Sialkot for a small salary. He remained for four years in this service, that is, from 1864 to 1868. During this period he also read one or two books of English. More over, he also took the examination of Mukhtar but flopped. In 1868 he resigned this job and came to Qadian and began to look after his land property. But most of his time was spent on reflecting on the Holy Qur’an and studying works of Tafsir and Traditions.

Moral Disposition

From his very childhood, the Mirza was very simple. He was unaware of worldly matters and appeared to be a little absent minded. He did not even know how to wind a watch. When he had to know time, he took out the watch from his pocket and began to count, starting from one. And even then, while he counted with his finger he also kept on counting the figures aloud lest he should forget. He could not just look at the watch and find out what time it was. Due to absent mindedness, it was difficult for him to differentiate between the shoes of the left and the right feet. Mirza Bashir Ahmad writes:

“Once some one brought for him gurgabi (a type of shoe used in Punjab). He put them on, but could not distinguish between the right and the left. Often he used to wear them on the wrong feet, and then feel uncomfortable. Sometimes when he would be hurt by the use of the wrong shoe, he would get irritated and say that nothing of those people was good. Mother said that she had inscribed signs indicating right and left on the shoes for the sake of his convenience and yet he used to put the shoes on the wrong feet. Hence she later removed the signs.”

Due to very frequent micturition the Mirza used to keep earthen marbles in his pockets. He also carried [clumps] of gur [a type of raw sugar] for he was excessively fond of sweets.

Mirza’s Physical Health

In his youth, the Mirza was so afflicted with hysteria that sometimes he used to fall down unconscious as a result of hysteric fits. The Mirza used to interpret these fits variously as hysteric and melancholia. He also suffered from diabetes and copious urination. Mentioning at one place that “I am a permanently sick person,” he adds:

“Headache, giddiness, insomnia, and palpitation of the heart come by fits and the lingering ailment in the lower part of my body is that of diabetes. Often I urinate up to a hundred times during the day or night. And all the other disorders of debility and exhaustion which are the natural results of such excessive urination have also fallen to my lot.”

In his youth, the Mirza engaged himself in vigorous spiritual exercises and courses of rigid self-discipline. He also fasted continuously for long periods of time. In one of his long spells of spiritual exertion, he fasted continuously for six months. In 1886, he passed another period of exclusive worship and prayer at Hoshiarpur. Later on, due to ill health and debility, he had to give these up. On March 31, 1891 he wrote to Nuruddin: “Now my health can no longer bear the rigours of supererogatory devotion and even a little bit of severe devotion and meditation or contemplation causes illness.”

Economic Condition

The Mirza began his life in ordinary circumstances: a life of hardship and poverty. But as his mission spread and he became the spiritual head of a prosperous sect, he grew prosperous and began to lead a comfortable life. He, too, was conscious of this change in his state: the ostensible difference between his earlier and later periods of life. In 1907, he wrote:

“Our living and our well-being had depended solely on the meager income of our father. Among outsiders, none knew me. I was an unknown person, living in the desolate village of Qadian, lying in a corner of anonymity. Then, God, according to His prophecy, turned a whole world towards me and helped us by such continuous victories that I have no words to express my thanks. Considering my own position, I did not hope to receive even ten rupees a month. But the Exalted Allah, who raises the poor from dust and brings the arrogant down to the earth, helped me to such an extent that up till now I have received about three hundred thousand rupees or, maybe, even more.”

In the footnote, he adds:

“Although thousands of rupees have come by means of money orders, yet more have been passed on to me directly by sincere friends as gifts, or in the shape of currency notes enclosed with letters. Some sincere people have sent currency notes or gold anonymously and I do not even know what their names are.”

Marriage and Children

The Mirza’s first marriage took place in 1852 or 1853 with one of his own relatives. This wife gave birth to two sons: Mirza Sultan Ahmad and Mirza Fazal Ahmad. In 1891, he divorced the lady. In 1884 he took another wife, the daughter of Nawab Nasir of Delhi. The rest of the offsprings of the Mirza were all from this wife. Three sons were born from her: Mirza Bashiruddin Mahmood, Mirza Bashir Ahmad (author of Sirat al-Mahdi), and Mirza Sharif Ahmad.

Death

When in 1891 the Mirza declared that he was the Promised Messiah, and later on in 1910 that he was a prophet of God, the Muslim `Ulama began to refute and oppose him. Among those prominent in opposing him was Mawlana Thana’ullah Amritsari, the editor of Ahl-i-Hadith. On April 5, 1907, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad issued an announcement in which, while addressing the said Mawlana, he wrote:

“If I am such a big liar and impostor as you portray me in each issue of your magazine, then I will die in your lifetime, for I know that the life period of a mischief-maker and liar is not very long and ultimately he dies an unsuccessful man during the life of his greatest enemies and in a state of humiliation and grief. And if I am not a liar and impostor and have been honoured by God’s communication and address to me, and if I am the Promised Messiah, then I hope that, with the grace of God and in accordance with God’s practice, you will not escape the punishment of the rejecters (of Truth). Thus, if that punishment which is not in man’s but in God’s hand, that is, fatal diseases like plague and cholera, do not afflict you during my lifetime, then I am not from God.”

One year after the publication of this announcement, on May 25, 1908, the Mirza fell ill, being afflicted with diarrhea at Lahore. Along with loose motions, he also had vomiting. He was put under treatment at once, but weakness increased and his condition became critical. The next day, on May 26, he breathed his last in the forenoon. About his death, his father-in-law [Mir Nawab Nasir] has stated:

“The night on which Hazrat Mirza Sahib fell ill, I was asleep at my place. When he felt very uncomfortable, I was awakened. When I went to Hazrat Sahib he addressed me and said, ‘Mir Sahib, I am ill with cholera’. After this, in my opinion, he did not speak a clear word till he died the next day after ten o’clock.” ( Hayat-i-Nasir, ed. Shaykh Yaqub Ali Irfani.)

The dead body was carried to Qadian. On May 27, 1908 the burial took place and Hakim Nuruddin became his successor, the first Khalifah of the Qadiani movement.

Hakim Nuruddin: The Qadiani Saint Paul

Hakim (Hakim means a physician practicing the traditional system of Greek-Arabian medicine) Nuruddin Bhairawl occupies a position of unique importance in the history of Qadianism, second only to that of its founder. In fact, some observers are of the view that the said Hakim was the real brain behind the movement, that the intellectual currents of this movement sprang from his mind.

Birth and Early Education

Hakim Nuruddin was born in. 1258 AH (1841 AD) in Bhaira, District Sargodha (Punjab). (These are based on Akbar Shah Khan Najibabidi’s Mirqt al-raqzn Hayat Nuruddin. Najibabadi was a pupil of the Hakim. These biographical details were related to him by the Hakim himself at the time when Najibabadi was his student as well as a devout follower.) Thus in 1857 he was 16 years of age, and was younger than the Mirza by just one or two years. His father, Hafiz Ghulam Rasul, was an Imam in a mosque in Bhaira, and was a Faruqi by lineage.

The Hakim’s early education took place in his home village. He read books on Fiqh in Punjabi language under the guidance of his mother. Then he went to Lahore. He was taught Persian by Munshi Qasim Kashmiri and learnt calligraphy from Mirza Irhim Dayrawi. But neither of the two attracted him. Both his teachers were Shias. In 1855 AD (1272 AH) he returned home and remained for some time studying under Mir Haji Sharafuddin. It is around this time that he began to learn the Arabic language systematically.

Under the influence of a bookseller who belonged to the movement of Sayyid Ahmad Shahid, there arose in him the urge to translate the Holy Qur’an, and he anxiously read Taqwiyat al-Iman and Mashziriq-al-Anwar. A little later, he returned to Lahore and acquired some knowledge of Medicine. While his education was at a very advanced stage, he took employment with the Normal School, Rawalpindi. There he taught Persian and at the same time learned arithmetic and geography from another teacher. After passing a tahsil examination, he became headmaster in Pindi Dandan Khan and once more resumed the study of Arabic. After four years, he ceased to remain in service and began to devote all his time to his own studies. For some time, he studied under Mawlawi Ahmaduddin (who was known as Buggiwale Qazi Sahib). Then, his love for knowledge made him travel to several parts of India. In Rampur he resumed his studies, studied Mishkat al-Masabih under Mawlana Hasan Shah, Sharh al-Wiqayah under Mawlawi Azizullah Afghani, Usul al-Shashi and Maibazi under Mawlawi Irshid Husain; the Diwan al-Mutanabbi under Mawlawi Sa’dullah; Sadra, etc., under Mawlawi ‘Abd al-‘Ali, and the higher books on logic like Mir Zahid Riaalah and Mir Zahid Mulla Falal half-heartedly. At this time, he enthusiastically supported Isma’il Shahid and sometimes used to speak to his teachers with great boldness.

From Rampur he went to Lucknow and began to study medicine under a famous physician, Hakim ‘Ali Husain. When ‘Ali Husain went to Rampur on invitation from Nawab Kalb-i-Ali Khan of Rampur, Nuruddin accompanied him. During his stay in Rampur he further studied literature under Mufti Sa’dullah. On the whole he remained with Hakim ‘Ali Husain for a period of two years and then went to Bhopal in order to complete his education in Arabic and to study Hadith. Bhopal, in those days, had become a great center of learning. The fgovernmental patronage of knowledge and learning had attracted a good number of scholars. In Bhopal he stayed with and was patronized by Munshi Jamaluddin Khan, the Chief Minister. During his stay, Nuruddin took lessons in Bukhari and Hidayah from Mawlawi Abd al-Qayyum (the son of Mawlana Abdul Hai Burhanwat, who was a Khalifah of Hazrat Sayyid Ahmad Shahid). From Bhopal he went on a visit to the Holy cities of Mecca and Medina in order to complete his education and also in order to attain other worldly felicity. An interesting anecdote is related in this connection, which was narrated by Nuruddin himself. While leaving for the Holy cities, he asked Mawlana Abd al-Qayyum to tender him some advice. He said, “Never become God or Prophet.” Abd al-Qayyum explained that by “not becoming God” what he had meant was that if any of his desires were frustrated, he should not feel greatly dejected, for to be able to do what one likes is the attribute of God alone. By “not becoming the Prophet” he meant that if people rejected his fatwas, he should not deem them to be condemned to hell, for it is the disobedience of the Prophet sallallahu `alayhi wa sallam alone which condemns one to hell (Mirqat al-Yaqin, p. 79).

In Mecca, he studied Abu Dawud under Shaykh Muhammad Khazraji, Sahih Muslim under Sayyid Husain, and began to study Musallam al-Thubut under Mawlana Rahmatullah Kayranawl, the author of Izhar al-Haq. Sometimes, he had heated discussions with his teachers and showed trends towards non-conformity and exaggerated confidence in the soundness of his own views and intelligence. (Mirqat al-Yaqin, p. 95-97.)

At Mecca be finished his study of Abu Dawud and Ibn Majah under Shaykh Muhammad Khazraji. In the meantime Shah ‘Abd al-Ghani Mujaddidi had arrived in Mecca. Later on when Shah Mujaddidi returned to Medina, the Hakim joined him and after taking an oath of allegiance to him remained as his student for six months.

Occupation

After pilgrimage and visit to the Holy places, Nuruddin returned to his native place, Bhaira, and stayed there for some time. During his stay be debated with people as to whether the current customs and usages conformed to the teachings embodied in the collections of Hadith, which turned some people against him. This led him to realise the ignorance and stagnation of the common people and his own superiority and intellectual excellence. He also went to Delhi during the Durbar of Lord Lytton and there met Munshi Jamaluddin Khan, the Chief Minister of Bhopal, who brought him to Bhopal. After a short stay at Bhopal, Nuruddin once more went back to Bhaira and started practising medicine there. Soon his reputation as a successful physician spread and he was invited by the Maharaja of Jammu to serve him as his personal physician. For a considerable period of time he served the ruler of Jammu, Poonch, and Kashmir and gained considerable influence there by dint of his ability as a physician and his eloquence, knowledge, and wit. He had become a very close confidant of the Maharaja and thus quite powerful.

An Ardent Follower of Mirza

There were many similarities of character and temperament between Hakim Nuruddin and Mirza Ghulam Ahmad. It is difficult to say how they came into contact with each other. Their first meeting, however, took place at Qadian in 1885. When the Mirza wrote Barahin-i-Ahmadiyya, Nuruddin wrote a book supporting it. His admiration for the Mirza increased so much so that he took an oath of allegiance at his hands and accepted him as his spiritual guide, his leader, and pledged to follow him. The following letter of Nuruddin shows the depth of his attachment to the Mirza:

“My master, my guide, my leader: Assalam-o-Alaykum wa Rahmat ullah,

It is my prayer to be ever present before you and to learn from you all that for which the Imam of the age has been made the Mujaddid. If it is permitted, I would resign my job and spend day and night in your exalted service; or if it is ordered, I would give up my present engagements and go around the whole world, summoning people towards the true religion and would lay down my life in this cause. I am a martyr in your cause: whatever I have is not mine; it is yours. Respected guide and mentor, with utmost sincerity I say that if all my wealth and belongings are sacrificed in the cause of religious preaching, I will have achieved my purpose. If the buyers of Barahin in advance are uneasy at the delay in the publication of the book, please permit me to render the humble service of paying them all their dues from my pocket.

“Respected pir and guide: this worthless one, ashamed of himself, says that if this offer is accepted it would be a pleasure for him. What I mean is that I may be permitted to bear the entire cost of printing Barahin and that whatever proceeds there might be from its sale should be spent on your needs. My relationship with you is the same as that of Faruq (with the Prophet sallallahu `alayhi wa sallam) and I am prepared to sacrifice all in this path. Please pray that the end of my life be like that of Siddiqs (the truthful ones).”

Nuruddin’s faith in the Mirza was very deep indeed. It so happened that when the Mirza wrote Fath-i-Islam and Tawdih al-Maram someone asked Nuruddin – before he had seen these books – if any other Prophet could come after the Holy Prophet sallallahu `alayhi wa sallam. “No”, he replied. “And if someone claims to be a Prophet?” he was asked. Nuruddin replied that if someone did claim so, it would be seen whether he was truthful or not; and that his claim would be accepted if he was truthful. After narrating this incident, Nuruddin himself adds:

“This was just the case of prophetbood. My faith is that even if the Promised Messiah were to proclaim himself to be the bearer of a Shari`ah and abrogate the Qur’anic Shari`ah, I will not reject that claim. For, when we have accepted him (i.e. the Mirza) to be truthful and to have been commissioned by God, then whatever he will say will of necessity be true and we will have to think that the (Qur’anic) verse in respect of khaatim an-nabiyyin (the last of the Prophets) has a different meaning.” (Sirat al-Mahdi;, pp. 96-99.)

During Disassociation with the Court of Jammu, Nuruddin wrote Fasl-ul-Khitab in four volumes under the guidance of the Mirza in which he refuted Christianity. He kept on contributing very magnanimously to the publication of the works of the Mirza and quite often the Mirza took large sums of money as loans from him and praised him for his religious enthusiasm, his readiness to help the religious cause, and his large-hearted generosity. The famous couplet of the Mirza about Nuruddin is:

“How good would it be, were every one – in the Ummat a Nuruddin;

That would be so, if the light of faith burnt in the heart of everyone.”

For several reasons, particularly , the intrigues of the courtiers, the Maharaja’s attitude towards Nuruddin subsequently changed. In 1893 or 1894, his service with the Maharaja was terminated and Nuruddin returned to Bhaira. After a brief stay and practice of medicine there he moved to Qadian permanently and dedicated his life to supporting the Mirza and spreading his movement.

Accession to Khilafat

On the Mirza’s death on May 26, 1908, he became his first Khalifah. The followers of the Mirza paid their allegiance to him and be was proclaimed to be the “Khalifah of the Promised Messiah”, and “Nuruddin the Great.” For quite some time Nuruddin remained hesitant whether he should consider those who did not believe in the Mirza’s prophethood to be unbelievers. Later, he was converted to the view that they were unbelievers. There was some controversy about his nomination as the Khalifah. Some people strongly opposed it. On one such occasion he said:

“I say by God that it is God Himself who had made me the Khalifah. So, who now has the power to snatch from me the robe (literally the covering sheet) of this Caliphate? It was the Will of God Himself, and was in the light of His Own wise consideration, to make me your Imam and Khalifah. You can attribute to me a thousand short-comings. They, in fact, will be attributable not to me, but to God Himself who appointed me the Khatifah.” (Review of Religions, Qadian, V61.14 No 6, p. 234 [cited from Ilyas Barni’s Qadiyani Mazhab].) On another occasion he said:

“God has made me the Khalifah. Now, neither can I be dismissed (from Caliphate) by your biddance nor has anyone the power to remove me. If you force me any further, bear in mind that I have at my disposal many Khalid bin Walid who will punish you as (Khalid bin Waild had punished) the apostates. (Tashkhiz at-Azhan, Vol. 9 No. 11 cited by Barni)

Nuruddin remained the Khalifah of the Qadiani movement for six years. In 1914 he fell from a horse and died on March 13, 1914. A few days before his death, his tongue had ceased to be functional. (The Daily Al-Fadhl, Qadian, 23 Februlry, 1932, [cited from Qadiani Mazhab],) He nominated Mirza Bashiruddin Mahmood, the eldest son of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, to be his successor and Khalifah.

Temperament

A study of Nuruddin’s life shows that he possessed a mercurial nature and remained a prey to mental conflicts during the greater period of his life. From the very beginning he had a bent towards “free-thinking”. First of all, he freed himself from the bonds of the four Muslim schools of jurisprudence and carried his non-conformism to an extreme. Then he came under the influence of Sir Sayyid Ahmad Khan’s literature and assimilated his way of thinking. This was the time when some elementary knowledge of physical sciences was finding its way to India and the rationalists among Indian Muslims were becoming deeply impressed by it. Those who had a religious inclination attempted to harmonize Qur’anic teachings with scientific knowledge. If this harmonisation presented any difficulty, they tried to overcome it by offering far-fetched interpretations of Qur’anic verses and the Quranic terminology. Nuruddin’s teaching of Tafsir was representative of this intellectual trend. (A good example of his way of thinking is found in the Tafsir of his pupil Mawlawi Muhammad Ali Lahori. His Tafsir is found in English as well as Urdu.)

In Sirat al-Mahdi, Mirza Bashir Ahmad writes:

“In the beginning, Hazrat Nuruddin, the first Khalifah, was deeply under the influence of the way of thinking and the work of Sir Sayyid. But, subsequently, due to contact with Hazrat Sahib, this influence gradually wore off.” (Sirat al-Mahdi, Vol. 1, p. 159.)

But a study of his ideas as well as those of his disciples makes it evident that either because of the influence of Sir Sayyid’s ideas or because of his own predilection he remained the same all his life. His mind [had] been moulded into a rigid frame and his mental attitudes had become too hardened to change.

A more careful study of his life reveals that along with his enlightenment and rationalism, there was a strong superstitious element in his personality. Despite all his non-conformism and rationalism he attached great importance to dreams and “inspirations”. It has been observed that not infrequently people who stand for intellectual freedom, in fact, for intellectual revolt, also have an inherent trait of superstitiousness. Their frame of mind is basically apologetic. Such people keep on raising the banner of revolt all their lives against certain institutions or personalities, but, at the same time, when they submit before someone, their power of free-thinking and independent judgement-is totally paralysed. Man’s life is a strange combination of action and reaction; and his personality a complex of divergent, even mutually conflicting, elements. Nothing is more difficult to understand and analyse than the driving urges of a man’s personality.

Mirza as Champion of Islam

We have covered so far a part of the life of Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, his life in his township in district Gurdaspur, where we saw him immersed in the study of religious books. His works published after 1880 indicate that the main subjects of his study were different religions, particularly Christianity and Indian religions such as Sanatan Dharma and Arya Samaj.

This period is known for the religious polemics. The educated people of the time had a relish for religious debates and controversies. We have already seen that Christian missionaries were busy propagating Christianity and refuting Islam. The British Government, which was officially the defender or the Christian Faith, patronised these activities, considering India a gift of Jesus Christ. On the other hand were the preachers of the Arya Samaj movement who were enthusiastically trying to undermine Islam. The British who were aware of the dangerous possibility of inter-communal concord in India, a manifestation of which was the struggle for Indian independence of 1857, found it expedient to encourage religious controversies. The British political interest was served by these controversies in so far as they led to mutual hatred, intellectual bewilderment, and moral chaos in the country so that the religious communities of India might be disposed at least to tolerate a government which sought to protect all of them and under whose shadow all could carry on their holy debates. In such an atmosphere, anyone who arose to defend Islam and falsify other religions naturally attracted the attention of all Muslims.

The ambitious and far-sighted Mirza chose this field for his adventures. He undertook to produce a voluminous work to demonstrate the truth of Islam, the Divine origin of the Qur’an, and the Prophethood of the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه و سلم by rational arguments on one hand, and to refute Christianity, Sangtan Dharma, Arya Samaj, and Brahmo Samaj etc. on the other hand. He named this book Barahin-i-Ahmadiyyah.

The Barahin and the Mirza’s Challenge

The writing of Barahin started in l879. (Sirat at-Mahdi, Vol. 11, p. 157.) The author undertook to put forward one hundred arguments in support of Islam. In this undertaking the Mirza also had correspondence with other learned people whom he requested to communicate to him their views in order to help him in this venture. Those who complied with his request included Mawlawi Chiragh Ali who was a noted colleague of Sir Sayyid Ahmad Khan. The Mirza included some of his articles and researches in his work. At long last this work, which was anxiously awaited by hundreds of people, did break into print in four volumes. Along with this book, its author also published an announcement in Urdu and English and sent it to rulers and ministers of States, to Christian clergymen, and to Hindu Pundits. In this book the Mirza announced for the first time that he had been appointed by God to demonstrate the truth of Islam and that he was prepared to satisfy the followers of other religions about his religion. The announcement categorically stated:

“This humble slave (the author of Barahin-i-Ahmadiyyah) has been appointed by the Glorious Almighty to strive for the reform of God’s creatures and to show to the ignorant the straight path (which leads to true salvation and by following which the light of heavenly existence and of Divine pleasure and graciousness can be experienced even in this world) in the manner of the Israelite Prophet of Nazareth (Messiah) with utmost humility and self-denial, self-abasement and gentleness. It is for this purpose that Barahin-i-Ahmadiyyah has been written, of which thirty-seven is to be found in parts have been published. Its summary the announcement enclosed with this letter. But since the publication of the whole book would require a long time, it has been decided that this letter along with the English announcement should be published and one copy of each sent to the honorable priests of Punjab, India and England and other countries wherever possible.” (Supplement to Barahin-i-Ahmadiyyah, Vol.1 by Merajuddin Umar, p. 82)

The Mirza challenged the world to come forward with any book parallel to this one, and invited the representatives of other religions to prove the truth of their religions by the same or even lesser number of arguments than he had put forward. He wrote:

“I, the author of this book, Barahin-i-Ahmadiyyah, make this announcement with the promise to make a reward of 10,000 rupees to the followers of all faiths and religions who deny the truth of the Glorious Qur’an and the Prophethood of Hazrat Muhammad Mustafa صلى الله عليه و سلم (God’s benediction and salutation be on him) and in support of it I commit myself to a formal legal undertaking and a Shar`i pledge that if any of these deniers can show that their scriptures have as many and as sound arguments as found in the Holy Qur’an and which we have mentioned herein to demonstrate the truth of the Glorious Message and the veracity of the Apostleship of the Khatim-al-Ambiya صلى الله عليه و سلم (God’s benediction and salutation be upon him) which have been derived from the Sacred Book (Qur’an) itself; or if they cannot come forward with an equal number of arguments, then half, or a third, or a fourth, or fifth of the number of our arguments; or if they find that impossible, then at least to refute our arguments one by one; then, in either of these cases, provided three authors accepted by both the parties unanimously express the view that the condition has been fulfilled in the manner it should have been fulfilled, the announcer (of this announcement) shall hand over to such a respondent without an excuse or hesitation the occupancy and ownership of his property valued at Rs. 10,000. (Barahin-i-Ahmadiyyah, Vol.1, pp. 17-22.)

The Mirza called upon the Muslims to make monetary contributions to this great service which he wanted to render to the cause of Islam and to participate in it generously. It seems that the response of Muslims to this call was not as enthusiastic as the Mirza had expected. In the later volumes of Barahin he has mourned their lack of enthusiasm. The announcements which formed the preface of the book are significant. In them we find some indications of the driving forces of the Mirza’s personality. In them we notice his habit of boastfulness and self-adulation and his confidence in “heavenly signs” as means of establishing his claims and persuading people. Along with all that, the statements unmistakably smack of his commercial mentality. (Barahin, Vol. 1.)

Preaching and Politics

In the third and fourth volumes of Barahin-i-Ahmadiyyah, the Mirza openly praised the British government and enumerated at length its acts of benevolence towards Muslims in the sections entitled, An Important Appeal to Islamic Associations: The Precarious Condition of Muslims and the English Government. In this appeal he urged all Islamic Associations to prepare a joint memorandum and send it to the government with signatures from all prominent Muslims. He also reiterated the services rendered by his family to the British and stressed the impermissibility of jihad.

Thus we find that even the first work of the Mirza was not free from panegyrics to the British government or from political admonitions to the Muslims to remain loyal to the British.

The Magnum Opus

The Mirza worked on this book from 1880 to 1884. After the publication of the fourth volume there came a long period of gap and the fifth and the last volume appeared in 1905, that is, full twenty-five years after the commencement of the work. In the fifth volume the author mentioned that the publication of the last volume had remained in suspension for twenty-three years. During this period a large number of people who had paid in advance for all the five volumes but had received only four volumes had passed away. Several other people who had paid in advance had expressed their disapproval and resentment at not receiving the promised volume for which the Mirza apologized in the fifth volume. In this volume he has also mentioned that previously he had in mind to bring forward 300 arguments to prove the truth of Islam, but later he gave up the idea. In the same way, instead of fifty, be would bring out only five volumes. The reason for this change of mind was that the difference between the two figures was merely that of a zero. In his own words:

“Earlier I had thought of writing 50 volumes, but now I have confined myself to writing five since the difference between the figures fifty and five is just that of one dot (that is zero). Thus the promise has been fulfilled by the publication of five volumes.” (Preface of Barahin-i-Ahmadiyyah, Vol.5, P. 7.)

In Sirat al-Mahdi, Mirza Bashir Ahmad writes:

“Now that four volumes of Barahin-i-Ahmadiyyah have come out in print, its preface and notes all relate to the time of publication and it contains very little of the original work, that is, not more than a few pages. This can be gauged from the fact that out of the 300 arguments which he had written, the Barahin-i-Ahmadiyyah contains only one argument and that too not in a complete form.” (Sirat al-Mahdi, Vol. 1, p.7.)

Anyone who studies Barahin-i-Ahmadiyyah is bound to be impressed by the author’s prolificity, perseverance, and diligence. These virtues, at best, could stand him in good stead as a successful debater and an able writer on religious polemics with Christians and Arya Samajis. In this huge work, however, one does not find any worthwhile research. Nor does one find that familiarity with the sources of Christianity, its ancient literature, its doctrines and history, and the grasp of its fundamental concepts as one finds, for example, in the works of Mawlana Rahmatullah Kairanwi (d. 1309 A.H. /1891 A.D.), the author of lzhar al-Haqq and Izalat al-Awham. Nor does one find that sweetness and elegance of expression, and that originality and brilliance of argument that one finds in works such as those of Mawlana Muhammad Qasim Nanotwi’s (d. 1297 A.H./ 1879 A.D.) Taqrir Dilpazir and Hujjat al-Islam.

Inspirations and Bragging

The reader also frequently encounters in the Mirza’s book references to his Divinely inspired revelations, to miracles, and to Divine communications and prophecies, and last but not the least, his boastfulness. All this leaves an unpleasant taste in the mouth and transforms the book, which claims to embody a sober academic discussion and a dignified religious debate, into a work of personal bragging – a work in which, again and again, the author stoops to self-advertisement and self-glorification.

The central theme of the book is that Divine inspiration had not ceased and should not cease. This inspiration itself is the most powerful proof of the validity of any claim and the truth of religion and faith. Whoever will follow the Holy Prophet صلى الله عليه و سلم perfectly will be endowed with the external and internal knowledge which had been granted originally to the Prophets, and the person will, therefore, become possessed of sure, categorical knowledge. The intuitive knowledge of such people would resemble the knowledge of the Prophets. It is these people who have been called Amthat in Hadith and Siddiq in the Qur’an. The time of their advent would resemble the time of the advent of the Prophets. It is such people who will establish the truth of Islam and their inspiration will be of a categorical nature. (Barahin-i-Ahmadiyyah, Vol.3, p. 231 and 244)

In trying to prove the continuity of this inspiration, he cites his own inspirations and writes:

“We have several examples of this inspiration before us. But in the one which took place just now at the time of writing these notes, on March 1882, it has been revealed as a prophecy that through this book and on becoming informed of its contents, the opponents will ultimately be defeated; that seekers of Truth will find true guidance; perversion of belief will be uprooted; and people will help and turn their attention and come around (me) etc., since God will put this into their hearts and direct them to it. (Barahin-i-Ahmadiyyah, Vol.3, p. 238.)

This has been followed by a more recent lengthy inspiration which is almost an entirely incoherent collection of different Qur’anic verses. This inspiration embraces about forty lines of the Barahin and contains about fifty-three or fifty-four Qur’anic verses, interspersed with a few Traditions of the Prophet صلى الله عليه و سلم. Besides, there are a few sentences by the Mirza himself which are an example of what might be termed as poor Indian-ized Arabic. The last lines of the inspiration which contain a comparatively smaller proportion of Qur’anic verses read as follows:

“Live in the world like a stranger or traveller. Become one of the righteous and the truthful. Bid whatever is good and forbid whatever is bad and send your salutations to Muhammad صلى الله عليه و سلم and his progeny. Prayer alone brings man up. Verily I will raise thee towards Myself and I have put love from Me (in the hearts of people). There is no god but Allah. So, write and let it be published and sent to the world. Grasp Unity (of God), Unity (of God), O people of Iran and give glad tidings to those who believed that they have a standing with their Lord. And read out to them what has been revealed to thee from thy Lord And do not swell thy face for the creatures of God and do not get tired of people. The people of al-Suffah? And who are the people of al-Suffah? Thou shalt see their eyes wet with tears and they will send their salutations to thee. O Lord of ours! We heard a herald calling towards belief, a summoner towards Allah, and a bright lamp. Be of hope! (Barahin-i-Ahmadiyyah, Vol. 3, p. 242.)

In the same way, an inspiration has been reproduced in the fourth volume of the same book. This inspiration too is an incoherent conglomeration of Qur’anic verses and Qur’anic expressions. It also contains some very obvious errors of Arabic language and grammar (which have been indicated by us by question marks):

“And when it is said to them believe as men believed they say: Should we believe as they believe who are stupid? Beware! it is they who are stupid, but they know not, and wish that you should compromise with them (?) Say: Unbelievers! I worship not that which you worship. It was said to you: turn to god but you turn not; and it was said to you, subdue your souls, but you subdue them not. Does thou seek of them any reward that feel burdened (in accepting your message). No, we brought Truth to them (gratuitously) and it is Truth to which they are averse. God is pure and free from whatever they attribute to Him. Do people think that they would be left by merely saying: We believed, and they would not he put to a trial ? These people love to be praised for deeds which they have not performed, while nothing is hidden from God and nothing is good which God does not make good and no one can restore him to His favours who has fallen from His grace.” (Barahin-i-Ahmadiyyah, Vol.4, p. 509.)

Apart from these revelations in the Arabic language there are two revelations in English as well. (Ibid, pp. 554 and 556.)

Mirza’s Beliefs in the Barahin

In the four volumes of Barahin (published 1880-1884), the Mirza expressed merely the view that ilham (Divine inspiration) had not ceased and would not cease, and that the legacy of the Prophets continues in respect of inspired comprehension of things in respect of the illumination of faith and categorical knowledge. In this book he has also frequently mentioned that be had been commissioned by God to reform the world and spread the message of Islam; that he was mujaddid (renovator) for the present age, and that he bore resemblance to Jesus (peace be on him).” (Sirat at-Mahdi, Vol. 1, p. 39. ) In this book he also adheres to the notion of the ascension of Jesus to the heaven and that he would return to the earth. In the appendix to his book, Nuzul al-Masih, published in 1902, and in volume 5 of Barahin, which came out in 1905, the Mirza has admitted that he used to subscribe to the above view and has even expressed his surprise at his having believed in the ascension and return of Jesus. In Barahin he had also strongly rejected the idea of any fresh revelation and of the advent of any new Prophet. The reason for this belief was that the Qur’an and its teachings were in no danger of being distorted nor was there any danger of Muslims reverting to pre-Islamic ignorance and paganism. On the contrary, he admitted that the attitude of the polytheists, owing to contact with the monotheists, is gradually tending towards monotheism. This being the case – that the main dangers which revelation and prophethood seek to avert were no longer real – there was no need for any new Shari`ah, or any fresh ilham (inspiration). This also established the termination of prophethood with the advent of the Holy Prophet صلى الله عليه و سلم:

“Now, since it is rationally impossible and inconceivable that the true teachings of the Glorious Furqan will be distorded or changed, or the darkness of polytheism and worship of God’s creatures would predominate again, it is also rationally inconceivable that there should be a new Shari`ah, or the sending down of a new inspiration (ilham). For that which leads to impossibility is itself also impossible. Thus, it is proved that the Holy Prophet صلى الله عليه و سلم was in reality the last of the prophets. (Barahin, Vol.4, p. III n.)

Reception of the Book

It seems that the book was enthusiastically welcomed in the religious and academic circles of the country. Indeed the publication of this work was very well-timed and the Mirza as well as his friends publicised it with great zest. The secret of the success of the book seems to lie in the fact that it challenged other religions and, instead of apologising on behalf of Islam, it took the offensive against them. Noted among those who appreciated and enthusiastically supported this book was Mawlana Muhammad Husain Batalawi. In his magazine Isha’at al- Sunnah, he wrote a long review eulogising the book in six issues of the magazine. (Vol.8, 684nos., 6-11. ) In this review the book was lavishly praised and commended as a great academic achievement of the time, a masterpiece of research and authorship. Not much later, the Mawlana felt alarmed at the big claims and “inspiration” of the Mirza and, subsequently, became one of his staunch opponents. On the other hand, there were many who were alarmed even by his first book and who began to feel that its author had set himself on a path which would lead him, in the near future, to claim prophethood for himself. Among these far-sighted people were the two sons of the late Mawlana Abdul Qadir Ludhianawi, Maulana Muhammad and Maulana Abdul Aziz. The Ahl-e-Hadith scholars of Amritsar and some scholars of the Ghaznawi family opposed him from the very beginning and denounced his inspirations as fantasies.” (See Isha’at al-Sunnah, June, 1884. Vol. Vil, No. 6)

This book brought the Mirza out of obscurity and put him on the stage of public renown so that countless eyes were turned towards him. In Sirat at-Mahdi, Mirza Bashir Ahmad has aptly observed how this book brought the Mirza to the limelight:

“Before writing Barahin, the Promised Messiah spent a life of anonymity and in this isolation his was the life of a darwish. Before Barahin he had become known to some extent as a result of his having written a series of articles in some newspapers but all this was very meagre. In fact, it is the announcement of Barahin-i-Ahmadiyyah which, for the first time and for good, placed him before the country and introduced him to those interested in academic and religious matters. The eyes of the people began to turn in amazement towards this anonymous villager who had promised to write a great book about the truth of Islam in such a challenging manner and with the promise of a huge sum of money as reward (to anyone who could refute his arguments). Thus the sun of guidance which had already appeared on the horizon now began to rise higher. Later the publication of Barahin-i-Ahmadiyyah created an extraordinary stir in the religious circles of the country. In general, the Muslims welcomed him as a great Mujaddid. As for the opponents of Islam, this book came to them as a bomb- shell and created great turbulence in their camp. (Sirat al-Mahdi, Vol 1, pp. 103-104. )

The Mirza himself says the following about his life before the publication of Barahin:

“This was the time when nobody knew me; when nobody was either in favour of or opposed to me, for, at that time, I was a non-entity; I was just one among the people, hidden in the corner of anonymity. (Tatimmah Haqiqat al-Wahy, pp. 27-28.)

He adds:

“All the people of this town (i.e. Qadian) and thousands of other people are aware that at this period of time I was, in fact, like a dead body which had been buried in the grave for centuries and no one even knew whose grave it was. (lbid, p. 28. )

Debates with Arya Samajis

In 1886, the Mirza had a debate with Murli Dhar of Arya Samij in Hoshiarpur. He has written a full-fledged book about this debate, Surmah-i-Chashm-i-Arya (Kohl for the Eye of the Arya). This is the second of his polemics on religions and religious sects.

The topic of the first day’s debate was the rational and historical proof of the miracle of cleaving the moon. The Mirza not only strongly affirmed this miracle but the miracles of other prophets as well. He showed that the occurrence of miracles and supernatural incidents was rationally possible. He took the position that because of the inherent limitations of man’s intellect, knowledge, and experience, he had no right to deny miracles and thus make the claim to comprehend this vast universe in its entirety. He repeatedly stressed that the knowledge of man was very limited and the range of possibilities very wide. (Surma-i-Chashm-i-Arya, pp. 557) (so that the notion that man’s knowledge could be comprehensive was untenable). He also stressed that in religious matters, faith in the unseen was essential and that this was not in conflict with reason, for the latter could not be all comprehensive in its range. In fact, whatever rational objections the Mirza pointed out to the belief regarding the ascension of Jesus to the heavens and his descent in future and his stay in the heaven for several centuries and the so-called ‘rationalist’ trend in his later writings can best be refuted by the arguments that he himself advanced in this book. The personality of the author in this book is quite different from the one in his later writings.

These two books made the Mirza excessively self-appreciative; he became aware of his ability as a writer and debater and became confident that he was capable of initiating a new movement and influencing his environment. It seems that this discovery proved to be the turning-point in his life. Henceforth, instead of debating with Christians and Arya Samajis he turned towards Muslims and began to challenge them to debate with him.

By Mawlana Zameelur Rahman

Imam Abu Hanifah (80 – 150 H) was from the generation of the Tabi’in as he was alive during the era of the Sahabah and he saw Anas ibn Malik (d. 93 H), although it is not authentic that he narrated from him or any other Sahabi. Imam al-Suyuti mentions in Tabyid al-Sahifah (Mahmud Muhammad Mahmud Hasan Nassar ed. p. 34) that Ibn Hajar al-’Asqalani said, “Ibn Sa’d narrated with a sanad in which there is no harm that Abu Hanifah saw Anas.” Ibn Hajar goes on to mention that this distinguishes Abu Hanifah from all the other Imams of the major towns from his contemporaries like al-Awza’i, Hammad ibn Zayd, Hammad ibn Salamah, al-Thawri, Malik, Muslim ibn Khalid and al-Layth ibn Sa’d.

CONTENTS

• The Status of Imam Abu Hanifah as a Narrator of Hadith
• An Example of a Hadith Transmission from Imam Abu Hanifah
• Narrations of Imam Abu Hanifah from Sharh Mushkil al-Athar
• Narrations of Imam Abu Hanifah from the Musannaf of Ibn Abi Shaybah
• The Scholarly Acceptance of Imam Abu Hanifah’s Pronouncements on al-Jarh wa al-Ta’dil

The Status of Imam Abu Hanifah as a Narrator of Hadith

Imam Abu Hanifah’s authority in fiqh is accepted by all from the Ahl al-Sunnah, both his supporters and his detractors. However, some still insist on casting doubt on his reliaibility in the narration of hadith. Imam Abu Hanifah did not narrate many hadiths as his preoccupation was fiqh and recording its masa’il, but his dependence on hadith and athar is apparent from his rulings and in this sense he is from the mukthirin – those who narrated large amounts of hadith (see Abu Hanifah wa Ashabuhu l-Muhaddithun, pp. 19-23).

Al-Khatib al-Baghdadi narrated in his Tarikh Baghdad (Dr. Bashshar ‘Awwad Ma’ruf ed. 15:473) with an authentic chain of narration [in which all the narrators, al-Khallal, al-Hariri, al-Nakha’i and Muhammad ibn Isma’il al-Farisi are thiqat (trustworthy)] from Makki ibn Ibrahim (126 – 214 H), a narrator from Abu Hanifah and one of the oldest shaykhs of Imam Bukhari and a narrator of the six famous collections of hadith described by Ibn Hajar as “thiqah thabt” in al-Taqrib one of the loftiest grades of reliability, that he said about Abu Hanifah,

“Knowledge” (‘ilm) in that time was knowledge of Qur’an and Sunnah, showing Abu Hanifah had vast knowledge of hadiths, but he would not be preoccupied with narration. Imam al-Dhahabi wrote:

Imam Abu Hanifah’s trustworthiness in narrating hadith has been transmitted from the following five Imams of al-Jarh wa l-Ta’dil:

1. Abu Dawud al-Sijistani (202 – 275 H), the author of the Sunan

Abu ‘Umar ibn ‘Abd al-Barr (368 – 463 H) narrates in his al-Intiqa fi Fada’il al-A’immati l-Thalathat al-Fuqaha (Abd al-Fattah Abu Ghuddah ed. pp. 66-67): ‘Abd Allah ibn Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Mu’min ibn Yahya (al-Qurtubi), Allah have mercy on him, narrated to us: Abu Bakr Muhammad ibn Bakr ibn ‘Abd al-Razzaq, known as Ibn Dasah, narrated to us: I heard Abu Dawud Sulayman ibn al-Ash‘ath ibn Ishaq al-Sijistani, Allah have mercy on him, say:

‘Abd Allah ibn Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Mu’min al-Qurtubi is reliable (saduq) as mentioned in Lisan al-Mizan (4:587) which also states that “he is from the oldest of Abu ‘Umar (Ibn ‘Abd al-Barr)’s shaykhs.” Ibn Dasah (d. 346) is trustworthy (thiqah) and a narrator of the Sunan from Abu Dawud al-Sijistani (Siyar A‘lam al-Nubala). The isnad is therefore sound (hasan).

“Imam” has different meanings, but when used in the context of hadith science and narrator-criticism, it is on par with “trustworthy” (thiqah) and “proof” (hujjah) and “firm” (thabt), as mentioned by al-Sakhawi in his Sharh Alfiyyat al-’Iraqi (al-Raf’ wa l-Takmil, p. 75-6). Hafiz Ibn Hajar al-’Asqalani also sufficed with “Imam” when grading Imam Abu Hanifah’s reliability in Taqrib al-Tahdhib, indicating this term is sufficient to establish trustworthiness.

2. Ali ibn ‘Abd Allah al-Madini (161 – 235 H), the great Imam of al-Jarh wa l-Ta’dil

Muhammad ibn al-Husayn ibn Ahmad ibn al-Husayn Abu l-Fath al-Azdi al-Mawsili (d. 374) mentioned in his book, al-Du‘afa, (quoted in Ibn ‘Abd al-Barr’s Jami‘ Bayan al-‘Ilm wa Fadlih, Abu al-Ashbal al-Zuhayri ed., p. 1083) ‘Ali ibn al-Madini said:

Abu l-Fath al-Azdi narrated it without chain but his manner of narration (using sighat al-jazm) indicates it is authentic according to him.

3. Shu’bah ibn al-Hajjaj (85 – 160 H), the creator of the science of al-Jarh wa l-Ta’dil

Ibn ‘Abd al-Barr narrated (Al-Intiqa fi Fada’il al-A’immat al-Thalathat al-Fuqaha) from Hakam ibn al-Mundhir from Abu Ya‘qub Yusuf ibn Ahmad ibn Yusuf Ibn al-Dakhil from Ahmad ibn al-Hasan al-Hafiz from ‘Abd Allah ibn Ahmad ibn Ibrahim al-Dawraqi: Yahya ibn Ma‘in was asked about Abu Hanifah while I listened. He said:

Al-Dawraqi is trustworthy (thiqah) according to al-Daraqutni and reliable (saduq) according to Ibn Abi Hatim (Misbah al-Arib 2:133). The rest of the narrators are known as huffaz and muhaddithin but their reliability is unknown. This narration is therefore either weak (da’if) or sound (hasan), depending on the principles used.

Shu’bah ibn al-Hajjaj would only narrate from trustworthy narrators, so if the above narration is sound, this would amount to Shu’bah declaring Abu Hanifah trustworthy.

4. Yahya ibn Ma’in (158 – 233 H), the great scholar of al-Jarh wa l-Ta’dil

Ahmad ibn Muhammad ibn al-Qasim ibn Muhriz, a student of Ibn Ma’in, narrated in his transmission of Ma’rifat al-Rijal of Ibn Ma’in from Yahya ibn Ma‘in that he said:

And he said once:

Ma’rifat al-Rijal, Muhammad Kamil al-Qassar ed., vol. 1, no. 230; also al-Khatib with his chain in Tarikh Baghdad 15:580

Ibn Muhriz’s reliability is unknown (he is majhul al-hal) but his narrations from Ibn Ma’in on the narrators of hadith have generally been accepted by the scholars of Rijal, and this transmission from him is corroborated by other narrations (mentioned below). It is well-known that Ibn Ma’in’s statement “there is no harm in him” is equivalent to his statement “trustworthy” (thiqah), as mentioned in Tadrib al-Rawi. This narration, therefore, proves Imam Abu Hanifah is trustworthy according to Ibn Ma’in.

Al-Khatib al-Baghdadi narrates: (Abu l-Hasan Muhammad ibn Ahmad ibn Muhammad ibn Ahmad) ibn Rizq (325 – 412) narrated to us: Ahmad ibn ‘Ali ibn ‘Umar ibn Hubaysh al-Razi narrated to us: I heard Ahmad ibn Muhammad ibn ‘Isam (d. 313) say: I heard Muhammad ibn Sa‘d al-‘Awfi say: I heard Yahya ibn Ma‘in say:

Ibn Rizq is trustworthy according to al-Khatib and al-Barqani. Ahmad ibn Ali ibn ‘Umar ibn Hubaysh is trustworthy (Tarikh Baghdad 5:510). Ahmad ibn Muhammad ibn ‘Isam’s reliability is unknown. He is mentioned in Tarikh Asbahan of Abu Nu‘aym. Muhammad ibn Sa‘d al-‘Awfi is weak (layyin) according to al-Khatib but according to al-Daraqutni “there is no harm in him.” The narration is therefore weak (da’if) or sound (hasan), but more probably the latter as it is supported by similar statements from Ibn Ma’in like the two narrations mentioned above.

Hafiz al-Mizzi (654 – 742), the teacher of al-Dhahabi, writes in the introduction to his major work on narrators Tahdhib al-Kamal,

Tahdhib al-Kamal, Bashshar ‘Awwad Ma‘ruf ed., 1:153

In his biography of Abu Hanifah in Tahdhib al-Kamal, he mentions the two narrations above without isnad, and also a third:

Salih ibn Muhammad ibn ‘Amr ibn Habib al-Asadi (d. 293) is trustworthy as mentioned by al-Daraqutni, al-Khatib and others (Misbah al-Arib, 2:93). Hence, this narration is authentic according to al-Mizzi.

There were other narrations from Ibn Ma’in declaring Abu Hanifah trustworthy as mentioned in Tarikh Baghdad but they have weaknesses in them.

Based on these aforementioned four narrations (from al-Dawraqi, Ibn Muhriz, Salih ibn Muhammad al-Asadi and al-’Awfi), the later scholars have agreed the preserved (mahfuz) opinion of Yahya ibn Ma’in is Abu Hanifah is trustworthy. This is clear from al-Mizzi’s relation of only the three above-mentioned narrations in his Tahdhib al-Kamal, followed by al-Dhahabi in his Siyar and al-’Asqalani in Tahdhib al-Tahdhib. Dr. Bashshar Awwad also mentions in his footnotes to Tarikh Baghdad the preserved (mahfuz) opinion of Yahya ibn Ma’in is that Abu Hanifah is trustworthy. None of the later scholars like Mizzi, Dhahabi and ‘Asqalani mentioned any criticism from Ibn Ma’in of Abu Hanifah, indicating they believed the criticism narrated from him is inauthentic or unreliable.

There is however a narration with an authentic chain to Ibn Ma‘in, as narrated by Ibn ‘Adi in his al-Kamil fi Du’afa al-Rijal from ‘Ali ibn Ahmad ibn Sulayman (227 – 317) who is thiqah according to Ibn Yunus (Siyar A‘lam al-Nubala) from Ahmad ibn Sa‘d ibn Abi Maryam (d. 253) who is saduq according to Ibn Hajar in al-Taqrib: “I asked Yahya ibn Ma‘in about Abu Hanifah and he said: “His hadiths are not written.”” This narration is also found in Tarikh Baghdad. Criticising this narration because of Ahmad ibn Sa’d ibn Abi Maryam as was done by Imam al-Kawthari in his Ta’nib al-Khatib is incorrect, as is clear from the biographical notices on Ahmad ibn Sa’d ibn Abi Maryam. While the phrase “his hadiths are not written” does not necessarily indicate weakness in Ibn Ma‘in’s usage, if it is accepted as a weakening (tad’if), it would contradict the above-mentioned more reliable and more numerous narrations, and would thus be shadhdh (an anomaly) and thus rejected when compared to the mahfuz narrations from Ibn Ma’in. There is another narration narrated in Tarikh Baghdad (15:581) from Ibn Ma’in saying Abu Hanifah “was weakened” but this is undoubtedly fabricated due to a particular narrator (Uthman ibn Muhammad ibn Abi Shaybah) in the chain.

5. Abu ‘Abd Allah al-Hakim al-Naysaburi (321 – 405 H), the author of al-Mustadrak

Abu ‘Abd Allah al-Hakim al-Naysaburi (321 – 405 H) , one of the first to write on the subject of ‘Ulum al-Hadith, wrote in his seminal work Ma’rifatu ‘Ulum al-Hadith in “Type 49 of the sciences of Hadith” (p. 642) that, “This type of science is knowledge of the well-known trustworthy imams (al-a’immat al-thiqat al-mashhurin) from the Tabi’in and their successors [i.e. the second and third generations] of those whose hadiths are gathered for memorisation, revision and seeking blessing through them. We will list them, from the east to the west.” (p. 642) While listing the “famous trustworthy imams” from Kufa, he mentions “Abu Hanifah al-Nu’man ibn Thabit al-Taymi” (p. 649).

Conclusion

In brief, therefore, it is established from Yahya ibn Ma’in, Abu Dawud al-Sijistani and al-Hakim that they believed Abu Hanifah was trustworthy and reliable in narrating hadith. The narration from Shu’bah is not as strongly established, while the narration from Ibn al-Madini is sound according to Abu l-Fath al-Azdi. Once it is established from the reliable scholars of al-Jarh wa l-Ta’dil that a narrator is trustworthy (thiqah) as is the case here, any unexplained criticism (jarh mubham) will not be accepted, based on the accepted principles of this science. Hence, al-Bukhari’s statement “they abandoned him” (“sakatu ‘anhu” which for al-Bukhari is equivalent to “tarakuhu“), al-Nasa’i’s “he is not strong” (laysa bi l-qawi), Muslim’s assessment in his al-Kuna wa l-Asma (no. 963 ed. ‘Abd al-Rahim Muhammad Ahmad al-Qashqari) that he is “confused in hadith” (mudtarib al-hadith) and al-Daraqutni’s “da’if” will not be accepted as they are unexplained. The explained criticism mentioned in the printed version of Mizan al-I’tidal by al-Dhahabi in which it mentions “al-Nasa’i and others weakened him due to his memory,” this is an insertion by a later scribe as is established by internal evidence (al-Dhahabi said he would not mention the biographies of the four imams of fiqh) and external evidence (al-’Asqalani did not mention it in Lisan al-Mizan which is an expansion of al-Dhahabi’s work; and the earliest manuscripts of Mizan al-I’tidal do not contain a biography of Abu Hanifah). This was detailed by Abu Ghuddah in his footnotes to al-Raf’ wa l-Takmil.

Ibn Ma’in, in fact, also provides us with an explanation of the reason for other muhaddithun’s criticism of Abu Hanifah. Ibn ‘Abd al-Barr narrates: ‘Abd al Rahman ibn Yahya narrated to us: Ahmad ibn Sa‘id narrated to us: Abu Sa‘id ibn al-A‘rabi narrated to is: ‘Abbas ibn Muhammad al-Duri narrated to us: I heard Yahya ibn Ma‘in say: “Our companions have gone overboard in [their bias] against Abu Hanifah and his companions.” It was said to him: “Would Abu Hanifah lie?” He said “He was nobler than that.” (Jami‘ Bayan al-‘Ilm wa Fadlih, Abu al-Ashbal al-Zuhayri ed., p. 1081) The editor Abu al-Ashbal al-Zuhayri says “It’s isnad is sahih.” This indicates the muhaddithun had a bias against Abu Hanifah and his students due to what they perceived as excessive issuance of rulings based on opinion, so their criticism should be taken with precaution. Hafiz Ibn ‘Abd al-Barr (d. 463 H) wrote: “Those who narrated from Abu Hanifah, and declared him trustworthy, and praised him, are more than those who criticised him; and those who criticised him from the scholars of hadith, most of what they blamed him for is immersion in juristic opinion, analogy and irja’ [all of which are invalid criticisms].” (Jami‘ Bayan al-‘Ilm wa Fadlih, quoted in the footnotes to al-Intiqa’ fi Fada’il al-A’immat al-Thalathah, p. 185)

Explained criticism (jarh mufassar), however, has precedence over accreditation (ta’dil). Some scholars of al-Jarh wa l-Ta’dil did explain their criticism of Abu Hanifah.  Ibn Abi Dawud (230 – 316) said as narrated by al-Khatib (Tarikh Baghdad 15:576) that Abu Hanifah narrated 150 hadiths and erred in half of them. However, it is known that there were individuals who fabricated narrations with chains through Abu Hanifah, and it was probably these narrations that these scholars criticised. This is known to have been the case with Ibn ‘Adi who narrated narrations from Abu Hanifah through Abba ibn Ja‘far al-Najirami who was active in the third century Hijri and would narrate fabricated hadiths through Abu Hanifah (Lisan al-Mizan 1:231). Many of his false hadiths are included in Musnad Abi Hanifah by Abu Muhammad al-Harithi (257 – 340). Al-Najirami was probably the reason why Ibn Abi Dawud believed Abu Hanifah would make mistakes and confused his narrations. Furthermore, there is some question over the integrity of Ibn Abi Dawud himself as mentioned in Lisan al-Mizan.

There is, however, another narration from Ibn al-Madini as narrated by al-Khatib in Tarikh Baghdad (15:581): ‘Ali ibn Muhammad (ibn al-Hasan) al-Maliki informed me: ‘Abd Allah ibn ‘Uthman al-Saffar reported to us: Muhammad ibn ‘Imran al-Sayrafi reported to us: ‘Abd Allah ibn ‘Ali ibn ‘Abd Allah al-Madini narrated to us: “I asked my father about Abu Hanifah, the champion of opinion, and he weakened him severely and said: “Were he in front of me, I would not ask him about anything. He narrated fifty hadiths in which he erred.”” This is an explained criticism as it states the weakening is due to the errors found in his narrations. All the narrators are trustworthy, besides al-Khatib’sshaykh, Ali ibn Muhammad ibn al-Hasan al-Maliki (350 – 437 H) who is reliable (saduq) as mentioned in Tarikh Baghdad (13:584), and besides the son of Ibn al-Madini whose reliability is unknown. The narration therefore has a questionable chain. Moreover, it is contradicted by the narration mentioned above from Ibn al-Madini that Abu Hanifah is trustworthy in hadith. It is also contradicted by the narration from Yahya ibn Ma’in mentioned above in which he said “I have not heard anyone weakening him,” as Ibn al-Madini was a contemporary. This narration from Ibn al-Madini is therefore objectionable (munkar) with respect to its matn (text), particularly since the later specialists in the field of narrator-criticism who had full knowledge of Abu Hanifah’s available hadith narrations in the Masanid, Kitab al-Athar and other works, like Imams al-Mizzi, al-Dhahabi, Ibn Kathir and Ibn Hajar al-’Asqalani, had only praise of him and assessed him to be strong in hadith; and if they found a large number of errors in his hadiths when compared to the hadiths of other narrators, they would not have made such an assessment.

The above is a detailed analysis of the bulk of the authentic information from the early scholars explicitly relating to Abu Hanifah’s reliability in narrating hadith. There are of course many other narrations relating to Imam Abu Hanifah’s piety and knowledge, and others criticising him in relation to fiqh and religion, but these have little relevance when it comes to his reliability in hadith. However, many evidences with respect to Abu Hanifah’s knowledge, honesty and memory support the conclusion that he was trustworthy in hadith.

In sum, it is established Abu Hanifah is trustworthy according to Yahya ibn Ma’in, Abu Dawud and al-Hakim, and probably Shu’bah ibn al-Hajjaj and Ibn al-Madini, so the ambiguous criticism of some muhaddithun will not be accepted based on the principle that an unexplained criticism is rejected in light of accreditation, while the authentic statements of Ibn Abi Dawud and Ibn ‘Adi explaining the criticism of Abu Hanifah that he erred when narrating hadiths can be explained by the deliberate fabrications made against Abu Hanifah circulating at that time. There is no doubt that the later pre-modern great scholars who had full access to all the primary sources and used them in their works, like al-Mizzi (in Tahdhib al-Kamal), al-Dhahabi (in Siyar A’lam al-Nubala and Tadhkirat al-Huffaz) and al-’Asqalani (in Tahdhib al-Tahdhib), all believed Abu Hanifah was trustworthy in hadith, based on a complete analysis of the evidence. It should therefore be accepted that Abu Hanifah was trustworthy in narrating hadith. Modern detractors of Abu Hanifah like al-Albani dug up statements criticising Abu Hanifah after the ummah agreed to reject them and with no apparent knowledge of the principles of al-Jarh wa l-Ta’dil, they present them as conclusive evidence of Abu Hanifah being weak in narrating hadith. Fair analyses, taking into account all the evidence and the principles outlined by the scholars of al-Jarh wa l-Ta’dil, and devoid of bias in favour of Abu Hanifah or against him, clearly show he was a reliable transmitter of hadith.

An Example of a Hadith Transmission from Imam Abu Hanifah

In Bab al-Mustahadatu kayfa Tatatahharu li al-Salah (Chapter on how the Woman in Post-Menstrual Bleeding Purifies Herself for Salah), Imam al-Tahawi narrates:

حدثنا صالح بن عبد الرحمن قال ثنا عبد الله بن يزيد المقرىء قال ثنا أبو حنيفة رحمه الله ح وحدثنا فهد قال ثنا أبو نعيم قال ثنا أبو حنيفة رحمه الله عن هشام بن عروة عن أبيه عن عائشة رضي الله عنها أن فاطمة بنت أبي حبيش أتت النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم فقالت إني أحيض الشهر والشهرين فقال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم إن ذلك ليس بحيض وإنما ذلك عرق من دمك فإذا أقبل الحيض فدعي الصلاة وإذا أدبر فاغتسلي لطهرك ثم توضئي عند كل صلاة

Translation

Salih ibn ‘Abd al-Rahman narrated to us: He said: ‘Abd Allah ibn Yazid al-Muqri’ narrated to us: He said: Abu Hanifah narrated to us – ha [a sign for the start of a new chain] – and Fahd narrated to us: He said: Abu Nu’aym narrated to us: He said: Abu Hanifah narrated to us from Hisham ibn ‘Urwah from his father from ‘A’ishah (Allah be pleased with her) that Fatimah bint Abi Hubaysh came to the Prophet (Allah bless him and grant him peace) and she said: “I was menstruating for a month or two months.” The Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and grant him peace) said: “That is not menstruation, but that is a [ruptured] vessel of your blood. Therefore, when the menstruation comes, leave Salah, and when it leaves [and post-menstrual bleeding begins], then bathe for your purification and then perform wudu for every Salah.” (Amani al-Ahbar fi Sharh Ma’ani al-Athar, Idaratu Ta’lifat Ashrafiyya, 2:91-2)

Brief Analysis of the Chain

Imam al-Tahawi transmits this hadith from Abu Hanifah through two routes, both containing two narrators between him and Abu Hanifah. After that the chain is the same, through the famous link of “Hisham from his father from ‘A’ishah.” Salih ibn ‘Abd al-Rahman, the first shaykh of al-Tahawi, was declared truthful by Ibn Abi Hatim in al-Jarh wa al-Ta’dil (ibid. 1:33). Fahd ibn Sulayman, the second shaykh, was declared “thiqah thabt” by Ibn Yunus (Misbah al-Arib, 2:491), one of the highest grades of reliability.

The two narrators from Imam Abu Hanifah are eminent narrators found in all six of the famous collections of hadith (Bukhari, Muslim, Tirmidhi, Abu Dawud, Nasa’i and Ibn Majah). Abu ‘Abd al-Rahman ‘Abd Allah ibn Yazid al-Muqri’ (120 – 213) was a famous scholar of hadith and readings of the Qur’an (qira’at). Abu Nu’aym al-Fadl ibn Dukayn (130 – 219) was a direct teacher of Imam al-Bukhari, and he narrates many of his hadiths in the Sahih.

The teacher of Abu Hanifah, Hisham ibn ‘Urwah (61 – 146), was a major narrator from the generation of the Tabi’in who heard and narrated from the Sahabah. His narrations, particularly through the route of his father from ‘A’ishah which is found here, are common in the six books of hadith.

(Al-Tahawi also narrated this hadith with the same two chains in his later unparalleled work Sharh Mushkil al-Athar (no. 2732, 7:157, Shu’ayb al-Arna’ut ed.))

This is one amongst many examples which illustrate the eminence of both those who took from Imam Abu Hanifah and those he took from, and puts to rest the claim that hadiths were alien to Abu Hanifah and his fiqh.

Narrations of Imam Abu Hanifah from Sharh Mushkil al-Athar

Imam Abu Ja’far al-Tahawi (239 – 321) narrated several hadiths in his masterpiece work, Sharh Mushkil al-Athar, containing Imam Abu Hanifah in its chain. One of them is referenced above. I will quote another five below, and another in a later post inshaAllah when discussing Imam al-Nasa’i’s narration from Abu Hanifah. All references are based on Shu’ayb al-Arna’ut’s excellent edition of the work available for download here. The second and fourth narrations in this list are examples of Imam Abu Hanifah’s thuna’iyyat (two-narrator chains).

1. Al-Tahawi narrates: Ibrahim ibn Abi Dawud narrated to us: He said: Muhammad ibn al-Muthanna narrated to us: He said: Ishaq ibn Yusuf al-Azraq narrated to us from Abu Hanifah from ‘Alqamah ibn Marthad from Sulayman ibn Buraydah from his father: He said: the Prophet (Allah bless him and grant him peace) said:

The shaykh of Imam al-Tahawi, Ibrahim ibn Abi Dawud, is Ibrahim ibn Sulayman ibn Dawud al-Barallusi al-Suri (d. 270). Al-Tahawi narrated many hadiths from him. Al-Dhahabi described him as a “proficient master” (al-hafiz al-mutqin) and Abu Sa‘id ‘Abd al-Rahman ibn Ahmad ibn Yunus (d. 347), the biographer of Egyptian narrators and a student of Imam al-Tahawi, said: “He was one of the memorisers, proficient Qur’an-reciters, trustworthy and firm narrators.” (Siyar A‘lam al-Nubala, al-Arna’ut ed. 12:612-3) The rest of the narrators in the chain are trustworthy hadith transmitters found in all six of the famous collections of hadith.

The narrator from Abu Hanifah, Ishaq ibn Yusuf (117 – 195 H), better known as al-Azraq, was declared thiqah by Ahmad ibn Hanbal, Ibn Ma‘in, al-‘Ijli, Ibn Sa‘d, al-Bazzar and al-Khatib al-Baghdadi (Tahdhib al-Tahdhib 1:257-8). The shaykh of Abu Hanifah in this chain is ‘Alqamah ibn Marthad al-Hadrami (d. 126), a Kufan narrator of hadith. Al-Mizzi lists Abu Hanifah amongst those who narrated from him (Tahdhib al-Kamal 20:310).

This hadith was narrated through the same chain by Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal (d. 241) in his Musnad (no. 23027, vol. 38:132, Shu’ayb al-Arna’ut ed.) from al-Azraq who narrated from Abu Hanifah from ‘Alqamah.

2. Al-Tahawi narrates: Ahmad ibn Dawud narrated to us: He said: Isma’il ibn Salim narrated to us: He said: Muhammad ibn al-Hasan narrated to us: He said: Abu Hanifah narrated to us: He said: ‘Ata’ ibn Abi Rabah narrated to us from Abu Hurayrah (Allah be pleased with him): He said: Allah’s Messenger (Allah bless him and grant him peace) said:

The shaykh of Imam al-Tahawi is Ahmad ibn Dawud ibn Musa al-Makki (d. 282), declared thiqah by Ibn Yunus (Misbah al-Arib no. 1593). Isma’il ibn Salim Abu Yahya al-Kufi is a narrator found in the collections of Muslim, Abu Dawud and al-Nasa’i, and was declared thiqah by Ibn Ma’in, Ahmad, Ibn Sa’d and others. Muhammad ibn al-Hasan al-Shaybani (132 – 189 H) is a mujtahid Imam, from the foremost students of Imam Abu Hanifah. Al-Dhahabi said: “[He is] strong in [his narrations from Imam] Malik,” ‘Ali ibn al-Madini said he is “reliable” (saduq), and al-Daraqutni said: “He does not deserve rejection.” (Lisan al-Mizan, Abu Ghuddah ed. 7:60-3) Al-Daraqutni also counted him amongst “the trustworthy masters [of hadith].” (Nasb al-Rayah, Muhammad ‘Awwamah ed. 1:409) His transmission of the Muwatta’ of Imam Malik which includes approximately a thousand narrations was well-received by the ‘ulama which is a strong indication of his strength and credibility in hadith science. The strong criticism of him from some authorities was a result of methodological differences and is of no consequence. ‘Ata ibn Abi Rabah (ca. 27 – 115) was the greatest of Imam Abu Hanifah’s teachers as he himself mentioned (see further down below), and he has many narrations found in all six of the famous collections of hadith. One of the scholars said: “‘Ata’ was black, blind in one-eye, snub-nosed, lame and limp and then he became blind after this, yet he was trustworthy [in transmitting hadith], a jurist and a scholar possessing many hadiths!” (Tahdhib al-Kamal, 20:76) He met 200 companions of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), and he would issue fatwa in the presence of the companions, such that Ibn ‘Abbas would say to questioners: “O people of Makkah! Do you gather your questions to me, when Ibn Abi Rabah is amongst you?!” (ibid. 20:77)

(For an elucidation of the meaning of this hadith, see Imam al-Tahawi’s commentary that follows after narrating it)

3. Al-Tahawi narrates: Rawh ibn al-Faraj narrated to us: He said: Yusuf ibn ‘Adi narrated to us: He said: ‘Abd al-Rahim ibn Sulayman al-Razi narrated to us from al-Nu’man ibn Thabit Abi Hanifah from Hammad [ibn Abi Sulayman] from Sa’id ibn Jubayr from Ibn ‘Abbas (Allah be pleased with them): He said:

Al-Tahawi’s shaykh, Rawh ibn al-Faraj Abu al-Zinba’ (d. 282), was a Maliki jurist and also the one who taught Imam al-Tahawi the science of qira’ah according to his transmission from the founder of one of the seven readings, ‘Asim ibn Bahdalah. He was thiqah as mentioned by al-’Asqalani inTaqrib al-Tahdhib. Yusuf ibn ‘Adi ibn Zurayq (d. 232) is a narrator found in the collections of al-Bukhari and al-Nasa’i, and he was thiqah (Tahrir al-Taqrib no. 7872). The narrator from Abu Hanifah, ‘Abd al-Rahim ibn Sulayman al-Kinani (d. 187), is a narrator found in all six collections of hadith, and was declared thiqah by a number of authorities. Hammad ibn Abi Sulayman (d. 120) was the primary teacher of Abu Hanifah in fiqh, and he was a mujtahid Imam, the greatest of the students of Ibrahim al-Nakha’i as he himself expressed. Hammad’s narrations are found in all six collections of hadith, although in Sahih al-Bukhari there is only one narration narrated as mu’allaq(i.e. where Imam al-Bukhari does not cite his chain to Hammad). For the scholars’ praise of his knowledge and reliability, see Tahdhib al-Kamal (7:269-79).

4. Al-Tahawi narrates: Yazid narrated to us: Abu Qatan narrated to us: Abu Hanifah narrated to us from ‘Atiyyah from Abu Sa’id [al-Khudri] from Allah’s Messenger (Allah bless him and grant him peace), then he mentioned the equivalent of it [i.e. the words:

The shaykh of al-Tahawi, Yazid ibn Sinan ibn Yazid al-Qazzaz (178 – 264), is also one of theshaykhs of al-Nasa’i in his Sunan. (Imam al-Tahawi in fact shares some shuyukh with all the collectors of the six books of hadith besides al-Bukhari.) He was declared thiqah by al-Nasa’i, Ibn Yunus and Ibn Abi Hatim (Tahdhib al-Kamal 32:152-5). The narrator from Imam Abu Hanifah Abu Qatan ‘Amr ibn al-Haytham (121 – 198) is a narrator found in all six of the famous collections of hadith besides Sahih al-Bukhari, and was declared thiqah by al-Shafi’i, Yahya ibn Ma’in, ‘Ali ibn al-Madini (Tahdhib al-Kamal 22:280-5). The shaykh of Imam Abu Hanifah is ‘Atiyyah ibn Sa’id ibn Junadah al-’Awfi (d. 111), a narrator found in the collections of Abu Dawud, al-Tirmidhi and Ibn Majah, and also in al-Bukhari’s al-Adab al-Mufrad. It was reported from Yahya ibn Ma’in that he said he is “acceptable” (salih) and “there is no harm in him,” and Ibn Sa’d said “he is thiqah if Allah wills,” although it is also reported from Ibn Ma’in that he considered him weak and this was reported from a number of other authorities also (Tahdhib al-Kamal 20:145-9). The text of the hadith itself, however, is of unquestionable authority, and is probably the most authentic hadith in existence.

5. Al-Tahawi narrates: Ahmad ibn Dawud narrated to us: He said: Isma’il ibn Salim al-Sa’ighnarrated to us : He said: Abu Mu’awiyah narrated to us: al-Nu’man ibn Thabit reported to me from ‘Alqamah ibn Marthad from Ibn Buraydah from his father: He said:

The chain is the same as the second narration mentioned above, except for the narrator from Abu Hanifah, Abu Mu’awiyah Muhammad ibn Khazim (113 – 195), whose narrations are found in all six collections of hadith, and he was declared thiqah by the major authorities of narrator-criticism. This hadith is well-known and is found with different chains of transmission in many books of hadith.

Narrations of Imam Abu Hanifah from the Musannaf of Ibn Abi Shaybah

Abu Bakr ibn Abi Shaybah has over forty reports in his renowned al-Musannaf with Abu Hanifah in their chains. There is always only one narrator between him and Abu Hanifah, and these single intermediaries give us an excellent insight into those who would narrate hadiths from Abu Hanifah. The number and calibre of hadith scholars who narrate from a shaykh after hearing from him is an indication of the shaykh’s rank and reliability. As Shaykh Muhammad ‘Awwamah said, Ibn Abi Shaybah narrated from Abu Hanifah “through the medium of 12 of his most eminent shuyukh.” (al-Musannaf li Bni Abi Shaybah, Muhammad ‘Awwamah ed. 20:6)

Abu Bakr ibn Abi Shaybah (159-235 H), the name with which he is better known, is ‘Abd Allah ibn Muhammad ibn Ibrahim. He was a contemporary of Imams Ahmad ibn Hanbal, Yahya ibn Ma‘in, Ishaq ibn Rahwayh and ‘Ali ibn al-Madini. His narrations are found in all six of the famous collections of hadith besides the collection of Imam al-Tirmidhi. Abu Hatim, Ibn Khirash and al-‘Ijli said: “[He was] trustworthy,” and al-‘Ijli added: “He was hafiz of hadith.” ‘Amr ibn ‘Ali said: “I have not seen [anyone who] had memorised more than Ibn Abi Shaybah.” Abu ‘Ubayd al-Qasim ibn Sallam said: “[Knowledge of] hadith culminates at four: Abu Bakr ibn Abi Shaybah, Ahmad ibn Hanbal, Yahya ibn Ma‘in and ‘Ali ibn al-Madini. Abu Bakr was the most retentive of them, Ahmad the most understanding of them, Yahya the most prolific of them and ‘Ali the most learned of them.” Ibn Hibban said: “He was a proficient and trustworthy master [of hadith], of those who wrote and collected and compiled, and he was the most retentive from the people of his time.” (Tahdhib al-Kamal, Bashshar ‘Awwad ed. 16:34-42) His work al-Musannaf is one of the largest collection of narrations including marfu‘, mawquf and maqtu‘ reports.

Based on Muhammad ‘Awwamah’s edition, I will list those who narrated from Imam Abu Hanifah and those who he narrated from according to the reports found in al-Musannaf, with reference to the hadith numbers in parentheses where those narrations can be found in the book:

Narrators from Abu Hanifah:

1. Ja‘far ibn ‘Awn (no. 1710)

His full name is Ja‘far ibn ‘Awn ibn Ja‘far ibn ‘Amr ibn Hurayth al-Makhzumi al-Kufi (120 – 206), and he is a narrator found in all six of the famous collections of hadith. His great grandfather, ‘Amr ibn Hurayth (d. 85) was from the young Sahabah, and is also a narrator found in the six collections. Ahmad ibn Hanbal said: “[He was] a pious man, there is no harm in his [narrations],” and Ahmad would recommend those who visit Kufa to take from Ja‘far. Yahya ibn Ma‘in, al-‘Ijli, Ibn Shahin, Ibn Qani‘, al-Dhahabi and others said he is “trustworthy” (thiqah). Ibn Sa‘d said: “He was trustworthy, with many hadiths.” (Tahdhib al-Kamal, Bashshar ‘Awwad Ma‘ruf ed. 5:70-3)

2. Yazid ibn Harun (no. 5400)

Yazid ibn Harun Abu Khalid al-Wasiti (118 – 206) is also a narrator found in all six collections. Ahmad ibn Hanbal said: “He was a proficient master of hadith.” Yahya ibn Ma‘in, ‘Ali ibn al-Madini, Abu Hatim, Ibn Sa‘d and others all said he is trustworthy. Ibn al-Madini said: “I have never seen a man who had memorised more than Yazid ibn Harun.” Yazid ibn Harun said about himself: “I memorised 24,000 hadiths with their chains, and this is no boast!” Abu Bakr ibn Abi Shaybah said: “I have not seen [anybody] with a more accurate memory than Yazid ibn Harun.” Al-‘Ijli said: “He was trustworthy and firm in hadith; and he was pious, with extremely wonderful Salah.” Ahmad ibn Sinan said: “I have not seen a scholar with more beautiful Salah than Yazid ibn Harun. He would stand as though a pillar praying from Zuhr to ‘Asr, and from Maghrib to ‘Isha’, he would not tire from Salah in the day and night.” Al-Mizzi states: “His excellences and virtues are very many.” (ibid. 32:261-70)

Here is Yazid’s praise of Abu Hanifah:

He said: “I comprehended the people and I have not seen anyone more intelligent, nor more virtuous, nor more scrupulous than Abu Hanifah!” (Tarikh Baghdad 15:498) Dr. Bashshar ‘Awwad Ma‘ruf comments, “Its isnad is sahih.” Al-Hasan ibn ‘Ali reported: I heard Yazid ibn Harun when a man asked him, “O Abu Khalid! Who is the best in fiqh from those you have seen?” say, “Abu Hanifah.” (Tarikh Baghdad 15:468) Dr. Bashshar ‘Awwad Ma‘ruf comments, “Its isnad is hasan.” The weight of such praise from Yazid ibn Harun of Imam Abu Hanifah can be gauged from this brief account of his qualities.

3. Waki‘ (no. 6147, 6222, 9580, 10125, 15124, 16941, 17599, 18841, 21925, 25743, 27713, 29599/33443)

Waki‘ ibn al-Jarrah al-Kufi (129 – 196) is also a narrator found in the six collections of hadith. Ahmad ibn Hanbal said: “I have not seen a greater container of knowledge than Waki‘, nor [one who] memorised more than Waki‘.” He also said: “I have never seen a man like Waki‘ in knowledge, memory, chain and chapters, along with humility and scrupulousness.” He also said: “Waki‘ was the Imam of Muslims in his time.” Yahya ibn Ma‘in said: “I haven’t seen anyone with a greater memory than Waki‘.” Ibn ‘Ammar said: “There was no one in Kufa in the time of Waki‘ greater in fiqh and more knowledgeable of hadith than him. Waki‘ was a luminary.” ‘Abd al-Razzaq al-San‘ani who was a contemporary of Waki‘ said: “I saw al-Thawri, Ibn ‘Uyaynah, Ma‘mar, Malik, and I saw and I saw, and my eyes have never seen the like of Waki‘.” ‘Ali ibn Khashram asked Waki‘ the method of acquiring such a proficient memory, and he said: “Abandoning sins, I have not experienced [anything] equal to it in [perfecting] memory.” Yahya ibn Aktham said: “I accompanied Waki‘ in journey and residence, and he would fast continuously and complete the Qur’an every night.” Waki‘’s son narrates: “My father would pray the entire night, and there did not remain in our house anybody except he would pray [in the night], and even our black slave girl would pray.” Al-‘Ijli said: “[He was] Kufan, trustworthy, a worshipper, pious, eloquent, from the memorisers of hadith, and he would issue fatwa.” (Tahdhib al-Kamal 30:462-84)

As shown in here, Waki‘ would issue fatwa according to the opinions of Imam Abu Hanifah. Al-Mizzi also quotes this from Yahya ibn Ma‘in in Tahdhib al-Kamal (30:474-5). Some of the fatwas Waki‘ reported from Abu Hanifah are recorded in the Musannaf; see numbers 10713 and 32152. The hadith narrations of Waki‘ in the Musannaf include a number of reports reaching the Sahabah.

4. ‘Isa ibn Yunus (no. 5876, 29099)

‘Isa ibn Yunus al-Kufi (d. 187) is also a narrator found in the six collections of hadith. He was the grandson of the famous narrator from the Tabi‘in, Abu Ishaq al-Sabi‘i (d. 127), who he saw. He was the brother of the famous narrator Isra’il ibn Yunus (100 – 160). Ahmad ibn Hanbal, ‘Ali ibn al-Madini, Abu Hatim, al-Nasa’i and others said he is trustworthy. Abu Zur‘ah said he was a “master [of hadith]” (hafiz). (Tahdhib al-Kamal 23:62-76)

Number 29099 is a narration from Imam Abu Hanifah that reaches ‘Umar ibn al-Khattab.

5. Hafs ibn Ghiyath (no. 5881, 17775, 21106, 24313)

Abu ‘Umar Hafs ibn Ghiyath al-Kufi (117 – 194), a narrator found in all six collections of hadith, was the Qadi of Kufa for thirteen years under Harun al-Rashid, and he was Qadi of Baghdad for two years. Yet, when he died, he did not leave behind any wealth. Yahya ibn Ma‘in, al-Nasa’i, Ibn Sa‘d and others said he is trustworthy. Al-‘Ijli said: “[He was] trustworthy, reliable, a jurist. Waki‘ was often asked about something, and he would say: ‘Go to our Qadi and ask him.’” Yahya ibn Sa‘id al-Qattan said: “The most trustworthy of the companions of al-A‘mash is Hafs ibn Ghiyath.” (Tahdhib al-Kamal 7:56-70)

Waki‘ ibn al-Jarrah listed Hafs amongst the companions of Imam Abu Hanifah as mentioned here. This is also recognised in the books of later non-Hanafi authorities, as for example, Imam al-Nawawi refers to him as “Hafs ibn Ghiyath al-Hanafi” in his work on Usul al-Hadith called al-Taqribof which al-Suyuti’s Tadrib al-Rawi is a commentary (Tadrib al-Rawi, Muhammad Ayman al-Shabrawi ed., p. 374). The narrations recorded in the Musannaf are all Hafs’s narrations from Abu Hanifah from Hammad ibn Abi Sulayman, either from Hammad’s own opinion or narrating from Ibrahim al-Nakha‘i or Sa‘id ibn Jubayr.

6. ‘Abd Allah ibn Numayr (no. 9434, 9437, 12388, 12401, 12602, 18685, 27562)

‘Abd Allah ibn Numayr al-Hamdani al-Kufi (115 – 199) is also a narrator found in all six collections of hadith. He was declared thiqah by Yahya ibn Ma‘in, Ibn Sa‘d, al-Daraqutni and others. Al-‘Ijli said: “Trustworthy, sound in hadith, a champion of the Sunnah.” (Tahdhib al-Kamal 16:225-9).

7. Abu Mu‘awiyah (no. 11053, 11124, 28902)

Abu Mu‘awiyah Muhammad ibn Khazim al-Tamimi al-Sa‘di al-Kufi (113 – 195) is also a narrator found in all of the six collections. Ahmad ibn Hanbal said: “Abu Mu‘awiyah is the most retentive of the companions of [Sulayman ibn Mihran] al-A‘mash.” Yahya ibn Ma‘in was asked who is the strongest of the narrators from al-A‘mash, and he replied: “After Sufyan and Shu‘bah, Abu Mu‘awiyah, the blind.” Al-‘Ijli said: “[He was] a Kufan, trustworthy (thiqah).” Al-Nasa’i, Ya‘qub ibn Shaybah, Ibn Sa‘d and al-Daraqutni said he was thiqah. However, many authorities discovered some errors in his narrations. He was criticised because of irja’, but this was from the acceptable category of irja’ discussed in detail here. (Tahdhib al-Kamal 25:123-34)

8. ‘Abd Allah ibn al-Mubarak (no. 12532, 28611)

‘Abd Allah ibn al-Mubarak (118 – 181) was one of the imams and luminaries of Islamic scholarship and piety, and also a narrator found in the six collections. ‘Abd al-Rahman ibn Mahdi said: “The four imams are Sufyan al-Thawri, Malik ibn Anas, Hammad ibn Zayd and Ibn al-Mubarak.” Shu‘ayb ibn Harb said: “Ibn al-Mubarak did not meet any man except Ibn al-Mubarak was more virtuous than him.” Ahmad ibn Hanbal said: “There was none in the time of Ibn al-Mubarak more ardent in gaining knowledge than him.” Sufyan ibn ‘Uyaynah: “I inspected the condition of the companions [of the Prophet (Allah bless him and grant him peace)] and I did not find any excellence in them over Ibn al-Mubarak except their companionship of the Prophet (Allah bless him and grant him peace) and their battles with him.” When the news of his death reached Sufyan ibn ‘Uyaynah, he exclaimed: “Allah have mercy on him! Indeed he was a jurist, a scholar, a worshipper, an ascetic, generous and brave, a poet.” ‘Abd al-Rahman ibn Mahdi would not favour anyone in hadith over Malik and Ibn al-Mubarak. When Ibn al-Mubarak’s students recounted his virtues, they would say: “He combined knowledge, jurisprudence, literature, grammar, language, poetry, eloquence, asceticism, scrupulousness, fairness, night-prayer, worship, pilgrimage, battles, bravery, insight, physical strength and avoiding talk about what did not concern him.” Yahya ibn Ma‘in said: “Ibn al-Mubarak was more learned than Sufyan al-Thawri.” Mu‘adh ibn Khalid ibn Shaqiq said: “I do not know that Allah has created a characteristic from the characteristics of virtue but Allah has put it in ‘Abd Allah ibn al-Mubarak.” Al-Mizzi said after collecting these narrations and others: “His virtues and excellences are very many.” (Tahdhib al-Kamal 16:5-24)

It has been mentioned in other articles that it was transmitted with authentic chains from ‘Abd Allah ibn al-Mubarak that he said: “When the opinion of Abu Hanifah and Sufyan concur on something, that is strong,” (Tarikh Baghdad 15:471) “the greatest faqih of people, is Abu Hanifah,” “I have not seen the like of him in fiqh,” (Tarikh Baghdad 15:469) “If anyone has the right to issue [a legal verdict] using his opinion, Abu Hanifah has the right to issue [a legal verdict] using his opinion.” (Tarikh Baghdad 15:471) According to another report with a good (hasan) chain, ‘Abd Allah ibn al-Mubarak said Abu Hanifah was a “sign” (ayah) in “virtue” (khayr) (Tarikh Baghdad 15:461).

9. ‘Abbad ibn al-‘Awwam (no. 12909, 13092, 16257, 26182)

‘Abbad ibn al-‘Awwam (115 – 185) Abu Sahl al-Wasiti is also a narrator found in the six collections of hadith. Ibn Sa‘d said: “He was from the nobles amongst men in all his affairs.” Yahya ibn Ma‘in, Abu Dawud, al-‘Ijli, al-Nasa’i, Abu Hatim and al-Bazzar said he is thiqah. (Tahdhib al-Kamal 14:140-5)

10. ‘Amr ibn Muhammad (no. 18274)

Amr ibn Muhammad al-‘Anqari al-Kufi (d. 199) is also a narrator found in all six books, although inSahih al-Bukhari his narration is only used for support (istishhad). Ahmad ibn Hanbal, al-Nasa’i and al-‘Ijli said he is trustworthy. (Tahdhib al-Kamal 22:220-3)

11. ‘Abd al-Rahim ibn Sulayman (no. 29599/33443)

‘Abd al-Rahim ibn Sulayman al-Kinani (d. 187) is a narrator found in all six collections. Yahya ibn Ma‘in, Abu Dawud and al-Daraqutni said he is thiqah. Al-‘Ijli said: “Trustworthy, pious, with many hadiths.” He was also known to have authored a number of books. (Tahdhib al-Kamal 18:36-9)

12. Abu Usamah (no. 30561, 35688)

Hammad ibn Usamah ibn Zayd (120 – 201) is also a narrator found in all six collections. Ahmad ibn Hanbal said he is thiqah and “the most learned of people about the conditions of people.” He also said: “How strong he was! He almost never erred.” Yahya ibn Ma‘in, Ibn Sa‘d, al-‘Ijli and al-Daraqutni said he is thiqah. It was reported from Abu Usamah that he said: “I wrote with these two fingers of mine 100,000 hadiths.” He was known to be from the constant worshippers (nussak) and and to have been extremely intelligent (Tahdhib al-Kamal 7:217-24).

Teachers:

1. Hammad (no. 1710, 5400, 5876, 5881, 6222, 9434, 9437, 9580, 10125, 11053, 12388, 12401, 12532, 12602, 12909, 13092, 15124, 16257, 17599, 17775, 18685, 21106, 24313, 27562, 27713, 28611, 29099, 30561)

Abu Isma‘il Hammad ibn Abi Sulayman al-Ash‘ari (d. 120) was the first and primary teacher of Imam Abu Hanifah. His narrations are found in all six collections of hadith, although in Sahih al-Bukhari they are without chain (mu‘allaq). He narrated from the Sahabi Anas ibn Malik (d. 93), and from the famous Tabi‘i, Sa‘id ibn Jubayr (38-95 H), and others. His primary teacher was Ibrahim al-Nakha‘i, a major scholar of hadith and fiqh from the Tabi‘in, who was the most learned regarding the opinions of ‘Abd Allah ibn Mas‘ud and his students. Ibn Abi Hatim narrated with his chain from ‘Abd al-Malik ibn Iyas: “I asked Ibrahim [al-Nakha‘i]: ‘Who should we ask after you?’ He said: ‘Hammad.’” Yahya ibn Ma‘in and al-Nasa’i said he is thiqah. Al-‘Ijli said: “Hammad ibn Abi Sulayman, a Kufan, trustworthy. He was the greatest jurist from the companions of Ibrahim.” Dawud al-Ta’i said: “Hammad ibn Abi Sulayman was generous with food and he was generous with dinars and dirhams.” (Tahdhib al-Kamal 7:269-79)

Al-Dhahabi said under the biography of Hammad ibn Abi Sulayman in Siyar A‘lam al-Nubala’: “The greatest faqih from the inhabitants of Kufa were ‘Ali and Ibn Mas’ud. The greatest faqih from their companions was ‘Alqamah. The greatest faqih from his companions was Ibrahim [al-Nakha’i]. The greatest faqih from the companions of Ibrahim was Hammad [ibn Abi Sulayman]. The greatestfaqih from the companions of Hammad was Abu Hanifah. The greatest faqih from his companions was Abu Yusuf. The companions of Abu Yusuf spread to the furthest regions, and the greatest faqihfrom them is Muhammad [ibn al-Hasan al-Shaybani]. The greatest faqih from the companions of Muhammad is Muhammad Abu ‘Abd Allah al-Shafi’i. Allah (Exalted is He) have mercy on them all.” Siyar A’lam al-Nubala (5:236)

2. ‘Ata’ (no. 6147, 21925)

‘Ata ibn Abi Rabah (ca. 27 – 115) was the greatest of Imam Abu Hanifah’s teachers as he himself mentioned (see further down below), and he has many narrations found in all six of the famous collections of hadith. One of the scholars said: “‘Ata’ was black, blind in one-eye, snub-nosed, lame and limp and then he became blind after this, yet he was trustworthy [in transmitting hadith], a jurist and a scholar possessing many hadiths!” (Tahdhib al-Kamal, 20:76) He met 200 companions of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him), and he would issue fatwa in the presence of the companions, such that Ibn ‘Abbas would say to questioners: “O people of Makkah! Do you gather your questions to me, when Ibn Abi Rabah is amongst you?!” (ibid. 20:77) (Tahdhib al-Kamal 20:69-86)

The two reports of Abu Hanifah reporting from him in the Musannaf are in the form of fatwas which he took from him. In the first, Abu Hanifah asked ‘Ata’ about an illegitimately born man leading the people in prayer, and he replied: “There is no harm in it – is there not from amongst them those who pray and fast more than us?” This indicates that Imam Abu Hanifah took both fiqh and hadith (an example was given in the previous post) from ‘Ata’ ibn Abi Rabah.

3. ‘Alqamah ibn Marthad (no. 11124)

‘Alqamah ibn Marthad al-Hadrami’s (d. 126) hadiths are also found in all six collections.  (Tahdhib al-Kamal 20:308-11)

4. Kathir al-Rammah (no. 16941)

Ibn Hibban mentions him in his Kitab al-Thiqat as follows: “Kathir ibn ‘Abd Allah ibn Aslam al-Rammah, a Kufan who narrated from Nafi‘ from Ibn ‘Umar…Isma‘il ibn Hammad ibn Abi Sulayman narrated from him.” (Kitab al-Thiqat 7:353)

5. Al-Haytham (no. 18274, 25743, 28902)

His full name is al-Haytham ibn Habib al-Kufi al-Sayrafi. He was declared trustworthy by Ibn Ma‘in, Abu Zur‘ah and Abu Hatim. He was recommended by Shu‘bah ibn al-Hajjaj for those wishing to narrate from Kufan scholars. His narrations are found in the Marasil of Abu Dawud.  (Tahdhib al-Kamal 30:369-70)

6. ‘Ammar ibn ‘Imran al-Hamdani (no. 18841)

He is probably ‘Ammar ibn ‘Imran al-Ju‘fi who was declared thiqah by al-‘Ijli (Misbah al-Arib 2:410)

7. Ibrahim ibn Muhammad ibn al-Muntashir (no. 26182)

He is a narrator found in the six collections of hadith. He narrated from Anas ibn Malik, and this particular report of Abu Hanifah from him is from Anas ibn Malik (see below). Ja‘far al-Ahmar said: “He was from the most virtuous of those we saw at Kufa in his time.” He was declared thiqah by a number of authorities, including al-Nasa’i, Ahmad, Abu Hatim, Ibn Hibban, al-‘Ijli and others. (Tahdhib al-Kamal 2:183-4)

8. ‘Asim ibn Bahdalah (no. 29599/33443)

‘Asim ibn Bahdalah or ‘Asim ibn Abi al-Najud al-Kufi is the famous founder of one of the seven readings of the Qur’an, and the commonest reading known as “Hafs from ‘Asim” is from the narration of his student from him. He is a narrator of hadith found in the six collections.  He acquired his knowledge of Qur’an recitation from Zirr ibn Hubaysh who acquired it from ‘Abd Allah ibn Mas‘ud who said: “I took more than seventy chapters [of the Qur’an directly] from the mouth of the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him and grant him peace)” (Sahih al-Bukhari) and the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said: “Whoever it pleases to recited the Qur’an freshly as it was revealed, then let him read according to the recitation of Ibn Umm ‘Abd [i.e. ‘Abd Allah ibn Mas‘ud].” (Musnad Ahmad, Sunan Ibn Majah) (Tahdhib al-Kamal 13:473-80)

9. ‘Awn ibn ‘Abd Allah (no. 35688)

‘Awn ibn ‘Abd Allah ibn ‘Utbah ibn Mas‘ud al-Kufi al-Zahid (ca. 50 – ca. 115) was the grandson of the Sahabi ‘Utbah ibn Mas‘ud, and he is a narrator found in the six collections of hadith besidesSahih al-Bukhari. He was a Tabi‘i who narrated from a number of the younger companions. Al-‘Ijli, Ahmad ibn Hanbal, Yahya ibn Ma‘in, Ibn Sa‘d and al-Nasa’i said he is thiqah. ‘Awn ibn ‘Abd Allah said he prayed behind Abu Hurayrah (d. 59) situating his birth around the middle of the first century. He was known as an ascetic who would frequently remember the afterlife and weep. Musa ibn Abi ‘Isa narrated that when ‘Awn would narrate to them, his beard would become wet with tears. Maslamah ibn Ja‘far narrated that ‘Awn would say: “May I be destroyed! How can I become heedless of my soul while the Angel of Death is not heedless of my soul?! May I be destroyed! How can I claim I have my intellect while I put to waste my share of the afterlife?! May I be destroyed! May I be destroyed! Nay, woe to me! Woe to me! Destruction is inevitable for me if I die proceeding upon the disobedience of my Lord.” Then he would cry until his beard became wet with tears. At his death, he distributed all his properties to the poor. It was reported from ‘Awn that he said: “Those before us would assign for their worldly life whatever was left over from their afterlife, while you assign for your afterlife whatever is left over from your worldly life.” He also said: “I don’t think a person looks at the faults of men but from a heedlessness which has made him to forget himself.” (Tahdhib al-Kamal 22:453-61)

The Marfu‘ Narrations of Abu Hanifah from the Musannaf of Ibn Abi Shaybah

1. Ibn Abi Shaybah narrates: ‘Abbad ibn al-‘Awwam narrated to us from Abu Hanifah from Ibrahim ibn Muhammad ibn al-Muntashir from Anas ibn Malik: He said:

2. Ibn Abi Shaybah narrates: Abu Mu‘awiyah narrated to us from Abu Hanifah from ‘Alqamah ibn Marthad from Ibn Buraydah from his father, he said:

The Scholarly Acceptance of Imam Abu Hanifah’s Pronouncements on al-Jarh wa al-Ta’dil

‘Allamah Zafar Ahmad al-’Uthmani wrote in his Abu Hanifah wa Ashabuhu al-Muhaddithun: “Know that the opinions of Imam Abu Hanifah in al-Jarh wa al-Ta’dil (narrator-criticism) and the principles of hadith were accepted and received from him by the ‘ulama of this field. They quoted him in their books as proof or for consideration, just as they took from Imam Ahmad, al-Bukhari, Ibn Ma’in, Ibn al-Madini, and other scholars of this field. This shows you his great standing in [the science of] hadith and his expansive knowledge and mastery.” (Abu Hanifah wa Ashabuhu al-Muhaddithun, Idarat al-Qur’an wa al-’Ulum al-Islamiyyah, p. 45)

I will quote below a few examples of the scholarly acceptance of Imam Abu Hanifah’s pronouncements in this important field:

1. Al-Saymari narrates in his published book Akhbar Abi Hanifah wa Ashabih: Muhammad ibn ‘Imran ibn Musa al-Marzubani reported to us: Muhammad ibn Makhlad al-‘Attar narrated to us: Abu Musa Qays al-Mu’addib narrated to us: Suwayd ibn Sa‘id narrated to us: Sufyan ibn ‘Uyaynah narrated to us:

This chain is hasan: Abu ‘Abd Allah al-Husayn ibn ‘Ali ibn Muhammad Al-Saymari (351 – 436) is a Hanafi faqih and muhaddith who narrated from al-Daraqutni and Ibn Shahin, and is saduqaccording to al-Khatib (Tarikh Baghdad 8:634-5); Abu ‘Ubayd Allah Muhammad ibn ‘Imran ibn Musa al-Marzubani (296 – 384) is thiqah according to al-‘Atiqi. (Tarikh Baghdad 4:227-9); Muhammad ibn Makhlad al-‘Attar (d. 331) is thiqah according to al-Daraqutni (Tarikh Baghdad 4:501); Abu Musa Qays ibn Ibrahim ibn Qays al-Tawabiqi al-Mu’addib (d. 284), al-Daraqutni said he is acceptable (salih) (Tarikh Baghdad 14:478-9); Suwayd ibn Sa‘id ibn Sahl al-Harawi (140 – 240) is thiqah according to Ahmad ibn Hanbal, and a narrator of Muslim (Tahdhib al-Kamal)

The same narration was also narrated by Ibn ‘Abd al-Barr through a different chain:

Ibn ‘Abd al-Barr said: [Abu Ya‘qub Yusuf ibn al-Dakhil narrated in his book Fada’il Abi Hanifah wa Akhbaruhu]: Abu l-‘Abbas al-Farid narrated to us: Muhammad ibn Isma‘il [al-Sa’igh] narrated to us: Suwayd ibn Sa‘id al-Anbari narrated to us: I heard Sufyan ibn ‘Uyaynah say:

al-Intiqa fi Fada’il al-A’immat al-Thalathah, p. 199

Ibn al-Dakhil (d. 388) is described as the “muhaddith of Makkah” by al-Dhahabi in Siyar A‘lam al-Nubala, but besides this there is no other criticism or praise of him, although his biography is known. Abu al-‘Abbas Muhammad ibn al-Husayn al-Farid, his reliability is unknown. Muhammad ibn Isma‘il al-Sa’igh (d. 276) is thiqah according to Abu Dawud and al-Dhahabi. Hence, although the chain is weak because of the unknown narrator in the chain, it is not “very weak” (da‘if jiddan) that it cannot be used as a supporting narration. This narration therefore strengthens the previous one.

The narration also corresponds with the information known about Sufyan ibn ‘Uyaynah (107 – 198) from the books of Rijal. As mentioned in Taqrib, he “was the strongest narrator from ‘Amr ibn Dinar (45 – 126).” Ibn ‘Uyaynah himself referred to ‘Amr ibn Dinar as “thiqah thiqah thiqah” – the repetition is for emphasis. And it is known some major Kufan narrators like Waki‘ ibn al-Jarrah and Yahya ibn Zakariyyah ibn Abi Za’idah narrated from him as mentioned in Tahdhib al-Tahdhib (4:118). Waki‘, as mentioned in an earlier post, would issue fatwas according to the opinions of Abu Hanifah, and Yahya ibn Zakariyya ibn Abi Za’idah, who was the strongest and greatest narrator in Kufa after Sufyan al-Thawri, is known to have been a “student of Abu Hanifah” as mentioned in al-Dhahabi’sTadhkirat al-Huffaz.

After mentioning the abovementioned narration, ‘Allamah Zafar Ahmad al-‘Uthmani says:

Abu Hanifah wa Ashabuhu al-Muhaddithun, p. 17

2. Imam al-Tirmidhi narrates in his Kitab al-‘Ilal: Mahmud ibn Ghaylan narrated to us: He said: Abu Yahya al-Himmani narrated to us: He said: I heard Abu Hanifah say: “I have not seen anyone a greater liar than Jabir al-Ju‘fi (d. 128), nor anyone more virtuous that ‘Ata’ ibn Abi Rabah (27 – 115).” (Al-Jami‘ al-Kabir, Dr. Bashshar ‘Awwad Ma‘ruf ed., 6:233)

Imam al-Tirmidhi narrated this in the context of determining the provenance of the science of al-Jarh wa al-Ta’dil. The narrators in al-Tirmidhi’s chain are reliable: Mahmud ibn Ghaylan (d. 239) is a narrator found in the Sahihs of al-Bukhari and Muslim, and declared thiqah by Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani in al-Taqrib (Tahrir al-Taqrib 3:353). Abu Yahya ‘Abd al-Hamid al-Himmani (d. 202) is also a narrator found in the Sahihs of al-Bukhari and Muslim, and declared thiqah by Ibn Ma‘in, al-Nasa’i, Ibn Qani‘ and others, although some invalid criticism was levelled at him because of irja’. (Tahrir al-Taqrib 2:300-1)

This narration has also been quoted in the books of Rijal under the biographies of Jabir al-Ju’fi and ‘Ata’ ibn Abi Rabah (e.g. Tahdhib al-Tahdhib 2:48), illustrating the acceptance of Imam Abu Hanifah’s view amongst the later experts of this science.

3. In another post, I also quoted Imam Abu Hanifah’s authentic criticism of deviant groups:

Al-Khatib al-Baghdadi narrates: al-Khallal reported to us: al-Hariri reported to us that ‘Ali ibn Muhammad al-Nakha‘i narrated to them: Muhammad ibn al-Hasan ibn Mukram narrated to us: Bishr ibn al-Walid narrated to us: I heard Abu Yusuf say: Abu Hanifah said: “Two groups of the worst of people are from Khurasan: the Jahmiyyah and the Mushabbihah (antropomorphists),” and he probably said “Muqatiliyyah (followers of Muqatil ibn Sulayman (d. 150 H)).” (Tarikh Baghdad 15:514-15) Dr. Bashshar ‘Awwad Ma‘ruf said: “Its isnad is sahih, its narrators are trustworthy (thiqat).”

With the same chain, al-Khatib narrates: al-Nakha‘i said: Muhammad ibn ‘Ali ibn ‘Affan narrated to us: Yahya ibn ‘Abd al-Hamid ibn ‘Abd al-Rahman al-Himmani narrated to us from his father: I heard Abu Hanifah say: “Jahm ibn Safwan is a kafir.” (Tarikh Baghdad 15:515) Dr. Bashshar ‘Awwad Ma‘ruf said: “Its isnad is hasan.”

Imam Abu Hanifah’s opinion on Jahm is in fact quoted in the books of Rijal. Al-’Asqalani said inTahdhib al-Tahdhib (vol 10:281): “Muhammad ibn Sima’ah (who is thiqah according al-Saymari and saduq according to al-’Asqalani in al-Taqrib) narrated from Abu Yusuf from Abu Hanifah that he said: ‘Jahm went overboard in negation until he said: He [i.e. Allah] is nothing, and Muqatil went overboard in affirmation until He deemed Allah to be like His creation.’” Al-’Asqalani also quotes him saying: “Two disgusting opinions came to us from the east: Jahm the negator [of Allah’s attributes] and Muqatil the anthropomorphist.”

For more examples of the recorded statements of Imam Abu Hanifah on al-Jarh wa al-Ta‘dil from Tahdhib al-Tahdhib, see Abu Hanifah wa Ashabuhu al-Muhaddithun, pp. 45-7.

[Article taken from  http://darulmaarif.com/imam-abu-hanifahs-rank-in-hadith/]

By Mawlana Muntasir Zaman

“What cosmic soul is imprisoned in that human body?” mused the learned Abū Zahrah (d. 1974 AH) in utter admiration—indeed, “it is the soul of al-Kawtharī!” he proclaimed. [1] In recent memory, relatively few scholars have managed to synthesize expertise in, not merely acquaintance with, the vast majority of Islamic sciences. Shaykh Muhammad Zāhid al-Kawtharī (or Mehmet Zahit Kevsari) is arguably theforemost contender for that accolade; his polymathic oeuvre leaves one hard-pressed to pinpoint his forte, [2] from the intricacies of philosophy[3] to the minutiae of Arabic grammar,[4] not to mention his undisputed command of theology,[5] Hadīth,[6] and Islamic law.[7] The ripple effect of his peerless intellectual contributions is strongly felt in Islamic seminaries throughout the world till this day.

A modest amount of literature is available on the life and thought of al-Kawtharī (henceforth Kawtharī), To add to the existing material, particularly for an English-speaking readership, the present article aims to delineate the most salient features of his scholarly career, provide a synopsis of his modus operandi vis-à-vis prophetic and non-prophetic reports, and examine the merits of two major points of contention. Relevant details on certain passages have been relegated to the footnotes for the purpose of brevity.

Curriculum Vitae

Born in the year 1296 AH/1879 CE in Düzce,[8] Turkey, Kawtharī was of Circassian decent with an ancestor bearing the name Kawthar—hence the sobriquet al-Kawtharī. He received his elementary education from local scholars, and then moved to the vibrant capital of the Ottoman Caliphate, Istanbul, where he attended lessons in the prestigious medrese complex of the Fatih Mosque.[9] After successfully completing the fifteen-year curriculum in 1325 AH/1907 CE,[10] he enjoyed a distinguished career as a lecturer at his alma mater and was appointed Deputy of the Office of Shaykh al-Islam.[11] Fleeing from the Republican militias of Ataturk, in the winter of 1922 he emigrated, with a heavy heart, from his homeland to the unfamiliar soil of Egypt, leaving behind a once-proud empire that now stood on the brink of collapse. The following thirty years were tirelessly spent in Cairo, a hotbed for competing paradigms of Islamic thought; the first decade of his sojourn was punctuated with two year-long visits to Damascus.[12] He was married to a woman of proverbial piety and patience who stood by his side through thick and thin until their last moments; together they had four children, one son and three daughters—sadly, they were laid to rest before their father. After struggling with poor health for several years, he breathed his last in Dhul Qa‘dah 1371 AH/August 1952 CE (Allah have mercy on him).[13]

The raison d’être of his repertoire was his gifted memory.[14] He would effortlessly quote from memory “vanished pages from the imperial libraries of Istanbul.”[15] Shortly before his demise, while breaking fast with a close pupil, he dictated from memory insights from his readings at the Topkapı Library—he had not visited the library since his emigration well over a quarter-century earlier.[16] His extensive knowledge of rare manuscripts, Arabic and non-Arabic, from libraries throughout the Muslim world was a novelty due to which he eclipsed others in his league.[17] Fortunately, he left behind a wide-ranging oeuvre that comprised of books, treatises, biographies, articles,[18] and annotations in Arabic, Persian, Turkish,[19] many of which have yet to see the light of day.[20] His legacy was carried on by his students,[21] notable among whom are Ahmad Khayrī Efendi (d. 1967),[22] Husām al-Dīn al-Qudsī (d. 1980), ‘Abd al-Fattāh Abū Ghuddah (d. 1997),[23] and Muhammad Amīn Sirāj (b. 1932),[24] apart from droves of others who received authorization from him.[25]

His exile in Cairo was riddled with impoverished living conditions; despite the odds, his self-sufficiency and contentment were truly commendable. Affluent well-wishers incessantly proffered monetary gifts, but he would politely refuse even though at times he was pressured by circumstances to sell his books—his lifeblood—to make ends meet.[26] When the India-based research center, al-Majlis al-‘Ilmī,[27] gifted him four copies of Jamāl al-Dīn al-Zayla‘ī’s magnum opus, Nasb al-Rāyah li Ahādīth al-Hidāyah, as a token of appreciation he compensated them with fifty copies of his book al-Nukat al-Tarīfah; he could not bear the thought of receiving a gift without returning the favor.[28] Pandering to the wealthy and ruling class was a Faustian bargain he was not prepared to make. His courageous opposition to modern curricular reform[29] and gratuitous government intervention[30] in Turkey is reminiscent of legendary anecdotes of al-‘Izz ibn ‘Abd al-Salam (d. 660 AH)[31] and Muhyī al-Dīn al-Nawawī (d. 676 AH).[32]

Cairo’s volatile scholastic and socio-political milieu was diametrically opposite to the relatively stable intellectual homogeneity in Ottoman Turkey during his tenure as Deputy of the Office of Shaykh al-Islam. This geographical shift sparked within him a new-found zeal.[33] In an unflinching commitment to preserve the traditional teachings of Islam, which he believed were slowly sinking in quicksand, he engaged with schisms of all sorts: he minced no words in his forceful disagreement with modern thinkers who drank from ‘the brackish waters of the West;’[34] he raged against liberal reformists who championed vague slogans of common good as a panacea to all conceivable ills;[35] and he administered the coup de grace to anti-madhhab advocates.[36]

The highlight of his intellectual career was the stimulating dialogues and correspondence with scholars of varying orientations, such as the Ottoman Shaykh al-Islām Mustafā Sabrī (d. 1954),[37] the Moroccan polymath Ahmad al-Ghumarī (d. 1961),[38] and the Yemeni Hadīth scholar ‘Abd al-Rahmān al-Mu‘allimī (d. 1966).[39] Given their diverse background, it is not surprising that these exchanges often brimmed with scholarly fury, but, in the same breath, were not bereft of the mutual decorum characteristic of Islamic dialogues of yesteryear.[40] After disagreeing with Yūnus ibn ‘Abd al-A‘lā (d. 264 AH) on a given issue, Imām al-Shāfī‘ī (d. 204 AH) gently held his hand and asked, “Can we not remain brothers even though we differ on this issue?” [41]

Methodology & Contentions

In the arena of polemics, even the victor seldom exits unscathed—every action has an equal and opposite reaction. Kawtharī, who was in the midst of Cairo’s heated intellectual feuds, was no exception. His damaging critique of not a few groups earned him the ire of detractors who criticized him for a number of perceived flaws, chief among them an excessive partisanship for his legal school and methodological inconsistency. The proceeding explanation, to be sure, is not to say he was absolved of errors—that is intrinsic to human nature. But many of Kawtharī’s supposed shortcomings can be assuaged to a large extent by better understanding his methodology. As such, a word on his modus operandi vis-à-vis prophetic and non-prophetic reports is in order.

An unwavering adherence to the widely-transmitted practice of Muslims is a theme that pervades his works.[42] Time and again, he assures his readers that the legitimacy of his stance is supported by the inherited practice of the vast majority of Companions and Successors.[43] He considered it paramount to gauge the reliability of isolated reports against constants drawn from the aggregate ethos of Islamic teachings; this is typified by his fellow Cairene Hanafī scholar Abū Ja‘far al-Tahāwī (d. 321 AH), who had formulated his unique Hadīth-cum-legal hermeneutics a millennium earlier.[44] More specifically, he advised that a report about/from someone should be studied in light of what is established about him.[45]Moreover, an in-depth reading of history was the sine qua non of his methodology as he took great pains to contextualize and note factors that may have influenced a scholar’s Weltanschauung.[46] To recapitulate his modus operandi in one word: nuance.

Critics derided him for an alleged slavish attachment to the eponym of his legal school and an equally stubborn refusal to accept any critique against him.[47] At the outset, it should be noted that partisanship (ta‘assub) is not a categorically negative quality. That many a prestigious scholar was extolled by the likes of al-Dāraqutnī (d. 385 AH)[48] and al-Hākim (d. 405 AH)[49] for partisanship for noble causes like the Sunnah is quite telling. But in order for it to be praiseworthy, one should be convinced of the veracity of his cause (with the possibility of error in probable issues) and substantiate it with cogent evidence. Given that partisanship (ta’ssaub) in common parlance carries a derogatory connotation, an appropriate substitute would be firm adherence (tamassuk).[50] Kawtharī himself warned of the dangers of odious fanaticism to one’s school since, inter alia, it prompts one to dismiss persuasive arguments as flimsy casuistry, and vice versa.[51] Leading by example, he had no qualms in abandoning the position of Imām Abū Hanīfah in the face of convincing evidence to the contrary, as in the issue of endowments.[52] With this mind, he is to be excused, even commended, for an unflinching devotion to his legal school, because ultimately he was defending a tradition that like others exercised legitimate judgment to arrive at the most accurate interpretation of the foundational sources of Islam. In many cases, his firmness was accentuated by the vehemence of the criticisms, which drove him to reciprocate accordingly.[53]

That a considerable amount of his oeuvre relates to the Hanafī school, in one way or another, was not an act of fanaticism. Rather, given his undisputed proficiency in the school, he was the most qualified to undertake such projects, which he accomplished with competence. He also penned a number of works on other schools, such as a biographical tract on al-Layth ibn Sa‘d (d. 175 AH), who founded an independent legal school, and he encouraged the publication of Ibn Abī Hātim al-Rāzī’s Adāb al-Shāfi‘ī wa Manāqibuhū, for which he also wrote a forward, to name a few.[54]

The second contention raised against him is methodological inconsistency. In other words, he is guilty of criticizing a narrator in one place while deeming him reliable elsewhere. This contention, however, stems from an inadequate understanding of Kawthrī’s methodology. Given that nuance placed an important role in his methodology, he would apply his discretion as a Hadīth expert when employing the reports of a narrator as per the context. This approach is in line with pioneering scholars of Hadīth like Imāms al-Bukhārī (d. 256 AH)[55] and Muslim (d. 261 AH) [56] who would assess the reports of a narrator based on the context through a rigorous selection process.[57] Kawtharī’s treatment of the narrator Muhammad ibn Humayd al-Rāzī (d. 248 AH) is a striking case in point. In a discussion on intersession, he faults Ibn ‘Abd al-Hādī (d. 744 AH) for citing only those who impugned al-Rāzī; as counterweight to this one-sided expose, he highlights the opinions of those who spoke approvingly of him.[58] Contrast this with an article where he exposes the flawed and disingenuous approach of Orientalists who cast doubts on Islam by misconstruing certain reports from books of history and Sīrah; here he states that al-Rāzī’s probity is disputed, but many have vehemently impugned him.[59] Prima facie this may seem inconsistent: in one place, he points out the positive of the narrator while in another other he points out the negative. Far from inconsistency, this demonstrates deep insight. In both scenarios, he openly acknowledges that opinions vary regarding al-Rāzī, but as per the demands of the context—one a rejoinder to a one-sided intra-Islamic polemic while another a response to biased anti-Islamic criticism—he accentuates one opinion over the other.[60]

In a similar manner, he would emphasize an aspect regarding an otherwise unreliable narrator that may have caught the attention of a scholar and prompted him to overlook the narrator’s shortcomings. Consider the case of al-Mughīrah ibn Ziyād (d. 152 AH) where Kawtharī states that although his probity is disputed, since a number of authorities have deemed him reliable and the compilers of the Sunan works transmitted from him, “it is not surprising that a mujtahid would employ his narrations.”[61] In this example, he is clearly not giving the green light of categorical acceptance; instead, he is drawing attention to one dimension that, in tandem with external factors, may have caught the attention of a scholar who ipso facto employed his reports.[62] It is therefore paramount to bear in mind the distinct, multifarious methods scholars devised in developing their views.[63]

Conclusion

Like other prominent figures whose lives decorate the annals of Islamic history, Kawtharī led an enviable life, one that serves as an example par excellence for the scholarly fraternity, in particular. It is tempting to exhaust the many inspirational episodes that fill his biography. This brief expose, however, does not pretend to be an exhaustive study of his life and thought; that would require an encyclopedic, albeit highly appreciated, undertaking. In the foregoing, we momentarily walked in the shoes of Kawtharī, from his humble beginnings in Düzce to his ascendancy in the upper scholarly echelons of the Ottoman Caliphate to his life-changing exile in Cairo. His self-sufficiency, humility, and generosity only enhanced the value of his peerless scholarly acumen. Charges of methodological inconsistency and partisanship for his school of law stem from an inadequate understanding of his modus operandi. Be it as it may, with the passing of Kawtharī, the Muslim world not only mourned the loss of an irreplaceable scholar, but, more precisely, it also sounded the death knell for the remnant of an age gone past.

[1] Abū Zahrah, al-Imām al-Kawtharī in al-Maqālāt, p.15.

[2] Surprisingly, his forte appears to have been Qur’ānic studies, based on the following reasons. First, Ibrāhīm al-Akīnī, his primary teacher, was a specialist, inter alia, in the science of Qirā’ah; see: al-Kawtharī, al-Tahrīr al-Wajīz, p.43. Second, he was part of the faculty of specialization in Hadīth and Qur’ānic exegesis where he taught Qur’ānic studies for a lengthy period; see: Ibrāhīm al-Sarrāwī, Introduction to Tabaqāt Ibn Sa‘d, sec. dāl. Finally, his most celebrated book is a two-volume introduction to Qur’ānic studies—it was left behind in Istanbul prior to his migration and is yet to be located; see: Khayrī, al-Imām al-Kawtharī in al-Maqālāt, p.451; al-Kawtharī, al-Maqālāt, p.22.

[3] For instance, he critically edited and annotated ‘Abd Allah al-Batalyawsī’s (d. 521 AH) al-Haqā’iq fī al-Matālib al-‘Aliyah al-Falsafiyyah al-‘Awīsah, an explanatory treatise on certain delicate philosophical concepts.

[4] In fact, his first work was a Persian poem on Arabic grammar entitled Nazm ‘Awāmil al-I‘rāb. He also wrote a one-volume critique on Muhammad al-Akīnī’s gloss on al-Fawā’id al-Diyā’iyyah (that is, ‘Abd al-Rahmān al-Jāmī’s [d. 998 AH] renowned commentary, commonly known as Sharh Mullā Jāmī fi al-Nahw, on Ibn Hājib’s [d. 646 AH] al-Kāfiyah). This is in addition to a ten-page treatise where he resolves the ambiguity of a passage from al-Muharram’s supercommentary on Jāmī’s aforementioned book. See: Khayrī, al-Imām al-Kawtharī in al-Maqālāt, p.450. For a glimpse into the sophisticated nature of Jāmī’s commentary, see: Moosa, Ebrahim (2015), What Is a Madrasa?, pp.117-18.

[5] Among the theological works he critically edited and annotated were Ibn Qutaybah’s al-Ikhtilāf fī al-Lafż, al-Bayhaqī’s al-Asmā’ wa al-Sifāt, Imām al-Haramayn’s al-‘Aqīdah al-Niżāmiyyah, and a number of treatises attributed to Imām Abū Hanīfah, such as al-Alim wa al-Muta‘allim and al-Fiqh al-Absat.

[6] This is clear to anyone who even reads his books out of curiosity. His marginal comments on his personal copy of ‘Abd al-Hayy al-Kattānī’s Fahras al-Fahāris are brilliant examples—among countless others—of his precision in the transmission of Hadīth. Muhammad Al Rashīd reproduced these comments in: al-Imām Zāhid al-Kawtharī wa Ishāmātuhū fī ‘Ilm al-Riwāyah wa al-Isnād, p. 74 ff.

[7] See: Abū al-Hājj, Athar al-Imām al-Kawtharī fī Nusrat wa Ta’yīd al-Madhāhib al-Fiqhiyyah al-Sunniyyah, p.30 ff.; al-Bayūmī, Muhammad Zāhid al-Kawtharī Rāwiyat al-‘Asr wa Amīn al-Turāth al-Islāmī in al-Muqaddimāt, p.19; al-Bannūrī, Introduction to al-Maqālāt, pp.7-8.

[8] To be precise, he was born in a village called al-Hājj Hasan Efendi, named after his father who had founded it, situated three miles south of Düzce. See: al-Kawtharī, al-Tahrīr al-Wajīz, p.43.

[9]  Classical Ottoman scholarship for the most part was shaped by three seminaries of learning: (1) the first seminary in Nicea in 1331 CE by Orhan Gazi; (2) the Fatih Mosque and Complex with its Sahn-i Seman (lit. eight courtyards, or, madrasas) by Mehmet the Conqueror in Constantinople in 1471 CE; and (3) the Süleymaniye Mosque under the instruction of Sultan Süleyman in 1557 CE. See:  Ozervarli, Sait (2016), Theology in Ottoman Lands in The Oxford Handbook of Islamic Theology (ed. Sabine Scmidtke), Oxford: Oxford University Press, p.570. On the vibrant scholarly activity in Ottoman lands during the 17^th century, see Khaled El Rouayheb’s phenomenal study “Islamic Intellectual History in the Seventeenth Century: Scholarly Current in the Ottoman Empire and the Maghreb.” By examining the works of various scholars in the Ottoman Empire and North Africa, the author argues against the notion that the 17^th century was a period of intellectual stagnation in the Muslim world, a notion that “risks reinforcing the impression that on the one side of the Mediterranean in the seventeenth century one encounters Galileo, Kepler, Bacon, Newton, Descartes, Malebranche, Spinoza, Locke, and Leibniz, whereas on the other side one encounters popular chroniclers, Sufi diarists, popularizers of medical or occult knowledge, and the like” (p.3).

[10] At the medrese complex, a prospective student would select a teacher of his choice with whom he would spend the following 15 years learning all the sciences. The teacher would deliver only two lessons daily, for which he would prepare throughout the day. Upon graduation, a student would in effect become a carbon copy of his mentor. The teacher would then restart the cycle with a new batch of students for another 15 years. Kawtharī’s teacher at first was Ibrāhīm Haqqī al-Akīnī (d. 1318/1901) and after he passed away he completed the course with ‘Alī Zayn al-‘Abidin al-Alasūnī (d. 1329/1911) in compliance with al-Akīnī’s bequest; this was apart from select books he studied privately with other teachers. On the intriguing pedagogy employed at the Fātih Mosque, see: al-Kawtharī, al-Tahrīr al-Wajīz, pp.9, 32-33. For a light hearted, yet miraculous, incident that occurred during preparation for his final exam, see: ibid., p.38.

[11] In the Ottoman Caliphate, the office of Shaykh al-Islām, the highest scholarly position, was designated to the head of religious affairs. This title was used earlier unofficially to refer to a scholar of great repute and an authority in religious matters. See: Abū Ghuddah, al-‘Ulamā’ al-‘Uzzāb, p.46. Since the Shaykh al-Islām was often preoccupied with political affairs, he was appointed three deputies: one to pass legal verdicts; a second to head the department of education (i.e. pedagogy, scholars, and religious institutes); and a third to oversee judicial affairs. Kawtharī occupied the second post known as Wakīl al-Dars, akin to the post of Shaykh al-Azhar in Egypt. See: Khayrī, al-Imām al-Kawtharī, p.437; al-Kawtharī, al-Tahrīr al-Wajīz, p.38.

[12] His trips to Damascus were for purely academic reasons. He spent his time buried in the rare manuscripts held in the vaults of the Zāhiriyyah Library—days would go by without food. See: Wahbī Sulaymān, Introduction to al-Imām Zāhid al-Kawtharī wa Ishāmātuhū, p.6; Mutī‘, Tārīkh ‘Ulamā’ Dimashq, vol.3, p.417.

[13] Khayrī, al-Imām al-Kawtharī, p.429-433, 438.

[14] Interestingly, Kawtharī personally told ‘Abd al-‘Azīz al-Ghumārī that his memory was such that with one glance at a passage from a book, he would not forget the line, let alone the page; that was until a near-death experience while in Turkey where he almost drowned, after which his memory was not the same. See: al-Ghumārī, al-Safīnah, vol.1, 169; cf. Al Rashīd, al-Imām Muhammad Zāhid, p.193. This near-death experience is described in: Khayrī, al-Imām al-Kawtharī, p.435. Now, with this in mind consider the story in reference before his demise.

[15] Brown, Jonathan (2014), Misquoting Muhammad, London: Oneworld Publication, p.15.

[16] Khayrī, al-Imām al-Kawtharī, p.433.

[17] See: al-Bayūmī, Muhammad Zāhid al-Kawtharī, p.20.

[18] This is in addition to the forwards and introductions he wrote for a wide-range of books and treatises that are significant works in their own right. That many of articles and introductions were posthumously printed for a broader readership demonstrates the value these writings held in the sight of scholars. It should be noted that the present compilation of his articles is not exhaustive; Iyād al-Ghawj wrote a piece on the articles that were not included. See: al-Sarhān, Footnotes on Rasā’il al-Imām Muhammad Zāhid al-Kawtharī, pp.107-8.

[19] He appears to have written only one book in Turkish: a biography of Mujaddid Alf-e Thānī (d. 1034 AH) entitled “al-Rawd al-Nādir al-Wardī fī Tarjamat al-Imām al-Rabbānī al-Sarhindī.” See: Khayrī, al-Imām al-Kawtharī, p.451.

[20] For a list of his writings, see: Khayrī, al-Imām al-Kawtharī, pp.450-59. His writings were characterized with a succinct and lucid literary style that allowed him to write in one volume what would otherwise require several volumes. See: ‘Awwāmah, Forward to al-Musannaf, vol.20, p.10.

[21] During his tenure as professor at the Fātih Mosque, he lectured the largest class, and hundreds of students graduated under his auspices. See: al-Sarrāwī, Introduction to Tabaqāt Ibn Sa‘d, sec. dāl.

[22] He was one of Kawtharī’s closest post-migration students, whose authoritative biography is cited throughout this article. For a short biography of Ahmad Khayrī, see: Al Rashīd, al-Imām Muhammad Zāhid al-Kawtharī, pp.149-53.

[23] He enjoyed a close relationship with Kawtharī during his studies at al-Azhar. He even took on the sobriquet ‘al-Kawtharī’ and named his eldest son Muhammad Zāhid out of love for his teacher. See: Al Rashīd, al-Imām al-Muhammad Zāhid, p.164. Kawtharī gave him the agnomen Abū al-Futūh and highly praised him. See: Al Rashīd, Imdād al-Fattāh, p.146; al-Kawtharī, Introduction to Manāqib wa Adāb al-Shāfi‘ī, p.541. However, he had no qualms in openly disagreeing with his teacher on certain issues with due respect. See, for instance: Abū Ghuddah, Kalimāt fī Kashf Abātīl wa Iftirā’āt, p.38.

[24] See: Brown, Misquoting Muhammad, p.160.

[25] For a well-prepared list of his students and those who received authorization from him, see: Al Rashīd, al-Imām al-Muhammad Zāhid, p.147 ff.

[26] Al-Kawtharī (2013), Rasā’il al-Imām Muhammad Zāhid al-Kawtharī ilā al-‘Allāmah Muhammad Yūsuf al-Bannūrī, ed. Su‘ūd al-Sarhān, Jordan: Dār al-Fath, p.45. Kawtharī developed a close bond with Shaykhs Yūsuf al-Bannūrī (d. 1977) and Ahmad al-Bijnawrī (d. 1997), two exceptionally talented scholars from Deoband, when the latter arrived in Cairo in the Spring of 1938 for scholarly work at the behest of the newly founded al-Majlis al-‘Ilmī. During their short stay, they sought out Kawtharī and enjoyed his companionship; Kawtharī would later reminisce over the fruitful time they had spent together. In the following year, Kawtharī and Bannūrī began corresponding via letters—from April, 24, 1939 until February, 3, 1952 shortly before the former’s demise. After more than a decade of correspondence, Kawtharī concludes his final letter with the following tear-inducing words, “My deteriorating health prevents me from continuing this correspondence with you and with Mawlānā Abū al-Wafā’ [al-Afghānī; d. 1975]—every beginning has an end. My soul is with you, praying for you every goodness. And upon you [peace] and Allah’s mercy and blessings.” See: Ibid., pp.24, 32, 222. This page turning correspondence, of which only Kawtharī’s letters are published, is a first-hand account into many less known aspects of his life.

[27] On the history and activities of al-Majlis al-‘Ilmī, see: al-Bannūrī, Introduction to Nasb al-Rāyah, vol.1, p.2.

[28] Al-Kawtharī, Rasā’il, pp.168-69.

[29] Khayrī, al-Imām al-Kawtharī, p.430.

[30] An attempt was made to demolish a madrasah built by Sultan Mustafa III (d. 1187/1774) to make way for a shelter for disaster victims. In a bold act that cost him the leadership post as Wakīl al-Dars, Kawtharī vehemently protested the intervention on religious grounds. See: Ibid., p.437.

[31] See, for instance: Ibn Hajar, Raf‘ al-Isr, vol.1, p.240.

[32] See his letters to al-Zāhir Baybars (d. 676/1277) in: al-Sakhāwī, al-Manhal al-‘Adhb al-Rawī, p.30 ff.

[33] ‘Awwāmah, Manhaj al-Imām Muhammad Zājid al-Kawtharī fī Naqd al-Rijāl, p.5.

[34] See: al-Kawtharī, al-Maqālāt, p.203.

[35] See, for instance: ibid., p.233 ff.

[36] See, for instance: ibid., p.129.

[37] See: al-Kawtharī, al-Istibsār fī al-Tahdduth ‘an al-Jabr wa al-Ikhtiyār, p.3; Sabrī, Mawqif al-‘Aql wa al-‘Ilm wa al-‘Alam ‘ind Rabb al-‘Alamīn, vol.3, p.390 ff./cf.vol.4, p.51. Kawtharī heaps praises on him before engaging in the discussion while Mustafa Sabrī calls him “My honorable friend Shaykh Zāhid.” Also, see Muhammad Amīn Sirāj’s comments in: ‘Awwāmah, Adab al-Ikhtilāf, pp.83-84.

[38] Whatever the misunderstanding that caused the subsequent furor, Ahmad al-Ghumārī eventually ceased his critique and personally went to Kawtharī to apologize and reconcile, and he described him as a “verifying hadith scholar with expansive research;” this was verified by al-Ghumārī’s close student ‘Abd Allah al-Talīdī. See: ‘Awwāmah, Manhaj al-Imām al-Kawtharī, p.24.

[39] The to-and-fro that ensued between the two scholars stemmed from Kawtharī’s book Ta’nīb al-Khatīb, a critique on al-Khatīb al-Baghdādī’s treatment of Imām Abū Hanīfah in Tārīkh Baghdād. See: Mamdūh, Sa‘īd (2009), al-Ittijāhāt al-Hadīthiyyah fi al-Qarn al-Rābi‘ ‘Ashar, Cairo: Dār al-Basā’ir, pp.148-49; ‘Awwāmah, Manhaj al-Imām Muhammad Zāhid al-Kawtharī fī Naqd al-Rijāl, p.49 ff.; ‘Abd al-Mālik, al-Madkhal ilā ‘Ulūm al-Hadīth, p.170. In several places, al-Mu‘allimī praised Kawtharī and thanked him for directing him to the location of numerous manuscripts. See: al-Mu‘llimī, Introduction to al-Jarh wa al-Ta‘dīl, vol.1, sect. kāf/wāw; idem, al-Anwār al-Kāshifah, p.175.

[40] See, for instance: al-Subkī, Qā‘idah fī al-Jarh wa al-Ta‘dīl in Arba‘ Rasā’il fī ‘Ulūm al-Hadīth, p.23 ff.; ‘Awwāmah, Adab al-Ikhtilāf, pp.79-94, 148-57.

[41] Ibn ‘Asākir, Tārīkh Madīnat Dimashq, vol.51, p.302.

[42] He writes, “I have always called towards an adherence of the sharī‘ah of Allah by mobilizing under the flags of these imams (Allah be pleased with them all), without paying heed to dissenters on the peripherals and fundamentals.” See: al-Kawtharī, al-Sirā‘ al-Akhīr bayn al-Islām wa al-Wathaniyyah in al-Maqālāt, p.306.

[43] See, for instance: al-Kawtharī, al-Nukat al-Tarīfah, vol.2, p.539.

[44] See: al-Kawtharī, al-Hāwī, pp.20-21; al-Bakrī, Hamzah (2015), Introduction to al-Nukat al-Tarīfah, Jordan: Dār al-Fath, p.34; Shamsy, The Canonization of Islamic Law, pp.205-7.

[45] For instance, one should examine negative reports about Imām Abū Hanīfah against what is widely transmitted about him. As Kawtharī says, “authentic isolated reports cannot overrule what is widespread (al-mustafīd al-mashhūr), let alone what is concurrently transmitted (mutawātir).” See: al-Kawtharī, Ta’nīb al-Khatīb, p.31. A practical example is reports concerning Ibn Mas‘ūd’s exclusion of the mu’awwidhatayn in his copy of the Qur’ān. Reports of this nature cannot be accepted as they conflict with what is widely related that Ibn Mas‘ūd taught these sūrahs to his students, as is transmitted via six of the ten modes of Qur’ānic recitation. See: al-Kawtharī, Masāhif al-Amsār in al-Maqālāt, p.16; ‘Awwāmah, Footnotes on al-Madkhal, vol.1, p.349.

[46] Kawtharī describes this as the dakhā’il of narrator criticism, a monumental task reserved exclusively for experts in the field. See: al-Kawtharī, Fiqh Ahl al-‘Irāq, p.77; Abū Ghuddah, Mas’alat Khalq al-Qur’ān; ‘Awwamah, Athar al-Hadīth, p.32. For instance, he explains that Ibn Qutaybah’s earlier critique of Imām Abū Hanīfah was due to the ubiquitous resentment in his circles towards the Imām. This was because during the Qurānic Inquisition, some Hanafī Mu‘tazilī theologians who held judicial positions vetted Hadīth scholars vis-à-vis their beliefs; thus the latter retaliated by criticizing, unfairly, the eponym of the former’s legal school. See: al-Kawtharī, Introduction to al-Ikhtilāf fī al-Lafż, p.4; cf. Ibn ‘Abd al-Barr, Jāmi‘ Bayān al-‘Ilm wa Fadlihī, vol.2, p.1087 ff.

[47] See: al-Ghumārī, ‘Abd Allāh (1986), Bida‘ al-Tafsīr, Casablanca: Dār al-Rashād al-Hadīthah, p.179; cf. Mamdūh, al-Ittijāhāt al-Hadīthiyyah, pp.148-49.

[48] Al-Dāraqutnī praised the piety of the grammarian Ismā’īl al-Saffār (d. 341 AH) and said he was partial towards the Sunnah. See: al-Baghdādī, Tārīkh Baghdād, vol.7, p.301.

[49] Al-Hākim said regarding Abū al-Fadl al-Tūsī (d. 348 AH), “In Khurasān, he was one of the pillars of Hadīth in addition to his religiosity, asceticism, generosity, and partisanship for the People of Sunnah.” See: Ibn ‘Asākir, Tārīkh Madīnat Dimashq, vol.62, p.45.

[50]As Ibn Mullā Farrūkh (d. 1061 AH) aptly points out, scholars from all the schools of law “expressly state the impermissibility of ta’assub but the correctness of firm adherence (salābah) to the madhhab.” In this context, ta‘ssub, he continues, is a desire-driven inclination to support one’s school and to interact with another school condescendingly. See: Ibn Mullā Farrūkh, al-Qawl al-Sadīd fī Ba‘d Masā’il al-Ijtihād wa al-Taqlīd, p.46.

[51] See: al-Kawtharī, Fiqh Ahl al-‘Irāq wa Hadīthuhum, p.10.

[52] See: al-Kawtharī, Muhādathah Qadīmah Hawl al-Waqf al-Ahlī, p.192; al-Bakrī, Introduction to al-Nukat al-Tarīfah, vol.1, p.36 ff.

[53] In his critique of Imām al-Haramayn al-Juwaynī (d. 478 AH), he writes, “God willing, I will a tread a moderate path between gentleness and harshness as per the demands of the argument I will critique, proportionate to its veracity and the lack thereof, giving according to his ‘measurement scale’ without meekness and virulence.” See: al-Kawtharī, Ihqāq al-Haqq, p.15; cf. idem, Rasā’il, p.92.

[54] Al-Bayūmī, Muhammad Zāhid al-Kawtharī, pp.30-31.

[55] Ibn Hajar (d. 852 AH) explains al-Bukhārī’s reason for narrating the hadiths of ‘Abd Allah ibn Sālih, which is his modus operandi vis-à-vis narrators of this class, “Whatever he transmits from his hadiths is authentic since he sieved them from [the corpus of] his hadiths.” See: Ibn Hajar, Hudā al-Sārī, vol.1, p.415.

[56] In justifying Muslim’s transmission from Matar al-Warrāq, a narrator with questionable memory, Ibn al-Qayyim al-Jawzī (d. 751 AH) writes, “There is no fault on the part of Muslim for relating his hadiths, because he selected from the hadiths of this class what he believed they remembered just as he abandoned from the hadiths of a reliable narrator where he believed that narrator erred.” See: Ibn al-Qayyim, Zād al-Ma‘ād, vol.1, p.353.

[57] An interesting example is al-Bukhārī’s alternating between the active and passive voices as per the context when prefacing the incident of Jābir ibn ‘Abd Allah’s month’s journey to acquire one hadith. See: Ibn Hajar, Fath al-Bārī, vol.1, p.73/vol.13, p.453; cf. ‘Awāmah, Footnotes on Tadrīb al-Rāwī, vol.4, p.542.

[58] Al-Kawtharī, Mahq al-Taqawwul in al-Maqālāt, p.351. That he pointed out al-Subkī’s error too, with whom he agreed overall on the subject, and that he mentioned additional criticism on al-Rāzī demonstrate his sincere search for the correct position.

[59] Al-Kawtharī, Kalimah ‘an Khālid ibn al-Walīd wa Qatl Mālik ibn Nuwayrah in al-Maqālāt, p.400.

[60] ‘Awwāmah, Manhaj al-Imām Muhammad Zāhid al-Kawtharī, pp.20-21.

[61] Al-Kawtharī, al-Nukat al-Tarīfah, vol.1, p.220. This is brought under a hadith al-Mughīrah narrates that supports Imām Abū Hanīfah’s position on making vinegar out of wine.

[62] Al-Bakrī, Introduction to al-Nukat al-Tarīfah, vol.1, p.25.

[63] Kawtharī explains that all Sunnī scholars accepted the Prophet’s hadīths as the second source of law, but in so doing each scholar formulated his respective techniques of text-based and isnād-based analysis. See:  al-Kawtharī, al-Hāwī fī Sīrat al-Imām Abī Ja‘far al-Tahāwī, p.19. Even the Companions employed various methods of verifying the reliability of hadiths, like juxtaposing it with the Qur’ān. See, for instance: Ibn Mansūr, Sa‘īd (1982), al-Sunan, ed. al-A‘żamī, India: al-Dār al-Salafiyyah, vol.1, p.268.

[Taken from https://ahadithnotes.com/2017/01/23/the-life-and-thought-of-imam-zahid-al-kawthari/]

By Shaykh Sharīf Hātim al-‘Awnī

Translated by Muntasir Zaman

[Translator’s preface: The following paper outlines an approach to evaluating the authenticity of historical reports. The author begins by emphasizing the merits of the Hadīth methodology, but makes sure to point out that not every science is obliged to adopt such a rigorous method. Drawing on statements from Hadīth experts like Ibn al-Mubarak and al-Khatīb al-Baghdādī, he proves that Hadīth scholars themselves were nuanced in their treatment of non-prophetic reports.

After a lengthy preamble, he presents a maxim that can be applied to such reports: every report that, directly or indirectly, forms the basis of a religious ruling will be accepted only through the rigorous methods of the Hadīth scholars used for the Sunnah; otherwise, their methods will not be applied. He then explains the theoretical application of this maxim in all areas from Sīrah to Companion statements to stories of the following generations; to illustrate its practical application, he provides two case studies.

To be sure, this paper is not a license to cite unsubstantiated stories. As the author himself explains, “Taking certain liberties when assessing transmitted information besides Hadīth is not tantamount to authenticating what is inauthentic; instead, every transmitted information is to be evaluated with a relevant scale.” Note: a paraphrased translation was adopted and subtitles were added to facilitate an easier read.]

Introduction

There has been an increasing demand to refine Hadīth studies in the fields of Sīrah, history, and prosopography. These demands have been made for a diverse set of methodologies, the most pure and cautious being the methodology of the Hadīth scholars. As a result, numerous research projects and books were produced, which is a blessed endeavor and a sign of great good. These studies have corrected many academic errors and refined some of the most integral primary sources. Nonetheless, these were human endeavors and therefore prone to error. An error in a peripheral issue is a light matter that can be easily resolved, but a methodological error is dangerous and its findings are difficult to remedy.

Varying Methods of Evaluation

It is clear from the words and practice of the Hadīth scholars that they would differentiate between prophetic reports and non-prophetic reports and between those related to matters of faith and those that were not. Even prophetic reports were further categorized: legal and theological hadīths were treated differently from hadīths on virtues and softening of hearts. In fact, legal hadīths themselves were divided into primary reports on a given subject and mere attestations, each being treated differently. In all these areas, Hadīth scholars worked wonders that humbles the intellect.

A flaw in some of the studies mentioned earlier is they were conducted by non-specialists in the field of Hadīth – who lack actual expertise, not mere degrees and titles. Consequently, at times, these studies failed to implement the nuances of the Hadīth methodology, thereby opposing the very methodology they set out to implement. The following statements explicitly establish this nuance. In al-Jāmi‘ li Akhlāq al-Rāwī wa Ādāb al-Sāmi‘, under the chapter “Writing that which does not require a chain of transmission,” al-Khatīb al-Baghdādī’s writes, “Chains of transmission are a mere adornment and not a prerequisite when citing anecdotes of the righteous, stories of the ascetics, advices of the eloquent, and aphorisms of the poets.” He relates from Yūsuf ibn al-Husayn al-Rāzī (d. 304) that he said, “The chain of transmission for a wise saying is its existence.”[1] He further relates:

Ibn al-Mubārak was asked, “Should we read the advices found in books [without chains to their respective sources]?” He replied, “If you find advice inscribed on a wall, read it and take heed.” When asked if the same applies to law, he replied, “It must be studied from a teacher.”

He then mentions the story of a Khurāsānī man who would attend the gathering of Yazīd ibn Hārūn and write information without their chains of transmission. When the attendees criticized him, Yazīd said:

There is no problem if the Khurāsānī man is writing stories of asceticism and anecdotes of admonition and morals. However, he has erred if he wrote legal hadīths on what is lawful and unlawful without their chains, because that is the only method of verification. He is, therefore, required to ask and evaluate their authenticity.

It should be noted that every discipline has specific methods to evaluate the transmitted and rational information therein. It is an egregious error to conflate distinct methodologies, as this will to lead to the deconstruction of each science. For example, applying the critical methods of the Hadīth scholars to pre-Islamic, early Islamic, and even general collections of poetry will do little more than deconstruct the Arabic language. Scholars of language have formulated adequate standards to critique their science and methods to assess transmitted language, and in doing so, they exerted much effort, fulfilling the responsibility on their shoulder towards the language of the Qur’ān and Sunnah.[2] It is essential that we respect experts of each field with regards to their respective fields and value the expertise of the specialists. So long as we are not experts in a given field, we will not compete with them, particularly the leading specialists, from the scholars of the various Islamic sciences.

The purpose of the above explanation is to point out that although the Hadīth methodology is the only method to evaluate transmitted religious knowledge, it is not necessarily the most efficient method for other sciences even though both sets of information are accompanied by chains of transmission. The presence of a chain of transmission should not lead one to evaluate it as per the Hadīth methodology used for prophetic hadīths, since the inclusion of a chain was part and parcel of all Islamic sciences. The presence of a chain, therefore, does not always mean it is to be scrutinized to evaluate the reliability of the report.

Having established that Hadīth scholars critique hadīths differently from historical reports, it is an opportune moment to emphasis that the Hadīth methodology is characterized by extreme caution and intense scrutiny and skepticism. Had it not been for the indescribable amount of care the Muslim civilization gave to the transmission, study, teaching, preservation, and writing of the Sunnah – it was their greatest preoccupation – such caution and skepticism would have removed authentic parts of the Sunnah. Their profound attention towards transmission allowed Hadīth scholars to be extremely meticulous without harming the Sunnah. As such, applying this rigorous methodology to sciences besides Hadīth is harmful because they do not require that degree of rigor and neither has the Muslim civilization given them attention that would facilitate such rigor without dismissing reliable information. Taking certain liberties when assessing transmitted information besides Hadīth is not tantamount to authenticating what is inauthentic; instead, every transmitted information is to be evaluated with a relevant scale.

Allow me to illustrate this theoretical expose with a simple, practical example. Say you hear a prominent scholar, whose knowledge and piety you hold in high regard, relate a plausible story about one of his teacher’s most famous or knowledgeable teacher. While relating the story, if the scholar says, “I heard many of my teachers mention regarding that scholar,” would you doubt it simply because the status of those teachers is unknown? To make this more practical, assume you hear Shaykh Bin Bāz (Allah have mercy upon him) say, “We heard many teachers say that so and so was such and such.” Would you doubt his story? Then why is it that when Ibn ‘Adī, a competent authority, says, “I heard several teachers relate that when Muhammad ibn Ismā‘īl al-Bukhārī (Allāh be pleased with him) arrived at Baghdad, news reached the partisans of Hadīth, so they gathered together and chose a hundred hadīths and shuffled their chains and texts…” a contemporary criticizes this story on the basis that the status of Ibn ‘Adī’s teachers is unknown whereas al-Bukhārī’s knowledge far exceeds what is described here and Ibn ‘Adī narrates it from a group of al-Bukhārī’s students? Had Ibn ‘Adī, who was a Hadīth expert and musnid, wanted, he could have cited one of his direct teachers, but he believed that the phrase “I heard several teachers relate” was a stronger expression for a story of this nature because it is evaluated differently from hadīths.

Maxim of evaluation: theory and practice

I can now proceed to explain a maxim that can help determine when to apply a more rigorous approach, like the Hadīth methodology, to evaluate historical accounts anecdotes or a less rigorous approach by adopting other relevant methods of evaluation. The maxim is as follows: every report that, directly or indirectly, forms the basis of a religious ruling will be accepted only through the rigorous methods of the Hadīth scholars used for the Sunnah; otherwise, their methods will not be applied. This maxim requires much explanation, but I will suffice on several examples that can shed light on pertinent aspects of it.

In the prophetic Sīrah, some reports can be used to extrapolate a legal ruling; here the rigorous method of assessment will be applied. Other reports cannot form the basis of a legal ruling, such as the date, number of participants, and exact location of a particular battle; here the Hadīth methodology will not be applied unless a ruling can be extrapolated from it indirectly, e.g. whether a report had occurred earlier or later to help determine abrogation, in which case it will be applied.

Then there are reports about the Companions. Some of these have a connection with the law, such as the Companions’ legal verdicts and judicial judgments. If the Companion report is the only piece of evidence on a subject where there is no scriptural evidence, then the Hadīth methodology will be applied. However, in the presence of authentic scriptural evidence, the Companion report is cited only to augment our understanding of the scriptural evidence. It is fine to apply the aforementioned caution when assessing such a report, but there is also scope not to because it will not affect the overall status of the ruling.

Companion reports that are merely historical, such as conquests and battles, will follow the same procedure as the Sīrah. But reports about their internal conflicts (fitnah) are to be assessed similar to prophetic hadīths. To be sure, this is in conformity with the aforementioned maxim and not an exception. Reports of internal conflicts are not only stories; they influence our judgment on who was right or wrong, and it may even influence some people’s perception of their probity and transgression. Those being judged here are none other than the Companions (Allah be pleased with them), who were praised and verified by Allah and His messenger. As such, these reports are to be scrutinized thoroughly, particularly when they can pave the way for people of innovation and animosity towards the religion of Allah and the Companions to misconstrue and fabricate against them.

That being said, it is possible to adopt a middle path when dealing with reports about internal conflicts or similar reports: when the crux of a report is verified by the Hadīth methodology, details surrounding it can be established from other reports [not established through such rigorous methods], provided they do not conflict with the established probity and virtue of the Companions or with the authentic report itself. By way of illustration, I spent several years studying the reports about Khālid ibn al-Walīd and Mālik ibn Nuwayrah during the renegade wars. The story is well-known, but forgers and their ilk from the Orientalists have built around it a web of despicable details. One researcher had outright rejected the story in its entirety, concluding that Mālik ibn Nuwayrah was a renegade who was lawfully killed despite the fact that he is unanimously mentioned among the Companions. After further research, it became clear that there is only one authentic chain of transmission for the story, related by Khalīfah ibn Khayyāt in his Tārīkh where Ibn ‘Umar said:

Abū Qatādah came to Abū Bakr with news about the death of Mālik and his people. This deeply troubled him, so he summoned Khālid. Thereafter, Abū Bakr said, “Did Khalid do more than formulate an opinion and err?” and sent Khālid away. He then paid the blood money for Mālik ibn Nuwayrah and returned the captives and spoils.

Despite its brevity, this report establishes the crux of the story and puts things into perspective: Khālid’s actions are excused and the despicable allegation against Mālik ibn Nuwayrah [that he was a renegade] is disproved because Abū Bakr paid his blood money. This begs the question: what are we to do about the details without which we cannot possibly understand the story? The way forward is to accept only those details that conform to the narrative in the authentic report and do not contravene the probity of the Companions, which is established from scripture. This is because the chains of these details are not authentic in the first place, and moreover, whatever conflicts with the constants will be disregarded. It is disingenuous to treat them equally to the constants, let alone rely upon them.

The default for historical accounts of the following generations, i.e. the second and third centuries, is to benefit from them without critiquing them according to the Hadīth methodology unless a judgment is going to be made regarding an individual who possesses religious sanctity, i.e. he is a Muslim (e.g. some of the kings and sultans), in which case it will be scrutinized like a religious ruling. This is only when such a judgment has academic benefit. If such research will yield no positive results or even unpleasant results, it should be avoided and time should not be wasted.

This universal maxim is also applied to the lives and stories of the scholars. Caution will be applied when a report will lead to passing a religious judgement, which is illustrated in the expressions of narrator criticism vis-à-vis the Hadīth transmitters. All other reports, like the aforementioned story of al-Bukhārī, words of wisdom, mention of their oeuvre, and descriptions of their libraries, etc., will not be scrutinized as thoroughly. Rather, the relevant standard of assessment will be applied, taking into consideration what is reasonable, the reliability of the transmitter (or source and author), and other factors that accompany the report. In addition, the expected outcome of such assessment should be weighed. This is a summary of my take on evaluating historical reports. And Allah knows best.

(Al-‘Awnī, Naqd Asānīd al-Akhbār al-Tārīkhiyyah in Idā’āt Bahthiyyah, pp.143-153)

[1] If the transmission of this quote is accurate, then Yūsuf ibn al-Husayn al-Rāzī learned this from his teacher, the renowned ascetic, Dhū al-Nūn al-Misrī, who was asked, “What is the chain of transmission for a wise saying?” to which he replied, “Its existence.” See Abū Nu‘aym, Hilyat al-Awliyā’, vol.9, pp.377-378.

[2] Refer to Muhammad ibn Sallām al-Jumahī’s (d. 231 AH) discussion on the methods of critiquing the various sciences, arts, and disciplines and the need to consult the specialists of each field in Tabaqāt Fuhūl al-Shu‘arā’, vol.1, pp.7-4. An interesting statement is reported from Yahyā ibn Sa‘īd al-Qattān, “Transmitters of poetry are more perceptive than Hadīth transmitters because the latter [unknowingly] narrates much forgeries while the former immediately detects a forgery [in poetry] upon reciting it. See Abū ‘Alī al-Qālī, Dhayl al-Amālī, vol.3, p.105. To asses this report according to the Hadīth methodology, it is narrated from al-Qālī from Muhammad ibn Abī al-Azhar from al-Zubayr ibn Bakkār; Muhammad ibn Mazīd ibn Abī al-Azhar al-Nahwī is a liar and fabricator according to the Hadīth scholars and linguists (like al-Marzubānī). See Lisān al-Mīzān, vol.7, pp.500-2.

Taken from ahadithnotes.com

By Shaykh Muhammad ‘Awwāmah

Translated by Muntasir Zaman

Name and lineage

He is the Imām, prolific Hadith memorizer, and authority, Jamāl al-Dīn Abū Muhammad ‘Abd Allāh ibn Yūsuf ibn Yūnus Ibn Muhammad al-Zayla‘ī[1] al-Hanafī, one of the leading Hadīth experts of the 8^thcentury, which brimmed with experts of Hadīth who revived the path of the earlier scholars vis-à-vis memorization, scope, and analytics. Biographers disagree on his name and his father’s name: is it ‘Abd Allāh ibn Yūsuf or Yūsuf ibn ‘Abd Allāh? The first opinion is more preferred, and Allāh knows best.[2]

Birth

Biographers have not specified the year of his birth, and neither have I come across any information to specify it either, but it is, nonetheless, safe to provide a rough estimation. Hāfiẓ al-Suyūtī writes, “the place of his entry is in the following generation. I mentioned him earlier only because his demise was earlier.” The “following generation” referred to in the quotation is the generation of Hāfiẓ Ibn Rajab (736-795 AH), Ibn Musallam (724-792 AH), Ibn Sayyid al-Nās (729-792 AH), and others. It is therefore not farfetched to assume that Hāfiẓ al-Zayla‘ī was born in the vicinity of 720 AH. A further indication of this estimation is that Hāfiẓ al-‘Irāqī would accompany him in research while sourcing the hadīths of al-Ihyā, and they would even assist one another; al-‘Irāqī was born in 725 AH.[3]

In Nasb al-Rāyah, al-Zayla‘ī frequently quotes Ibn Daqīq al-‘Īd’s al-Imām, and in each case, he mentions “the Shaykh said” and not once does he say “our Shaykh said.” Ibn Daqīq al-‘Īd passed away in 702 AH in Cairo, al-Zayla‘ī’s hometown. Furthermore, in several places he quotes al-Sarūjī, who passed away in Cairo in 710 AH, and Ibn Sayyid al-Nās, who passed in 724 AH, from his ‘Uyūn al-Athar; not once does he refer to them as “our Shaykh.” However, he frequently quotes Hāfiẓ al-Mizzī (d. 742 AH) and Hāfiẓ al-Dhahabī (d. 748 AH) and refers to them as “our Shaykh.” To the best of my knowledge, Hāfiẓ al-Mizzī was the first of his teachers to pass away.

Teachers

Al-Zayla‘ī acquired knowledge from the senior scholars of Fiqh and Hadīth in his time.

The following are some of his teachers in Fiqh: (1) Imām Fakhr al-Dīn ‘Uthmān ibn ‘Alī al-Zayla‘ī (743 AH), the commentator on al-Kanz, one of the most authoritative texts in Hanafi jurisprudence. Hāfiẓ al-Zayla‘ī quotes him in Nasb al-Rāyah and describes him as “Imām Fakhr al-Dīn.” (2) Shams al-Dīn Muhammad ibn Ahmad Ibn ‘Adlān (d. 749 AH), described by Ibn Fahd as the Shaykh of the Shafi‘īs. (3) Shihāb al-Dīn Ahmad ibn Muhammad ibn Qays al-Ansārī (d. 749 AH), the jurist of Cairo and Alexandria. (4) Bahā’ al-Dīn ‘Abd Allah ibn ‘Abd al-Rahmān Ibn ‘Aqīl (d. 761 AH), the commentator on Alfiyyat Ibn Mālik.

The following are some of his teachers in Hadīth: (1) Imām Abū al-Hajjāj al-Mizzī (d. 742 AH), the teacher of the Hadīth experts of his time, who al-Zayla‘ī quotes in Nasb al-Rāyah on a number of occasions. (2) Imām Shams al-Dīn al-Dhahabī (d. 747 AH). Al-Zayla‘ī repeatedly cites his book, Mizān al-I‘tidāl, and at times even critiques him. (3) Imām ‘Alā’ al-Dīn al-Māridīnī (d. 750 AH), who al-Zayla‘ī quotes frequently, but critiques every time.

Acquaintance with, and praise in, the field of Hadīth

Al-Zayla‘ī developed a deep acquaintance with the field of Hadīth and frequently consulted the relevant books. He collected popular and rare, classical and new – relatively – Hadīth works until he developed proficiency in the science. He managed to locate hadīths other experts in the field were unable to locate; Nasb al-Rāyah is a clear testimony to this.

While enumerating those who wrote takhrīj works on al-Hidāyah, the learned Hadīth expert Qāsim [ibn Qutlūbughā] (d. 879 AH) describes al-Zayla‘ī as “the most expansive in scope and wide-ranging in collection.”[4] The erudite scholar al-Laknawī (d. 1304 AH) writes, “His takhrīj work is indicative of his depth in the field of Hadīth and narrator criticism, and his encompassing vision in the branches of Hadīth to the highest extent.”[5] The teacher of our teachers, the authoritative expert, Shaykh Muhammad Zāhid al-Kawtharī (d. 1371 AH) writes, “His takhrīj works bear testimony to his depth and expansive scope in the disciplines of Hadīth in terms of commentary, narrator criticism, texts, and routes.”[6] The Imām of this era, Shaykh Anwar Shāh al-Kashmīrī (d. 1352 AH) went as far as saying, “In my opinion, Hāfiẓ al-Zayla‘ī has better memory than Hāfiẓ Ibn Hajar.”[7] This is the opinion of Shaykh al-Kashmīrī, and Allāh knows best.

Works

His works are few in number. This is possibly because he lived a short life. Despite this, the written legacy he left behind is a sufficient source of provision and pride. The biographers mention only two books, and I came across a third.

The first is al-Is‘āf bi Ahādīth al-Kashshāf where he sourced the hadīths of al-Zamakhsharī’s Tafsīr al-Kashshāf. In Nasb al-Rāyah, he expressly mentions this book with the aforementioned title, and in several places, he alludes to it without naming it. That he mentions the book in the first volume of Nasb al-Rāyahdemonstrates that it is an earlier work, or alternatively, he began writing both books simultaneously.

In his annotation on al-Maqāsid al-Hasanah, our teacher, the learned Hadīth scholar, Shaykh ‘Abd Allāh al-Siddīq al-Ghumārī describes this work as “a beneficial and lengthy takhrīj work.” This is the description of one who is well versed with its contents, because he was in possession of a manuscript of the book. I wrote to him, requesting that he describe the book, so he replied (may Allāh reward him):

I have a copy of the takhrīj of the hadīths in al-Kashshāf. It is in one volume and does not have a preface. The author exhausted all the prophetic hadīths in al-Kashshāf, but left out many Companion reports because his primary focus was to source the prophetic hadīths. He does not pass a judgment on the authenticity, soundness, or weakness of a hadīth unless he quotes someone else. My copy of the book is new, and in the Egyptian National Library there is a good quality, antique manuscript.

Hāfiẓ Ibn Hajar summarized this book ­– just as he summarized al-Zayla‘ī’s takhrīj on the hadīths of al-Hidāyah – entitled al-Kāf al-Shāf bi Takhrīj Ahādīth al-Kashshāf. In 1354 AH, Mustafā Muhammad publishing house printed the book alongside Tafsīr al-Kashshāf under the guidance of our teacher, the prolific Hadīth memorizer, Shaykh Ahmad al-Siddīq al-Ghumārī.

The second book is Mukhtasar [summation of] Ma’ānī al-Āthār by Imām al-Tahāwī. While discussing the scholarly activity surrounding Sharh Ma‘ānī al-Āthār, ‘Allāmah al-Kawtharī mentions this and writes, “Hāfiẓ al-Zayla‘ī is also among those who summarized the book. His summary is preserved in Ruwāq al-Atrāk library (in Azhar) and Köprülü Library in Istanbul.”[8] The third book is Nasb al-Rāyah li Ahādīth al-Hidāyah, which will be studied in detail shortly [not translated here], with the help of Allāh.

Academic honesty

Many biographers note a noble academic trait that was pronounced in al-Zayla‘ī: impartiality and the abandonment of madhhab fanaticism. While describing al-Zayla‘ī and his book Nasb al-Rāyah, Hāfiẓ Ibn Hajar writes, “In every chapter, he cites the evidence of the opposition, and in so doing, he exhibits a great deal of fairness. He quotes what he finds without objection…”[9] ‘Allāmah al-Kashmīrī traces the cause of al-Zayla‘ī inculcating this trait to the fact that he was from “the Sūfī mentors whose souls were trained through spiritual exercises and seclusion…”[10]

This trait is manifest in Nasb al-Rāyah. The author was rooted in the Hanafī legal school and then cross-pollinated his knowledge by studying under Ibn ‘Adlān, the teacher of the Shāfi‘ī jurists, and others besides him. Furthermore, he was deeply influenced by al-Imām of Ibn Daqīq al-Īd, who was a Mālikī and Shāfi‘ī scholar, and by Ibn al-Jawzī’s al-Tahqīq and Ibn ‘Abd al-Hādī’s al-Tanqīh, both of whom were Hanbalī scholars.

While we are at it, it is important to clarify that some people are surprised by al-Zayla‘ī’s abandonment of madhhab fanaticism in light of his repeated usage of the phrase “the hadīths of the khusūm (opposition)” whereby he intends the hadīths adduced as proof by the other legal schools; he calls them the khusūm! How does one reconcile the two? The answer is the word khasm is not used as per the common parlance of the general masses, i.e. the enemy or similar usages. In this context, it is in reference to those disagreeing on a given topic. Here is the quote from al-Qāmūs al-Muhīt under the roots khā’, ṣād, and mīm, “Al-khusūmah: debate…a khasim person – on the scale of farih – is a debater.” As such, the intent of al-Zayla‘ī’s statement “the hadīths of the khusūm” is the hadīths of those who hold an opinion contrary to the Hanafīs – it does not mean the hadīths of the enemies! Hence, correct understanding is integral.

Demise

In the closing of al-Zayla‘ī’s entry, Ibn Fahd writes, “He (Allāh have mercy on him) passed away on the 11^thof Muharram in 762 AH” and that was in Cairo. No one specified the location of his grave.[11] Based on the estimation I postulated for the year of his birth, he lived for 40 years. Allāh have mercy on us, him, and all the Muslims.

[1] Al-Zayla‘ī is an attribution to Zayla‘ from the port cities of Ethiopia [present day Somalia]. A group of scholars are attributed to this place. Most prominent among them are two: the scholar under discussion and his teacher Fakhr al-Dīn al-Zayla‘ī (d. 743 AH), the commentator on al-Kanz.

[2] The following scholars have preferred the former opinion: Hafiẓ Ibn Hajar in al-Durar al-Kaminah(2:417), Ibn Fahd and al-Suyūtī in their respective addendums on Tadhkirat al-Huffaẓ (pp.128 and 362), al-Suyūtī in his Tabaqāt al-Huffāẓ (p.531) and Husn al-Muhādarah (1:359), and al-Laknawī in al-Fawā’id al-Bahiyyah (pp.229-230 – here he relates the disagreement- and p.237 – here he authenticates the former opinion). That the second opinion (Yūsuf ibn ‘Abd Allāh) is preferred is indicated by the fact that his title is unanimously Jamāl al-Dīn, which predominantly is the title of a person whose name is Yūsuf.

[3] Ibn Hajar, al-Durar al-Kāminah, vol.2, p.417.

[4] Ibn Qutlūbughā, Munyat al-Alma‘ī, p.9.

[5] Al-Laknawī, al-Fawā’id al-Bahiyyah, p.227.

[6] Al-Kawtharī, annotations on Dhuyūl Tadhkirat al-Huffāẓ, p.129.

[7] Al-Kashmīrī, Fayd al-Bārī ‘alā Sahīh al-Bukhārī, vol.1, p.368.

[8] Al-Kawtharī, al-Hāwī fī Sīrat Abī Ja‘far al-Tahāwī, p.33.

[9] Introduction to Nasb al-Rāyah, pp.6-7, quoting Tabaqāt al-Tamīmī.

[10] Al-Kashmīrī, Fayd al-Bārī, vol.1, p.107 in the footnotes.

[11] Ibn Fahd, Dhayl Tadhkirat al-Huffāẓ, p.130.

Reviewed by Muntasir Zaman

[Marwiyyāt Abī Mikhnaf fī Tārīkh al-Tabarī: ‘Asr al-Khilāfah: al-Dirāsah Naqdiyyah, by Yahyā ibn Ibrāhīm al-Yahyā, Riyadh: Dār al-‘Asimah, 2011, 528 pp., $9.50 (hardback), ISBN 978-603-8057-11-7]

Introduction

The rapid expansion of Islam’s borders from a fledgling state to a massive empire is arguably one of the greatest military feats. By 30 AH/650 CE, the entire Arabian Peninsula and the area spanning from Egypt on the west to the Iranian plateau on the east were all under Muslim rule.[1] The annals of Islamic history are replete with extraordinary accomplishments by Muslims throughout this vast landscape. In the same breath, however, one comes across pages blemished with internecine conflict and political strife. Reports of this nature prima facie are clearly troubling, but this can be assuaged to a considerable extent by probing their authenticity.[2] Sieving the reliable from the unreliable is of greater importance in regards to the formative period of Islam,[3] particularly the Prophet’s life and the decades that immediately proceeded his demise, as it serves as a window to Islam in its most pristine form.[4]

One method of carrying this out is to critically examine influential historians who played a key role in shaping the dominant narrative of early Islamic history, specifically those who were the center of heated contention, such as Muhammad ibn Ishāq (d. 151 AH),[5] Sayf ibn ‘Umar al-Tamīmī (d. ca. 180 AH),[6] and Muhammad ibn ‘Umar al-Wāqidī (d. 207 AH).[7] To this end, Shaykh Yahyā Ibrāhīm al-Yahyā in his landmark study Marwiyyāt Abī Mikhnaf fī Tārīkh al-Tabarī sets out to examine a historian of ill repute, the Kūfan Abū Mikhnaf (d. 157 AH). The present study—based on the author’s M.A dissertation submitted to the Islamic University of Madīnah under the supervision of the renowned historian, Dr. Diyā’ al-Umarī—analyzes the historical accounts of Abū Mikhnaf in al-Tabarī’s History, with specific reference to the era of the Rightly-Guided Caliphs (r. 11-40 AH). This short review aims to summarize the author’s research, explore certain points of importance, and make brief comments in the relevant footnotes. The driving impetus for this review is to draw the attention of students and scholars to this phenomenal study; hence, a digital copy of the book is provided here.

Summary

After the introduction (pp.5-22), the book consists of two chapters. The first chapter comprises of four sections; the first explores the life and times of Abū Mikhnaf (pp.25-87), followed by three sections which analyze his accounts of the reign of the first three caliphs, viz. Abū Bakr, ‘Umar, and ‘Uthmān (Allah be pleased with them) respectively—a total of 18 reports (pp.89-185). Considering the extensive material on the fourth caliph ‘Alī (Allah be pleased with him), the author dedicated the second chapter to reports about his reign. This chapter also comprises of four sections, viz. his ascendance to the caliphate, the Battle of Jamal, the Battle of Siffīn, and the Arbitration—a total of 126 reports (pp.189-484). He then concludes the book by recapitulating its key findings (pp.487-491)[8] and follows this with the relevant indices (pp.491-512). The author discusses copious insights throughout the book; by way of illustration, this review will delineate essential aspects from the introduction and select passages in order to provide an overview of his study.

By applying a stringent set of criteria in assessing the status of these prolific historians, one may object that a large portion of history will be lost since early Muslim scholars were lenient vis-à-vis historical reports. There are three reasons why this objection is unacceptable. First, history books are not the sole repository of historical reports; there are countless anecdotes recorded in the Hadīth, exegetical, and prosopographical literature, from which an authentic sketch of early Islamic history can be drawn—obviously, in addition to reliable reports in history books.[9] Second, as the purpose of reading history is to derive practical lessons from actual occurrences, it is pointless to collate unreliable reports. Third, that scholars adopted a relatively lenient stance in respect to historical reports is not to say they accepted the reports of all and sundry; though a non-Hadīth transmitter’s retention, for instance, is not required to the degree of a Hadīth transmitter, the same is not true for his probity (p.8).

The author highlights five points he believes are imperative for students of history to bear in mind, such as reading history through the lens of the society whose culture one seeks to explore[10] and analyzing a report about/from someone against what is already established regarding him (pp.9-11).[11] This is followed by a brief outline of al-Tabarī’s modus operandi, e.g. despite the voluminous nature of the book, he included chains of transmission, but, in the same vein, he did not ensure the authenticity of the reports therein (pp.11-14).[12] His focus on Abū Mikhnaf is convincing as he is of questionable probity yet occupies a significant part of al-Tabarī’s repertoire: roughly 600 reports spanning the period from the Prophet’s demise to the fall of the Umayyads in 132 AH/750 CE, undoubtedly the most crucial years in Islam’s history (p.6). Since they lived about a century apart, al-Tabarī obviously narrated material from Abū Mikhnaf via intermediaries; to be precise, he did so through five channels, some of which are problematic (pp.58-63).

Abū Mikhnaf: His name was Lūt ibn Yahyā al-Azdī, born in ca. 90 AH in the city of Kūfah. He hailed from a family deeply involved in the political affairs of the city: they accompanied ‘Alī ibn Abī Tālib (Allāh be pleased with him) during his campaigns and occupied important offices. He passed away in 157 AH (pp.27-32). Apart from a vague epithet “authority of historical reports in Kūfah” from a Shī‘ite source, there is a dearth of information on his educational upbringing. Nearly fifty titles are attributed to him, mostly covering the history of ‘Irāq, such as K. Futūh al-‘Irāq and K. Maqtal al-Husayn. Though his works were incorporated into later sources, none of them are extant in their original form. He can be analogized with a journalist who seeks out news from multifarious sources, particularly first hand witnesses, which is why his informants are many but not a few of them are unknown (pp.47-57).[13]

That a one’s environment profoundly influences his Weltanschauung goes without saying. Abū Mikhnaf is therefore to be assessed against the theological, scholastic, and socio-political milieu of his hometown, Kūfah. The prosperous southern ‘Irāqī city founded in 17 AH under the auspices of ‘Umar ibn al-Khattāb hosted well over a thousand Companions, among them the likes of Ibn Mas‘ūd and ‘Alī, and produced some of the greatest Muslim scholars.[14] The intellectual florescence and scholarly currents in Kūfah notwithstanding, it became a center for Shī‘ite thought, at first as an innocuous admiration for ‘Alī and his descendants but later it evolved into extreme veneration (ghulūw).[15] The Battle of Siffīn (37 AH), inter alia, left an indelible mark on the people of Kūfah whereby it instilled within them resentment towards the Umayyads and henceforth set the tone for posterity. Nevertheless, two major developments concern us here: (1) extreme veneration—even deification—of ‘Alī in tandem with animosity towards the Companions[16] and (2) widespread fabrication of reports (pp.33-41).[17]

Given his family history and environment of upbringing, it comes as no surprise that Abū Mikhnaf was categorically considered a Shī‘ite. And, more seriously, his beliefs had a direct bearing on his portrayal of early historical accounts. Hadīth scholars impugned him in no uncertain terms: Ibn Ma‘īn (d. 233 AH) said he is unreliable, Abū Hātim al-Rāzī (d. 277 AH) said he is abandoned in Hadīth, and Ibn Hibbān (d. 354 AH) said he was a Rāfidī who cursed the Companions and related fabrications from reliable informants—to name a few. Conversely, Shī‘ite scholars like Ahmad al-Najāshī (d. 450 AH) and Ibn Mutahhar al-Hillī (d. 726 AH) have embraced him, for the most part, with open arms (pp. 41-46).

One should not, however, be quick to reject the Mikhnafian corpus en bloc, since in some instances these accounts are attested by other sources (e.g. Khālid’s letter to the Persians, p.143). That being said, the general assessment of Abū Mikhnaf’s oeuvre turns out to be terribly negative. In the reports examined by the study under review, he narrated unattested accounts (e.g. ‘Umar striking Abū Shajarah, p.150), included unverified details (e.g. the incident of Saqīfat Banī Sā‘idah, p.122) and even engaged in deliberate interpolation (e.g. ‘Alī taking the pledge of allegiance, p.191). All of this reinforces the author’s thesis that Abū Mikhnaf is a disreputable source. Even if his deficiencies as a transmitter are dismissed, and we assume a tabula rasa, his reports are almost always defective with interruptions in their chains or transmitted from unreliable informants (p.488).

Conclusion

Few books have managed to serve a pivotal role in portraying early Islamic history as al-Tabarī’s opus, Tārīkh al-Umam wa al-Mulūk. Considering its potential impact in shaping our understanding of history, there is a pressing need to verify the major sources this voluminous work relied upon. [18] Yahyā al-Yahyā’s Marwiyyāt Abī Mikhnaf fī Tārīkh al-Tabarī is a welcome contribution in achieving this goal. His detailed examination of Abū Mikhnaf’s reports vis-à-vis the era of the Rightly-Guided Caliphs (r. 11-40 AH) demonstrates the need to revisit a number of accounts and sources that have hitherto largely been taken for granted. The author is to be recognized for engaging his readers with practical case studies—not a mere theoretical expose of scholarly opinions, ubiquitous in contemporary literature—arguably the most effective method to arrive at a conclusive judgment. By synthesizing theory with application, the present study offers a trajectory for further academic research in a genre still in its nascent phase. It is the duty of scholars to follow his cue by replicating this framework on other influential historians—students of historiography look forward for such projects to materialize.

[1] Cook, David (2015) Understanding Jihad, California: University of California Press, p.11. To quantify this statement, consider that by the end of ‘Uthmān’s reign in 35 AH, a total of 3,500,000 sq. miles of territory came under Muslim rule. See: Hamīdullah, Majmū‘at al-Wathā’iq al-Siyāsiyyah, p.499; al-A‘żamī, Mustafa (2003) The History of the Qur’ānic Text: From Revelation to Compilation, Leicester: UK Islamic Academy, p.38.

[2] Abū al-Yusr ‘Abidīn mentions a number of reasons mistakes creep into books of history, such as an overly good opinion of certain sources, human error, impartiality to one’s school, and more recently the preponderance of printed material and news that lack a rigorous process of authentication. See: Abū al-Yusr, Muhammad (2006), Aghālīt al-Mu’rrikhīn, Damascus: Maktabat al-Ghazālī, pp.17-21.

[3] The formative period of Islamic history is said to have ended around the 3^rdAH/10^thCE century. See: Robinson, Chase (2003), Islamic Historiography, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, p.xviii. However, the ‘formative period’ varies based on the given context; see, for instance: Shamsy, Ahmad (2012), The Canonization of Islamic Law, Cambridge: Cambridge University Press pp. 2 ff., 168-169.

[4] See: al-Kawtharī, Kalimah ‘an Khālid ibn al-Walīd wa Qatl Mālik ibn Nuwayrah in al-Maqālāt, Cairo: al-Maktabah al-Tawfīqiyyah, p.399. His concise yet valuable comments on early historians is a worth read in: ibid., pp.400-401.

[5] On Ibn Ishāq see: Ibn Sayyid al-Nās, ‘Uyūn al-Athar, Damascus: Dār Ibn Kathīr, vol.1, pp.54-67; Ma‘bad, Ahmad (1988), Footnotes on al-Nafh al-Shadhī fī Sharh Jāmi‘ al-Tirmidhī, Riyadh: Dār al-‘Asimah, vol.2, p.697 ff.

[6] On Sayf ibn ‘Umar, see: Blankinship, Khalid (1993), The History of al-Tabarī, Translator’s Forward, New York: State University of New York Press, vol.11, p.xvi ff.; Anthony, Sean (2011), The Caliph and the Heretic:Ibn Saba’ and the Origins of Shi’ism, Leiden: Brill, p.9 ff. Recently, some of Sayf’s works have been discovered, such as his K. al-Riddah wa al-Futūh and K. al-Jamal wa Masīr ‘A’ishah wa ‘Alī; both were edited and annotated by Qāsim al-Samarrā’ī.

[7] On al-Wāqidī, see: Ibn Sayyid al-Nās, ‘Uyūn al-Athar, vol.1, pp.67-73; al-‘Umarī, Diyā’ (1994), al-Sīrah al-Nabawiyyah al-Sahīhah, Madīnah: Maktabat al-‘Ulūm wa al-Hikam, pp.61-63.

[8] His findings are summarized in eleven points. To name a few: (i) Abū Mikhnaf is unanimously unreliable, and he deliberately distorts information; (ii) al-Tabarī’s reliance on Abū Mikhnaf for reports concerning the Battle of Siffīn, for instance, to the exclusion of other available works does not mean he preferred Abū Mikhnaf’s account; he was possibly unaware of sources; (iii) that Abū Bakr’s son Muhammad had a hand in ‘Uthmān’s assassination is false.

[9] For instance, the account of Saqifah Banī Sā‘idah is reported by leading authorities like al-Bukhārī (d. 256 AH), Ahmad (d. 241 AH), Ibn Abī Shaybah (d. 235 AH) among others, and therefore, a full description of the incident can be constructed from these sources. The author bemoans the nonchalance with which many history books, in spite of the aforementioned fact, choose to include only the account of Abū Mikhnaf (p.488).

[10] Accordingly, it is disingenuous to criticize the marriage of our mother ‘A’ishah at a young age based on modern marital ethics. Despite the lengths his most ardent critics would go to criticize him, the Prophet’s marriage (peace and blessings be upon him) with ‘A’ishah was never considered problematic since marriage at a young age was socially acceptable. This does not seem to be an issue until the early 1900s with the Orientalist David Margoliouth (d. 1940). See: Brown, Jonathan (2014), Misquoting Muhammad: The Challenge and Choices of Interpreting the Prophet’s Legacy, London: Oneworld Publication, p.144; idem (2011), Muhammad: A Very Short Introduction, Oxford: Oxford Press, p.76.

[11] For instance, one should examine negative reports about Imām Abū Hanīfah against what is widely transmitted about him. As al-Kawtharī says, “authentic isolated reports cannot overrule what is widespread (al-mustafīd al-mashhūr), let alone what is mass transmitted (mutawātir).” See: al-Kawtharī, Ta’nīb al-Khatīb, p.31. A practical example is reports concerning Ibn Mas‘ūd’s exclusion of the mu’awwidhatayn in his copy of the Qur’ān. Reports of this nature cannot be accepted as they conflict with what is widely related that Ibn Mas‘ūd taught these sūrahs to his students, as is transmitted via six of the ten modes of Qur’ānic recitation. See: al-Kawtharī, Masāhif al-Amsār in al-Maqālāt, p.16; ‘Awwāmah, Footnotes on al-Madkhal, vol.1, p.349.

[12] Ibn Hajar writes, “Most Hadīth scholars of the past—from 200 AH onwards—believed that citing a hadith with its chain of transmission absolved one of the responsibility [of analyzing it].” See: Ibn Hajar, Lisān al-Mīzān, vol.4 p.125; cf. ‘Awwāmah, Footnotes on Tadrīb al-Rāwī, vol.3, pp.519-520. Zayn al-Dīn al-‘Irāqī explains that although citing a hadith alongside its problematic chain without expounding on its defects is reprehensible, to do so without citing its chain at all is worse. See: al-‘Irāqī, Sharh al-Tabsirah wa al-Tadhkirah, vol.1, p.313; Brown, Jonathan, Did the Prophet Say It or Not? The Literal, Historical, and Effective Truth of Hadīths in Early Sunnism, Journal of the American Oriental Society (2009), pp.281-282.

[13] In al-Tabarī’s History, Abū Mikhnaf has 148 informants (p.87).

[14] On the academic standing of Kūfah, see: al-Kawtharī, Fiqh Ahl al-‘Irāq, pp.51-65. A translation of this section is available here.

[15] It is unfair, as the author himself points out, to place the entirety of Kūfah throughout its history into one category. On the negative statements by Hadith scholars concerning the hadiths of Kūfah, see: ‘Awwāmah, Footnotes on Tadrīb al-Rāwī, vol.2, pp.248-255.

[16] As Wadad Kadi points out, the distinguishing traits of the early Shī’ah were “attribution of supernatural abilities to ‘Alī and his descendants, and hatred towards the Companions and the first three caliphs.” On the other extreme, some Umayyads vilified ‘Alī and his party. Sunnī scholars from Kūfah, however, struck a balance: they rejected both tendencies by revering all the Companions despite their mutual differences—this was a quintessential hallmark of the Sunnī Weltanschauung. See: Kadi, Wadad, The Development of the Term Ghulāt in Muslim Literature; Stodolsky, Volkan (2012), A New Historical Model and Periodization for The Perception of the Sunnah of the Prophet and His Companions, (Unpublished PhD – ProQuest), pp.195-196.

[17] It should be remembered that these fabrications did not go undetected. ‘Abd Allah ibn al-Mubārak said, “If a person tried to fabricate a hadīth at night, by dawn people will announce: so and so is a liar!” And when he was asked, “What to do with these forgeries?” he replied, “The critical scholars live for this.” See: Al-Rāzī, al-Jarh wa al-Ta‘dīl, vol.1, p.3; Ibn al-Jawzī, al-Mawdū‘āt, vol.1, pp.38-39.

[18] On al-Tabarī’s sources, see: ‘Alī, Jawwād (2012), Mawārid Tārīkh al-Tabarī, Ch.1; Rosenthal, Franz (1989),The History of al-Tabarī, Translator’s Forward, New York: State University of New York Press, vol.1, pp.5-10, 53-54.

[Taken from ahadithnotes.com]

Answered by Mawlana Yusuf Shabbir

Query: What is the date of birth and the date of demise of our beloved Prophet Muḥammad ﷺ?

Reply:

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

This issue has been addressed in my Arabic article Matā Wulida al-Rasūl Ṣallāllāhu ʿAlayhi wa Sallam wa Matā Tuwuffiya.[1] A summary is outlined below.

(1) Blessed birth of the Prophet ﷺ

According to the majority of scholars, the Prophet ﷺ was born in Rabīʿ al-Awwal in the Year of the Elephant, which corresponds to 571 CE. This was 53 years before the migration of the Prophet ﷺ to the blessed city of Madīnah. There is general agreement among scholars that the Prophet ﷺ was born on Monday, as affirmed by a Prophetic statement transmitted in Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim (1162). However, there is a difference of opinion regarding the precise date of birth. The following are some of the views:

1. The precise date of birth is unknown.
2. The blessed birth occurred on a Monday in Rabīʿ al-Awwal and the date is unknown.
3. 1st Rabīʿ al-Awwal – This view is attributed to ʿAbd Allah ibn ʿAbbās (d. 68/687-8) (may Allah be pleased with him).
4. 2nd Rabīʿ al-Awwal – This is the view of Imam Abū Maʿshar Najīḥ ibn ʿAbd al-Raḥmān (d. 170/787) and Ḥāfiẓ ʿAbd al-Ganī al-Maqdisī al-Ḥanbalī (d. 600/1203). Ḥāfiẓ Mugalṭāya al-Ḥanafī (d. 762/1361) is inclined towards this.
5. 3rd Rabīʿ al-Awwal.
6. 8th Rabīʿ al-Awwal – This is the view of most experts including Imam Muḥammad ibn Jubayr ibn Muṭʿim (d. circa 100/719), Ḥāfiẓ Muḥammad ibn Mūsā al-Khuwārizmī al-Ḥanafī (d. 403/1012), Imam Ibn Ḥazm (d. 456/1064), Ḥāfiẓ Abū al-Khaṭṭāb ibn Diḥyah (d. 633/1235), Shaykh Idrīs Kāndhelwī (d. 1394/1974) and Mufti Rashīd Aḥmad Ludyānwī (d. 1422/2002). This view is also attributed to ʿAbd Allah ibn ʿAbbās (d. 68/687-8) (may Allah be pleased with him).
7. 9th Rabīʿ al-Awwal – This is the view of the famous Muslim astronomer Maḥmūd Pashā (d. 1302/1885) who conducted detailed research on this subject and concluded that the Prophet ﷺ was born on the morning of 9 Rabīʿ al-Awwal, which corresponds to 20 April 571 CE. This view has been endorsed by Mawlānā Shiblī Nuʿmānī (d. 1332/1914), Shaykh Muḥammad ibn ʿAfifī al-Bājūrī (d. 1345/1927), Qāḍī Sulaymān Manṣūrpūrī (d. 1349/1930), ʿAllāmah Zāhid Kawtharī (d. 1371/1952), Sayyid Sulaymān Nadwī (d. 1373/1953) and Mawlānā Ṣafī al-Raḥmān Mubārakpūrī (d. 1427/2006).
8. 10th Rabīʿ al-Awwal – This is the view of Imam ʿĀmir ibn Sharāḥīl al-Shaʿbī (d. circa 104/722), Imam Abū Jaʿfar al-Bāqir (d. 114/732-3) and Ḥāfiẓ Dimyāṭī al-Shāfiʿ ī (d. 705/1306).
9. 12th Rabīʿ al-Awwal – This is the view of Imam Ibn Isḥāq (d. 150/767-8), Imam Ibn Ḥibbān (d. 354/965), Imam Abū al-Ḥasan al-Māwardī (d. 450/1058), Imam Ibn Khaldūn (d. 808/1406) and others. Although this is a commonly held view, it is worth noting that from an astronomical perspective, this date in the Year of the Elephant does not coincide with a Monday in any way. This is why many experts have questioned this view and deemed it incorrect.
   Friday 17th Rabīʿ al-Awwal – This has been refuted by Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Kathīr (d. 774/1373).
10. 22nd Rabīʿ al-Awwal.

Thus, the preferred view is that the Prophet ﷺ was born on 8th or 9th Rabīʿ al-Awwal (19 or 20 April 571 CE)[2] although 1st or 2nd Rabīʿ al-Awwal (12 or 13 April 571 CE) are possible dates. The difference of opinion clearly suggests that, contrary to popular belief, there is no unanimous or fixed position regarding the precise date of the blessed birth of our beloved Prophet ﷺ.

(2) Demise of our beloved Prophet ﷺ

There is general agreement among scholars that the Prophet ﷺ passed away on a Monday in Rabīʿ al-Awwal in the 11th year after migration. However, there is a difference of opinion regarding the precise date in Rabīʿ al-Awwal. The following are the principal views:

1. 12th Rabīʿ al-Awwal – This is the most famous opinion and is the view of Imam Ibn Isḥāq (d. 150/767-8), Imam Wāqidī (d. 207/823), Imam Ṭaḥāwī (d. 321/933), Imam Ibn Ḥibbān (d. 354/965), Imam Ibn Ḥazm (d. 456/1064), Ḥafiẓ Ibn ʿAbd al-Barr (d. 463/1071), Imam Ibn al-Jawzī (d. 597/1201), Imam Nawawī (d. 676/1277), Ḥāfiẓ Dhahabī (d. 748/1348), Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Nāṣir al-Dīn al-Dimishqī (d. 842/1438), Imam Ibn Ḥajar al-Makkī (d. 974/1567), Qāḍī Sulaymān Manṣūrpūrī (d. 1349/1930), Mawlānā Ṣafī al-Raḥmān Mubārakpūrī (d. 1427/2006) and many others. This view is also attributed to ʿAlī ibn Abī Ṭālib (d. 40/661), ʿĀʾishah (d. 58/678) and ʿAbd Allah ibn ʿAbbās (d. 68/687-8) (may Allah be pleased with them) and Ḥāfiẓ Ibn al-Ṣalāḥ (d. 643/1245). However, many experts such as Imam Suhaylī (d. 581/1185) have questioned this view based on the fact that 9th Dhū al-Ḥijjah (the day of ʿArafah) in the 10th year after migration was a Friday. Accordingly, it is impossible for 12th Rabīʿ al-Awwal, three months later, to have fallen on a Monday even after considering all the possible variations in the number of days of Dhū al-Ḥijjah, Muḥarram and Ṣafar. The only possible way of reconciling 12th Rabīʿ al-Awwal with Monday is to assume that Dhū al-Ḥijjah started a day later in the blessed city of Madīnah. However, this reconciliation is only valid if all four months, Dhū al-Qaʿdah, Dhū al-Ḥijjah, Muḥarram and Ṣafar, were all complete months of 30 days. This is extremely rare, especially if Makkah was already a day ahead in Dhū al-Ḥijjah. For this reason, experts such as Ḥafiẓ Ibn Ḥajar ʿAsqalānī (d. 852/1449), Mufti Rashīd Aḥmad Ludyānwī (d. 1422/2002) and others argue that this view is wrong and is based on a transcribing error of 2nd Rabīʿ al-Awwal becoming 12th Rabīʿ al-Awwal. Mawlānā Ashraf ʿAlī Thānawī (d. 1362/1943) is also of the view that this date is incorrect.
2. 2nd Rabīʿ al-Awwal – This is the view of Imam Abū Isḥāq Saʿd ibn Ibrāhīm ibn ʿAbd al-Raḥmān ibn ʿAwf al-Zuhrī (d. 125/742-3), Imam Muḥammad ibn Qays (d. circa 126/743-4), Imam Sulayman al-Taymī (d. 143/761), Imam Khalifah ibn Khayyāṭ (d. 240/854-5), Imam Ṭabarānī (d. 360/971). Scholars who are inclined to this view include Imam Abū al-Yumn ibn ʿAsākir (d. 686/1287), Imam ʿIzz al-Dīn ibn Jamāʿah (d. 767/1366), Imam Ibn Khaldūn (d. 808/1406), Ḥafiẓ Ibn Ḥajar al-ʿAsqalānī (d. 852/1449), Imam Qasṭalānī (d. 923/1517), Mufti Rashīd Aḥmad Ludyānwī (d. 1422/2002) and others.
3. 1st Rabīʿ al-Awwal – This is the view of Imam ʿUrwah ibn al-Zubayr (d. 94/712-3), Imam Ibn Shihāb al-Zuhrī (d. 124/742), Imam Musā ibn ʿUqbah (d. 141/758-9), and Ḥāfiẓ Muḥammad ibn Mūsā al-Khuwārizmī al-Ḥanafī (d. 403/1012). Imam Suhaylī (d. 581/1185) is inclined towards this view although he suggests that the second view is also plausible. Ḥāfiẓ Ibn Sayyid al-Nās (d. 734/1334) suggests that both this and the previous view are possibilities. It is worth noting that both views are substantiated via a narration transmitted by Imam Ibn Jarīr (d. 310/923) from ʿAbd Allah ibn ʿAbbās (d. 68/687-8) who suggests that the Prophet ﷺ remained alive for 81 days after the verse “Today, I have completed for you your faith” was revealed. The majority of the scholars are of the view that this verse was revealed on 9th Dhū al-Ḥijjah, as explicitly mentioned in the narration of Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī (45, 4407, 4606, and 7268).
4. 13th Rabīʿ al-Awwal – This is the view of Ḥafiẓ Badr al-Dīn ibn Jamāʿah (d. 733/1333) and Shaykh Muḥammad ibn ʿAfifī al-Bājūrī (d. 1345/1927). The latter adopted this view based on the research of the Muslim astronomer Maḥmūd Pashā (d. 1302/1885), who also appears inclined towards this view. Apart from the astronomical possibility of this date coinciding with a Monday, there is no evidence to substantiate this position.

Thus, similar to the date of birth, there is no scholarly consensus on the precise date of the demise of our beloved Prophet ﷺ. The strongest view, however, appears to be that the Prophet ﷺ passed away on Monday 1st or 2nd Rabīʿ al-Awwal 11 AH, which corresponds to 27 or 28 May 632 CE.

Allah knows best

Yusuf Shabbir

Approved by: Mufti Shabbir Ahmed Sahib

19 Ṣafar 1438 / 19 November 2016

www.nawadir.org

Footnotes

[1] The article is accessible on the following link: https://nawadir.org/2016/11/20/dates-of-the-blessed-birth-and-demise-of-prophet-muhammad-arabic/

[2] This is in accordance with the old Gregorian calendar. The equivalent in the new Gregorian calendar is 21 or 22 April.

By Mawlana Muntasir Zaman

To understand the contribution of the scholars of Deoband in the field of Hadīth, multiple aspects need to be addressed. However, for the sake of brevity, this paper will focus on two aspects: first, their Hadīth curriculum and second, their written works.

Hadīth Curriculum

Dār al-‘Ulūm Deoband and its affiliates enjoys one of the most comprehensive Hadīth curricula amongst the Islāmic institutions of the Indian subcontinent. The following set of traditional Hadīth literature forms the core of their Hadīth syllabus:

• Al-Kutub al-Sittah (the six canonical Hadīth books: Sahīh al-Bukhārī, Sahīh Muslim, Sunan al-Nasa’ī, Sunan Abī Dāwūd, Sunan al-Tirmidhī, Sunan Ibn Mājah)
• Al-Muwatta’ by Mālik ibn Anas: the recension of Yahyā ibn Yahyā al-Masmūdī and the recension of Muhammad ibn al-Hasan al-Shaybanī
• Sharh Ma‘ānī al-Āthār by Abu Ja‘far al-Tahāwī
• Al-Shamā’il al-Muhammadiyyah by Abū ‘Īsā al-Tirmidhī
• Mishkāt al-Masābīh by al-Khatīb al-Tibrīzī

In addition, the following books are also part of the curriculum, although some are taught in only certain branches:

• ‘Amal al-Yawm wa al-Laylah by Abū Bakr Ibn al-Sunnī
• Al-Targhīb wa al-Tarhīb by ‘Abd al-‘Ażīm al-Mundhirī
• Riyād al-Sālihīn by Muhyī al-Dīn al-Nawawī
• Āthār al-Sunan by al-Shawq al-Nīmawī
• Hayāt al-Sahābah by Yūsuf Kāndhlawī
• Zād al-Tālibīn by Muhammad ‘Āshiq Ilāhī

With respect to works on Hadīth terminology and its connected sciences, the following books are taught, some only at certain branches:

• Ma‘rifat Anwā‘ ‘Ilm al-Hadīth (known as Muqaddimat Ibn al-Salāh) by Abū ‘Amr Ibn al-Salāh
• Nuzhat al-Nażar Sharh Nukhbat al-Fikar by Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalānī
• Tadrib al-Rāwī by Jālal al-Dīn al-Suyūtī
• Al-Muqaddimah by ‘Abd al-Haqq al-Dihlawī

While teaching al-Kutub al-Sittah, the scholars would ensure that the collections were read from cover to cover because they disapproved of reading only select portions from them. Generally, the student/s will read all six books from beginning to end while the teacher will listen, although at times the teacher will read while the students listen. A student will only receive a certificate of graduation once he has studied the six books and other Hadīth collections, keeping in mind that the final year of the higher studies at Dār al-‘Ulūm is specifically for the study of the six books, both in terms of text-transmission (riwāyah) and in terms of commentary and explanation (dirāyah).

In many branches, students are required to commit a certain number of hadīths to memory in the course of their studies, and in some branches, students are encouraged to memorize entire Hadīth collections, such as Riyād al-Sālihīn and Mishkāt al-Masābīh.

Dār al-Ulūm Deoband also currently offers a two-year extensive post-graduate course on the specialization of Hadīth, wherein a student specializes in the sciences of Hadīth terminology, isnād grading, narrator evaluation, etc., under the tutelage of expert Hadīth teachers.

Written Contributions

The scholars of Deoband have made noteworthy contributions in the dissemination of Hadīth by means of publishing classical Hadīth books, making their own personal compilations, and making valuable manuscripts of classical hadith available for scholars and students. Among their written contributions in the form of commentaries, lectures, editing of manuscripts, annotation, compilation, and authorship are the following.

Commentaries

Many of their learned scholars have written commentaries on al-Kutub al-Sittah, and other commonly available Hadīth works in Arabic, Urdu, and other languages.

Sahīh al-Bukhārī

• Anwār al-Bārī by Ahmad Ridā al-Bijnorī
• Fadl al-Bārī fī Fiqh al-Bukhārī by ‘Abd al-Ra’ūf al-Hazārawī
• Tuhfat al-Qārī bi Mushkilāt al-Bukhārī by Muhammad Idrīs Kāndhlawī
• Farhat al-Qārī ‘an Sahīh al-Bukhārī by Shayr Zamān al-Hazārawī
• Al-Kawthar al-Jārī fī Sharh al-Bukhārī by ‘Abd al-Rahmān al-Murdānī
• Talkhīs al-Bukhārī by Shams al-Duhā al-Zankūnī
• Is‘ād al-Bārī by Siddīq Ahmad Bāndawī

Among works written on related aspects are the following:

• Nibrās al-Sārī fī Atrāf al-Bukhārī by ‘Abd al-‘Azīz Punjābī
• In‘ām al-Bārī fī Sharh Ash‘ār al-Bukhāri by Muhammad ‘Āshiq Ilāhī
• Kitāb al-Mu‘jam li Rijāl al-Bukhārī by Muhammad Asīr al-Adrawī
• Izālat al-Qassās ‘an Wajh Qāl Ba‘d al-Nās by Mujīb al-Rahmān al-Bangladeshī
• Mā Yanfa‘ al-Nās fī Sharh Qāl Ba‘d al-Nās Muhammad Tāhir al-Rahīmī

The last two are treatises that explain the statement of Imām al-Bukhārī in his Sahīh “qāl ba’d al-nās (some people said).”

They also dedicated works to the explanation of the chapter headings of Sahīh al-Bukhārī, like: Shaykh al-Hind Mahmūd al-Hasan, Mawlānā Muhammad Idrīs Kāndhlawī, Mawlānā Mājid ‘Alī Mānawī, Mawlānā Fakhr al-Dīn Murādabādī, Sayyid Badshāh Gul (his work is entitled Hamd al-Muta’ālī). The most extensive work in this regard was written by Mawlānā Muhammad Zakariyyā Kāndhlawī in Arabic entitled al-Abwāb wa al-Tarājim, recently published in six large volumes.

Sahīh Muslim

After citing several renowned commentaries on Sahīh Muslim, ‘Allāmah al-Kawthari, the deputy to the last Shaykh al-Islam of the Ottoman Empire, explains:

Truth be told, none of these commentaries fulfil the right of Sahih Muslim, of commentary and exposition from all perspectives, which concern the thirsty researchers [seeking] to reveal the secrets of the book. So if one commentary excels in jurisprudence or beliefs according to one school, for example, you find it lacking in the commentary of what relates to the remainder of the schools of practice and belief. This does not quench the thirst of the researcher. Or you find it neglecting the commentary of its introduction despite it being from the oldest of what the imams of hadith wrote in preparing the principles of the science of hadith like the book al-Tamyiz by Muslim, and such [a book] deserves a full commentary. And you find amongst the commentators those who omit commenting on the narrators altogether, although the researcher is in great need of this in areas of known criticism. Hence, when one of these commentaries pleases you from some perspectives, you find it does not quench your thirst from other perspectives. The remainder of the commentaries are similar. This is a substantial gap. We had the strongest desire that a commentary of Sahih Muslimappears in the world of print to fill this gap.

Now we are ones who have chanced upon our longed-for lost treasure in the production of Fath al-Mulhim fi Sharh Sahih Muslim in its wonderful dress and brilliant suit in a number of Indian prints.

Fath al-Mulhim, the commentary in reference, was authored by Mawlānā Shabbīr Ahmad ‘Uthmānī. However, he passed away prior to its completion. Thereafter, Muftī Taqī ‘Uthmānī, a leading scholar from Pakistan, took the initiative to complete it.

Many of them wrote specifically on Imām Muslim’s introduction to his Sahīh in view of its importance and benefit. The most outstanding among them was by ‘Alī Ahmad al-A‘żamī in Arabic, which unfortunately has yet to be published. There are others written in Urdu.

Sunan al-Nasa’ī

• Al-Muktafā bi Sharh al-Mujtabā by Ahmad Hasan al-Fattanī

Jāmi‘ al-Tirmidhī

• Al-Tīb al-Shadhī by Ashfāq al-Rahmān Kāndhlawī
• Hadiyyat al-Ahwadhī by Ibrāhīm Balyāwī
• Tanqīh al-Shadhī by Shams al-Haqq al-Afghānī
• Nazl al-Thawī by Asghar Husayn
• Ma‘ārif al-Sunan by Muhammad Yūsuf Banūrī. He included therein the valuable discourses and research of his teacher, Anwar Shāh al-Kashmīrī. He passed away before completing the work. An effort is currently being made to complete this monumental work
• Khazā’in al-Sunan by Sarfarāz Khān Safdar
• Sayyid Badshāh Gul and Muhammad Mūsā Rūhānī Bāzī have also written commentaries on it

Mawlānā Fadl Allāh al-Rahmānī wrote a commentary on ‘Ilal al-Tirmidhī and Mawlānā Zakariyyā Kāndhlawī wrote a commentary on al-Shamā’il al-Muhammadiyyah of al-Timidhī.

Mawlānā Yūsuf Banūrī started work on a book with the title Lubb al-Lubāb fī Takhrīj Mā Yaqūlu al-Tirmidhī wa fī al-Bāb, in which he attempted to source and reference the hadiths Imam al-Tirmidhī in his Sunan alluded to with the words “wa fī al-bāb ‘an” (There are other reports in this chapter from so and so).” However, because of other engagements and responsibilities, he was only able to complete a small portion. As such, he delegated the job of completing the book to Muftī Walī Hasan, who also managed to complete only on a small portion because of his teaching and other commitments. Finally, the responsibility was given over to Mawlānā Habīb Allāh Mukhtār who finished a large portion of book in several volumes under the new title: Kashf al-Niqāb ‘ammā Yaqūluhu al-Tirmidhī wa fī al-Bāb.

Sunan Abī Dāwūd

• Badhl al-Majhūd by Khalīl Ahmad al-Sahāranpūrī
• Intibāh al-Ruqūd fī Hall Sunan Abī Dāwūd by Shayr Zamān al-Hazārawī
• Zubdat al-Maqsūd fī Hall Qāl Abū Dāwūd by Muhammad Tāhir al-Rahīmī

Others have written commentaries on the statement of Imām Abū Dāwūd in his Sunan, “qāl Abū Dāwūd.”

Muwatta’ Mālik (Recension of Yayhā ibn Yahyā)

• Awjaz al-Masālik by Muhammad Zakariyyā Kāndhlawī
• Kashf al-Mughattā fī Rijāl al-Muwatta’ by Ashfāq al-Rahmān Kāndhlawī in respect to the narrators of the book

Sharh Ma’ānī al-Āthār by al-Tahāwī

• Amānī al-Ahbār by Yūsuf Kāndhlawī. He passed away before completing one-fourth of the book
• Tabhīj al-Rāwī bi Takhrīj Ahādīth al-Tahāwī by ‘Āshiq Ilāhī
• Majānī al-Athmār by the above author
• Talkhīs al-Tahāwī by Husayn ‘Alī Punjābī
• Nathr al-Azhār by Muhammad Amīn Aurakzā’ī
• Al-Hāwī ‘alā Mushkilāt al-Tahāwī by ‘Abd al-Rahmān al-Kāmilpūrī

The following are Urdu commentaries:

• Al-Kalām al-Hāwī fī ‘Ibārat al-Tahāwī by Sarfarāz Khan Safdar
• Īdāh al-Tahāwī by Shabbīr Ahmad al-Mirathī
• Misbāh al-Tahāwī by As‘ad Allāh al-Rāmfūrī

The following are specifically on the narrators of the book:

• Tarājim al-Ahbār min Rijāl Sharh Ma’ānī al-Āthār by Muhammad Ayyūb al-Mażāhīrī
• Rijāl al-Tahāwī by ‘Abd al-‘Azīz Punjābī
• Al-Hāwī fī Rijāl al-Tahāwī by Habīb al-Rahmān al-A‘żamī

The author of Tarājim al-Ahbār, Muhammad Ayyūb, also wrote a book entitled Tashīh al-Aghlāt al-Kitābiyyah al-Wāqi‘ah fī al-Nusakh al-Tahāwiyyah regarding the mistakes found in the manuscripts of the book.

Mishkāt al-Masābīh

Mishkāt al-Masābīh of al-Khatīb al-Tibrīzī is one of the most circulated and studied Hadīth books in the Indian subcontinent. Many scholars of Deoband have annotations and commentaries on it in Arabic and Urdu.

Among the Arabic commentaries is:

• Al-Ta‘līq al-Sabīh by Muhammad Idrīs Kāndhlawī

In Urdu, there are many commentaries, some of the prominent among them are:

• Tanżīm al-Ashtāt li Hall ‘Awīsāt al-Mishkāh by Abū al-Hasan al-Chātghāmī
• Mir‘āt al-Amālīh Sharh Mishkāt al-Masābīh by Muhammad al-Chātghāmī.

Miscellaneous Hadīth Literature

They also have commentaries on other Hadīth works. Among them are:

• Qalā’id al-Azhār an Arabic commentary on Kitāb al-Āthār of Muhammad ibn al-Hasan al-Shaybānī by Mahdī Hasan al-Shāhjahānpūrī. He completed one-third of the book
• Fadl Allāh al-Samad fī Sharh al-Adab al-Mufrad by Fadl Allāh al-Jīlānī. He also has a book on the commentary of ‘Ilal al-Tirmidhī by his teacher ‘Abd al-Latīf.
• Tuhfat al-Ikhwān bi Sharh Hadīth Shu‘ab al-Īmān by Idrīs Kāndhlawī
• Ta‘tīr al-Mashām fī Sharh Bulūgh al-Marām by Muhammad Hayāt al-Sanbhali
• Al-Fawā’id al-Saniyyah fi Sharh al-Arba‘īn al-Nawawiyyah by ‘Āshiq Ilāhī
• Tuhfat al-Quddūs fī Sharh Bahjat al-Nufūs by Żafar Ahmad ‘Uthmānī
• Sharh Shu‘ab al-Īmān by ‘Abd Allāh Qutb Shāh al-Murdānī

Dictations and Lectures

The Hadīth lessons delivered at Dār al-‘Ulūm Deoband were unique and comprehensive, touching on all dimensions of a Hadīth text: its commentary, jurisprudence, differences amongst the scholars, narrator criticism and so on. Fortunately, from its inception until the present day, these lectures were recorded. Thus, their lecture notes, containing treasures of knowledge, were found among many of the graduates of Dār al-‘Ulūm. Many of them went on to print whatever they possessed and disseminated it. This genre of books has become a beneficial library of immense academic value.

These dictations are similar to the encyclopedic Hadīth commentaries and are useful for students, researchers, scholars, and teachers alike due to the mature and insightful explanations they offer – which is a natural result of the extensive experience of the lecturers in teaching these Hadīth collections.

Most books of this genre are dictations on al-Kutub al-Sittah in Arabic and some are in Urdu. The most outstanding among them are the dictations of Mawlānā Rashīd Ahmad Gangohī and Mawlānā Anwar Shāh al-Kashmīrī, because the students and scholars who compiled, organized, reviewed and thereafter disseminated them were also experts in the field. All the dictations of Mawlānā Rashīd Ahmad Gangohī were printed posthumously after being edited and annotated by Mawlānā Zakariyyā Kāndhlawī or by some of his reputable companions and students. Some of these dictations are as follows:

Sahīh al-Bukhārī

• The dictations of Rashīd Ahmad Gangohī were compiled by Mājid ‘Alī Mānawī, Husayn ‘Alī Punjābī, and Muhammad Yahyā Kāndhlawī. The most prominent and beneficial among them are those compiled by Muhammad Yahyā which was edited, annotated, and then printed by his son Mawlānā Zakariyyā entitled Lāmi‘ al-Darārī. This collection of lecture notes is in Arabic and the remainder are in Urdu.
• Al-Nūr al-Sārī: the dictations of Mahmūd Hasan al-Deobandī
• Fayd al-Bārī: the dictations of Anwar Shāh al-Kashmīrī compiled by Badr ‘Ālam al-Mirathi. It is adorned with the beneficial footnotes of the compiler, entitled al-Badr al-Sārī. Many other reputable scholars have also compiled his dictations, among whom were Munāżir Ahsan Gīlānī and Muhammad Tayyīb al-Qāsimī, but they have yet to be printed.
• Dars-e Bukhārī and Fadl al-Bārī: the dictations of Shabbīr Ahmad ‘Uthmānī
• Īdāh al-Bukhārī: the dictations of Fakhr al-Dīn al-Murādabādī
• Taqrīr al-Bukhārī: the dictations of Husayn Ahmad al-Madanī and Zakariyyā Kāndhlawī, each respectively

Sahīh Muslim

• Al-Hall al-Mufhim: the dictations of Rashīd Ahmad Gangohī
• The dictations of Anwar Shāh al-Kashmīrī compiled by ‘Abd al-A‘lā al-Hasanī and ‘Alī Ahmad al-A‘żamī, which have not been printed as of yet

Jāmi‘ al-Tirmidhī

• Al-Kawkab al-Durrī: the dictations of Rashīd Ahmad Gongohī edited and annotated by Zakariyyā Kāndhlawī
• Taqrīr al-Tirmidhī: the dictations of Mahmūd Hasan al-Deobandī
• Al-‘Arf al-Shadhī: the dictations of Anwar Shāh al-Kashmīrī compiled by Muhammad Chirāgh
• Al-Wird al-Shadhī: the dictations of Mahmūd Hasan al-Deobandī
• Al-Naf‘ al-Shadhī: the dictations of Rashīd Ahmad Gangohī
• The dictations of ‘Abd al-Rahmān al-Kāmilpūrī
• The dictations of Husayn Ahmad al-Madanī. There are a few, the most outstanding and commonly available among them is entitled Ma’ārif Madaniyyah, which was compiled with additions by Tāhir Hasan Amrohī.

Sunan Abī Dāwūd

• Anwār al-Mahmūd the collective dictations of Mahmūd Hasan al-Deobandī, Anwar Shāh al-Kashmīrī, Shabbīr Ahmad ‘Uthmānī in Arabic compiled by Muhammad Siddīq al-Najīb Abādī, who also consulted Badhl al-Majhūd of Khalīl Ahmad al-Sahāranfūrī.

Sunan al-Nasa’ī

• Al-Fayd al-Samā’ī the dictations of Rashīd Ahmad Gangohī

Sunan Ibn Mājah

• The dictations of Rashīd Ahmad Gangohī which have yet to be published

Other dictations on Sunan Ibn Mājah, Sharh Ma‘ānī al-Āthār, and other works have been published in Urdu.

Marginalia

During his studies, a student may not be able to consult the detailed commentaries. As such, scholars have authored brief annotations on the curricular books, known as “marginalia” (Hawāshī). These generally comprise of a collection of short passages from earlier works, capturing the gist of what is found in the lengthier commentaries. Most of the curricular books printed in the Indian subcontinent are annotated with such marginalia. The scholars of Deoband have written marginalia on countless Hadīth books.

Among those written on common Hadīth works are the following:

• Sahīh al-Bukhārī: by Ahmad ‘Alī al-Sahāranpūrī, ‘Abd al-‘Azīz Punjābī (entitled Miqbās al-Wārī), Muhammad Tāhir al-Murdānī, and ‘Abd al-Jabbār al-A‘żamī
• Jāmi‘ al-Tirmidhī: by Ahmad ‘Alī al-Sahāranpūrī, Mājid ‘Alī Mānawī, Ashraf ‘Alī al-Thanwī (entitled al-Thawāb al-Hulī)
• Sunan Abī Dāwūd: Fakhr al-Hasan Gangohī, Muhammad Hayāt al-Sanbhalī, Mājid ‘Alī Mānawī
• Sunan al-Nasa’ī: by Ashfāq al-Rahmān Kāndhlawī
• Suan Ibn Mājah: by Ashfāq al-Rahmān Kāndhlawī and Fakhr al-Hasan Gangohī, and Anwar Shāh al-Kashmīrī
• Muwatta’ Mālik: by Ashfāq al-Rahmān Kāndhlawī
• Sharh Mā’ānī al-Āthār: by Muhammad Ayyūb al-Sahāranpūrī and ‘Abd al-‘Azīz Punjābī
• Mishkāt al-Masābīh: by Muhammad Ayyūb al-Sahāranpūrī and Nasīr al-Dīn al-Kāmilpūrī

The prints of Sahīh al-Bukhārī, Jāmi‘ al-Tirmidhī, and Mishkāt al-Masābīh commonly available in the Indian subcontinent are adorned with the marginalia of Ahmad ‘Alī al-Sahāranpūrī.

Among those written on other Hadīth works are:

• The marginalia of Anwar Shāh al-Kashmīrī on Āthār al-Sunan of al-Shawq al-Nīmawī
• The marginalia of Zakariyyā Kāndhlawī on Lāmi‘ al-Darārī, al-Kawkab al-Durrī, and Badhl al-Majhūd
• The marginalia of ‘Āshiq Ilāhī on al-Rasā’il al-Thalāth of Shāh Walī Allāh al-Dihlawī
• The marginalia of ‘Abd al-‘Azīz Punjābī and Muhammad Yūsuf al-Kamilpūrī on Nasb al-Rāyah entitled Bughyat al-Alma‘ī
• The marginalia of Zakariyyā Kāndhlawī on al-Ishā‘ah fī Ashrāt al-Sā‘ah of Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Rasūl al-Barzanjī

Hadīth Terminology

Among the many salient features of Islām is the manner in which Muslim scholars have preserved the teachings of the Messenger of Allāh (peace and blessings be upon him). They have laid down principles to ascertain the authenticity of hadīths and their narrators. The scholars of Deoband have also written on this subject. Some of their works are:

• Qāwā‘id fī ‘Ulūm al-Hadīth by Żafar Ahmad ‘Uthmānī. An introduction to his monumental work I‘lā‘ al-Sunan, which was edited and annotated then printed separately by ‘Abd al-Fattāh Abū Ghuddah.
• Mabādī’ ‘Ilm al-Hadīth wa Usūluh by Shabbir Ahmad ‘Uthmānī, the introduction to his commentary on Sahīh Muslim, Fath al-Mulhim, which was edited and annotated then printed separately by ‘Abd al-Fattāh Abū Ghuddah.
• Minhat al-Mughīth: a commentary Zayn al-Dīn al-‘Irāqī’s Alfiyyat al-Hadīth by Idrīs Kāndhlawī
• ‘Ilm al-Hadīth by Ashfāq al-Rahmān Kāndhlawī
• Jawāhir al-Usūl fī Usūl al-Hadīth by ‘Abd al-Rahmān al-Murdānī
• Ahsan al-Khabar fī Mabādi’ ‘Ilm al-Athar Muhammad Hasan al-Bashārawī
• ‘Ulūm al-Hadīth Muhammad ‘Ubayd Allāh al-Asadī
• Miftāh al-Hadīth by ‘Abd al-Jalīl al-Qāsimī
• Fawā’id Jāmi‘ah: a commentary on of ‘Abd al-‘Azīz al-Dihlawī’s al-‘Ujālah al-Nāfi‘ah by ‘Abd al-Halīm Nu‘māni
• Basā’ir al-Sunnah Amīn al-Haqq al-Murdānī
• Al-Hadīth al-Hasan by Ni‘mat Allāh al-A‘żamī and the students from the faculty of Hadīth specialization at Dār al-‘Ulūm Deoband
• Ta‘dīl Rijāl al-Bukhārī by Habīb al-Rahmān al-A‘żamī
• Fann Asmā’ al-Rijāl by Asīr Adrawī

Authority of Hadīth and Its Compilation

In recent times, there has been an organized effort to disprove the authority of Hadīth and to criticize the method of Hadīth compilation in the early stages of Islām. In order to address this critical issue, the scholars of Deoband have written numerous books, some of which are:

• Hujjiyyat al-Hadīth by Idrīs Kāndhlawī, Muhammad Tayyib al-Qāsimī, each respectively
• Nusrat al-Hadīth by Habīb al-Rahmān al-A‘żamī in Urdu. This was translated into Arabic by Mas’ūd al-A‘żamī with a forward by Muhammad ‘Awwāmah.
• Al-Intisār li Sunnat Sayyid al-Abrār Muhammad Tāhir al-Murdānī
• Natā’ij al-Inkār al-Hadīth by Sarfarāz Khan Safdar
• Al-Madkhal ilā Dirāsāt al-Hadīth al-Nabawī al-Sharīf and Dawr al-Hadīth fī Takwīn al-Munākh al-Islāmī by Abū al-Hasan al-Nadawī
• Tadwīn-e Hadīth by Munāżir Ahsan Gīlānī. This was later translated into Arabic by ‘Abd al-Razzāq al-Iskandarī and revised by Bashshār ‘Awwād Ma‘rūf
• Dirāsāt fī al-Ahādīth al-Nabawiyyah by Mustafa Azami
• Al-Fawā’id al-Malakūtiyyah fī ann al-Hadīth Hujjah by Mūsā Ruhānī Bāzī
• The first part of the book al-Imām Ibn Mājah wa Kitābuhū al-Sunan by ‘Abd al-Rashīd Nu‘mānī has a detailed discussion on the compilation of Hadīth
• On Schacht’s Origins of Muhammadan Jurisprudence by Mustafa Azami

Many of those among them who have written commentaries on Hadīth books often discuss this subject in detail in beginning of their works.

Editing Manuscripts

One of the greatest academic services in our times is the editing and publication of classical Islamic manuscripts not readily available to students of knowledge, researchers, and scholars. Prior to the publication of any work, scholars carry out an in depth cross-examination of its various manuscripts to ensure the original text is authentically presented. Some of the works edited and published by the scholars of Deoband are as follows:

• Nasb al-Rāyah fī Takhrīj Ahādīth al-Hidāyah of Jamāl al-Dīn al-Zayla’ī. This was edited and annotated by ‘Abd al-Azīz Punjābī and Muhammad Yūsuf al-Kamilfūrī and then revised by Yūsuf Banūrī.
• Jam‘ al-Fawā’id min Jāmi‘ al-Usūl wa Majma‘ al-Zawā’id of Muhammad ibn Muhammad al-Maghribī edited by ‘Āshiq Ilāhī
• Sahīh Ibn Khuzaymah edited by Mustafa Azami
• Nukhab al-Afkār fī Tanqīh Mabānī al-Akhbār: the commentary of Badr al-Dīn al-‘Aynī on Sharh Mā‘ānī al-Āthār edited and annotated by Arshad al-Madanī
• Al-Mughnī fī Dabt Asmā’ al-Rijāl of Muhammad Tāhir al-Fattani edited by Zayn al-‘Ābidīn al-A‘żamī

A name that features prominently in the list of those who have revived countless classical Hadīth manuscripts in the past century is the great Hadīth scholar Mawlānā Habīb al-Rahmān al-A‘żamī. Some of the works edited and annotated by him are:

• Al-Musannaf of ‘Abd al-Razzāq al-San‘ānī
• Al-Musannaf of Abū Bakr ibn Abī Shaybah. He began working on this massive Hadīth collection towards the end of his life and was unable to complete it
• Al-Musnad of ‘Abd Allāh ibn al-Zubayr al-Humaydī
• Al-Sunan of Sa’īd ibn Mansūr
• Kitāb al-Zuhd wa al-Riqāq of ‘Abd Allāh ibn al-Mubārak
• Al-Matālib al-‘Āliyah bi Zawā’id al-Masānīd al-Thamāniyah of Ibn Hajar
• Mukhtasar al-Targhīb wa al-Tarhīb of Ibn Hajar
• Kashf al-Astār ‘an Zawā’id al-Bazzār of Nūr al-Dīn al-Haythamī
• Majma‘ Bihār al-Anwār of Muhammad Tāhir al-Fattanī

Miscellaneous Works

The scholars of Deoband authored numerous Arabic and Urdu works in the field of Hadīth to address the challenges they witnessed and the demands of their time, some of which are:

Arabic Works

• Jāmi‘ al-Āthār by Ashraf ‘Alī al-Thanwī. He was unable to complete this work due to other responsibilities.
• I‘lā‘ al-Sunan by Żafar Ahmad ‘Uthmānī. It was written under the supervision and in light of the teachings of his teacher Ashraf ‘Alī al-Thanwī.

The content of these works is the study and collection of those narrations and reports upon which the Hanafīs, who are often accused of abandoning Hadīth and an over reliance on their intellect, based their rulings. I‘lā‘ al-Sunan was printed in twenty-one volumes. The actual book is in eighteen volumes and the remaining three volumes are introductions to the book:

• The first volume is an explanation of the terminology and principles of Hadīth, with special focus given to the terminology specific to the Hanafīs. This was also printed separately with the editing and annotation of ‘Abd al-Fattāh Abū Ghuddah entitled Qawā‘id fī ‘Ulūm al-Hadīth
• The second volume is a collection of the principles and terminology of Fiqh entitled Qawā‘id fī ‘Ulūm al-Fiqh. This was written by Habīb Ahmad al-Kīrānawī
• The third volume is regarding Imām Abū Hanīfah and his companions from the Hadīth scholars.

Other works are:

• Al-Tasharruf bi Ma‘rifat Ahādīth al-Tasawwuf by Ashraf ‘Alī al-Thanwī
• Al-Tasrīh bi Mā Tawātar fī Nuzūl al-Masīh, by Anwar Shāh al-Kashmīrī
• Al-‘Anāqīd al-Ghāliyah by ‘Āshiq Ilāhī
• Juz’ fī Hajjat al-Wadā‘ wa ‘Umrāt al-Rasūl by Zakariyyā Kāndhlawī
• Alfiyyat al-Hadīth by Muhammad Manżūr Nu‘mānī
• Zād al-Tālibīn by ‘Āshiq Ilāhī
• Al-Sayf al-Mujallā ‘alā al-Muhallā by Mahdī Hasan al-Shāhjahānpūrī. A four-volume refutation on the isolated views of Ibn Hazam in his book al-Muhallā
• Ta‘qīb al-Taqlīb al-Wāqi’ fī Tahdhīb al-Tahdhīb by Muhammad Ayyūb al-Sahāranpūrī in respect to the mistakes found in Tahdhīb al-Tahdhīb of Ibn Hajar
• Intikhāb Mishkāt al-Masābīh by Muhammad Ilyās Kāndhlawī
• Hayāt al-Sahābah by Muhammad Yūsuf Kāndhlawī
• Al-Ahādīth al-Muntakhabah fī al-Sifāt al-Sitt by the above author
• Mā Tamassu ilayh al-Hājah by ‘Abd al-Rashīd Nu‘mānī. This work was also edited and annotated by ‘Abd al-Fattāh Abū Ghuddah, who changed the title to al-Imām Ibn Mājah wa Kitābuhu al-Sunan.
• Makānat al-Imām Abū Hanīfah fi al-Hadīth by the above author and also edited and annotated by ‘Abd al-Fattāh Abū Ghuddah
• Bayn al-Da‘īf wa al-Mawdū‘ by ‘Ubayd Allāh al-As‘adī
• Fihris Musnad Ahmad by ‘Abd al-‘Azīz Punjābī
• Tabwīb Musnad Ahmad by the above author

Mawlānā Habīb al-Rahmān al-A‘żamī wrote an academic critique on Shaykh Ahmad Shākir’s marginalia on Musnad Ahmad. Shaykh Ahmad Shākir was so impressed with his critique that he added it to subsequent prints of the book.

Urdu Works

• Tarjumān al-Sunnah by Badr ‘Ālam al-Mirathī
• Jawāhir al-Hikam by the above author
• Ma‘ārif al-Sunnah of Ihtishām al-Hasan Kāndhlawī
• Tajrīd al-Bukhārī by Muhammad Hayāt al-Sanbhalī
• Intikhāb al-Sihāh al-Sittah by Zayn al-‘Ābidīn al-Mirathī
• Intikhāb al-Targhīb by ‘Abd Allāh Tāriq
• Ma‘ārif al-Hadīth by Muhammad Manżūr Nu‘mānī
• Fadā’il al-A‘māl by Zakariyyā Kāndhlawī
• Ibn Mājah Aur ‘Ilm-e Hadīth by ‘Abd al-Rashīd Nu‘mānī. This is a different work from the one mentioned above.

Conclusion

As mentioned earlier, the purpose of this paper is to highlight the most important contributions of the scholars of Deoband in the field of Hadīth with an emphasis on the works of their earlier scholars. Countless research papers, treatises, monographs and lecture notes on numerous subjects of Hadīth, in particular those by contemporary scholars of Deoband, have not been discussed.

The numerous works presented in this short article are part of the great legacy bequeathed to the students, teachers, researchers, and scholars of the ummah by the scholars of Deoband. They left no stone unturned in the service of the Sunnah: its preservation, revival, dissemination, and explanation to the masses. Despite their monumental service to Hadīth and its related sciences, it is unfortunate that this great service has gone largely unnoticed by many students and scholars of Islām. In fact, an effort is often made to portray a negative image of these luminaries and to give people the impression that the scholars of Deoband are far behind in the field of Hadīth!

It is hoped that the reader now has a basic appreciation for the works rendered by these illustrious personalities in the service of the Sunnah, which ought to be viewed as an extension to the continuous effort to preserve the noble Islāmic legacy. May Allāh accept their efforts and make it a means of their elevation in the hereafter, Āmīn.

Taken from: https://ahadithnotes.com/2015/05/19/the-contribution-of-the-scholars-of-deoband-in-the-field-of-hadith-reviving-a-forgotten-legacy/

By Qāri Izhār Ahmad Thānawi [1]

Translation and footnotes by Faraz Abdul Moid

Shams al-Dīn Abū ‘l-Khayr Muhammad bin Muhammad bin Muhammad bin Ali al-Jazarī was born in Damascus on the 25^th of Ramadan, 751 AH (corresponding to 1350 CE). By the of age 15 or 16, he had not only memorized the Qur’an but had also committed to memory the famous book of Shafi’ī law al-Tanbīh, plus two books on qirā’ah: the Shātibiyyah and al-Taysīr [2]. His teachers included Taqi al-Dīn al-Baghdādi, Ibn al-Husayn al-Hanafi, Shaykh Ibn al-Labbān, and others. In his studies in law, he benefited from Jamāl al-Isnawī, Ibn Raslān, Abu ‘l-Baqā al-Subkī, and others. Amongst his teachers in Hadith were Ibn Abd al-Karīm al-Hanbali, Bahāuddīn Amīnī, Ibn al-Muhibb al-Maqdisi, and Allāmah Ibn Kathīr amongst others. Imam Tāsh Kubrā Zādah [3] has mentioned, “He learnt Hadith from a cohort of scholars.”

Imam Jazari memorized over 100,000 Hadiths, along with having acquired expertise in Hadith, law, and qirā’āh. Imām Sakhāwi mentions, “Many scholars had granted him licenses to issue legal verdicts, lecturing, and teaching the sciences of qirā’ah.”

He studied the sciences of qirā’ah from approximately 40 scholars by traveling through Damascus, Makkah, Madinah, Cairo, and Alexandria. Thereafter he was elected to the post of Shaykh al-Qurrā in Damascus. At that time the Levant was a province of the regime in Egypt. The king of Egypt, Malik al-Žāhir Sayf al-Dīn Barqūq, appointed Imam Jazari as the head of the educational department at al-Jāmi’ah al-Salāhiyyah. 

In 797 AH, the governor of the Levant, Amīr Altamash, appointed him to the post of Qādī (judge) of Shām. Imam Jazari, however, had disagreements with the government in important matters related to the judicial post. Furthermore – due to the plotting of some individuals who were envious of him – the central government began to mistreat him. Inevitably, he decided to leave Damascus and migrated to Bursa in modern-day Turkey. The king of Turkey, Bāyazīd bin Uthman Yaldaram – who was already acquainted with the personality of Imam Jazari – treated him with great honor and respect, requesting Imam Jazari to permanently take residence in Bursa which Imam Jazari accepted. From thereon, the fruits of his lectures and writings began to materialize. Those who valued his knowledge, especially the students of qirā’ah, benefited from him tremendously.

In 805 AH, Timur Lang [4] had set out to attack Turkey and overthrew the government of Bāyazīd. Bāyazīd was arrested and passed away while imprisoned. Aside from accruing gold and riches, Timur Lang was interested in convening elite experts of various sciences and fields to his kingdom in Samarqand. Hence, Timur respectfully had Imam Jazari and a few selected scholars travel along with him. He took them with him, amidst the royal army, to major cities of learning in Transoxiana. During Imam Jazari’s stay in these cities, great scholars of the localities came to benefit from his knowledge and considered it to be an enormous blessing for them, especially after having benefited from his published works that had reached them. Timur Lang placed much deference and trust in Imam Jazari. He would say that Imam Jazari was a person who would experience clairvoyance (kashf) and would be blessed with visions of the Prophet sallallahu `alayhi wa sallam whenever he wished.

In 807 AH, after the passing of Timur Lang, Imam Jazari headed towards Shiraz via Khorasan, Herat, Yazd (in Iran), and Esfahan. He arrived to Shiraz in 808 AH. Pīr Muhammad, the governor of Shiraz and a paternal grandson of Timur Lang, held much respect for and conviction in Imam Jazari. He obliged Imam Jazari to stay in Shiraz and appointed him to the position of Chief Judge. After a long stay in Shiraz, Imam Jazari set off for the Hajj pilgrimage in 827 AH. After the Hajj, he traveled to Cairo where scholars and students came from far off places to visit him. Droves of Qurrā and scholars were seen in Cairo, all of them seeking to receive ijāzah from him as a source of blessing. Amidst these crowds of scholars was a young Ibn Hajr al-Asqalāni, who subsequently became the renowned commentator of Sahīh al-Bukhāri. In addition to this, Imam Jazari conducted lectures on the Musnad Ahmad, Musnad al-Shāfi’ī, as well as other works and conferred ijāzāt.

After returning to Shiraz, Imam Jazari founded a large seminary named Dār al-Qur’ān. It should be noted that he had already established a seminary in Damascus with the same name. Also to note is that some have inaccurately mentioned “Dār al-Qurrā” as the name of this seminary.

Since his era till present, no one has reached the level of Imam Jazari in the sciences of qirā’ah. al-Hāfiž Ibn Hajr al-Asqalāni states, “He held the highest position in the world in the science of qirā’ah.”

Allāmah Shawkāni mentions, “He was unmatched in the science of qirā’ah in the entire world.”

Allāmah Suyūti says, “When it came to the science of qirā’ah he was unparalleled in the world during his time, and he was a hāfiž of Hadith.”

Mawlana Abd al-Hayy Farangi Mahalli mentions, “Amongst the glorious personalities of Islam in the 8^th century were Zayn al-Dīn Iraqi, Shams al-Dīn Jazari, and Sirāj al-Dīn Balqīnī.”

Imam Jazari authored around 45 works on different sciences. From amongst them, his most famous works are al-Nashr fi Qirā’āt al-`Ashr, Taqrīb al-Nashr, al-Durrah, Munjid al-Muqriīn, al-Muqaddamah al-Jazariyyah, Tahbīr al-Taysīr, Tabaqāt al-Qurrā, al-Tamhīd fi `Ilm al-Tajwīd, Tayyibat al-Nashr fi al-Qirā’āt al-`Ashr, and al-Hišn al-Hašīn.

On the 5^th of Rabi’ al-Awwal, 833 AH (corresponding to 1429 CE), at the age of 82, Imam Jazari passed away. He was buried within the precincts of the Dār al-Qur’ān seminary.

May Allah (SWT) quench him with His vast mercy.

—————————

Footnotes:

[1] Qāri Izhār Ahmad Thanawi was born in Thanabhawan, India, in 1346 AH/1927 CE. His initial studies were completed in his hometown at the Imdād al-‘Ulūm institute. In 1362 AH/1943 CE he registered for higher studies at Mazāhir al-‘Ulūm in Sahāranpūr, and in 1366 AH/1947 CE he completed his hadith studies under Shaykh al-Hadith Muhammad Zakariyya al-Kandhlawi. In 1373 AH/1954 CE he met the outstanding student of Shaykh Abd al-Rahmān al-Makkī, Shaykh Abd al-Mālik. He spent six years under the tutelage and apprenticeship of this great scholar, mastering the science of tajwīd and qirā’āt at his hands. In 1379 AH/1959 CE he completed his study of the ten qirā’āt and became a teacher of Arabic at a Dār al-‘Ulūm in Lahore, Pakistan. His students include Shaykh Ahmad Mia al-Thānawī. His date of demise is not known. Check Husn al-Muhādarāt fī Rijāl al-Qirā`āt, Vol. 2 pg. 286. (Taken – with minor edits – from Qari Saleem Gaibie’s commentary on the Jazariyyah.)

Qāri Izhār has commentaries on many major works of qirā’ah. He is the author of al-Jawāhir al-Naqiyyah – a commentary of al-Muqaddimah al-Jazariyyah – from where this biography of Imam Muhammad Ibn al-Jazari was taken. This article, translated into English from Urdu, was checked and approved by Mawlana Ahteramul Haque (Chicago, IL).

[2] A work on the seven qirā’āt by Uthmān bin Sa’īd bin Uthmān al-Umawi (371 AH – 444 AH), more commonly known as Abu Amr al-Dāni from Dénia, a historical coastal city of Alicante province in Spain. After studying locally, he began his educational travels in 397 AH during which he ventured through Qayrawan and Egypt, and performed Hajj. He was a follower of the Māliki madhhab, and was counted amongst the huffāž of hadith, along with being renowned as an Imam of qirā’ah, ulūm al-Quran, and tafsīr. Ibn Ubaydullah al-Hijri quotes Abu Amr as having said, “I did not see anything except that I wrote it, and I did not write anything except that I memorized it, and whatever I memorized I did not forget.” He authored around 120 works which include al-Ishārah in the science of qirā’ah, al-Tajdīd fi al-Itqān wa al-Tajwīd, al-Ihtidā’ fi al-Waqf wa al-Ibtidā’, al-Bayān fi `Addi Āyi al-Quran, Tabaqāt al-Qurrā, and more. (Siyar A’lām al-Nubalā by al-Dhahabi and al-A’lām by Khayr al-Dīn al-Zirkalī)

[3] Isām al-Dīn Abu al-Khayr Ahmad bin Mustafa bin Khalīl (d. 968 AH), more commonly known as Tāsh Kubrā Zādah, a dynamic Ottoman Turkish Hanafi scholar who wrote a commentary on al-Muqaddimah al-Jazariyyah. He also authored Tabaqāt al-Fuqahā and various other works in the field of history, Arabic grammar, and scholastic theology. In 958 AH, he was appointed as a judge in Istanbul. (al-Madhhab al-Hanafi by Ahmad al-Naqīb and al-A’lām by Khayr al-Dīn al-Zirkalī)

[4] Also known as Tamerlane, a Turco-Mongol conqueror and founder of the Timurid Empire in Central Asia and Persia. He passed away in February 1405 CE, and is buried at the Gur-i-Amir mausoleum in Samarkand, Uzbekistan.

By Mawlana Muhammad ‘Abd al-Sattar Tonswi

[The following article was authored by Moulana Muhammad Abdul Sattar Tonswi, originally titled Izalat al Shak An Mas‘alah Fadak, which deals with the circumstances surrounding the garden of Fadak. The author has endeavoured to answer the baseless Shia allegations together with displaying the great love shared by the Ahlul Bayt and the general Sahabah. Though it is a concise read, he has not omitted the academic discussions which scholar and layman alike will find invaluable. – Taken from Mahajjah.com, where one can also find a pdf version]

بسم الله الرحمن الرحيم

In the name of Allah the most beneficent the most merciful

Introduction

All praises are due to Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala, Lord of the entire universe. Peace and salutations be upon the master of the Messengers, his family, his honourable consorts, and his Companions.

Wherever I have travelled to deliver lectures amongst the Muslims I have been inundated with queries regarding the incident of Fadak[1]. What should be taken to note however is that the incident itself does not hold a fundamental position in Islam which one has to be cognisant of in order to preserve ones faith.

If for instance one has faith in the necessary articles of Islam but does not know the particulars and facts surrounding the incident of Fadak, or perhaps may not have knowledge of the incident at all, then too his faith will be sound. This is merely a historical incident.

My conviction of the unanimity between the Ansar and Muhajirin the Banu Hashim and Quraysh in general and specifically between Abu Bakr, ‘Umar, ‘Uthman, ‘Ali, ‘Abbas, Hassan, Hussain, Sayyidah Fatimah al Zahra and Sayyidah Aisha al Siddiqah radiya Llahu ‘anhum. Furthermore my belief is that they are embodiments of the Qur’anic statements:

رُحَمَاءُ بَيْنَهُمْ

Merciful among themselves.[2]

and

وَاعْتَصِمُوْا بِحَبْلِ اللّٰهِ جَمِيْعًا

And hold firmly to the rope of Allah all together.[3]³

This in addition to being an ardent follower of the various Qur’anic injunctions has spurred me on to compile this treatise.

We are living in an era wherein there is an effort to discredit the unity of Islam from various platforms. From the time of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam to this day there has been a struggle to drive a wedge between the Muslims thereby creating opposing sects. Additionally there are those who wish to put into ill repute, through false accusations, the leaders and stalwarts of Islam whose souls had been nourished by Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam himself. They accuse the noble Companions of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam of being narcissistic and self-absorbed enemies of each other, hankering for worldly gain, not caring for the poor and needy. Their targets are Abu Bakr, ‘Umar, ‘Uthman, ‘Ali, and Sayyidah Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anhum — the guiding stars of this Ummah. (We seek refuge in Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala from such folly)

Due to the aforementioned concerns, as a well-wisher, I have decided to pen a few lines.

It is hoped that through this treatise the champions of the Islamic cause and their pure character will remain untainted by the unjustified attacks on the Noble Companions. May this also be a means of keeping the unity of the Ummah intact. And there is no might to do good actions save through the grace of Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala.

Before delving into the incident of Fadak contemplate over the following: Every just and level headed individual knows full well that in the past, present, or future whenever a religious movement is founded, the cornerstone to its rise and success are those persons who sacrifice their all in laying its foundation. They stake their wealth, family, and lives in working towards attaining success for the cause. Yet all this is only bearable when, and if, they have complete faith and confidence in the leader of the movement. It is acceptable only when they are fully aware that the leader is not egotistic nor is his gaze on the wealth of the masses, rather he places the greater good before himself and his dear ones.

The secret to success has always remained in the selflessness of a sincere leader who gives himself over to the cause. Behind such a leader the said constituents will be at his beck and call.

The Formula of Success

The reason this formula has been liked and proven successful is because this was the first lesson learnt from the pure and infallible teachings, together with the blessed lives, of the Messengers ‘alayh al Salam.

Where kings ascend to power to amass wealth, live luxurious lives, and are infatuated with fulfilling their every fantasy and carnal desire. Where their nights and days, their hearts and minds are preoccupied with the singular goal of attaining this world, in a breath of fresh air we see a stark contrast between them and the Messengers’alayh al Salam and their vicegerents radiya Llahu ‘anhum. Their objective and goal in life remain a far cry from the kings of this world. Their hearts are set on pleasing Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala. The ache and passion emanating from them is to sacrifice their wealth and riches, near and dear ones, body and soul, comforts and luxuries in the path and pleasure of Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala. This is what hopes and dreams are made off and this is true success.

Whatever oppressions and difficulties these individuals were confronted by, whilst traversing this path, was not only bearable to them; rather they enjoyed divine ecstasy and comfort therein. Their status was one of ultimate slavery to Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘alaand doing everything for Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala. Every moment spent, and every breath taken, all worry and concern must be only to please Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala. One’s talking, listening, giving, standing, sitting, laying, and ultimately ones living and dying must be for Him alone. It was this lesson that they left behind for their vicegerents who took it on wholly.

The legacy of Caesar and Khosrow for those to come after them was wealth and materialistic possessions coupled with power and pride. The Messengers ‘alayh al Salam on the other hand left a legacy of sincerity, exemplary character, Prophetic knowledge, and the passion to sacrifice in the path of Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala. Money and riches that came their way was left in the treasury for distribution in the cause of Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala, the poor, and destitute.

The Qur’an is loud and clear with regards to Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam:

قُلْ إِنَّ صَلَاتِيْ وَنُسُكِيْ وَمَحْيَايَ وَمَمَاتِيْ لِلَّهِ رَبِّ الْعَالَمِيْنَ

Say, “Indeed, my prayer, my rites of sacrifice, my living and my dying are for Allah, Lord of the worlds.”[4]

قُلْ مَا أَسْأَلُكُمْ عَلَيْهِ مِنْ أَجْرٍ إِلَّا مَنْ شَاءَ أَن يَتَّخِذَ إِلَىٰ رَبِّهِ سَبِيلًا

Say, “I do not ask of you for it any payment – only that whoever wills might take to his Lord a way.”[5]

In a prophetic narration Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam has mentioned:

مالي وللدنيا

What have I to do with the world?[6]

It is for this very reason that Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam was enveloped, day and night, in the concern of emancipating those who are unmindful of the hereafter, stooped in ignorance and stranded in the love of this world, shackled by their own desires. The worry was to save them from having no connection with Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala to attaining that divine light which will enlighten for them the road to the recognition of Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala together with preparing them to sacrifice their wealth, lives, families, and friends; in short to sacrifice everything in the court of Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala.

For the period of twenty- three years Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, with a heavy and pained heart remained pre occupied in working tirelessly and fervently calling towards Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala, spreading the message of Islam, nurturing, and advising with complete sincerity and devotion. The result of this blessed dissemination resulted in the extraordinary. People began to accept the creed of Islam in droves as the Qur’an outlines:

وَرَأَيْتَ النَّاسَ يَدْخُلُوْنَ فِي دِيْنِ اللَّهِ أَفْوَاجًا

And you see the people entering into the religion of Allah in multitudes.[7]

The above verse is referring to those who had now entered Islam in unprecedented numbers. Regarding whom the Qur’an says:

يَتْلُوْ عَلَيْهِمْ آيَاتِهِ وَيُزَكِّيْهِمْ وَيُعَلِّمُهُمُ الْكِتَابَ وَالْحِكْمَةَ وَإِنْ كَانُوْا مِنْ قَبْلُ لَفِيْ ضَلَالٍ مُّبِيْنٍ

Reciting to them His verses and purifying them and teaching them the Book and wisdom, although they had been before in manifest error.[8]

The nurturing, teaching and purifying of the Companions radiya Llahu ‘anhum led to them abandoning all sin and misdeeds, to the extent that Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala refers to them repeatedly in the Qur’an in the noblest of manners, alluding to their complete faith, guidance, trust, sincerity, and above all attaining His eternal pleasure.

On the occasion of the Treaty of Hudaybiyyah 1400 courageous Companions radiya Llahu ‘anhum with the spirit of sacrificing their lives took the pledge of fighting the disbelievers to martyrdom upon the blessed hands of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam.

This show of the Companions radiya Llahu ‘anhum undying love and zeal to lay down their life is recorded in Hayat al Qulub. A book which the Shiathemselves consider as reliable.

‘Urwah ibn Mas’ud narrates his experience thus:

The Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum honored and obeyed the instructions of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam. If he ordered them, they would carry out his order immediately; if he performed ablution, they would struggle to take the remaining water not letting it fall to the earth; and when they spoke, they would lower their voices and would not look at his face constantly out of respect.

He further said:

I have never seen anyone respected by his courtiers as much as Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam is respected by his Companions.[9]

This pledge is known as Bay’at al Ridwan[10]. Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala refers to it in the Qur’an in the following manner:

إِنَّ الَّذِيْنَ يُبَايِعُوْنَكَ إِنَّمَا يُبَايِعُوْنَ اللَّهَ يَدُ اللَّهِ فَوْقَ أَيْدِيْهِمْ

Indeed, those who pledge allegiance to you, [O Muhammad] – they are actually pledging allegiance to Allah. The hand of Allah is over their hands.[11]

Based on the outcome of the pledge Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala mentions:

لَّقَدْ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنِ الْمُؤْمِنِيْنَ إِذْ يُبَايِعُوْنَكَ تَحْتَ الشَّجَرَةِ فَعَلِمَ مَا فِيْ قُلُوْبِهِمْ فَأَنزَلَ السَّكِيْنَةَ عَلَيْهِمْ وَأَثَابَهُمْ فَتْحًا قَرِيْبًا

Certainly was Allah pleased with the believers when they pledged allegiance to you, [O Muhammad], under the tree, and He knew what was in their hearts, so He sent down tranquility upon them and rewarded them with an imminent conquest.[12]

It is with regards to these 1400 loyal and blessed souls who were ready to sacrifice their lives, Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala mentions further in the same chapter:

إِذْ جَعَلَ الَّذِيْنَ كَفَرُوْا فِيْ قُلُوْبِهِمُ الْحَمِيَّةَ حَمِيَّةَ الْجَاهِلِيَّةِ فَأَنزَلَ اللَّهُ سَكِيْنَتَهُ عَلَىٰ رَسُوْلِهِ وَعَلَى الْمُؤْمِنِيْنَ وَأَلْزَمَهُمْ كَلِمَةَ التَّقْوٰى وَكَانُوْا أَحَقَّ بِهَا وَأَهْلَهَا وَكَانَ اللَّهُ بِكُلِّ شَيْءٍ عَلِيْمًا

When those who disbelieved had put into their hearts chauvinism – the chauvinism of the time of ignorance. But Allah sent down His tranquillity upon His Messenger and upon the believers and imposed upon them the word of righteousness, and they were more deserving of it and worthy of it. And ever is Allah, of all things, Knowing.[13]

Towards the end of the chapter Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala states:

مُّحَمَّدٌ رَّسُوْلُ اللَّهِ وَالَّذِيْنَ مَعَهُ أَشِدَّاءُ عَلَى الْكُفَّارِ رُحَمَاءُ بَيْنَهُمْ تَرَاهُمْ رُكَّعًا سُجَّدًا يَّبْتَغُوْنَ فَضْلًا مِّنَ اللَّهِ وَرِضْوَانًا سِيْمَاهُمْ فِيْ وُجُوْهِهِمْ مِّنْ أَثَرِ السُّجوْدِ ذٰلِكَ مَثَلُهُمْ فِيْ التَّوْرَاةِ وَمَثَلُهُمْ فِي الْإِنجِيْل

Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah; and those with him are forceful against the disbelievers, merciful among themselves. You see them bowing and prostrating [in prayer], seeking bounty from Allah and [His] pleasure. Their mark is on their faces from the trace of prostration. That is their description in the Torah and their description in the Gospel.[14]

In short Surah al Fath makes mention of the Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum; their complete faith, trust, sincerity, and passion to attain His eternal pleasure. The aforementioned qualities were in reality the reason why Muslims later on would search for the Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum who participated in Badr or Bay’at al Ridwan seeking through them solutions when faced by challenges and opposition from the disbelievers. The masses would flock to them finding resolutions by way of their blessings, prayers, and complete spirituality.

Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala mentioned regarding the Companions radiya Llahu ‘anhum in the 26^th Juz of the Qur’an:

وَلٰكِنَّ اللَّهَ حَبَّبَ إِلَيْكُمُ الْإِيْمَانَ وَزَيَّنَهُ فِيْ قُلُوْبِكُمْ وَكَرَّهَ إِلَيْكُمُ الْكُفْرَ وَالْفُسُوْقَ وَالْعِصْيَانَ أُولٰئِكَ هُمُ الرَّاشِدُوْنَ

But Allah has endeared to you the faith and has made it pleasing in your hearts and has made hateful to you disbelief, defiance and disobedience. Those are the [rightly] guided.[15]

Ponder for a moment, how intense was the iman of the Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum and to what extent was their abhorrence to disbelief, sin, and going against the instructions of Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala and His beloved Messenger salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam.

In various places in the Qur’an Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala celebrates the Muhajirin[16] and the Ansar[17] thus:

لِلْفُقَرَاءِ الْمُهَاجِرِيْنَ الَّذِيْنَ أُخْرِجُوْا مِنْ دِيَارِهِمْ وَأَمْوَالِهِمْ يَبْتَغُوْنَ فَضْلًا مِّنَ اللَّهِ وَرِضْوَانًا وَيَنصُرُوْنَ اللَّهَ وَرَسُوْلَهُ أُولٰئِكَ هُمُ الصَّادِقُوْنَ

For the poor emigrants who were expelled from their homes and their properties, seeking bounty from Allah and [His] approval and supporting Allah and His Messenger, [there is also a share]. Those are the truthful.[18]

وَالَّذِيْنَ تَبَوَّءُوا الدَّارَ وَالْإِيْمَانَ مِنْ قَبْلِهِمْ

And [also for] those who were settled in al Madinah and [adopted] the faith before them.[19]

الَّذْينَ أُخْرِجُوْا مِنْ دِيَارِهِمْ بِغَيْرِ حَقٍّ إِلَّا أَن يَقُولُوْا رَبُّنَا اللَّهُ

[They are] those who have been evicted from their homes without right – only because they say, “Our Lord is Allah.”[20]

وَالَّذِيْنَ آمَنُوْا وَهَاجَرُوْا وَجَاهَدُوْا فِي سَبِيْلِ اللَّهِ وَالَّذِيْنَ آوَوْا وَّنَصَرُوْا أُولٰئِكَ هُمُ الْمُؤْمِنُوْنَ حَقًّا لَّهُم مَّغْفِرَةٌ وَّرِزْقٌ كَرِيْمٌ

But those who have believed and emigrated and fought in the cause of Allah and those who gave shelter and aided – it is they who are the believers, truly. For them is forgiveness and noble provision.[21]

وَالسَّابِقُوْنَ الْأَوَّلُوْنَ مِنَ الْمُهَاجِرِيْنَ وَالْأَنْصَارِ وَالَّذِيْنَ اتَّبَعُوْهُمْ بِإِحْسَانٍ رَّضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُمْ وَرَضُوْا عَنْهُ وَأَعَدَّ لَهُمْ جَنَّاتٍ تَجْرِيْ تَحْتَهَا الْأَنْهَارُ خَالِدِيْنَ فِيْهَا أَبَدًا ذٰلِكَ الْفَوْزُ الْعَظِيْمُ

And the first forerunners [in the faith] among the Muhajirin and the Ansar and those who followed them with good conduct – Allah is pleased with them and they are pleased with Him, and He has prepared for them gardens beneath which rivers flow, wherein they will abide forever. That is the great attainment.[22]

In many other places of the Qur’an too, has Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala applauded the spiritual achievements of the Companions radiya Llahu ‘anhum essentially regarding them as the yardstick of one’s faith. The unmatched deep-rooted conviction possessed by the Companions radiya Llahu ‘anhum coupled with taqwa[23] and enjoying closeness to Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala all but sealed their entry into Jannat. The announcement of the Qur’an is clear; if one desires true guidance as willed by Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala, the sole path is to follow the footsteps of the Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum.

فَإِنْ آمَنُوْا بِمِثْلِ مَا آمَنتُمْ بِهِ فَقَدِ اهْتَدَوْا

So if they believe in the same as you believe in, then they have been [rightly] guided[24]

وَإِذَا قِيْلَ لَهُمْ آمِنُوْا كَمَا آمَنَ النَّاسُ

And when it is said to them, “Believe as the people have believed,”[25]

The Sahabah

A group so numerous that the Qur’an says, “And you see the people entering into the religion of Allah in multitudes.” A nation brimming with taqwa and purity. Individuals who had attained the everlasting Pleasure of Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala and promises of Jannat. Giants, to whom iman had been made beloved, and sin—much less disbelief—had been made abhorrent. A people to whom the Qur’an bears testimony.

It is incomprehensible that in front of these bold personalities the Queen of Jannat, the beloved daughter of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anha is oppressed and they sit back not batting an eyelid. It is insanity to believe that an army possessing such deep-rooted faith, the Ansar, Muhajirin, Banu Hashim, and Banu ‘Abd Manaf witness such coercion and remain dumbstruck.

If for arguments sake one were to be inclined to believe so, this would result in the testimony of the Qur’an being false and the twenty-three years of effort of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam worthless. Furthermore, holding such belief would render the Qur’an and all the articles of faith which has reached us through the Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum unreliable. Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala save us from such falsities!

The incident of Fadak and the supposed oppression of Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anha is merely a historical account which has no mention in the Qur’an nor in the accepted narrations of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam. If therein lay elements which discredit the Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum and their Islamic integrity together with bringing into question the veracity of the Qur’an and Ahadith it will not be accepted. The benchmark in judging the reliability of such incidents falls into the scope of the Qur’an and Sunnah, failing to attain which, such an interpretation will be sought which does not go against the ethos of the faith. In principle, to accept any historical recollection which goes against the Qur’an and accepted narrations of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam in addition to making it a foundation to support integral theological arguments is nothing short of ignorance and misguidance.

Ignoring any truthful interpretation or explanation of the Fadak incident and blindly attributing coercion to the first Khalifah of Islam, Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu, whilst assuming the silence of the Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum, toping that off with the accusation of them being accessories; is belying the Qur’an and ahadith. It is implausible that ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu, who incidentally holds the mantle of the Lion of Allah, and ‘Abbas radiya Llahu ‘anhu,the uncle of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, remained quiet whilst the oppression of one of their own took place. Therefore, if one has no knowledge of the correct interpretation and explanation of this historical incident in light of the Qur’an and Sunnah it is best to not turn one’s attention to it all. This is a safer and healthier for one and all.

Now that we have discussed these fundamental aspects let us move on to the incident of Fadak, seeking the help of Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala.

Fadak

To understand the matter of Fadak it is imperative to keep in mind the following:

Firstly, Fadak was a village approximately three nights journey from Madinah, which contained some springs and a few date palms. It came into the possession of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam peacefully with no resistance and was included in the spoils of war. Historians, Muslim, non-Muslim, Ahlus Sunnah wa l-Jama’ah, and Shia are all unanimous that Fadak was from the fay’.[26] In the book Sharh Nahj al Balaghah, a book of the Shia themselves authored by Sayed ‘Ali al Naqi there is mention of this fact:

The people of Fadak had given up half according to one source and according to another the entire village peacefully without showing any resistance to Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam.[27]

The Qur’an outlines that wealth attained peacefully is termed as fay’.

Secondly, the wealth of fay’ whether it be of Fadak or otherwise is determined by the Qur’an as follows:

مَّا أَفَاءَ اللَّهُ عَلَىٰ رَسُوْلِهِ مِنْ أَهْلِ الْقُرَىٰ فَلِلَّهِ وَلِلرَّسُوْلِ وَلِذِيْ الْقُرْبَىٰ وَالْيَتَامَىٰ وَالْمَسَاكِيْنِ وَابْنِ السَّبِيْلِ كَيْ لَا يَكُوْنَ دُوْلَةً بَيْنَ الْأَغْنِيَاءِ مِنْكُمْ ۚ

And what Allah restored to His Messenger from the people of the towns – it is for Allah and for the Messenger and for [his] near relatives and orphans and the [stranded] traveller – so that it will not be a perpetual distribution among the rich from among you.[28]

As mentioned in the verse, the reason for allotting this wealth to the discretion of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam was to facilitate the poor and not indulge the rich. This verse is explicit in conveying its meaning and holds no room for any sort of ambiguity. It outlines the recipients of fay’ plainly which was quite evident to Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, as well as Abu Bakr, ‘Umar, ‘Ali, and Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anhum. Similarly, the injunctions of this verse and by extension all other verses are clear to all Muslims, not masked by any form of indistinctness.

A commentary of this verse, sourced from a Shia exegesis of the Qur’an, reads as follows:

هي لله وللرسول عليه السلام و لمن قام مقامه بعده

Fay’ is the right of Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala, His Messenger salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, and for those in his position after him.[29]

It is therefore clear that fay’ is not such wealth which can be owned or inherited.

Thirdly, Fadak and its position as fay’ remained unchanged from the time of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam through to the time of ‘Ali, and even Hassan radiya Llahu ‘anhuma. This fact is reiterated in the books of both the Ahlus Sunnah wa l-Jama’ah and the Shia, as we will demonstrate through excerpts from the books of the Shia. There was no change in the status of Fadak in the least during the Caliphate of the four Rightly Guided Khalifas; Abu Bakr, ‘Umar, ‘Uthman, and ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhum. The zoning of the land of Fadak was kept in the same manner as designated by Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam which was in accordance to the dictates of the Qur’an. Admittedly during the Caliphate of Marwan this changed but were soon reversed when ‘Umar ibn ‘Abdul ‘Aziz rose to the seat of Caliphate.

If we were to label the actions of Abu Bakr and ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhuma as hypocritical and oppressive in the matter of Fadak, then by all means attach these same labels to Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam before them, and to ‘Uthman, ‘Ali, and Hassan radiya Llahu ‘anhumwho came after them; seeing as there was no difference in dealing with the matter during their era. Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala save us from such foolishness.

Furthermore, the management of the wealth of fay’ was handed to ‘Abbas and ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhuma by ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu himself. They would administrate the lands and gardens of the Bani Nadhir clan amongst the other lands of fay’. The produce and income of the lands were dealt with by them as it was dealt with by Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam.

Fourthly, this too has been recorded in the reliable books of both groups; Ahlus Sunnah wa l-Jama’ah and Shia that Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhucalled upon Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anha explaining to her his stance on the matter of fay’. His actions were to be true to the actions of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, not making any changes in the management and administration of the lands. His sentiment of love and admiration for her however shone through when he offered his own wealth to her as she would like to pick and choose from.

Consequently, Haqq al Yaqin, considered to be amongst their reliable works, there is mention of the statements of Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhuregarding the many virtues of Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anha:

I will not withhold any of my personal wealth from you. Take whatever your heart desires. You are the Queen of the Ummah of your father in addition to holding a blessed and pure linage for your children. No one can deny your virtue. My wealth is all but yours, take without any hesitation. As far as the wealth of the Muslims is concerned however, I cannot oppose the ruling of your beloved father salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam.[30]

Similarly, there is a narration recorded in Sahih al Bukhari the statement of Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu to Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anha:

قرابة رسول الله صلى عليه وسلم احب الي من قرابتي

The family of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam is more beloved to me than my own family.[31]

Another narration of Sahih al Bukhari regarding a statement of Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu:

لست تاركا شيئا كان رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم يعمل به إلا عملت به ، وإني لأخشى إن تركت شيئا من أمره أن أزيغ

I cannot leave out that which Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam would do. I will do only that which I know of him. If not, I fear misguidance for myself.[32]

The above displays that though Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu was prepared to sacrifice his own wealth for Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anha, he would not under any circumstance be prepared to go against the command and actions of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam.

The fifth and possibly the most pertinent point to take note of is the incident which is oft repeated wherein Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anha voiced her anger to Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu due to her being deprived of the lands Fadak. This altercation is not and cannot be substantiated through any reliable source of the Ahlus Sunnah wa al Jama’ah. It is not possible to ascertain that she portrayed Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu as one who had oppressed her and went on to seize Fadak from her. Similarly, it cannot be proven through any reliable source that she rallied against him taking an oath not to speak to him. Take it as a challenge of mine, no one till the end of time can prove the premise of her vocalising her displeasure toward Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu.

Anger as with other emotions, cannot be proven unless displayed by the subject themselves. Sure, conjecture is the go to when one runs out of facts and reliable authorities, however is this enough to prove the emotions of an individual let alone their actions? Given that there are cues which point toward one’s emotional state, the question remains, is there room for error in interpreting such cues or not? Well, even the infallible may blunder without the reality of the matter being clear to them. The incident of Nabi Musa ‘alayh al Salam and Khidr is clear evidence of this. When Khidr caused some damage to the ship, the infallible Prophet, Musa ‘alayh al Salam, expressed his opinion based on conjecture; reproaching Khidr ‘alayh al Salam on his supposed intention of drowning those onboard whereas that was, as we know, far from the truth. It is therefore evident that simply one’s opinion regarding another’s actions does not make that the truth.

It would be incorrect to opine on a rift between Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu and Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anha through mere speculation even if for arguments sake that individual is infallible. Undoubtedly this theory cannot hold any weight until and unless Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anha herself clearly mentioned it to be as such. This theory is nowhere established amongst the reliable books of the Ahlus Sunnah wa al Jama’ah.

Looking to the reliable books of the Shia we find mention of a clear vocal display of anger from Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anha toward ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu regarding the Fadak issue. What is peculiar however is that during the reign of ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu he did not make any change into the management of Fadak, opting to follow his predecessors, Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu and ‘Umarradiya Llahu ‘anhu, who dealt with it in the same fashion as Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam did.

The anger of Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anha toward ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu which is factual according to Shia sources leaves them venerating him to levels of infallibility and naming him the chosen, rightful leader. Yet they hurl abuses of coercion and oppression upon Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhuregarding whom there is no proof of conflict.

Is this justice? Is this integrity?

The next point to take into consideration when understanding the issue of Fadak is that according to the Shia, Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anhamaintained ownership of the seven gardens of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam which was separate from the gardens, lands, and wealth of ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu. The narrations of the Shia speak of ‘Abbas radiya Llahu ‘anhu, the uncle of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, seeking these seven gardens from Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anha to which she countered that there cannot be inheritance in these lands, thereby not giving him anything from it.

Consequently, this excerpt from the book Furu’ al Kafi states:

عن احمد ابن محمد عن ابي الحسن الثاني عليه السلام قال سالته عن الحيطان السبعة التي كانت ميراث رسول الله صلي الله عليه و سلم لفاطمة عليها السلام فقال لا انما كانت وقفا كان رسول الله صلي الله عليه و سلم يأخذ اليه منها ما ينفق علي اضيافه فلما قبض صلي الله عليه و سلم جاء العباس يخاصم فاطمة فيها فشهد علي عليه السلام و غيره انما وقف على فاطمة عليها السلام و هي الدلال والعفاف والحسنى والصيافة ومالام ابراهيم والمبيت والبرقة

Ahmed ibn Muhammad narrating from Imam Musa al Kazim says I asked the Imam regarding the seven gardens which had been bequeathed to Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anha by Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam. The Imam replied that these were in fact waqf[33] not inheritance, from which Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam would take and spend on his guests accordingly. When Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam left this world, ‘Abbas radiya Llahu ‘anhu came seeking these seven gardens from Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anha to which ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu among others bore testimony to the lands being waqf. The names of these seven gardens were al Dalal, al ‘Ifaf, al Husna, al Siyafah, Ma li ummi Ibrahim, al Mabit, and al Baraqah.[34]

At this juncture it is worth pondering that knowing Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anha had these seven gardens and ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu possessed his own lands, it is far-fetched to conceive that Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam left the lands of Fadak too to his daughter which would then be an assault on the nobility of prophethood, especially when considering the output of the land was, according to Shia sources, worth thousands of gold coins. Mulla Baqir al Majlisi has inferred in Hayat al Qulub that the agreement between Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and the people of Fadak was of twenty-four thousand gold coins per annum.

Therefore, theorising that Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam would in addition to the seven gardens grant the income of Fadak to Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anha is in direct opposition to the directives of the Qur’an and paints a bleak picture of the nobility of prophethood as well. If this was truly the case that would mean Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam went against the direct command of Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala:

كَيْ لَا يَكُوْنَ دُوْلَةً بَيْنَ الْأَغْنِيَاءِ مِنْكُمْ

So that it will not be a perpetual distribution among the rich from among you.[35]           

Additionally, this would imply that Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam had self-serving motives and would give undue preference to his family members. Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala protect us from such irrational thoughts. Furthermore, this contradicts the mantle of ‘mercy unto mankind’ which was given to Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam. How would this oppression be bearable to him whereas the people of Suffah, and other poor Muhajirin and Ansar, were in dire straits, not having proper clothing nor sufficient food to nourish themselves together with there being a severe need for wealth to be injected into the military campaigns. The final expedition of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, the expedition of Tabuk, which was also known as the voyage of hardship was the epitome of sacrifice and meagre provisions. The Companions radiya Llahu ‘anhumwere each rationed to a single date for the day. When that was depleted they sufficed on sucking the date pit at times sharing one between a few and drinking water. The transportation of this expedition has been drawn out in the Qur’an in the following manner:

وَلَا عَلَى الَّذِيْنَ إِذَا مَا أَتَوْكَ لِتَحْمِلَهُمْ قُلْتَ لَا أَجِدُ مَا أَحْمِلُكُمْ عَلَيْهِ تَوَلَّوا وَّأَعْيُنُهُمْ تَفِيْضُ مِنَ الدَّمْعِ حَزَنًا أَلَّا يَجِدُوْا مَا يُنفِقُوْنَ

Nor [is there blame] upon those who, when they came to you that you might give them mounts, you said, “I can find nothing for you to ride upon.” They turned back while their eyes overflowed with tears out of grief that they could not find something to spend [for the cause of Allah].[36]

It is therefore inconceivable to assume that Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam ignored the needs of the poor, orphans, Muhajirin, Ansar, and general Muslim population by handing over such a large amount of wealth to his daughter. This would in turn mean that Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam went against the law of the Qur’an. This premise is even more unlikely when we look at the incident wherein Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anha requested help from her father by means of a slave girl only to be directed towards the recitation of Sub an Allah, Alhamdulillah, and Allahu Akbar thirty-three times after every salah thereby gaining divine help which is undoubtedly more effective then receiving help from a slave girl. Similarly, when Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anha made inquiries regarding Fadak, Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam chose not to hand it over to her, placing the needs of the Banu Hashim, poor and needy ahead of family. Throughout his life the noble Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallamcontinued spending on those in need and into the Islamic economy as mentioned in narrations found in reliable books such as Mishkat al Masabih and Sunan Abu Dawood. This is further understood through the following injunction of the Qur’an:

يَا أَيُّهَا النَّبِيُّ قُلْ لِّأَزْوَاجِكَ إِنْ كُنْتُنَّ تُرِدْنَ الْحَيَاةَ الدُّنْيَا وَزِيْنَتَهَا فَتَعَالَيْنَ أُمَتِّعْكُنَّ وَأُسَرِّحْكُنَّ سَرَاحًا جَمِيْلًا

وَإِن كُنْتُنَّ تُرِدْنَ اللَّهَ وَرَسُوْلَهُ وَالدَّارَ الْآخِرَةَ فَإِنَّ اللَّهَ أَعَدَّ لِلْمُحْسِنَاتِ مِنْكُنَّ أَجْرًا عَظِيْمًا

O Prophet, say to your wives, “If you should desire the worldly life and its adornment, then come, I will provide for you and give you a gracious release. But if you should desire Allah and His Messenger and the home of the Hereafter – then indeed, Allah has prepared for the doers of good among you a great reward.”[37]

Further on Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala mentions:

إِنَّمَا يُرِيْدُ اللَّهُ لِيُذْهِبَ عَنْكُمُ الرِّجْسَ أَهْلَ الْبَيْتِ وَيُطَهِّرَكُمْ تَطْهِيْرًا

Allah intends only to remove from you the impurity [of sin], O people of the [Prophet’s] household, and to purify you with [extensive] purification.[38]

Pause and think for a moment. Is it possible for Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam to want for his beloved daughter that which he disliked for his noble consorts? It only makes sense that he would want to keep his daughter away from the filth of materialism just as he wished for the Mothers of the Believers; his wives. The more pressing concern for him was to distribute this wealth to those in need and worthy of it, not to merely enrich family members soiling them with the possessions of this world. Purifying the noble family of the filth of this world was the command of the Qur’an which was followed perfectly in every sense by Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam.

These verses of the Qur’an and traditions of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam make it crystal clear that those who claim Fadak was given to Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anha are laying claim to fallacies. Such a statement undermines the character of Prophethood and can only be a fabrication.

If the claim that it was a gift were to be accepted for a moment, it would raise the question that why she would then—as is alleged by the Shia—ask for it as inheritance from Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu. It simply does not make sense, not from the view point of the Ahlus Sunnah wa al Jama’ah nor the Shia.

The Inheritance of the Prophets

Let us now try to understand the reality of the claim to inheritance, When Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anha and ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu, and even ‘Abbas radiya Llahu ‘anhu for that matter say concerning these seven gardens that they form part of the waqf by Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and not inheritance; then how is it possible to then raise the question of inheritance here, more so when the Qur’an too has called the lands of Fadak fay’, ergo waqf. Just as raising the issue of inheritance with regards the seven gardens and Fadak is nonsensical, similarly the matter of inheritance will not be applicable to any other wealth left behind by any Messenger.

The narrations of both the Ahlus Sunnah wa al Jama’ah and the Shia are unanimous that the Messengers ‘alayh al Salam do not leave behind any materialistic inheritance, the only inheritance of the Messengers ‘alayh al Salam are divine knowledge and absolute character.

The First Proof

Narration of Imam Jafar al Sadiq from the Shia compilation; Usul al Kafi.

إن العلماء ورثة الأنبياء إن الأنبياء لم يورثوا دينارا ولا درهما ولكن أورثوا العلم فمن أخذ منه أخذ بحظ وافر

The Ulama’ are the heirs of the Ambiya’ who bequeath neither dinar nor dirham but only that of knowledge; and he who acquires it, has in fact acquired an abundant portion.[39]

The Second Proof

The parting advices of ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu to his son Muhammad ibn Hanafiyah recorded in the Shia book Man la Yahduruhu al Faqih.

تفقه في الدين فان الفقهاء ورثة الأنبياء إن الأنبياء لم يورثوا دينارا ولا درهما ولكنهم ورثوا العلم فمن أخذ منه أخذ بحظ وافر

Gain a deep understanding of the faith as verily the learned are the heirs of the Messengers who bequeath neither dinar nor dirham but only that of knowledge; and he who acquires it, has in fact acquired an abundant portion.[40]

The Third Proof

Imam Jafar al Sadiq says:

إن العلماء ورثة الأنبياء و ذاك ان الانبياء لم يورثوا درهما ولا دينارا وانما ورثوا احاديث من احاديثهم فمن أخذ بشيء منها فقد أخذ حظا وافرا

The learned are the heirs of the Messengers and that is because the Messengers bequeath neither dirham nor dinar but only their narrations (knowledge and laws of the faith); and he who acquires any part of it, has in fact acquired an abundant portion.[41]

The above three narrations are clear in that the Messengers ‘alayh al Salam do not bequeath any tangible, material wealth. It is their refined character and divine knowledge that is left for those after them to benefit from. ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu and Imam Jafar al Sadiq rahimahu Llah bring these narrations forth from Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam explaining this matter. The third narration is especially significant as it restricts the meaning, i.e. they do not bequeath anything besides knowledge.

The Fourth Proof

Imam Jafar al Sadiq says:

ورث سليمان داؤد وورث محمد صلى الله عليه وسلم سليمان

Sulaiman ‘alayh al Salam was the inheritor of Dawood ‘alayh al Salam, similarly Muhammad salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam inherited from Sulaiman ‘alayh al Salam.[42]

Ponder over this saying of Imam Jafar al Sadiq. Surely the inheritance here can only be that of prophethood, knowledge, and divine character. It is not possible to assume materialistic inheritance here. The statement refers to a spirituality which passes down from prophet to prophet.

The Fifth Proof

Ibn Babawayh in his book, Al Khisal, which is considered as reliable by the Shia writes:

اتت فاطمة بنت رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم في شكواه الذي توفي فيه فقالت يا رسول الله هاذان ابنان فورثهما شيأ قال اما الحسن فان له هيبتي و اما الحسين فان له جراتي

Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anha came to Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam in his final sickness and requested, “These two are my children, grant them something to inherit from you. He replied to her saying, “As for Hassan, he has inherited my awe and Hussain holds my valour.”[43]

In this narration Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam bequeathed his character to his beloved grandsons; Hassan and Hussain radiya Llahu ‘anhuma. There is no mention of monetary inheritance. This narration has been recorded in Sharh Nahj al Balaghah[44] as well as in Al Manaqib al Fakhirah li al ‘Itrah al Tahirah[45]

The Sixth Proof

عن الفضيل بن يسار قال سمعت ابا جعفر عليه السلام يقول لا والله ما ورث رسول الله العباس ولا على ولا ورثته الا فاطمة عليها السلام

Fudhayl ibn Yasar relates that he heard Abu Jafar, i.e. Imam Baqir, saying, “I swear by Allah, neither ‘Abbas nor ‘Ali inherited from Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam. It was only Fatimah that inherited from Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam.”[46]

According to this narration of Man la Yahduruhu al Faqih the inheritance of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam was restricted to Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anha alone, ‘Abbas , ‘Ali, the noble consorts of the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, and his other family members radiya Llahu ‘anhumalike did not inherit.

The injunctions of inheritance specified in the Qur’an outlines half to a daughter and one eighth to the wives collectively. If Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam was governed by the Qur’anic injunctions of inheritance as the layman, then the Shia should wonder why Imam Baqir rahimahu Llah would make the afore mentioned statement.

Considering the collective statements laid out, one must conclude that the Imams hold the opinion that Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam was not held by the injunctions of inheritance as we are. The distribution of the estate of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam was vastly different from the common Muslim. As with laws there remain exemptions and here it was Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam who is exempted from this law.

The belief held by the Ahlus Sunnah wa al Jama’ah is in fact the same.

The following is recorded Sahih al Bukhari:

لا نورث ما تركنا صدقة

We the fraternity of Prophets do not leave behind any inheritance, what we leave is Sadaqah.[47]

The exemption is clear from this narration of Sahih al Bukhari.

The account of the request from Fatimah

The Shia and their leaders recount quite forcefully, citing Sahih al Bukhari, the tale of Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anha seeking her inheritance from Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu during his Caliphate which he denied her; causing her to leave empty handed which in turn enraged her. Some individuals of the Ahlus Sunnah wa l-Jama’ah, due to their limited knowledge, not broadening their study to other books of hadith or simply not studying Sahih al Bukhari well hold the same erroneous view. They are of the misconception that Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anha went to Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhuseeking her inheritance from Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam.

This train of thought is incorrect. In fact, looking at what is established from Sahih al Bukhari, and Sahih Muslim we come to realise that far from having a heated exchange, Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anha did not go personally to Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu at all. The established narrations however show that she sent a representative to Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu seeking clarification regarding her inheritance.

عن عائشة أن فاطمة بنت النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم أرسلت إلى أبي بكر تسأله ميراثها من رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم مما أفاء الله عليه

Aisha radiya Llahu ‘anhu relates that Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anha sent an emissary to Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu asking him regarding her inheritance from Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam which Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala had bestowed upon him.[48]

It is evident from this narration that she in fact sent someone to Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu and did not go herself. The narrations which omit the portion of her sending a representative is not to be taken on its face value as they all refer to but one single incident.

This kind of language is found throughout. For example one says the king built this river. In fact, the king did none of the labour he simply had it commissioned. The building of the river is however still attributed to him. In a similar fashion the act of asking is attributed to Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anha even though she herself did none of the talking.

The Objective and Wisdom of the Question Fatimah Poses

One may wonder, the Qur’an is clear on the laws of Fay’ and it is now common knowledge that Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam will not leave inheritance, then why does Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anha supposedly seek inheritance. The liable recipients of Fay’ as drawn out by the Qur’an are Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala, his Messenger salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, his near relatives, orphans, and the stranded traveller. Furthermore, the Qur’an aptly discourages giving any of it to the wealthy. To reiterate then, what was the objective of Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anha seemingly asking for her share?

The erudite scholar of recent, ‘Allamah Anwar Shah al Kashmiri rahimahu Llah has indicated towards a befitting answer in his commentary on al Jami’ al Tirmidhi on the authority of Sayyad Samhudi rahimahu Llah in the following manner:

Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anha approached the subject of management of the land of Fay’ owing to her family ties. In no way was this proposal one of ownership. The reply then sent to her by Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu was the narration of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallamwhich specifies, no heir will receive any inheritance, not in the form of ownership nor in the form of management. ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu, ‘Abbas radiya Llahu ‘anhu, ‘Abdul Rahman ibn ‘Awf radiya Llahu ‘anhu and many other senior Sahabah concurred with him on this judgment.[49]

Upon this resolve, Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anhu never again approached the topic. The hadith which Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu presented before her appears in Sahih al Bukhari.

إن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم قال لا نورث ما تركنا صدقة إنما يأكل آل محمد صلى الله عليه وسلم في هذا المال وإني والله لا أغير شيئا من صدقة رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم عن حالها التي كان عليها في عهد رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم ولأعملن فيها بما عمل به رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم

The Messenger of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam said, “We (prophets) do not have any heirs; what we leave behind is (to be given in) charity.” The household of the Messenger of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam will live on the income from these properties, but, by Allah, I will not change the charity of the Messenger of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam from the condition in which it was in his own time. I will do the same with it as the Messenger of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam himself used to do.[50]

Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu presented his case to Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anha stating he will not allow such changes which go against the practice of the Messenger salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam. He further assured her that the expenses of the noble family will continue to come through the same avenue. She, having heard his case rested hers, content with the decision and his steadfastness.

The Shia hold the same view as is recorded in their books; Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anha was pleased with the answer of Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu. Her livelihood and expenses were sourced from Fadak as well as the other lands of Fay’.

ولك على الله ان اصنع بها كما كان يصنع فرضيث بذالك و اخذت العهد عليه به وكان يأخذ غلتها فيدفع اليهم منها ما يكفيهم

I swear by Allah, I will do exactly as Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam had done. She was pleased by this and held him to his word. Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu after taking the produce of the land, would hand over to them that which would suffice them.[51]

The reason behind her asking was to merely be handed the management of the lands together with the other close family members. However, due to there being a lingering fear that the masses would interpret this as having the inheritance of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam distributed which would in turn lead to the future misappropriation of the lands, Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu took the decisive step of nipping it in the bud. It was due to this very fear ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu vetoed the proposal of splitting the lands of Fay’ that was under the supervision of ‘Ali and ‘Abbas radiya Llahu ‘anhuma.

Another reason which could explain Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anha sending an official delegation seeking clarity on this matter in a public setting would be to educate the ummah. Elucidating to the people, the inheritance of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam was a spiritual one. Noble character and divine knowledge the corner stones of this inheritance. Making it as apparent as the sun at midday, there is none and never will be any material possessions handed down to the heirs, be it herself or her children. The wealth of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, just as his life, was to be spent in the path of Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala.

If this question was not posed in the public setting of the court there could have been room for doubt in many a person’s mind that Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam was indeed bound by the injunctions of inheritance laid out in the Qur’an.

Furthermore, she was striving to educate her children on the lesson of keeping aloof from the wealth Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam.

Perhaps her intention was to test Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu. Would he endeavour to follow in the footsteps of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam spending on the poor, orphans, Bani Hashim, and the various worthy recipients or would he take a new path. The outcome of the matter was pivotal in establishing Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu as a trustworthy successor of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam. He would firmly adhere to the teachings of his predecessor and not shy away based on nobility or love.

Proofs of the Shia for Inheritance

First Proof

يُوْصِيْكُمُ اللَّهُ فِي أَوْلَادِكُمْ ۖ لِلذَّكَرِ مِثْلُ حَظِّ الْأُنثَيَيْنِ ۚ

Allah instructs you concerning your children: for the male, what is equal to the share of two females.[52]

This verse is general in its meaning. Just the layman is bound to it so to was Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam. His wealth was the right of his daughter. Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu went against this verse, depriving Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anha of her right by claiming the narration:

لا نورث ما تركنا صدقة

We the fraternity of Prophets do not leave behind any inheritance, what we leave is Sadaqah[53]

Back to top

Answer

The verse presented by the Shia is specific to the ummah and does include the Messenger salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam. The Shia and the Ahlus Sunnah wa l-Jama’ah both establish that the Messengers ‘alayh al Salam do not leave monetary inheritance. We have produced statements to support the above from the reliable books of the Shia. ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu and Imam Jafar al Sadiq rahimahu Llah both held the same view as we have already established. Similarly, the narrations of the Ahlus Sunnah wa al Jama’ah mirror the same view. The claim of the Shia that this narration has only been recorded by Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu is unsubstantiated. Besides, even if it were so it would not bring into question the veracity of the narration. The division of hadith to mutawatir[54] and khabr-wahid[55] is for those who have not heard it directly from Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam. For the Companions who heard it directly from him it leaves no room for doubt. Just as the Qur’an is concrete, for them all such narrations hold the same conviction.

The afore-mentioned explanation is however not necessary as this hadith has been narrated by many other Companions as well. The narrators of this hadith include but is not restricted to; ‘Umar, ‘Uthman, ‘Ali, ‘Abdul Rahman ibn ‘Awf, ‘Abbas, Hudhayfah ibn Yaman, Zubair ibn al ‘Awwam, Sa’d ibn Waqqas, Abu al Darda’, Abu Hurairah, and the Honorable Consorts radiya Llahu ‘anhum.

This narration is therefore the explanation of the verse in contention of Surah al Nisa. It exempts Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam from the injunctions mentioned therein. This is not a standalone phenomenon. Turning our attention to the following verse shows us the same occurrence.

فَانكِحُوْا مَا طَاْبَ لَكُمْ مِّنَ النِّسَاءِ مَثْنَىٰ وَثُلَاثَ وَرُبَاعَ

Then marry those that please you of [other] women, two or three or four.[56]

This verse is for the ummah at large, however Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam is exempt from its legal implications as he was given the option of marrying more than four.

A narration expounding upon a verse by broadening or narrowing its meaning does not necessarily dispute the verse. The Shia too have expounded upon the very verse citing legal implications in the case of children being disbelievers to a Muslim father, the children murdering the father, or their being enslaved. Similarly, they have expanded its meaning to exclude children born after li’an.[57]

Second Proof

وَوَرِثَ سُلَيْمَانُ دَاوُوْدَ

And Sulaiman inherited Dawood.[58]

Back to top

Answer

Inheritance in this verse alludes to prophethood, kingdom, and knowledge. Looking at the context of this verse implies the same. Dawood ‘alayh al Salam had nineteen children, if this verse is subjected to monetary inheritance, it would imply depriving the other children.

The narration of Usul al Kafi; a canonical Shia book, gives strength to our answer.

قال ابو عبد الله عليه السلام ان سليمان ورث داؤد وان محمدا ورث سليمان

Sulaiman inherited from Dawood and Muhammad inherited from Sulaiman

Inheritance of prophethood is definitely meant in the verse as is here. Muhammad salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam in no way could possibly inherit the wealth of Sulaiman ‘alayh al Salam.

Third Proof

Zakariyya ‘alayh al Salam supplicated to Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala thus:

وَإِنِّيْ خِفْتُ الْمَوَالِيَ مِنْ وَرَائِيْ وَكَانَتِ امْرَأَتِيْ عَاقِرًا فَهَبْ لِيْ مِنْ لَّدُنْكَ وَلِيًّا

And indeed, I fear the successors after me, and my wife has been barren, so give me from Yourself an heir.[59]

يَرِثُنِيْ وَيَرِثُ مِنْ آلِ يَعْقُوْبَ ۖ وَاجْعَلْهُ رَبِّ رَضِيًّا

Who will inherit me and inherit from the family of Jacob. And make him, my Lord, pleasing [to You].”[60]

From these verses they deduce that the prophets do have heirs who inherit their wealth.

Back to top

Answer

Here too our answer is the same not without our own proof though. Inheritance in these verses refer to knowledge and prophethood. It is illogical to assume otherwise. Firstly, in the era of Zakariyya ‘alayh al Salam there were thousands upon thousands of individuals from the progeny of Yaqub ‘alayh al Salam. Would they then be deprived of his inheritance upon the supplication of Zakariyya ‘alayh al Salam?

Secondly, it is irrational to assume that a Prophet of Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala would supplicate for such worldly benefit which will deprive other deserving recipients of their rights. This goes to undo the very fabric of prophethood which demands purity of heart and mind from greed and gluttony.

One cannot, after searching endlessly, establish material inheritance of or from the Prophets ‘alayh al Salam in the Qur’an. Neither have they inherited nor have their dependents inherited from their estate.

O Shia! Were ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu and Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anha oblivious of these realities that you profess them inheritors of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and make such preposterous deductions from these verses?

When ‘Abbas radiya Llahu ‘anhu gave up the conjoined supervision of the fay’ lands, it landed into the sole supervision of ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu. If the laws of inheritance were to be applied, then how could ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu take the supposed right of ‘Abbas radiya Llahu ‘anhu. Furthermore, these lands were supervised by Hussain and Hassan radiya Llahu ‘anhuma after ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu. If indeed this was inheritance as some believe it to be then each one of them would have taken their shares from these lands. ‘Abbas and ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhuma would have split their share considering the share of Honourable Consorts radiya Llahu ‘anhunna of Muhammad salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam. This would have then been distributed between Hussain and Hassan radiya Llahu ‘anhuma and their sisters. Evidently this was not the case.

Have the proponents of injustice towards Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anha considered that if not distributing the inheritance was coercion then this would in turn mean injustice to the Honourable Consorts radiya Llahu ‘anhunna. This hand of injustice would have been dealt to ‘Abbas radiya Llahu ‘anhuand Aisha al Siddiqah radiya Llahu ‘anha, the daughter of Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu as well.

The management of the lands of Fadak during the Caliphate of ‘Ali and Hassan radiya Llahu ‘anhuma was exactly the same as had been during Caliphate of Abu Bakr and ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhuma.

The beloved son of the Ahlul Bayt, Zaid al Shahid rahimahu Llah, is reported to have said:

اما انا لو كنت مكان ابي بكر حكمت كما حكم به ابو بكر في فدك

Had I been in the position afforded to Abu Bakr, I would have passed the same decision as he had with regards to Fadak.[61]

If by following the footsteps of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam in the Fadak issue Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu was unjust, then so too by extension are ‘Ali, Hassan, Hussain, and Zaid al Shahid radiya Llahu ‘anhum unjust. Allah save us from such folly.

Question

Why were the wives of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam each given a home if there was no distribution of estate?

Back to top

Answer

Just as Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam had given Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anha and Usamah radiya Llahu ‘anhu houses during his lifetime, similarly each wife had been afforded a home with sole ownership.

The Qur’an indicates towards these homes of the honourable wives of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam:

وَقَرْنَ فِيْ بُيُوْتِكُنَّ

And abide in your houses

This proves that the homes of the honourable wives were owned by them and was not given to them as inheritance.

If we were to assume that these homes were in the ownership of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam then too there is no objection. When a man passes away the widow is given the right to reside in his house for her ‘iddah[62] as she cannot marry during this period.

The wives of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam were prohibited from remarrying, therefore they were given the right to reside in these homes indefinitely.

The narrations that allude to the gifting of Fadak

The narrations regarding the inheritance of Fadak and the circumstances surrounding it are well established, there is no scope to consider that it had been given as a gift. We do, however, find some narrations that mention the same. These recollections are fabricated by the Shia which can be gauged by the narrators hailing from that school of thought. Contrary to this we find in the reliable books of the Ahlus Sunnah wa l-Jama’ah the statement of ‘Umar ibn ‘Abdul ‘Aziz when he ascended the Caliphate:

إن رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم كانت له فدك فكان ينفق منها ويعود منها على صغير بني هاشم ويزوج منها أيمهم وإن فاطمة سألته أن يجعلها لها فأبى فكانت كذلك في حياة رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم حتى مضى لسبيله فلما أن ولي أبو بكر رضي الله عنه عمل فيها بما عمل النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم في حياته حتى مضى لسبيله فلما أن ولي عمر عمل فيها بمثل ما عملا حتى مضى لسبيله ثم أقطعها مروان ثم صارت لعمر بن عبد العزيز قال يعني عمر بن عبد العزيز فرأيت أمرا منعه رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم فاطمة عليها السلام ليس لي بحق وأنا أشهدكم أني قد رددتها على ما كانت يعني على عهد رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم

Fadak belonged to the Messenger of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, and he made contributions from it, showing repeated kindness to the poor of the Banu Hashim from it, and supplying from it the cost of marriage for those who were unmarried. Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anha asked him to give it to her, but he refused. That is how matters stood during the lifetime of the Messenger of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam till he passed on

When Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu was made ruler, he administered it as the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam had done in his lifetime till he passed on. Then when ‘Umar ibn al Khattab radiya Llahu ‘anhu was made ruler he administered it as they had done till he passed on. Then it was given to Marwan who distributed it, and it afterwards came to ‘Umar ibn ‘Abdul ‘Aziz.

(Umar ibn ‘Abdul ‘Aziz said,) I consider I have no right to something which the Messenger of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam refused to Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anha, and I call you to witness that I have restored it to its former condition; meaning in the time of the Messenger of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam.[63]

The narrations that suggest Fatimah’s radiya Llahu ‘anha displeasure

When Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anha approached Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu regarding the inheritance of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam he countered her with the narration:

نحن معاشر الانبياء لا نورث ما تركنا فهو صدقة

We the fraternity of Prophets do not leave behind any inheritance, what we leave is charity.[64]

Upon which, some narrations suggest, Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anha exhibited displeasure and refused to speak to him again. At this juncture is it important to understand the reality of this account.

The narration as mentioned previously recounts Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anha turning back happy with this answer and not brining it up again. There is no mention of her getting angry here, besides it is impossible for any individual of the ummah to show anger on the mention of a hadith of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, more so his beloved daughter. The question, however, remains that why is there then the word “غضبت”, i.e. “she got angry,” in this narration?

Firstly, looking at the recollections of Fadak we find there are five Sahabah who report this narration namely, Aisha al Siddiqah, Abu Hurairah, Abu al Tufayl, ‘Amir ibn Wathilah, and Umm Hani radiya Llahu ‘anhum. The narrations of the latter four have no mention of Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anhadisplaying anger. Looking at the narration of Aisha radiya Llahu ‘anha, we find that through Imam al Zuhri rahimahu Llah only a few students relate this portion.[65] The remainder of the narrators from Aisha radiya Llahu ‘anha as well as from Imam al Zuhri rahimahu Llah omit this addition. And for good reason too. Wherever there is mention of the display of anger it is not established from Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anha herself, it is simply conjecture based on what human sentiment could be in that situation.

Deducing from the apparent can be misleading as we find in the incident of Musa ‘alayh al Salam. He returns from Mount Tur only to find the Israelites rebelling, upon which he takes his brother Harun ‘alayh al Salam to task by physically grabbing his beard and hair, supposing he had not followed the instructions he left before the trek to the Mountain. This was an error of judgement by Musa ‘alayh al Salam based on the apparent.

In the instance of Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anha displaying anger, it is deduction not based on the apparent, rather it is conjecture based on what the sentiment could be. It is nigh impossible to ascertain the reaction of an emotion when the occurrence of that emotion is based on mere guess work.

Secondly, a narrator will sometimes make an addition to a narration through deductive analogy which may or may not be correct. Take for example the incident wherein Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam distanced himself from his wives for a few days. Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam had taken up residence during this time in the upper story secluding himself. The talk of the town was that Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam had divorced his wives. ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu hearing of this came to Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam seeking clarity on the matter and was informed that he had not divorced his wives.

As Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam had taken up seclusion and had stopped coming to his wives for a few days, people through deductive analogy assumed that he had divorced his wives. An unfortunate miscalculation.

Similarly, in the narration of Fadak when the narrators came across the phrase “لم تتكلم”, i.e. “she did not speak thereafter,” some narrator assumed it was due to her displeasure and conveniently added “غضبت”, i.e. “she got angry,” to the narration which then got carried down by other narrators.

The correct meaning of “لم تتكلم”, i.e. “she did not speak thereafter.” is she did not approach Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu thereafter to engage him on the matter as she was pleased with his decision!

To assume that she was angry with Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu and refused to speak to him thereafter is a mistake born of deductive analogy, though this will not affect the narrators’ reliability and trustworthiness or bring into doubt his worthiness.

Just as after seeking clarification from Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam it was established that he had not divorced his wives, similarly one cannot establish the displeasure of Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anha unless she determines it so through her own words. How can one have the courage to just assume that Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anha had gotten angry after hearing a hadith of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam. The narrator, having heard the phrase ‘she did not speak thereafter’ went on to narrate the incident loosely, not verbatim, thereby including the phrase ‘she got angry’ based on deductive analogy.

This stance is further strengthened when one looks at the other students of Imam al Zuhri rahimahu Llah who have omitted this portion completely. They did in fact narrate the hadith verbatim.

As this narration is brought forth in Sahih al Bukhari, one may have some misgivings then, of the veracity of this book. One must understand that the meaning of this corpus being authentic is that the narrators are all reliable, trustworthy, and just. There are no liars or fabricators found therein. If a narrator is found to have narrated a hadith loosely; not verbatim, thereby making an error of judgment it will not bring into question his reliability or trustworthiness nor will it put a question mark on the authenticity of Sahih al Bukhari.

If, for arguments sake the incident of Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anha getting angry was true it would have been the topic of the day and a point of wide spread controversy among the Ahlul Bayt, Tabi’in, and people of Madinah. As the only source for this point of contention are a few students of Imam al Zuhri rahimahu Llah it holds no weight nor is there any substance of truth therein.

Intelligence and justice demands that Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anha was pleased with the decision of Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu and the hadith of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam. Anything else is implausible from one who enjoyed the title batul (chaste), pure from the ill of worldly gain and was given the honour of being the Queen of Jannat.

Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anha was Pleased

The narrations of both the Ahlus Sunnah wa l-Jama’ah and the Shia outline the pleasure of Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anha upon the steps taken to follow Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam in the matter of Fadak. Looking at the books of the Ahlus Sunnah wa l-Jama’ah one will find such narrations in al Bayhaqi, commentaries of Sahih al Bukhari, commentaries of Mishkat al Masabih, Nibras—the commentary on Sharh al ‘Aqa’id[66],al Bidayah wa al Nihayah, Tabaqat ibn Sa’d, and other such books.

After the passing of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu addressed Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anha in the presence of ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu with the following:

والله ما تركت الدار والمال، والأهل والعشيرة، إلا إبتغاء مرضاة الله، ومرضاة رسوله، ومرضاتكم أهل البيت، ثم ترضاها حتى رضيت. قال ابن كثير: وهذا إسناد جيد قوي

I have only spent my wealth, home, and family to attain the pleasure of Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala, His Messenger salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, and the pleasure of you; the Ahlul Bayt. The narrator says, he continued making her happy until she became pleased. Hafiz ibn Kathir making a critical analysis of this narration concludes that the chain of narrators is strong.[67]

In the books of the Shia, which they consider to be most reliable, such as the commentary of Nahj al Balaghah by Ibn al Maytham al Bahrani[68], the commentary of the same by Ibn Abi al Hadid[69], and Durrah Najafiyyah[70] the following is recorded:

كان رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم يأخذ من فدك قوثهم و يقسم الباقي ويحمل منه في سبيل الله و لك على الله ان اصنع بها كما كان يصنع فرضيت بذالك و اخذت العهد عليه به وكان يأخذ غلتها فيدفع اليهم منها ما يكفيهم ثم فعلت الخلفاء بعده كذالك الى ان ولى معاوية

Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu addressed Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anha with the following, “Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam would take from Fadak for your provisions and distribute the rest. He would also finance expeditions from it. I swear by Allah, I will do exactly as Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam had done.” She was pleased by this and held him to his word. Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu after taking the produce of the land, would hand over to them that which would suffice them. The Khalifas after him would do the same till Muawiyahascended the Caliphate.

The above mentioned three books of the Shia are clear on the following issues:

1. The produce of Fadak was used for the expenses of the Ahlul Bayt and the poor. Together with this it was used to finance the needs of the Islamic Empire. It was never gifted to Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anha, ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu or their children: Hassan and Hussain radiya Llahu ‘anhuma.
2. Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anha took the pledge from Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu to continue distributing the wealth of Fadak as Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam had done. He agreed to this which pleased her.
3. Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anha, Hassan, and Hussain radiya Llahu ‘anhuma would have their needs seen to by Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu from the produce of Fadak.
4. The manner of distribution was the same throughout the lives of the rightly guided Khalifas: Abu Bakr, ‘Umar, ‘Uthman, and ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhum. During the Caliphate of Hassan radiya Llahu ‘anhu too there was no change until the reign of Muawiyah radiya Llahu ‘anhu. Prior to the reign of Muawiyah radiya Llahu ‘anhu there was no change as the Khalifas adhered firmly to the command of Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala and his Messenger salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam. This being the case, it is impossible to fathom that Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anha was displeased with the command of Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala and Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam. If one is adamant that she was displeased, why did she then continue taking from the produce of Fadak. The only logical explanation is that this was the misunderstanding of a narrator from the chain of narrators which thereafter carried on down the links.
5. The statements recorded in these books also clarify the misconceptions that some have regarding ‘Uthman radiya Llahu ‘anhu supposedly handing the land over to Marwan during his Caliphate. It has been thoroughly established that he had handled the affair just as his predecessors had done.

Similarly, Sayed ‘Ali Naqi has written in his commentary on Nahj al Balaghah:

ابو بکرغله وسودآن را گرفته بقدر کفایت با اهل بیت عليه السلام مي داد وخلافاء بعد از وبرآن اسلوب رفتار نمودند تا زمان معاويه

Abu Bakr would hand over to the Ahlul Bayt from the produce of Fadak which would suffice them. The Khalifas after him carried on the tradition till the advent of Muawiyah.[71]

This too establishes that Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anha was happy in taking her expenses, ergo pleased with the situation. Besides this it is evident from Shia sources that the wife of Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu would unremittingly serve Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anha. During her days of sickness too Asma’ bint ‘Umays radiya Llahu ‘anha—the wife of Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu—would see to her needs. When the time came for Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anha to leave this temporary abode, the shrouding and burial affair too was headed by Asma’ bint ‘Umays radiya Llahu ‘anha.

Jila’ al –’Uyun has the following:

امیرالمومنين و اسمآء بنت عميس فطمة را غسل دادند

‘Ali and Asma’ bint ‘Umays performed the ghusl for Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anha.[72]

During her final illness Asma’ bint ‘Umays radiya Llahu ‘anha prepared a canopy makeshift veil and presented it to Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anha. Seeing this Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anha made a bequest requesting her burial service be covered by this veil which was adhered to.

The incident regarding ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu taking the pledge of allegiance at the hand of Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu and reading salah behind him is also found in Shia sources. Al Ihtijaj authored by the Shi’i scholar al Tabarsi holds the following:

ثم تناول يد ابى بكر فبايعه

‘Ali then took the hand of Abu Bakr, pledging allegiance to him.[73]

In the same book we find regarding ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu:

ثم قام و تهيأ للصلوة و حضر المسجد و صلى خلف ابى بكر

Then ‘Ali stood up, prepared for salah, and prayed behind Abu Bakr.[74]

The same text is found in other Shia sources such as Tafsir al Qummi and Mirat al ‘Uqul Sharh al Usul wa al Furu’.

If Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anha was indeed displeased, then why would ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu take the pledge and pray behind Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu. Now after fourteen hundred years someone comes along, hears the supposed incident of her displeasure and concludes that keeping his distance from Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu is the demand of his iman. Notwithstanding the Lion of Allah—’Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu—took the pledge at his hands. If there was any substance to their claim of displeasure why would he go through with the pledge?

All the above solidifies the fact that ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu and Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anha had a good relationship with Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhuand were pleased with him. It is highly unlikely to have a close relationship as theirs whilst harbouring ill feelings. If there was true anger, then one would expect a reaction like that of Musa ‘alayh al Salam with Harun ‘alayh al Salam. He physically gripped his brother thinking him to be at fault. Or perhaps it would warrant a reaction like that of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam when he saw his beloved daughter donning silver upon which, according to Shia sources, angered him.

The Shi’i scholar ‘Abbas al Qummi writes in Muntaha al Amal:

Fatimah became angry with ‘Ali regarding Fadak and said to him:

اشتملت شملة الجنين وقعدت حجرة الظنّين

You’ve curled up like a foetus and sit back like the helpless.[75]

In the Shia book Al Ihtijaj, which Baqir al Majlisi has translated in Haqq al Yaqin as follows:

خطا بهای شجاعانه درشت با سید وصیا نمود که مانند جنین در رهم پرده نشین شده ومثل خا نان در خانه گر یخته

Why is it you sit hiding not coming to my assistance.[76]

Similarly, we find in the Shia book Jila’ al -’Uyun:

Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anha became angry with ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu and left to go to the house of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam.

Further on in the book we find:

She went to complain of ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu.[77]

If all these incidents of displeasure, Musa ‘alayh al Salam and Harun ‘alayh al Salam, Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and his daughter, Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anha and ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu; does not warrant pointing a finger at their iman nor defamation of their character then is it not the highest form of injustice to do the contrary when Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu supposedly angers Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anha?

The Funeral of Fatimah

To say that due to the supposed bad blood between Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu and Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anha he did not attend her janazah nor was he informed of it is diverging from the truth. There was no need for him to be informed by a third party as his wife, Asma’ bint ‘Umays radiya Llahu ‘anha was the one taking care of Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anha during her final days. It was his wife who saw to the burial service, as well as the veiled canopy for it. Furthermore, there is no narration stating he did not lead her funeral prayer, rather some narrations establish the very fact:

عن جعفر ابن محمد عن ابيه قال ماتت فاطمة بنت النبي صلي الله عليه و سلم فجاء ابو بكر و عمر ليصلوا فقال ابو بكر لعلي ابن ابى طالب ثقدم فقال ما كنت لاتقدم و انت خليفة رسول الله صلي الله عليه و سلم فتقدم ابو بكر فصلى عليها

Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anha passes away, Abu Bakr and ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhuma come for the funeral prayer. Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhugives ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu the option to perform the prayer. He refuses citing seniority. He says how can I perform the prayer in your presence; the vicegerent of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam. Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu goes forward and performs the prayer.[78]

عن حماد عن ابراهيم قال صلى ابو بكر الصديق على فاطمة بنت رسول الله صلي الله عليه و سلم فكبر عليها اربعا

Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu performed the funeral prayers of Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anha and said the takbir four times therein.[79]

This narration is found verbatim in Sirah Halabiyyah.[80]

The historians of both the Ahlus Sunnah wa l-Jama’ah and the Shia mention that Hussain radiya Llahu ‘anhu gave the honour of performing the funeral prayers of Hassan radiya Llahu ‘anhu to the then governor of Madinah, Sa’id ibn al ‘As. Hussain radiya Llahu ‘anhu said:

لولا انه سنة ما قدمته

If it was not tradition for the leader to perform the prayer I would not have allowed him to.

This too strengthens the fact that it was none other than Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu who performed the funeral prayer of Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anha. The tradition was for the ruler to lead these prayers. And Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala knows best.

What should be noted too, from the perspective of the underlying principles of hadith, a narration that establishes will be given preference over another that negates the same.

Through this principle it is plausible to conclude regarding those narrations which mention ‘Ali or ‘Abbas radiya Llahu ‘anhuma reading the funeral prayer, leading it is not intended. And Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala knows best, His Knowledge is supreme.

Following the chain of thought without any bias one will reach the conclusion that it is impossible to fathom injustice from a man who followed Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam in totality, did not take a dime from Fadak for his own use, left a bequest to return the wages he had taken from the treasury, and preferred old pieces of cloth for his shroud rather than spend on new. May Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala reward him tremendously.

It was his complete honesty and justice that led the Muhajirin, Ansar, Banu Hashim, and Quraysh to unify in pledging allegiance to him. The vicegerent of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, the first Khalifah, Sayyidina Abu Bakr al Siddiq radiya Llahu ‘anhu. It was through this sense of brotherhood, unity, and mutual love that they attained the highest of stages in this world and the hereafter.

They and their era are the yardstick for success for every individual, society, and era to come after.

If Muslims desire rectification and safety of their iman, worldly success, and everlasting salvation the only way is to tread the path of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam which was followed without deviating in the slightest by Abu Bakr, ‘Umar, ‘Uthman, ‘Ali, the Ahl Bayt, and the Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum. It was these pure souls that pleased their Creator subhanahu wa ta ‘ala, their Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, and the creation. They left an unprecedented example for the world to follow.

May Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala grant us the ability to follow their footsteps.

و ما توفيقي الا بالله

I am helpless without Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala.

[1] Fadak is the name of a small hamlet near Khaybar, in northern Arabia, situated approximately 140 km from Madinah.

[2] Surah al Fath: 29

[3] Surah Al ‘Imran: 103

[4] Surah al An’am: 162

[5] Surah al Furqan: 57

[6] Musnad Imam Ahmed ibn Hanbal: #2641

[7] Surah al Nasr: 2

[8] Surah Al ‘Imran: 164

[9] Hayat al Qulub, vol. 2 pg. 405

[10] Bay’at al Ridwan was a pledge that was sworn to Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam by his Companions radiya Llahu ‘anhum on the occasion of Hudaybiyyah. The pledge, sworn under a tree, was to avenge the rumoured death of ‘Uthman radiya Llahu ‘anhu.

[11] Surah al Fath: 10

[12]Surah al Fath: 18

[13] Surah al Fath: 26

[14] Surah al Fath: 29

[15] Surah al Hujurat: 7

[16] The Muhajirin (Emigrants) were the first converts to Islam, who emigrated with the Prophet salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam from Makkah to Madinah, the event known in Islam as the Hijrah.

[17] The early Muslims from Madinah are called the Ansar (Helpers).

[18] Surah al Hashr: 8

[19] Surah al Hashr: 9

[20] Surah al Haj: 40

[21] Surah al Tawbah: 74

[22] Surah al Tawbah: 100

[23] Being conscious and cognizant of Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala.

[24] Surah al Baqarah:137

[25] Surah al Baqarah: 13

[26] Wealth attained peacefully is termed as fay’

[27] Sharh Nahj al Balaghah pg. 959.

[28] Surah al Hashr: 7

[29] Tafsir al Safi, pg. 210.

[30] Haqq al Yaqin, pg. 231.

[31] Sahih al Bukhari: Hadith: 3508.

[32] Sahih al Bukhari. Hadith: 3093.

[33] Habous property.

[34] Furu’ al Kafi vol. 3 pg. 27.

[35] Surah al Hashr: 7.

[36] Surah al Tawbah: 92.

[37] Surah al Ahzab: 28,29.

[38] Surah al Ahzab: 33.

[39] Usul al Kafi, pg. 18.

[40] Man la Yahduruhu al Faqih, vol. 2 pg. 346

[41] Usul al Kafi, pg. 17.

[42] Usul al Kafi, pg. 137.

[43] Al Khisal of Ibn Babawayh, pg. 39.

[44] Sharh Nahj al Balaghah, vol 2 pg. 261.

[45] Al Manaqib al Fakhirah li al ‘Itrah al Tahirah, pg. 189.

[46] Man la Yahduruhu al Faqih, vol. 2 pg. 217.

[47] Sahih al Bukhari, Hadith: 6346

[48] Sahih al Bukhari, Hadith 3998

[49] Al ‘Urf al Shadhi, pg. 485.

[50] Sahih al Bukhari, Hadith 3998

[51] Sharh Nahj al Balaghah, pg. 332.

[52] Surah al Nisa: 11

[53] Sahih al Bukhari: Hadith: 6346

[54] Hadith narrated by such a large number of people that it is impossible for them to have agreed upon a lie collectively.

[55] Hadith which does not reach the level of mutawatir.

[56] Surah al Nisa: 3

[57] Sworn allegation of adultery committed by one’s spouse leading to a legal judgement separating a wife from her husband.

[58] Surah al Naml: 16

[59] Surah al Maryam: 5

[60] Surah al Maryam: 6

[61] Al Bidayah wa Al Nihayah. vol.5 pg.289

[62] The period a woman must observe after the death of her spouse or after a divorce, during which she may not marry another man.

[63] Sunan Abu Dawood, Hadith: 2972

[64] Sahih al Bukhari, Hadith: 6346

[65] This narration has a total of 36 chains of narration. 11 chains run through Abu Hurairah, Abu al Tufayl, ‘Amir ibn Wathilah, and Umm Hani; wherein there is no mention of Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anha becoming angry. The remaining 25 chains are from Aisha radiya Llahu ‘anha by a narrator by the name of Zuhri. 9 do not have any mention of Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anha becoming angry. Thus 20 narrations of the 36 narrations have no indication of anger. It is only in the remaining 16 that we find the words she became angry, all narrated by way of Zuhri. Of these 16 narrations, 7 clearly mention this to be the words of Zuhri—appearing after the words, “He said,” as opposed to being the words of Aisha radiya Llahu ‘anha and another narration contains the words, “She said,” after this statement indicating that there was an interruption in the wording. This leaves only 8 out of 36 narrations wherein the students of Zuhri did not differentiate his words from the actual narration of Aisha radiya Llahu ‘anha. Thus the entire allegation against Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu is based upon this assumption of Zuhri and not from Aisha’s radiya Llahu ‘anhanarration. An error in judgement on Zuhri’s part.

[66] Al Nibras, pg.550

[67] Al Bidayah wa al Nihayah, vol.5 pg.289

[68] Sharh Nahj al Balaghah of Ibn al Maytham al Bahrani, 543/35

[69] Sharh Nahj al Balaghah of Ibn Abi al Hadid, 296/16

[70] Durrah Najafiyyah pg. 332

[71] Sharh Nahj al Balaghah of Sayed ‘Ali Naqi, pg.960

[72] Jila’ ul -’Uyun pg. 73

[73] Al Ihtijaj pg.52.

[74] Al Ihtijaj pg.60.

[75] Muntaha al Amal. pg. 97.

[76] Haq al Yaqin. vol.1 pg. 161.

[77] Jila’ al ‘Uyun pg. 61, 71

[78] Kanz al ‘Umal vol. 6 pg. 318.

[79] Tabaqat ibn Sa’d vol. 8 pg. 29.

[80] Sirah Halabiyyah vol.3 pg.391.

Adapted from al-Rahiq al-Makhtum by Ṣafī al-Raḥmān al-Mubarākpūrī

وَلَقَدْ نَصَرَكُمُ اللہُ بِبَدْرٍ وَّاَنۡتُمْ اَذِلَّۃٌ ۚ فَاتَّقُوا اللہَ لَعَلَّكُمْ تَشْكُرُوۡنَ

And indeed He [Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala] aided you at Badr when you were few in number. So fear Him so that you may show gratitude.[1]

Reason Of The Battle

It all began with the al ‘Ushayrah Invasion when a caravan belonging to Quraysh had escaped an imminent military encounter with Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and his men. When their return from Syria approached, Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam despatched Sayyidina Talhah ibn ‘Ubaidullah and Sayyidina Sa’id ibn Zaid radiya Llahu ‘anhuma northward to scout around for any movements of this sort. The two scouts stayed at al Hawra’ for some days until Abu Sufyan, the leader of the caravan, passed by them. The two men hurried back to Madinah and reported to Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam their findings. Great wealth amounting to fifty thousand dinars (gold coins) guarded by 40 men moving relatively close to Madinah constituted a tempting target for the Muslim military, and provided a potentially heavy economic, political and military strike that was bound to shake the entire structure of the Makkan polytheists.

Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam immediately exhorted the Muslims to rush out and waylay the caravan to make up for their property and wealth they were forced to give up in Makkah. He did not give orders binding to everyone, but rather gave them full liberty to go out or stay back, thinking that it would be just an errand on a small scale.

The Muslim army was made up of 300-317 men, 82-86 Muhajirin—61 from Aws and 170 from Khazraj. They were not well-equipped nor adequately prepared. They had only two horses belonging to Sayyidina al Zubair ibn al ‘Awwam and Sayyidina al Miqdad ibn al Aswad al Kindi radiya Llahu ‘anhuma, 70 camels, one for two or three men to ride alternatively. The Messenger of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam himself, Sayyidina ‘Ali and Sayyidina Murthid ibn Abi Murthid al Ghanawi radiya Llahu ‘anhuma had only one camel. Disposition of the affairs of Madinah was entrusted to Sayyidina Ibn Umm Makhtum radiya Llahu ‘anhu but later to Sayyidina Abu Lubabah ibn ‘Abd al Mundhir radiya Llahu ‘anhu. The general leadership was given to Sayyidina Mus’ab ibn ‘Umair al Qurashi al ‘Abdari radiya Llahu ‘anhu, and their standard was white in colour. The little army was divided into two battalions, the Muhajirin with a standard raised by Sayyidina ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib radiya Llahu ‘anhu, and the Ansar whose standard was in the hand of Sayyidina Sa’d ibn Mu’adh radiya Llahu ‘anhu. Sayyidina al Zubair ibn al ‘Awwam was appointed to the leadership of the right flank, Sayyidina al Miqdad ibn ‘Amr to lead the left flank, and the rear of the army was at the command of Sayyidina Qais ibn Abi Sa’sa’ah radiya Llahu ‘anhu. The General Commander-in-Chief was Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, of course.

Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, at the head of his army, marched out along the main road leading to Makkah. He then turned left towards Badr and when he reached al Safra’, he despatched two men to scout about for the camels of Quraysh.

Abu Sufyan, on the other hand, was on the utmost alert. He had already been aware that the route he was following was attended with dangers. He was also anxious to know about the movements of Muhammad salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam. His scouting men submitted to him reports to the effect that the Muslims were lying in ambush for his caravan. To be on the safe side, he hired Damdam ibn ‘Amr al Ghifari to communicate a message asking for help from the Quraysh. The messenger rode fast and reached Makkah in a frenzy. Felling himself from his camel, he stood dramatically before the Ka’bah, cut off the nose and the ears of the camel, turned its saddle upside down, tore off his own shirt from front and behind, and cried, “O Quraysh! Your merchandise! It is with Abu Sufyan. The caravan is being intercepted by Muhammad and his Companions. I cannot say what would have happened to them. Help! Help!”

The effect of this hue and cry was instantaneous and the news stunned Quraysh and they immediately remembered their pride that was wounded when the Muslims had intercepted the Hadrami caravan. They therefore swiftly mustered almost all of their forces and none stayed behind except Abu Lahab, who delegated someone who owed him some money to go on his behalf. They also mobilized some Arab tribes to contribute to the war against Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam. All the clans of Quraysh gave their consent except Banu ‘Adi. Soon an excited throng of 1300 soldiers including 100 horsemen and 600 mailed soldiers with a large number of camels, were clamouring to proceed to fight the Muslims. For food supplies, they used to slaughter an alternate number of camels of ten and nine every day. They were however afraid that Banu Bakr, on account of old long deep-seated animosity, would attack their rear. At that critical moment, Iblis (Satan) appeared to them in the guise of Suraqah ibn Malik ibn Ju’sham al Mudlaji—chief of Banu Kinanah—saying to them, “I guarantee that no harm will happen from behind.”

Allah speaks of this:

وَ اِذْ زَیَّنَ لَہُمُ الشَّیۡطٰنُ اَعْمَالَہُمْ وَقَالَ لَا غَالِبَ لَكُمُ الْیَوْمَ مِنَ النَّاسِ وَ اِنِّیۡ جَارٌلَّكُمْ

And [remember] when Satan made their deeds pleasing to them and said, “No one can overcome you today from among the people, and indeed, I am your protector.”[2]

They set out burning with indignation, motivated by a horrible desire for revenge and exterminating anyone that might jeopardise the routes of their caravans:

وَلَا تَكُوۡنُوۡا کَالَّذِیۡنَ خَرَجُوۡا مِنۡ دِیَارِہِمۡ بَطَرًا وَّ رِئَآءَ النَّاسِ وَیَصُدُّوۡنَ عَنۡ سَبِیۡلِ اللہِ

Do not be like those who left their homes boastfully and to be seen of men, and hinder (men) from the path of Allah.[3]

Or as Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam said:

O Allah these are the haughty and conceited; they have come defying Allah and defying His Messenger.

They moved swiftly northward to Badr. On the way they received another message from Abu Sufyan asking them to go back home because the caravan had escaped the Muslims. Incidentally, Abu Sufyan, on learning the intention of the Muslims, led his caravan off the main route, and inclined it towards the Red Sea. By this manoeuvre, he was able to slip past the Muslim ambush and was out of their reach.

On receiving Abu Sufyan’s message, the Makkan army showed a desire to return home. The tyrant Abu Jahl, however haughtily and arrogantly insisted that they proceed to Badr, stay three nights there for making festivities. Now they wanted to punish the Muslims and prevent them from intercepting their caravans, and impress on the Arabs that Quraysh still had the upper hand and enjoyed supremacy in that area.

Notwithstanding Abu Jahl’s threats and insistence, Banu Zahrah, acting on the advice of al Akhnas ibn Shurayq, broke away and returned to Makkah. Thenceforth al Akhnas remained ‘the well-rubbed palm-tree’ for Banu Zahrah and was blindly obeyed in all relevant matters.

Banu Hashim were also inclined to break away, but Abu Jahl’s threats made them desist from that idea.

The rest of the army, now 1000 soldiers, approached Badr and encamped themselves beyond a sand dune at al ‘Udwat al Quswa.

‘The intelligence corps’ of the Madani army reported to Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam that a bloody encounter with the Makkans was inescapable, and that a daring step in this context had to be taken, or else the forces of evil would violate the inviolable and would consequently manage to undermine the noble cause of the Islam and tread upon its faithful adherents. The Muslims were afraid that the pagan Makkans would march on and start the war activities within the headquarters of Islam, Madinah. A move of such nature would certainly damage and produce an infamous impact on the dignity and stance of the Muslims.

On account of the new grave developments, Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam held an advisory military emergency meeting to review the ongoing situation and exchange viewpoints with the army leaders. Admittedly, some Muslims feared the horrible encounter and their courage began to waver; in this regard, Allah says:

کَمَاۤ اَخْرَجَکَ رَبُّکَ مِنۡۢ بَیۡتِکَ بِالْحَقِّ ۪ وَ اِنَّ فَرِیۡقًا مِّنَ الْمُؤْمِنِیۡنَ لَکٰرِہُوۡنَ ۙ﴿۵﴾ یُجَادِلُوۡنَکَ فِی الْحَقِّ بَعْدَ مَا تَبَیَّنَ کَاَنَّمَا یُسَاقُوۡنَ اِلَی الْمَوْتِ وَہُمْ یَنۡظُرُوۡنَ

As your Rabb caused you [O Muhammad salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam] to go out from your home with the Truth, and verily, a party among the believers disliked it, disputing with you concerning the Truth after it was made manifest, as if they were being driven to death while they were looking (at it).[4]

Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam apprised his men of the gravity of the situation and asked for their advice. Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu was the first who spoke on the occasion and assured Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam of the unreserved obedience to his command. Sayyidina ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu was the next to stand up and supported the views expressed by his noble friend. Then Sayyidina al Miqdad ibn ‘Amr got up and said, “O Messenger of Allah! Proceed where Allah directs you to, for we are with you. We will not say as the Banu Isra’il said to Sayyidina Musa ‘alayh al Salam:

فَاذْہَبْ اَنۡتَ وَرَبُّکَ فَقَاتِلَاۤ اِنَّا ہٰہُنَا قٰعِدُوۡنَ

Go you and your Lord and fight. We will stay here.[5]

Rather we shall say:

اذهب أنت وربك فقاتلا إنا معكما مقاتلون ، فوالذي بعثك بالحق لو سرت بنا إلى برك الغمادلجالدنا معك من دونه ، حتى تبلغه.

Go you and your Lord and fight and we will fight along with you. By Allah! If you were to take us to Bark al Ghima, we will still fight resolutely with you against its defenders until you gained it.[6]

Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam thanked him and blessed him.

Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala guaranteed His Messenger salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam:

یٰۤاَیُّہَا النَّبِیُّ حَسْبُکَ اللہُ وَمَنِ اتَّبَعَکَ مِنَ الْمُؤْمِنِیۡنَ

O Nabi, sufficient for you is Allah and whoever follows you of the believers.[7]

The three leaders who spoke were from the Muhajirin, who only constituted a minor section of the army. Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallamwanted, and for the more reason, to hear the Ansar’s view because they were the majority of the soldiers and were expected to shoulder the brunt of the war activities. Moreover, the clauses of the ‘Aqabah Pledge did not commit them to fighting beyond their territories.

Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam then said, “Advise me, my men!” by which he meant the Ansar, in particular. Upon this Sayyidina Sa’d ibn Mu’adh radiya Llahu ‘anhu stood up and said, “By Allah, I feel you want us (the Ansar) to speak.” Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam directly said, “O yes!” Sa’d said:

O Rasulullah! We believe in you and we bear witness to what you have vouchsafed to us and we declare in unequivocal terms that what you have brought is the Truth. We give you our firm pledge of obedience and sacrifice. We will obey you most willingly in whatever you command us, and by Allah, Who has sent you with the Truth, if you were to ask us to plunge into the sea, we will do that most readily and not a man of us will stay behind. We do not grudge the idea of encounter with the enemy. We are experienced in war and we are trustworthy in combat. We hope that Allah will show you through our hands those deeds of valour which will please your eyes. Kindly lead us to the battlefield in the Name of Allah.

Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam was impressed with the fidelity and the spirit of sacrifice which his Companions showed at this critical juncture. Then he said to them, “Advance and be of cheer, for Allah has promised me one of the two (the lucrative course through capturing the booty or martyrdom in the cause of Allah against the polytheists), and by Allah it is as if I now saw the enemy lying prostrate.”

وَ اِذْ یَعِدُكُمُ اللہُ اِحْدَی الطَّآئِفَتَیۡنِ اَنَّہَا لَكُمْ وَتَوَدُّوۡنَ اَنَّ غَیۡرَ ذَاتِ الشَّوْکَۃِ تَكُوۡنُ لَكُمْ وَیُرِیۡدُ اللہُ اَنۡ یُّحِقَّ الۡحَقَّ بِکَلِمٰتِہٖ وَیَقْطَعَ دَابِرَ الْکٰفِرِیۡنَ ۙ﴿۷﴾ لِیُحِقَّ الْحَقَّ وَیُبْطِلَ الْبَاطِلَ وَلَوْکَرِہَ الْمُجْرِمُوۡنَ

[Remember, O believers], when Allah promised you one of the two groups – that it would be yours – and you wished that the unarmed one would be yours. But Allah intended to establish the truth by His words and to eliminate the disbelievers. That He should establish the truth and abolish falsehood, even if the criminals disliked it.[8]

In the immediate vicinity of Badr, Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and his Companion of the cave Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhuconducted a scouting operation during which they managed to locate the camp of Quraysh. They came across an old bedouin nearby whom they manipulated and managed to extract from him the exact location of the army of the polytheists. In the evening of the same day, he despatched three Muhajirin leaders: Sayyidina ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib, Sayyidina al Zubair ibn al ‘Awwam, and Sayyidina Sa’d ibn Abi Waqqas radiya Llahu ‘anhum to scout about for news about the enemy. They saw two men drawing water for the Makkan army. On interrogation, they admitted that they were water carriers working for Quraysh. But that answer did not please some Muslims and they beat the two boys severely in order to extract from them an answer, even if it was not true, alluding to the caravan laden with wealth. The two boys thus lied, and so they were released. Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam was angry with them and censured them saying, “On telling the truth, you beat them, and on telling a lie, you released them!” He then addressed the two boys and after a little conversation with them he learned a lot about the enemy: the number of soldiers, their exact location and names of some of their notables. He then turned to the Muslims and said, “Harken, Quraysh has sent you their most precious lives.”

The same night it rained on both sides. For the polytheists it obstructed further progress, whereas it was a blessing for the Muslims. It cleaned them and removed from them the stain of Shaitan. Allah sent rain to strengthen their hearts and to plant their feet firmly therewith.

اِذْ یُغَشِّیۡكُمُ النُّعَاسَ اَمَنَۃً مِّنْہُ وَیُنَزِّلُ عَلَیۡكُمۡ مِّنَ السَّمَآءِ مَآءً لِّیُطَہِّرَكُمۡ بِہٖ وَیُذْہِبَ عَنۡكُمْ رِجْزَ الشَّیۡطٰنِ وَلِیَرْبِطَ عَلٰی قُلُوۡبِكُمْ وَیُثَبِّتَ بِہِ الۡاَقْدَامَ

[Remember] when He covered you with a slumber as a security from Him, and He caused rain to descend on you from the sky, to clean you thereby and to remove from you the rijz [whispering, evil suggestions, etc.] of Satan, and to strengthen your hearts, and make your feet firm thereby.[9]

They marched a little forward and encamped at the farther bank of the valley. Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam stopped at the nearest spring of Badr. Sayyidina al Hubab ibn Mundhir radiya Llahu ‘anhu asked him, “Has Allah inspired you to choose this very spot or is it a stratagem of war and the product of consultation?” Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam replied, “It is stratagem of war and consultation.” Al Hubab radiya Llahu ‘anhu said, “This place is no good. Let us go and encamp on the nearest water well and make a basin or reservoir full of water, then destroy all the other wells so that they will be deprived of the water.” Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam approved of his plan and agreed to carry it out, which they actually did at midnight.

Sayyidina Sa’d ibn Mu’adh radiya Llahu ‘anhu suggested that a trellis be built for Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam to function as headquarters for the Muslim army and a place providing reasonable protection for the leader. Sayyidina Sa’d radiya Llahu ‘anhu began to justify his proposal and said that if they had been victorious, then everything would be satisfactory. In case of defeat, Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallamwould not be harmed and he could go back to Madinah where there were more people who loved him and who would have come for help if they had known that he was in that difficult situation, so that he would resume his job, hold counsel with them, and they would strive in the cause of Allah with him again and again. A squad of guards was also chosen from amongst the Ansar under the leadership of the same man, Sayyidina Sa’d ibn Mu’adh radiya Llahu ‘anhu, in order to defend Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam in his headquarters.

Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam spent the whole night preceding the day of the battle in prayer and supplication. The Muslim army, wearied with their long march, enjoyed sound and refreshing sleep, a mark of the Divine favour and of the state of their undisturbed minds.

اِذْ یُغَشِّیۡكُمُ النُّعَاسَ اَمَنَۃً مِّنْہُ وَیُنَزِّلُ عَلَیۡكُمۡ مِّنَ السَّمَآءِ مَآءً لِّیُطَہِّرَكُمۡ بِہٖ وَیُذْہِبَ عَنۡكُمْ رِجْزَ الشَّیۡطٰنِ وَلِیَرْبِطَ عَلٰی قُلُوۡبِكُمْ وَیُثَبِّتَ بِہِ الۡاَقْدَامَ

[Remember] when He covered you with a slumber as a security from Him, and He caused rain to descend on you from the sky, to clean you thereby and to remove from you the Rijz [whispering, evil suggestions, etc.] of Satan, and to strengthen your hearts, and make your feet firm thereby.[10]

That was Friday night, Ramadan 17th, the year 2 A.H.

In the morning, Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam called his men to offer the prayers and then urged them to fight in the way of Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala. As the sun rose over the desert, Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam drew up his little army, and pointing with an arrow which he held in his hand, arranged the ranks. Quraysh, on the other hand, positioned their forces in al ‘Udwat al Quswa opposite the Muslim lines. A few of them approached, in a provocative deed, to draw water from the wells of Badr, but were all shot dead except one, Hakim ibn Hizam, who later became a devoted Muslim. ‘Umair ibn Wahab al Jumahi, in an attempt to reconnoitre the power of the Muslims, made a scouting errand and submitted a report saying that the Muslim army numbered as many as 300 men keen on fighting to the last man. On another reconnaissance mission he came to the conclusion that neither reinforcements were coming nor ambushes laid. He understood that they were too brave to surrender and too intent on carrying out their military duties to withdraw without slaying the largest possible number of the polytheists. This report as well as kindred relations binding the two belligerent parties together, slackened the desire to fight among some of the Quraysh. To counteract this reason-based opposition advocated by a rival of his, ‘Utbah ibn Rabi’ah and others, Abu Jahl started an anti-campaign seeking vengeance on Muhammad’s salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam followers for the Quraysh killed at Nakhlah. In this way, he managed to thwart the opposite orientation, and manipulated the people to see his evil views only.

When the two parties approached closer and were visible to each other, Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam began supplicating to Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala, “O Allah! The conceited and haughty Quraysh are already here defying You and belying Your Messenger. O Allah! I am waiting for Your victory which You have promised me. I beseech You Allah to defeat them (the enemies).” He also gave strict orders that his men would not start fighting until he gave them his final word. He recommended that they use their arrows sparingly and never resort to sword unless the enemies came too close. Abu Jahl also prayed for victory, saying, “Our Lord, whichever of the two parties was less kind to his relatives, and brought us what we do not know, then destroy him tomorrow.” They were confident that their superior number, equipment and experience would be decisive. The Noble Qur’an, with a play on the word, told them that the decision had come, and the victory—but not in the sense they had hoped for:

اِنۡ تَسْتَفْتِحُوۡا فَقَدْ جَآءَكُمُ الْفَتْحُ ۚ وَ اِنۡ تَنۡتَہُوۡا فَہُوَ خَیۡرٌ لَّكُمْ ۚ وَ اِنۡ تَعُوۡدُوۡا نَعُدْ ۚ وَلَنۡ تُغْنِیَ عَنۡكُمْ فِئَتُكُمْ شَیۡئًا وَّلَوْ کَثُرَتْ ۙ وَ اَنَّ اللہَ مَعَ الْمُؤْمِنِیۡنَ

[O disbelievers] if you ask for a judgement, now has the judgement come unto you and if you cease [to do wrong], it will be better for you, and if you return [to the attack], so shall we return. And your forces will be of no avail to you, however numerous it be. And verily, Allah is with the believers.[11]

The first disbeliever to trigger the fire of the battle and be its first victim was al Aswad ibn ‘Abd al Asad al Makhzumi, a fierce bad-tempered idolater. He stepped out swearing he would drink from the water basin of the Muslims, otherwise, destroy it or die for it. He engaged with Sayyidina Hamzah ibn ‘Abd al Muttalib radiya Llahu ‘anhu, who struck his leg with his sword and dealt him another blow that finished him off inside the basin.

The battle had actually started. Protected by armour and shields, ‘Utbah ibn Rabi’ah stepped forth between his brother, Shaybah, and his son, al Walid ibn ‘Utbah, from the lines of Quraysh and hurled maledictions at the Muslims. Three young men of the Ansar came out against them: ‘Awf and Mu’awwadh—the sons of Harith—and ‘Abdullah ibn Rawahah radiya Llahu ‘anhum. But the Makkans yelled that they had nothing to do with them. They wanted the heads of their cousins. Upon this Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam asked Sayyidina ‘Ubaidah ibn al Harith, Sayyidina Hamzah—his uncle, and his cousin Sayyidina ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhum to go forward for the combat. The three duels were rapid. Sayyidina Hamzah radiya Llahu ‘anhu killed Shaybah, while Sayyidina ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu killed al Walid. Sayyidina ‘Ubaidah radiya Llahu ‘anhu was seriously wounded but, before he fell, Sayyidina Hamzah radiya Llahu ‘anhu fell upon ‘Utbah and with a sweep of his sword, cut off his head. Sayyidina ‘Ali and Sayyidina Hamzah carried Sayyidina ‘Ubaidah radiya Llahu ‘anhum back with his leg cut off. He passed away four or five days later of a disease in the bile duct. Sayyidina ‘Ali radiya Llahu ‘anhu was possessed of a deep conviction that Allah’s Words:

ہٰذٰنِ خَصْمٰنِ اخْتَصَمُوۡا فِیۡ رَبِّہِمْ ۫

These two opponents (believers and disbelievers) dispute with each other about their Lord.[12]

were revealed in connection with men of Faith who confess their Lord and seek to carry out His Will (i.e. Muhammad ’s followers at Badr Battle), and men who deny their Lord and defy Him (the people of Quraysh).

The duel was followed by a few more duels but the Makkans suffered terrible defeats in all the combats and lost some of their most precious lives. They were too much exasperated and enraged and fell upon the Muslims to exterminate them once and for all. The Muslims, however, after supplicating to Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala, calling upon Him for assistance, were made to hold to their position and conduct a defensive war plan that was successful enough to inflict heavy losses on the attackers. Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam used to pray to Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala ceaselessly and persistently, day and night to come to their succour. When the fierce engagement grew too hot he again began to supplicate to Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala saying:

اللَّهُمَّ إِنْ تُهْلِكْ هَذِهِ الْعِصَابَةَ مِنْ أَهْلِ الْإِسْلَامِ لَا تُعْبَدْ فِي الْأَرْضِ

O Allah! Should this group of Muslims be defeated today, You will no longer be worshipped on the earth.[13]

He salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam continued to call out to Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala, stretching forth his hands and facing al Qiblah, until his cloak fell off his shoulders. Then Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu came, picked up the cloak, and put it back on his shoulders and said:

يَا نَبِيَّ اللَّهِ ، كَفَاكَ مُنَاشَدَتُكَ رَبَّكَ ، فَإِنَّهُ سَيُنْجِزُ لَكَ مَا وَعَدَكَ

O Nabi of Allah, you have cried out enough to your Lord. He will surely fulfil what He has promised you.[14]

Immediate was the response from Allah, Who sent down angels from the heavens for the help and assistance of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and his Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum. The Glorious Qur’an observes:

اِذْ یُوۡحِیۡ رَبُّکَ اِلَی الْمَلٰٓئِکَۃِ اَنِّیۡ مَعَكُمْ فَثَبِّتُوا الَّذِیۡنَ اٰمَنُوۡا ؕ سَاُلْقِیۡ فِیۡ قُلُوۡبِ الَّذِیۡنَ کَفَرُوا الرُّعْبَ

Remember when Allah revealed to the angles, “Verily, I am with you, so keep firm those who have believed. I will cast terror into the hearts of those who have disbelieved.”[15]

Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala, the All-Mighty, also inspired another message to His Messenger salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, saying:

اِذْ تَسْتَغِیۡثُوۡنَ رَبَّكُمْ فَاسْتَجَابَ لَكُمْ اَنِّیۡ مُمِدُّكُمۡ بِاَلْفٍ مِّنَ الْمَلٰٓئِکَۃِ مُرْدِفِیۡنَ ﴿۹﴾ وَمَا جَعَلَہُ اللہُ اِلَّا بُشْرٰی وَلِتَطْمَئِنَّ بِہٖ قُلُوۡبُكُمْ ۚ وَمَا النَّصْرُ اِلَّا مِنْ عِنۡدِ اللہِ ؕ اِنَّ اللہَ عَزِیۡزٌ حَکِیۡمٌ

[Remember] when you asked help of your Lord, and He answered you, “Indeed, I will reinforce you with a thousand of the angels, each behind the other (following one another) in succession.” And Allah made it not but good tidings and so that your hearts would be assured thereby. And victory is not but from Allah. Indeed, Allah is Exalted in Might and Wise.[16]

Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, in his trellis, dozed off a little and then raised his head joyfully crying:

O Abu Bakr, glad tidings are there for you: Allah’s victory has approached! By Allah, I can see Jibril ‘alayh al Salam on his mare in the thick of a sandstorm!”

He then jumped out crying:

سَیُہۡزَمُ الْجَمْعُ وَ یُوَلُّوۡنَ الدُّبُرَ

Their multitude will be put to flight, and they will show their backs.[17]

At the instruction of Jibril ‘alayh al Salam, Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam took a handful of sand, cast it at the enemy and said, “Confusion seize their faces!” As he flung the dust, a violent sandstorm blew like furnace blast into the eyes of the enemies. With respect to this, Allah says:

وَمَا رَمَیۡتَ اِذْ رَمَیۡتَ وَلٰکِنَّ اللہَ رَمٰی

And you [i.e. Muhammad salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam] threw not when you did throw but Allah threw.[18]

Only then did he give clear orders to launch a counter-attack. He was commanding the army, inspiring confidence among his men and exhorting them to fight manfully for the sake of Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala, reciting the Words of Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala:

وَسَارِعُوۡۤا اِلٰی مَغْفِرَۃٍ مِّنۡ رَّبِّكُمْ وَجَنَّۃٍ عَرْضُہَا السَّمٰوٰتُ وَالۡاَرْضُ ۙ اُعِدَّتْ لِلْمُتَّقِیۡنَ

And be quick for forgiveness from your Lord, and for Paradise as wide as are the heavens and the earth.[19]

The spirit he infused into his men was clearly witnessed by the valour of Sayyidina ‘Umair radiya Llahu ‘anhu, a lad of sixteen, who flung away some dates he was eating crying out, “These (the dates) are holding me back from Jannat.” So saying he plunged into the thick of the battle and died fighting bravely. Unique deeds of valour, deep devotion, and full obedience to Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam were exhibited in the process of the battle. The army of the faithful was borne forward by the power of enthusiasm which the half-hearted warriors of Makkah miserably lacked. A large number of the polytheists were killed and the others began to waver. No wonder! The standard-bearers of Truth were given immediate help, and supernatural agencies (the angels), were sent to their assistance by Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala to help them defeat the forces of evil.

The records of Hadith speak eloquently of the fact that the angels did appear on that day and fought on the side of the Muslims.

عن ابن عباس قال بينما رجل من المسلمين يومئذ يشتد في إثر رجل من المشركين أمامه إذ سمع ضربة سوط فوقه وصوت الفارس يقول أقدم حيزوم فنظر إلى المشرك أمامه فخر مستلقيا فنظر إليه فإذا قد حطم أنفه وشق وجهه كضربة السوط فأحضر ذلك أجمع فجاء الأنصاري فحدث ذلك رسول الله فقال صدقت ذلك من مدد السماء الثالثة

Sayyidina Ibn ‘Abbas radiya Llahu ‘anhuma said, “While on that day a Muslim was chasing a disbeliever and he heard over him the swashing of a whip and the voice of the rider saying, ‘Go ahead Hayzum.’ He glanced at the polytheist who had (now) fallen down on his back. The Ansari came to Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and related that event to him. Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam replied, ‘You have told the truth. This was the help from the third heaven.’”[20]

One of the Ansar captured ‘Abbas ibn ‘Abd al Muttalib, who said, “O Messenger of Allah, by Allah this man did not capture me. I was captured by a man who was bald and had the most handsome face, and who was riding a piebald horse. I cannot see him here among the people.” The Ansari interrupted, “I captured him, O Rasulullah.” Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam replied, “Be quiet, Allah, the All-Mighty strengthened you with the help of a noble angel.”

Iblis, the arch satan, in the guise of Suraqah ibn Malik ibn Ju’sham al Mudlaji, on seeing angels working in favour of the Muslims, and Quraysh rapidly losing ground on the battlefield, made a quick retreat despite the polytheists’ pleas to stay on. He ran off and plunged into the sea.

فَلَمَّا تَرَآءَتِ الْفِئَتٰنِ نَکَصَ عَلٰی عَقِبَیۡہِ وَقَالَ اِنِّیۡ بَرِیۡٓءٌ مِّنۡكُمْ اِنِّیۡۤ اَرٰی مَا لَا تَرَوْنَ اِنِّیۡۤ اَخَافُ اللہَ

But when the two armies sighted each other, he (Satan) turned on his heels and said, “Indeed, I am disassociated from you. Indeed, I see what you do not see; indeed I fear Allah.”[21]

The ranks of Quraysh began to give way and their numbers added nothing but confusion. The Muslims followed eagerly their retreating steps, slaying or taking captive all that fell within their reach. Retreat soon turned into ignominious rout; and they fled in haste, casting away their armour, abandoned beasts of burden, camp and equipage.

The great tyrant Abu Jahl, on seeing the adverse course of the battle, tried to stop the tidal wave of the Islamic victory by nerving the polytheists and encouraging them by all means available and adjuring them by Lat and ‘Uzza and all symbols of paganism to stand firm in place and retaliate against the Muslims, but to no avail. Their morale had already been drastically reduced to zero, and their lines broken down. He then began to realize the reality of his arrogance and haughtiness. None remained around him except a gang of doomed polytheists whose resistance was also quelled by an Islamic irresistible storm of true devotion-based valour and Islam-orientated pursuit of martyrdom. Abu Jahl was deserted and left by himself on his horse waiting for death at the hand of two courageous lads of the Ansar.

Sayyidina ‘Abd al Rahman ibn ‘Awf radiya Llahu ‘anhu related the following interesting story in this regard:

I was in the thick of the battle when two youths came to me, still seemingly inexperienced in the art of fighting, one on the right and the second on the left. One of them spoke in a secret voice asking me to show him Abu Jahl. I asked about his intention, to which he replied, that he had a strong desire to engage with him in a combat until either of them was killed. It was something incredible to me. I turned left and the other said something to the same effect and showed a similar desire. I acceded to their earnest pleas and pointed directly at their target. They both rushed swiftly towards the spot, and without a moment’s hesitation struck him simultaneously with their swords and finished him off. They went back to Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, each claiming that he had killed Abu Jahl to the exclusion of the other. Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam asked if they had wiped the blood off their swords to which they answered in the negative. He then examined both swords and assured them that they both had killed him. When the battle concluded, Abu Jahl’s spoils were given to Sayyidina Mu’adh ibn ‘Amr ibn al Jamuh radiya Llahu ‘anhuma, because the other—Sayyidina Mu’awwadh ibn al ‘Afra’ radiya Llahu ‘anhu—was later killed in the course of the same battle. At the termination of the battle, Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam wanted to look for this archenemy of Islam, Abu Jahl. Sayyidina ‘Abdullah ibn Mas’ud radiya Llahu ‘anhu found him on the verge of death breathing his last. He stepped on his neck addressing him, “Have you seen how Allah has disgraced you?” The enemy of Islam still defiantly answered, “I am not disgraced. I am no more than a man killed by his own people on the battlefield.” He then inquired “Who has won the battle?” Sayyidina Ibn Mas’ud radiya Llahu ‘anhu replied, “Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala and His Messenger.” Abu Jahl then said with a heart full of grudge, “You have followed difficult ways, you shepherd!” Sayyidina Ibn Mas’ud radiya Llahu ‘anhu used to be a shepherd working for the Makkan aristocrats. Sayyidina Ibn Mas’ud radiya Llahu ‘anhu then cut off his head and took it to the Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam who, on seeing it, began to entertain Allah’s praise, “Allah is Great! Praise belongs to Allah, Who has fulfilled His Promise, assisted His servant and defeated the confederates alone.”

He then set out to have a look at the corpse. There he said, “This is the Pharaoh of this nation.”

Some Significant Instances Of Devotion:

1. Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam advised his Sahabah radiya Llahu ‘anhum to preserve the lives of the Banu Hashim who had gone out to Badr with the polytheists unwillingly because they had feared the censure of their people. Among them, he named al ‘Abbas ibn ‘Abd al Muttalib and Abu Bukhtari ibn Hisham. He ordered the Muslims to capture, but not to kill them. Sayyidina Abu Hudhayfah ibn ‘Utbah radiya Llahu ‘anhu showed great surprise and commented saying, “We kill our fathers, children, brothers, and members of our clan, and then come to spare al ‘Abbas? By Allah! If I see him I will surely strike him with my sword.” On hearing these words, Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, addressing Sayyidina ‘Umar ibn al Khattab radiya Llahu ‘anhu, said, “Is it fair that the face of the Messenger’s uncle be struck with a sword?” Sayyidina ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu got incensed and threatened to kill Sayyidina Abu Hudhayfah radiya Llahu ‘anhu if he does not obey the command of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam. The latter later said that extreme fear had taken firm grip of him and he felt that nothing except martyrdom could expiate for his mistake. He was actually martyred later on during al Yamamah events.
2. Sayyidina ‘Abd al Rahman ibn ‘Awf radiya Llahu ‘anhu and Umayyah ibn Khalaf had been close friends during the pre-Islamic era. When the battle of Badr ended, Sayyidina ‘Abd al Rahman radiya Llahu ‘anhu saw Umayyah and his son among the captives. He threw away the armour he had as spoils, and walked with them both. Sayyidina Bilal radiya Llahu ‘anhu, Rasulullah’s salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam mu’adhin, saw Umayyah and all the torture he had been put to at the hand of this man dawned upon him. He thus swore he would have revenge on Umayyah. Sayyidina ‘Abd al Rahman radiya Llahu ‘anhu tried to ease the tension and address the embarrassing situation amicably, but with no success. The Muslims gathered around and struck Umayyah’s son with swords. At this point, Sayyidina ‘Abd al Rahman radiya Llahu ‘anhu called upon his old friend to run for his life but he was put to swords from different people and lay down dead. Sayyidina ‘Abd al Rahman radiya Llahu ‘anhu, completely helpless and resigned said, “May Allah have mercy on Bilal, for he deprived me of the spoils, and I have been stricken by the death of my two captives.”
3. On the moral level, the Battle of Badr was an inescapable conflict between the forces of good and those of evil. In this context, Sayyidina ‘Umar ibn al Khattab radiya Llahu ‘anhu did not spare the life of any polytheist even his uncle on the maternal side al ‘As ibn Hisham ibn al Mughirah.
4. Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu shouted at his son ‘Abd al Rahman, still a polytheist and fighting with them, “Where is my wealth, you wicked boy?” The son answered that it was gone with the wind.
5. When the battle ended, the Muslims began to hold some polytheists in captivity. Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam looked into the face of Sayyidina Sa’d ibn Mu’adh radiya Llahu ‘anhu, the head of the Prophet’s guards, and understood that he was hateful to taking the enemy elements as prisoners. Sayyidina Sa’d radiya Llahu ‘anhu agreed to what Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam said and added that it was the first victory for the Muslims over the forces of polytheism, and he had more liking for slaying them than sparing their lives.
6. On the Day of Badr, the sword of Sayyidina ‘Ukkashah ibn Mihsan al Asadi radiya Llahu ‘anhu broke so Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam gave him a log of wood which he shook and it immediately turned into a long strong white sword. Sayyidina ‘Ukkashah radiya Llahu ‘anhu went on using that same sword in most of the Islamic conquests until he was martyred in the fight against the apostates after the demise of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam.
7. When the war activities had been concluded, Sayyidina Mus’ab ibn ‘Umair al ‘Abdari radiya Llahu ‘anhu saw his brother, still a polytheist, being handcuffed by an Ansari. Sayyidina Mus’ab radiya Llahu ‘anhu recommended that the Ansari tighten the knot for the prisoner’s mother was wealthy enough to ransom her son. ‘Abu ‘Aziz, Mus’ab’s brother, tried to appeal to his brother through their family ties, but the latter firmly replied that the Ansari was more eligible for brotherhood than him.
8. When Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam ordered that the corpses of the polytheists be dropped into an empty well, Sayyidina Abu Hudhayfah ibn ‘Utbah radiya Llahu ‘anhu looked sadly at his dead father, who fought on the side of the polytheists. Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam noticed that and asked him about it. Sayyidina Abu Hudhayfah radiya Llahu ‘anhu said that he had never held the least doubt that his father met his fate deservedly, but added that he wished he had been guided to the path of Islam, and that is why he felt sad. Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam whispered in his ears some comforting words.

The outcome of the battle was as aforementioned an ignominious rout for the polytheists and a manifest victory for the Muslims. Fourteen Muslims were killed, of whom six were from the Muhajirin and eight from the Ansar radiya Llahu ‘anhum. The polytheists sustained heavy casualties, seventy were killed and a like number taken prisoners. Many of the principal men of Makkah, and some of Rasulullah’s salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallambitterest opponents, were among the slain. Chief of these was Abu Jahl.

On the third day, the Messenger of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam went out to look at the slain polytheists, and said, “What an evil tribe you were as regards to your Messenger. You belied me but the others believed; you let me down while the others supported me; and you expelled me whereas the others sheltered me.”

He stood over the bodies of twenty-four leaders of Quraysh who had been thrown into one of the wells, and started to call them by name and by the names of their fathers, saying, “Would it not have been much better for you if you had obeyed Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala and His Messenger? Behold, we have found that our Lord’s promise do come true; did you (also) find that the promises of your Lord came true?” Thereupon, Sayyidina ‘Umar ibn al Khattab radiya Llahu ‘anhu said, “O Messenger of Allah! Why do you speak to bodies that have no souls in them?” Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam answered, “By Him in Whose hand is Muhammad’s soul! You do not hear better what I am saying than they do.”

Reaction In Makkah

The polytheists having received a large dose of disciplining and heavy defeat, fled away in great disorder in the vales and hillocks heading for Makkah panicked and too ashamed to see their people. Ibn Ishaq related that the first herald of bad tidings was al Haysaman ibn ‘Abdullah al Khuza’i. He narrated to them how their notables were killed. People there did not believe him at first and thought that he had gone mad, but soon the news was confirmed and a state of incredible bewilderment overwhelmed the whole Makkan scene. Abu Sufyan ibn al Harith gave Abu Lahab a full account of the massacre and the disgraceful rout they sustained, with emphasis on the role that the angels played in bringing about their tragic end. Abu Lahab could not contain himself and gave vent to his feelings of resentment in beating, abusing, and slapping Sayyidina Abu Rafi’ radiya Llahu ‘anhu, a Muslim, but reticent on his conversion, for reiterating the role of the angels. Sayyidah Umm al Fadl radiya Llahu ‘anha, another Muslim woman, greatly exasperated by Abu Lahab’s thoughtless behaviour, struck him with a log and nearly cracked his skull. Seven days later, he died of an ominous ulcer and was left for three days unburied. His sons, however, for fear of shameful rumours, drove him to a pit and keeping their distance, hurled stones and dust at him.

The defeat was a matter of great shame and grief for the Makkans. In almost every house there were silent tears for the dead and the captives. They were burning with humiliation and were thirsty for revenge. Wailing, lamenting, and crying however were decreed strictly forbidden lest the Muslims should rejoice at their affliction.

Madinah Receives The News Of Victory

Two heralds, Sayyidina ‘Abdullah ibn Rawahah and Sayyidina Zaid ibn Harithah radiya Llahu ‘anhuma were despatched to Madinah to convey the glad tidings of victory to the Muslims there. The multi-ethnic and ideological structure of Madinah featured different respective reactions. Rumour-mongers amongst the Jews and hypocrites spread news to the effect that Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam had been killed, and tried to impress their false assumption on the fact that Sayyidina Zaid ibn Harithah radiya Llahu ‘anhu was riding al Qaswa’, Rasulullah’s salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam camel-cow. Having reached, the two messengers imparted to the Muslims the happy news of victory, and furnished accurate information about the course of events in order to establish the sense of reassurance deep in the hearts of the anxious, but now, joyous Muslims. They immediately started acclaiming Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala’s name and entertaining His praise at the top of their voices. Their chiefs went out of the city to wait and receive Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam on the road leading to Badr.

Sayyidina Usamah ibn Zaid radiya Llahu ‘anhuma related that they received the news of the manifest victory shortly after Sayyidah Ruqayyahradiya Llahu ‘anha—Rasulullah’s salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam daughter and the wife of Sayyidina ‘Uthman ibn ‘Affan radiya Llahu ‘anhu—had been buried. She had been terminally ill and Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam had asked Sayyidina ‘Uthman radiya Llahu ‘anhu to stay in Madinah and look after her.

Before leaving the scene of the battle, dispute concerning the spoils of war arose among the Muslim warriors, as the rule relating to their distribution had not yet been legislated. When the difference grew wider, Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam suspended any solution whereof until the Revelation was sent down. Sayyidina ‘Ubadah ibn al Samit radiya Llahu ‘anhu said:

We went out with Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and I witnessed Badr with him. The battle started and Allah, the Exalted, defeated the enemy. Some of the Muslims sought and pursued the enemy, some were intent on collecting the spoils from the enemy camp, and others were guarding the Messenger of Allah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and were on the alert for any emergency or surprise attack. When night came and the Muslims gathered together, those who had collected the booty said, “We collected it, so no one else has any right to it.” Those who had pursued the enemy said, “You do not have more right to it than we do; we held the enemy at bay and then defeated them.” As for the men who had been guarding Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, they also made similar claims to the spoils. At that very time, a Qur’anic verse was revealed saying:

یَسۡـَٔلُوۡنَکَ عَنِ الۡاَنۡفَالِ ؕ قُلِ الۡاَنۡفَالُ لِلہِ وَ الرَّسُوۡلِ ۚ فَاتَّقُوا اللہَ وَ اَصۡلِحُوۡا ذَاتَ بَیۡنِکُمۡ ۪ وَ اَطِیۡعُوا اللہَ وَ رَسُوۡلَہٗۤ اِنۡ کُنۡتُمۡ مُّؤۡمِنِیۡنَ

They ask you [O Muhammad salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam] about the spoils of war. Say, “The spoils are for Allah and the Messenger.” So fear Allah and adjust all matters of difference among you, and obey Allah and His Messenger if you are believers.[22]

On their way back to Madinah, at a large sand hill, Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam divided the spoils equally among the fighters after he had taken al Khums (one-fifth). When they reached al Safra’, he ordered that two of the prisoners should be killed. They were al Nadr ibn al Harith and ‘Uqbah ibn Abi Mu’it, because they had persecuted the Muslims in Makkah and harboured deep hatred towards Allah and His Messenger salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam. In a nutshell, they were criminals of war in modern terminology, and their execution was an awesome lesson to the oppressors. ‘Uqbah forgot his pride and cried out, “Who will look after my children, O Messenger of Allah?” Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallamanswered, “The fire (of Hell)!” Did ‘Uqbah not remember the day when he had thrown the entrails of a sheep onto the head of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam while he was prostrating himself in prayer, and Sayyidah Fatimah radiya Llahu ‘anha had come and washed it off him? He had also strangled Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam with his cloak if it had not been for Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu to intervene and release Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam. The heads of both criminals were struck off by Sayyidina ‘Ali ibn Abi Talib radiya Llahu ‘anhu.

At al Rawha’, a suburb of Madinah, the Muslim army was received by the joyous people of Madinah who had come to congratulate Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam on the manifest victory that Allah had granted him. Sayyidina Usayd ibn Hudayr radiya Llahu ‘anhu, acting as a mouthpiece of the other true believers, after entertaining Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala’s praise, excused himself for not having joined them on the grounds that Rasulullah’s salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam intention was presumably, an errand aiming to intercept a caravan of camels only. He added that if it had occurred to him that it would be real war, he would have never tarried. Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam assured Usayd that he had believed him.

Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam now entered Madinah as a man to be counted for in a new dimension—the military field. In consequence, a large number of the people of Madinah embraced Islam, which added a lot to the strength, power, and moral standing of the true religion. Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam exhorted the Muslims to treat the prisoners so well to such an extent that the captors used to give the captives their bread (the more valued part of the meal) and keep the dates for themselves.

Prisoners of war constituted a problem awaiting resolution because it was a new phenomenon in the history of Islam. Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam consulted Sayyidina Abu Bakr and Sayyidina ‘Umar ibn al Khattab radiya Llahu ‘anhuma as to what he should do with the prisoners. Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu suggested that he should ransom them, explaining this by saying, “They are after all our relatives, and this money would give us strength against the disbelievers. Moreover, Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala could guide them to Islam.” Sayyidina ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu advised killing them saying, “They are the leaders of kufr (disbelief).” Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam preferred Abu Bakr’s suggestion to that of ‘Umar’s. The following day, Sayyidina ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu called on Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam and Sayyidina Abu Bakr radiya Llahu ‘anhu to see them weeping. He was extremely astonished and inquired about the situation so that he might weep if it was worth weeping for, or else he would feign weeping. Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam said that a Qur’anic verse had been revealed rebuking them for taking ransom from the captives rather than slaying them:

مَا کَانَ لِنَبِیٍّ اَنۡ یَّكُوۡنَ لَہٗۤ اَسْرٰی حَتّٰی یُثْخِنَ فِی الۡاَرْضِ ؕ تُرِیۡدُوۡنَ عَرَضَ الدُّنْیَا ٭ۖ وَاللہُ یُرِیۡدُ الۡاٰخِرَۃَ ؕ وَاللہُ عَزِیۡزٌ حَکِیۡمٌ ﴿۶۷﴾ لَوْلَا کِتٰبٌ مِّنَ اللہِ سَبَقَ لَمَسَّكُمْ فِیۡمَاۤ اَخَذْتُمْ عَذَابٌ عَظِیۡمٌ

It is not for a Prophet that he should have prisoners of war [and free them with ransom] until he had made a great slaughter [among his enemies] in the land. You desire the good of this world [i.e. the money of ransom for freeing the captives], but Allah desires [for you] the Hereafter. And Allah is All-Mighty, All-Wise. Were it not a previous ordainment from Allah, a severe torment would have touched you for what you took.[23]

The previous Divine ordainment went as follows:

فَاِمَّا مَنًّۢا بَعْدُ وَ اِمَّا فِدَآءً حَتّٰی تَضَعَ الْحَرْبُ اَوْزَارَہَا

Thereafter (is the time) either for generosity (i.e. free them without ransom) or ransom.”[24]

Which included an area providing permission to take ransom. That is why no penalty was imposed. They were rebuked only for taking prisoners before subduing all the land of disbelief. Apart from this, the polytheists taken to Madinah were not only prisoners of war but rather arch-criminals of war whom modern war penal law brings to justice to receive their due sentence of death or prison for life.

The ransom for the prisoners ranged between 1000 and 4000 dirhams (silver coins) in accordance with the captive’s financial situation. Another form of ransom assumed an educational dimension. Most of the Makkans, unlike the Madanis, were literate and so each prisoner who could not afford the ransom was entrusted with ten children to teach them the art of writing and reading. Once the child had been proficient enough, the instructor would be set free. Another clan of prisoners were released without ransom on grounds of being hard-pressed. Sayyidah Zainab radiya Llahu ‘anha, the eldest daughter of Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam, paid the ransom of her husband Abu al ‘As with a necklace. The Muslims released her prisoner and returned the necklace in respect to Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam but on condition that Abu al ‘As allows Sayyidah Zainab radiya Llahu ‘anha to migrate to Madinah, which he actually did. In captivity, there was also an eloquent orator called Suhayl ibn ‘Amr. Sayyidina ‘Umar radiya Llahu ‘anhu suggested that they pull out his front teeth to disable him from speaking, but Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam turned down his suggestion for fear that Quraysh should retaliate in the same manner on one hand, and on the other for fear of Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala’s wrath on the Day of Resurrection.

Sayyidina Sa’d ibn al Nu’man radiya Llahu ‘anhu, a pilgrim detained in Makkah, was released in return for setting Abu Sufyan’s son, a captive, free.

The Battle Of Badr In Its Qur’anic Context

The Chapter of al Anfal (spoils of war) was revealed on the occasion of the Battle of Badr, 17 Ramadan 2 A.H. It constituted a unique Divine commentary on this battle. Allah, the All-High, in the context of this Chapter draws on major issues relating to the whole process of Islamisation. Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala, here draws the attention of the Muslims to the still lingering moral shortcomings in their character. He wants them to build an integrated, purified society. He speaks about the invisible assistance he sent down to His obedient servants to enable them to accomplish their noble objectives. He wants the Muslims to rid themselves of any trait of haughtiness or arrogance that might sneak in. He wants them to turn to Him for help, obey Him, and His Messenger salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam.

After that He delineated the noble objectives for which Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam launched that bloody battle, and directed them to the merits and qualities that brought about the great victory. The polytheists, hypocrites, the Jews, and prisoners of war were also mentioned, being admonished to surrender to the Truth and adhere to it only. The question of the spoils of war was resolved and the principles and basics relevant to this issue were clearly defined.

The laws and rules pertinent to war and peace were legalised and codified, especially at this advanced stage of the Islamic action. Allah wanted the Muslims to follow war ethics dissimilar to those of pre-Islamic practices. The Muslims are deemed to outdo the others in ethics, values, and fine ideals. Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala wants to impress on the world that Islam is not merely a theoretical code of life, it is rather mind cultivation-orientated practical principles. In this context, Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala established inter and intrastate relations. The fast of Ramadan was established as an obligatory observance in the year 2 A.H, appended by the duty imposed upon Muslims of paying zakat (mandatory alms) in order to alleviate the burden of the needy Muhajirin radiya Llahu ‘anhum.

A wonderful and striking coincidence was the establishment of Shawwal ‘Eid (the Festival of the Fast-Breaking) directly after the manifest victory of Badr. It was actually the finest spectacle ever witnessed of Muslims leaving their houses praying, acclaiming Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala’s Name, and entertaining His praise at the top of their voices in recognition of His favour and grace, and last but not least, the support He rendered them and through which the forces of the Truth overpowered those of evil.

وَاذْكُرُوۡۤا اِذْ اَنۡتُمْ قَلِیۡلٌ مُّسْتَضْعَفُوۡنَ فِی الۡاَرْضِ تَخَافُوۡنَ اَنۡ یَّتَخَطَّفَكُمُ النَّاسُ فَاٰوٰىكُمْ وَ اَیَّدَكُمۡ بِنَصْرِہٖ وَ رَزَقَكُمۡ مِّنَ الطَّیِّبٰتِ لَعَلَّكُمْ تَشْكُرُوۡنَ

And remember when you were few and were reckoned weak in the land, and were afraid that men might kidnap you, but He provided a safe place for you, strengthened you with His help, and provided you with good things so that you might be grateful.[25]

Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala commends the faith of the Muhajirin and Ansar radiya Llahu ‘anhum in these glowing words and assures them forgiveness and Jannat:

وَالَّذِیۡنَ اٰمَنُوۡا وَہَاجَرُوۡا وَجٰہَدُوۡا فِیۡ سَبِیۡلِ اللہِ وَالَّذِیۡنَ اٰوَوۡا وَّنَصَرُوۡۤا اُولٰٓئِکَ ہُمُ الْمُؤْمِنُوۡنَ حَقًّا ؕ لَہُمۡ مَّغْفِرَۃٌ وَّرِزْقٌ کَرِیۡمٌ

Those who have believed and emigrated (i.e. the Muhajirin) and fought in the cause of Allah and those who gave shelter and aided (i.e. the Ansar)—it is they who are the believers, truly. For them is forgiveness and noble provision.[26]

And Rasulullah salla Llahu ‘alayhi wa sallam said in their regard:

لعل الله اطلع على من شهد بدرا فقال اعملوا ما شئتم فقد غفرت لكم

Allah subhanahu wa ta ‘ala glanced at the participants of Badr and said, “Do as you please for I have indeed forgiven you.”[27]

Adapted from Al-Rahiq al-Makhtum by Saif al-Rahman Mubarakpuri

Download pdf

[1] Surah Al ‘Imran: 123

[2] Surah al Anfal: 48

[3] Surah al Anfal: 47

[4] Surah al Anfal: 5, 6

[5] Surah Ma’idah: 24

[6] Al Sirah al Nabawiyyah by Ibn Hisham

[7] Surah al Anfa: 64

[8] Surah al Anfal: 7, 8

[9] Surah al Anfal: 11

[10] Surah al Anfal: 11

[11] Surah al Anfal: 19

[12] Surah al Hajj: 19

[13] Sahih Muslim hadith no. 3315

[14] Sahih Muslim hadith no. 3315

[15] Surah al Anfal: 12

[16] Surah al Anfal: 9, 10

[17] Surah al Qamar: 45

[18] Surah al Anfal: 17

[19] Surah Al ‘Imran: 133

[20] Sahih Muslim hadith no. 1763

[21] Surah al Anfal: 48

[22] Surah al Anfal: 1

[23] Surah al Anfal: 67, 68

[24] Surah Muhammad: 4

[25] Surah al Anfal: 26

[26] Surah al Anfal: 74

[27] Sahih al Bukhari hadith no. 3966

By Mawlana Yusuf Shabbir

Obituary: Shaykh al-Ḥadīth Mufti Saʿīd Aḥmad Pālanpūrī (1359/1940 – 1441/2020)

بسم الله الرحمن الرحیم

As we awoke this morning, it was extremely saddening to receive the news of the demise of the Shaykh al-Ḥadīth and Ṣadr al-Mudarrisīn (the lead of teachers) of Darul Uloom Deoband, Ḥaḍrat Mufti Saʿīd Aḥmad Pālanpūrī Raḥimahullāh who passed away in Mumbai, India earlier today on 25 Ramaḍān 1441 (19 May 2020). This is undoubtedly a great loss for Darul Uloom Deoband where Mufti Ṣāḥib taught for 48 years, and for the entire Ummah.

Upon receiving the news, my respected father Mufti Shabbir Ahmad (b. 1376/1957) said:

“Mufti Ṣāḥib was an ocean of knowledge and a great intellectual. It will be difficult to replace him. He made a significant contribution to Islamic academia. There is probably no Darul Uloom in the world with Urdu as the medium, where his works are not benefited from. We have lost two great personalities over the past few days. Mufti Ṣāḥib had understood Shāh Walī Allah Muḥaddith Dehlawī [d. 1176/1762] and simplified his complex work Ḥujjat Allah al-Bālighah. I had a personal relationship with Mufti Ṣāḥib for over 40 years, since my days of study in Saharanpur. At that time, Mufti Ṣāḥib was teaching Mishkāt al-Maṣābīḥ in Darul Uloom Deoband. This shows his lofty status and acceptance among his teachers, peers and students from his early years of teaching.”

Given the status, contribution and life-long service of Mufti Ṣāḥib, I thought it would be useful, for our English readers, to pen a brief overview of his life and share some memories.

Early life and primary education

Shaykh al-Ḥadīth Mufti Saʿīd Aḥmad ibn Yūsuf ibn ʿAlī Pālanpūrī was born in the Palanpur region, situated in North Gujarat, India in approximately 1359/1940. It was here that he acquired his primary (Maktab) education.

Subsequently, he enrolled at Darul Uloom Chhapi where he studied Persian by his maternal uncle Mawlānā ʿAbd al-Raḥmān Shīrā and other teachers. After six months, his uncle left the institute, so he also left with him and continued his Persian studies with him in his uncle’s village.

Thereafter, Mufti Ṣāḥib enrolled at a seminary in Palanpur city which was being managed by the great reformer Mawlānā Nadhīr Miyā Ṣāḥib. Here, Mufti Ṣāḥib studied the first four years of the ʿAlim programme until Sharḥ Jāmī. His teachers included Mufti Muḥammad Akbar Miyā Pālanpūrī and Mawlānā Hāshim Bukhārī, who was a graduate of Darul Uloom Deoband originally from Bukhārā, who is buried in the Baqīʿ cemetery in the blessed city of Madīnah.

Intermediate and advanced education

In 1377 (1958), Mufti Ṣāḥib travelled to Mazahirul Uloom, Saharanpur in the Indian state of Uttar Pradesh and studied various disciplines here for the next three years. His teachers here included: Mufti Yaḥyā Ṣāḥib (d. 1417/1996), Mawlānā ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz Rāipūrī and the master of inheritance, Mawlānā Waqār Ṣāḥib.

Thereafter, in 1380 (1961), Mufti Ṣāḥib enrolled in Darul Uloom Deoband to complete his studies and successfully graduated in 1382 (1963). Mufti Ṣāḥib was extremely intelligent and hardworking, and as a result attained 1^st position in his class. Some of his notable teachers during these two years and the books he studied with them are as follows:

• Mawlānā Fakhr al-Dīn Murādābādī (d. 1392/1972) taught him Ṣaḥīh al-Bukhārī.
• ʿAllāmah Ibrāhīm Balyāwī (d. 1387/1967) taught him Muqaddimah and Kitāb al-Īmān of Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim along with the first volume of Sunan al-Tirmidhī.
• Mawlānā Bashīr Aḥmad Khān taught him the rest of Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim.
• Mawlānā Fakhr al-Ḥasan Murādābādī (d. 1393/1973) taught him Sunan Abī Dāwūd along with the second volume of Sunan al-Tirmidhī and Kitāb al-ʿIlal.
• Mawlānā Muḥammad Ẓuhūr taught him Sunan al-Nasāī.
• Mufti Sayyid Mahdī Ḥasan (d. 1396/1976) taught him Sharḥ Maʿānī al-Āthār.
• Ḥakīm al-Islām Qārī Muḥammad Ṭayyib (d. 1403/1983) taught him Muwaṭṭaʾ Mālik.

In 1382 (1963), Mufti Ṣāḥib enrolled on the Iftāʾ programme under the tutelage of Mufti Sayyid Mahdī Ḥasan Ṣāḥib. Given his abilities, his study period was extended for another year, and he was appointed in the final six months of the second year as Assistant Mufti, which was something unique at the time.

During this period, he also began to memorise the Quran. Mufti Ṣāḥib mentions that Mawlānā Fakhr al-Dīn Murādābādī Ṣāḥib would spend a lot of time on teaching the book of Tafsīr of Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī and it was then he realised that memorising the Quran is essential to fully understand the Quran.

First teaching post

After successfully graduating as a Mufti with invaluable practice, Mufti Ṣāḥib was appointed as a teacher in the famous seminary of Gujarat, Darul Uloom Ashrafia, Rander. Mufti Ṣāḥib taught here for nine years between 1384 (1965) and 1393 (1973) and his appointment from the outset was to teach the upper classes. Thus, during his time here, he taught the translation of the Quran, the four Sunan ḥadīth books, Jalālayn, Mishkāt al-Maṣābīḥ, the final half of Hidāyah and many other books. During this time, he also began to author some works including his famous book ‘Ḥurmat Muṣāharat’.

Final teaching post

In 1393 (1973), Mufti Ṣāḥib was appointed to teach in Darul Uloom Deoband, which he successfully did for 48 years until his demise. Thousands of students from across the world benefited from him.  I met some of his students in Uzbekistan. His students attest that from the very beginning, Mufti Ṣāḥib’s lessons were very popular. Along with his profound knowledge, wit and method of deduction, his ability to simplify difficult concepts and instil them within the minds of the students was second to none. This is also evident from his publications.

As mentioned above, Mufti Ṣāḥib was tasked from very early on to teach the upper classes. Throughout his 48 years at Deoband, Mufti Ṣāḥib taught many books. They include: the 6 famous ḥadīth collections, Muwaṭṭāʾ Mālik, Muwaṭṭāʾ Muḥammad, Mishkāt, Sharḥ Maʿānī al-Āthār, Hidāyah, Sullam al-ʿUlūm, Hadyah Saʿīdiyyah, Mullā Ḥasan, Jalālayn, al-Fawz al-Kabīr, Musallam al-Thubūt, Sharḥ al-Āqāid, Dīwān Mutanabbī, Meybdhī, Tafsīr Bayḍāwī, Nukhbat al-Fikr, Ḥusāmī, Mullā Ḥasan, al-Sabʿ al-Muʿallaqāt, Sirājī, Tafsīr Maẓharīm Muqaddimah Ibn al-Ṣalāḥ and Ḥujjat Allah al-Bāligah.

In 1429 (2008), Mufti Ṣāḥib was appointed as the Shaykh al-Ḥadīth, a role Mufti Ṣāḥib continued to fulfil until his demise.  Although the Darul Iftāʾ would consult him on important matters, Mufti Ṣāḥib generally stayed away from Iftāʾ matters and focused on his teaching and publications. There were some brief periods when he was tasked to supervise and manage the Darul Iftāʾ based on need.

Students

Mufti Ṣāḥib has thousands of students across the world. Some of his notable students include:

• Shaykh al-Ḥadīth Mufti Aḥmad Khānpūrī Ṣāḥib (b. 1365/1946) (India).
• Mawlānā Muḥammad Sufyān Qāsmī (b. 1374/1954) (India).
• Mufti Shabbīr Aḥmad Qāsmī (India).
• Mufti Muḥammad Salmān Manṣūrpūrī (b. 1386/1967) (India).
• Mawlānā Sayyid Mahmūd Madani (d. 1383/1964) (India).
• Shaykh al-Ḥadīth Mawlānā Shafīq al-Islām Ṣāḥib (Bangladesh).
• Mufti Maḥmūd Bārdolī (India).
• Shaykh Taha Karaan (South Africa).
• Mufti Abdul Mannan (Uzbekistan).

Publications

Along with the thousands of students who studied under him, Mufti Ṣāḥib’s legacy lies in his publications. Mufti Ṣāḥib was a prolific writer in the Urdu language. He authored more than 40 books of various sizes. They include:

1. Tafsīr Hidāyat al-Qurān – Mawlānā Muḥammad ʿUthmān Kāshif Ilāhī started this Urdu commentary and completed the Tafsīr of Juz 1-9 and 30. Mufti Ṣāḥib completed this and also began to cover the parts authored by Mawlānā Muḥammad ʿUthmān. This was fully completed. The beauty of this tafsīr is that it focuses on conveying the meaning of the text and the actual message of the Quran without branching off into related discussions.
2. Tuḥfat al-Qārī Sharḥ Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī – This is a complete commentary of Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī, published in 12 volumes. The commentary is consistent from the beginning to end. From the published complete Urdu commentaries on the Ṣaḥīḥ, it is undoubtedly the best. It does not merely regurgitate what is in the earlier commentaries. Mufti Ṣāḥib has his own perspective in many places on the commentary of the ḥadīths and also in some of the chapter headings. The style and some personal anecdotes and stories make it an interesting read. It must be remembered that this, along with the next work, is primarily based on durus (lessons).
3. Tuḥfat al-Almaʿī Sharḥ Sunan al-Tirmidhī – This is a complete commentary of Sunan al-Tirmidhī, Shamāil and Kitab al-ʿIlal, published in eight volumes. Like the commentary of Sunan al-Bukhārī, this commentary is very popular and students from across the world benefit from it. In the Urdu language, this is the best complete commentary of Sunan al-Tirmidhī to date. Like the previous commentary, it is consistent throughout, unlike many commentaries which focus on the first few chapters or some others which are selective. Naturally, the commentary’s focus is more on the Fiqh and meanings (dirāyat) of the Ḥadīths as is the norm in the sub-continent. The beauty of this commentary is ḥall (solving) of the book with every sentence addressed, which is somewhat similar to the Arabic commentary Tuḥfat al-Ahwadhī.
4. Raḥmat Allah al-Wāsiʿah – This is a detailed commentary in Urdu of Ḥujjat Allah al-Bālighah, authored by Shāh Walī Allah Muḥaddith Dehlawī (d. 1176/1762). I have benefited a lot from this work. Without it, it is difficult to understand many parts of the book. The Ummah is indebted to Mufti Ṣāḥib for this amazing work and simplifying every line of it. The book is published in five large volumes and is a must for all scholars especially in contemporary times.
5. Ḥujjat Allah al-Bālighah with Arabic footnotes – This is useful for teachers.
6. Al-ʿAwn al-Kabīr – This is an Arabic commentary on al-Fawz al-Kabīr.
7. Sharḥ ʿIlal al-Tirmidhī – This is a short Arabic commentary on Kitāb al-ʿIlal.
8. Tahdhīb al-Mugnī – This is an Arabic commentary on ʿAllāmah Ṭāhir Pattanī’s (d. 986/1578-9) book on transmitters, ‘al-Mugnī’.
9. Fayḍ al-Munʿīm – This is an Urdu commentary on the Muqaddimah of Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim.
10. Tashīl Adillah Kāmilah – This is an Urdu commentary on Shaykh al-Hind Mawlānā Maḥmūd Ḥasan Deobandī’s (d. 1339/1920) renowned book ‘Adillah Kāmilah’ which contains the 10 common issues where the non-Muqallids of India had an objection.
11. Āp Fatwā keysey dey – This is an Urdu commentary of Sharḥ ʿUqūd Rasm al-Muftī.
12. Ḥayāt Imam Abū Dāwūd – This features the biography of Imam Abū Dāwūd.
13. Ḥayāt Imam Ṭaḥāwī – This features the biography of Imam Ṭaḥāwī. I recall our respected teacher Shaykh al-Ḥadīth Mawlānā Muḥammad Yūnus Jownpūrī (d. 1438/2017) making reference to this book in some of his early writings.
14. Āsān Naḥw, Āsān Ṣarf, Āsān Manṭiq – These are three separate series which are popular in the curriculum of many seminaries.
15. Dārī awr Anbiyā kī Sunnatey – A short booklet on the beard and hygiene of the body.
16. Ḥurmat Muṣāharat – A famous book pertaining to the Maḥram relationship established via lawful or unlawful relationships and touching with lust.
17. Ḥawāshī Bāqiyāt Fatāwā Rashidiyyah – These are footnotes on this addendum to the Fatwa collection of Mawlānā Rashīd Aḥmad Gangohī (d. 1323/1905).
18. Ḥawāshī Imdād al-Fatāwā – These are footnotes on this Fatwa collection of Mawlānā Ashraf ʿAlī Thānawī (d. 1362/1943).
19. ʿIlmī Khuṭubāt – This is a two-volume collection in Urdu featuring some of Mufti Ṣāḥib’s speeches.
20. Hādiyah Sharḥ Kāfiyah – This is an Urdu commentary on the famous Grammar book, ‘Kāfiyah’. Mufti Ṣāḥib also has an Arabic work ‘Wāfiyah Sharḥ Kāfiyah’ on the same book.

The wide range of books authored by Mufti Ṣāḥib demonstrate his profound knowledge, intellectual acumen and grasp of the Islamic sciences as well as related sciences such as Grammar and Manṭiq (logic). The first four books mentioned above are probably the most famous books authored by Mufti Ṣāḥib. Today, in India, his commentaries on Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī and Sunan al-Tirmidhī are the most commonly used from all the Urdu commentaries. All his books share a similar feature in that they are an easy read and difficult concepts are simplified for the reader. May Allah Almighty make all these works Ṣadaqah Jāriyah for him and accept all his efforts.

Travels and speeches

Along with his teaching and writing, Mufti Ṣāḥib was a public orator and would travel throughout India and the world to deliver speeches and share Islamic knowledge. His speeches were clear, structured and easy to understand for the laymen. Mufti Ṣāḥib spoke with full confidence and authority. His speeches would contain many academic and intellectual points, and he would not shy away from touching controversial subjects.

During his life, Mufti Ṣāḥib visited many countries. From 1990, he spent his Ramadan out of India more or less every year. Based on my knowledge (and this list will be updated as necessary), the countries he visited include the following:

1. Barbados
2. Canada (Mufti Ṣāḥib’s lectures at Masjid Darul Salam from 1997 onward are available on: http://talksofdeen.com/saeed.html).
3. Congo
4. Grenada
5. Guyana
6. Kenya
7. Malawi
8. Mauritius
9. Mozambique
10. Panama
11. Qatar
12. Reunion
13. Saudi Arabia – Mufti Ṣāḥib visited Saudi Arabia for Hajj for the first time in 1400 (1980) via sea travel.
14. South Africa
15. Tanzania
16. Trinidad
17. Turkey
18. United Arab Emirates
19. USA
20. UK
21. Zambia
22. Zimbabwe

Mufti Ṣāḥib visited the UK, USA and Canada many times. There are two Masjids in the UK that deserve a special mention in this regard: Tayyibah Masjid, Bolton and Masjid Quba, Stamford Hill, London. These two Masjids regularly hosted Mufti Ṣāḥib during the month of Ramadan. May Allah Almighty reward Qārī Yakub Nanji, Mawlānā Ismail Sidyot, Hafiz Abdurrahim Mulla, Farook Bhai Bham and all the others who hosted Mufti Ṣāḥib in the UK.  Qari Yakub Ṣāḥib was the first one to invite Mufti Ṣāḥib to the UK in 1985 or 1986.

Some qualities

Along with Mufti Ṣāḥib’s profound knowledge, it is important to highlight some of his qualities. When examining or judging personalities, it is important to consider their lives as a whole including their contribution and knowledge, along with their piety, qualities and characteristics. Many times, personalities are judged based on just one aspect of their lives, for example, their controversial views or some of their personality traits. This does not provide an accurate reflection and leads to gross injustice.

(1) Taqwa

A unique quality of Mufti Ṣāḥib that deserves a special mention is his Taqwā and cautiousness. Two examples are sufficed with here:

First, Mufti Ṣāḥib was given the responsibility of managing the Majlis Taḥaffuẓ Khatm Nubuwwat which he continued until his demise. In 1419 (1998-9), Mufti Ṣāḥib requested the Shūrā (Governing Council) to appoint someone else. The Shūrā refused to accept this request and fixed an additional monthly allowance of 1000 rupees for him. However, Mufti Ṣāḥib refused to accept the allowance whilst agreeing to continue in this role.

Second, in 1423 (2002), Mufti Ṣāḥib stopped taking a salary from Darul Uloom Deoband and started teaching on a voluntary basis and did so until his demise. What is remarkable is that shortly thereafter, Mufti Ṣāḥib also returned all his salary of 30 years (949,804.75 Rupees). Mufti Ṣāḥib explained that Allah Almighty had granted him sufficient income from the sale of his books that not only was he able to stop taking a salary, he was able to return all his salary from the very beginning to Darul Uloom’s treasury. Likewise, Mufti Ṣāḥib returned the salary of 9 years (23,250 rupees) to Darul Uloom Ashrafia, Rander. This was not necessary upon Mufti Ṣāḥib. However, this illustrates his Taqwā, Zuhd (abstinence) and caution in such matters. Such examples are rare nowadays.

In reality, Mufti Ṣāḥib had inherited this Taqwā from his father. Mufti Ṣāḥib’s brother Mufti Amīn Ṣāḥib, also a lecturer in Darul Uloom Deoband, mentions that his father was a student in Dabhel in the era of ʿAllāmah Shabbīr Aḥmad ʿUthmānī (d. 1369/1949), Mawlānā Badr ʿĀlam Mīrtī (d. 1385/1965) and Shaykh Muḥammad Yūsuf Binorī (d. 1397/1977). He was unable to complete his studies, however, Mawlānā Badr ʿĀlam Mīrtī who was a very pious person (read his profile on this link) advised him:

“Yūsuf, if you want your sons to become good scholars, then abstain from unlawful wealth, and also protect your children from unlawful wealth, because knowledge is nūr, which does not enter a body nourished with the unlawful.”

The reason for this specific advice was that usury was prevalent in Mufti Ṣāḥib’s father’s village, and this was the reason why Mufti Ṣāḥib’s father had to leave his studies to earn a livelihood to protect Mufti Ṣāḥib’s grandfather from usury.

As my respected father Mufti Shabbir Ahmad always mentions:

“The fruits of the sacrifices of forefathers materialise in subsequent generations. Allah Almighty creates scholars in their families.”

My father also informed me that Mufti Saʿīd Ṣāḥib’s father was poor and Mufti Ṣāḥib grew up in poverty. This is same person who, decades on, returns his salary of 39 years to his employers.

(2) Love of Sunnah and rejection of innovations

Mufti Ṣāḥib was renowned for his love of the Sunnah and dislike of innovations. He would highlight repeatedly that the reason Darul Uloom Deoband was established was to revive the Sunnah and eradicate innovations. He would also complain that not much difference is now left between Deobandis and the Barelwis. Whenever Mufti Ṣāḥib felt an innovation is creeping in, he would not hesitate in highlighting it. Most recently, it was his view that communal Taʿziyat programs are an innovation. He highlighted this in many speeches and also a wrote a booklet on this subject.

Likewise, Mufti Ṣāḥib explains in Tuḥfat al-Almaʿī (5:552) that people started to take blessing from the pomegranate tree which was where the humble origins of Darul Uloom Deoband lie. Mufti Ṣāḥib comments:

“Some servant of Allah cut it, Allah reward him, he did a very good thing. Such self-declared blessed things become a Fitnah (problem) for people, and when exaggeration begins in beliefs, then people’s faith is spoiled.”

Mufti Ismail Kotwal of Canada mentioned to me that Mufti Ṣāḥib would not allow the Imams of the Masjids in Canada in which he would perform Ṣalāh to massage him. Mufti Ṣāḥib would remark,

“This is against the iḥtirām (respect) of your position.”

Mufti Ismail added that Mufti Ṣāḥib was very punctual with congregational Ṣalāh. In the mid-90s, Ramadan was in the winter and the owner of the house where Mufti Ṣāḥib was residing was not at home. Mufti Ṣāḥib walked from the house alone in the extreme cold and said:

“My Allah will take me.”

(3) Say the truth without fear

Mufti Ṣāḥib was very principled and had a strong character, notwithstanding his humour and affection. He would not hesitate in the slightest to speak the truth as he saw it. Many examples can be cited. On the issue of moon-sighting in the UK, his position is well known. He made this clear in various speeches across the UK. In 2019, he visited our Darul Uloom Bury and also mentioned this in his Dars (lesson) despite knowing that the Darul Uloom’s position on the matter is contrary to his.

Another example is his position on the 80 Durūd after ʿAṣr Ṣalāh narration. Mufti Ṣāḥib made it clear in public that the ḥadīth is not established. His position is correct in this regard. This was also the view of our respected teacher Shaykh al-Ḥadīth Mawlānā Muḥammad Yūnus Jownpūrī (d. 1438/2017), as outlined in an Urdu treatise of mine.

(4) Effort and sacrifice

Mufti Ṣāḥib was a very hard-working individual who would spend a lot of time on preparing for his lessons and meticulously writing, proofreading and publishing his works.

Mufti Ismail Kotwal narrates that a teacher of Sunan al-Nasāī once asked Mufti Ṣāḥib about the commentaries he should use. Mufti Ṣāḥib said, “Fatḥ al-Bārī”. The teacher replied, “I do not have the time to look at Fatḥ al-Bārī.” Mufti Ṣāḥib replied:

“Then, you should not be teaching Sunan al-Nasāī.”

Tazkiyah

Unlike the prevalent trend today, Mufti Ṣāḥib would not speak much of his ijāzah and his spiritual connections. Mufti Ṣāḥib initially had a spiritual connection with Shaykh al-Ḥadīth Mawlānā Muḥammad Zakariyyā Kāndhelwī (d. 1402/1982) from his study days in Saharanpur. He would also attend the gatherings of Mawlānā Shāh ʿAbd al-Qādir Rāipūrī (d. 1382/1962). Ḥaḍrat Mufti Muẓaffar Ḥusayn Ṣāḥib (d. 1424/2003), who was a very pious person, granted him ijāzah in Taṣawwuf.  There may also be others who granted him Ijāzah, and Allah knows best.

It is worth noting that Mufti Ṣāḥib would stress the importance of Sunnah and highlight that some practices in some circles are contrary to the Shariah. An example of this is Murāqabah (meditation) and loud Dhikr at the graves. Mufti Ṣāḥib has strongly rejected this and deemed it an innovation (Tuḥfat al-Almaʿī, 3:462). Mufti Ṣāḥīb would also mention that many un-Islamic practices entered into Taṣawwuf after the first few centuries.

Personal memories

(1) June 2015

My first recollection of meeting Mufti Ṣāḥib is June 2015 when he visited Darul Uloom Blackburn and delivered a lesson. At the time, I wrote some notes on Facebook which are presented here with some revisions. It is important to contextualise the points and note that a difference of opinion or perspective can exist in relation to some of the points.

‘Important points from Ḥaḍrat Mufti Saʿīd Pālanpūrī’s speech and subsequent discussions at Darul Uloom Blackburn

1. There is no example in Islamic history of males teaching mature females as has become common now. There are examples of males narrating Ḥadīths from females. This is an exception based on necessity.
2. There is no example in Islamic history of females travelling for Tablīgh as they do now. Females would teach the females within their areas.
3. The recitation of Ḥadīths should be clear, audible and not fast. Every word should be clear. Teachers should ensure students read in such a way that every student understands what is being read.
4. When the name of the Prophet ﷺ is mentioned, the durūd should be read clearly with pleasure. Each letter of the durūd should be clear.
5. The recitation of ḥadīth (ʿIbārah) in a class should not be the responsibility of one or two students. The teacher should choose a different person every day randomly so that all students prepare and make the effort to prepare before the class.
6. Do not blame and misuse the name of the Akābir (elders) for leaving large chunks of the books until the end of the year and then completing them by mere recitation. This is not the method of the Akābir. The Akābir would comment on the Ḥadīths throughout the books. This is clear from the Ḥadīth commentaries of Mawlānā Rashīd Aḥmad Gangohī, ʿAllāmah Anwar Shāh Kashmīrī, Mawlānā Ḥusayn Aḥmad Madanī and others. There are two aspects: (a) Understanding a book (b) Detailed discussions. If the first is regarded as the priority with some detailed discussions where required, the books can be completed from beginning to end without any problem. The problem is that many people conduct detailed discussions, often unrelated, at the beginning of the year which wastes time.
7. Tip for Students: Knowledge is acquired through studying, not merely residing in an institute.
8. Another tip: There are three signs of a successful student: (a) Prior reading of the lesson to be delivered. (b) Listening attentively during the lesson and understanding the entire lesson. (c) Memorising what has been taught.
9. A successful student undertakes prior reading of the lesson, listens attentively during the lesson and memorises the lesson.
10. Another tip: Purify your hearts before you study, so that you acquire the Nūr of the knowledge.
11. Tip for Teachers: Knowledge is not acquired through mere teaching, but through reading extensively.
12. There are three signs of a successful teacher: (a) Learn and memorise the lesson yourself. (b) Master the subject matter, not just by reading the commentaries. For example, if you are teaching Mukhtaṣar al-Qudūrī, then along with the commentaries, read the lower books such as Taʿlīm al-Islām, Bahishtī Zeywar as well as Hidāyah, Kanz, al-Durr al-Mukhtār and other books. (c) Summarise all that you have read and make your own notes as you will be unable to repeat this exercise and you will be unable to remember everything in the future.
13. A successful teacher memorises the lesson, masters the subject matter and summarises all his readings into notes.
14. We do not have a uniform in Deoband. The concept of a uniform does not exist in Islam. Any form of dress that conforms to Islam is accepted
15. Property and Medical Insurance as well as extended warranties on products is permissible according to me. The Darul Iftāʾ of Deoband prohibits this. [Tr.Note: refer to this link for our position on medical insurance].
16. Mina is not part of Makkah. This is the Fatwa of Deoband and Saharanpur and this is because the boundaries of certain specified places are fixed similar to the Masʿā. [Tr. Note: refer to this link for the alternative view].
17. There are two views regarding ear drops nullifying the fast or not. Take the cautious opinion and refrain from using.
18. Regarding the use of Kohl and the passage of substances through the eyes whilst fasting, it will not break the fast, irrespective of the scientific research on this.
19. Mawlānā Ashraf ʿAlī Thānawī’s 95^th lesson of the 100 lessons is that there are four schools of thought in Fiqh (Ḥanafī, Shāfiʿī, Mālikī, Ḥanbalī) and three schools of thought in ʿAqīdah (Ashāʿirah and Māturīdiyyah who did Tanzīh and Tawīl, and the Salaf who did Tanzīh as well as Tafwīḍ). Anything besides cannot be adopted.
20. It is preferable to start supplications with Ḥamd (praising Almighty Allah) and then Durūd.

(2) May 2017

It was then in May 2017, Mufti Ṣāḥib visited Blackburn once again. Prior to visiting Blackburn, Mufti Ṣāḥib visited Batley, where he was hosted by my dear colleague Shaykh Khalil Ahmad Kazi. Shaykh Khalil informed me that Mufti Ṣāḥib was enquiring about me. There were, I think, several reasons for this. First, I had sent Mufti Ṣāḥib a copy of my work, Tansḥīṭ al-Ādhān min Kitāb al-Arbaʿīn fi al-Adhān. Second, I had sent Mufti Ṣāḥib a copy of my treatise on 80 Durūd after ʿAṣr Ṣalāh, which agreed with his stance. Third, I had sent a treatise accompanied with a question to Darul Iftāʾ at Deoband on the issue of the Injīl and other books being the Kalām (direct speech) of Allah Almighty. Although Mufti Ṣāḥib was not directly involved in Darul Iftāʾ, this was shared with him given the complexity of the issue. Shaykh Khalil informed me that Mufti Ṣāḥib made reference to this.

Mufti Ṣāḥib then visited Darul Uloom Blackburn. Whilst sat in Mufti ʿAbduṣṣamad Ṣāḥib’s office, he asked my father about me and also asked Mufti ʿAbduṣṣamad Ṣāḥib about Mawlānā Muʿāwiyah due to his works. I recall Mufti Ṣāḥib informing my father that he read the Arabic book on Adhān and that it is written very well. He then mentioned that apart from a few works, he has not authored books in Arabic, because he is unable to articulate himself in Arabic in the way that he can in Urdu. He suggested that to master Arabic, he would need to reside in an Arab country for a period of time. In Urdu, he explained, I can explain any difficult concept without any problem. My respected father thanked Mufti Ṣāḥib for his comments and noted that elders reading the books of the young ones provides encouragement.

During his lesson, Mufti Ṣāḥib’s advice included:

“Along with Fiqh and Quran, a Mufti must study and remain attached with the Ḥadīths.”

(3) June 2019

My final meeting with Mufti Ṣāḥib was on Tuesday 11 June 2019 when he visited Darul Uloom Blackburn and delivered the opening lesson of Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhārī. Our respected Mufti Ahmad Khanpuri (b. 1365/1946), who is a student of Mufti Ṣāḥib, was also present. On the same day, our respected Shaykh al-Islam Mufti Muhammad Taqi Usmani (b. 1362/1943) was also in Blackburn. I was therefore unable to partake in the full speech. However, I participated for a few minutes and sat next to my dear respected Mufti Maḥmūd Bardolī at the back. Mufti Saʿid Ṣāḥib was discussing the issue of Waḥy (revelation) and he then said, which I recollect and translate from the recording (at 79 mins), “In the UK here, I have a friend, Ḥaḍrat Mawlāna (Mufti) Shabbir Ahmad Ṣāḥib, he has a very learned son, Mufti Yūsuf, he sent a question to Darul Iftāʾ, Darul Uloom Deoband, and sent references of 50 books that the previous books were the Kalām (speech) of Allah, and Mufti Ḥabīb al-Raḥmān replied and I am clarifying this issue [that it is not Kalām of Allah].” The specific of the issue aside, for Mufti Ṣāḥib to mention a young insignificant person like me in a public speech was not only a great honour for me, but also illustrative of Mufti Ṣāḥib’s humility, acknowledgement and encouragement.

However, the highlight of the day was the afternoon lunch at the residence of my respected father Mufti Shabbir Ahmad where some of the great luminaries of the sub-continent and the UK came together in one room. They included:

• Shaykh al-Ḥadīth Mufti Saʿīd Aḥmad Pālanpūrī (India)
• Shaykh al-Islam Mufti Muḥammad Taqī Usmani (Pakistan)
• Shaykh al-Ḥadīth Mufti Aḥmad Khanpūrī (India)
• Ḥaḍrat Mawlānā Ibrāhīm Pāndor (South Africa)
• Mufti Shabbīr Aḥmad (UK)
• Mufti ʿAbdussamad Aḥmad (UK)
• Mufti Ikrām al-Ḥaq (UK)
• Mufti Maḥmūd Bārdolī (India)
• Mawlana Ṣalīḥ (India)
• Mawlana Ismail Sidyot (UK)
• Mufti Ibrahim Raja (UK)
• Mufti Abdul Hamid (UK)

It was a memorable occasion. Mufti Saʿīd Ṣāḥib arrived first in my colleague Mawlānā Rafiq Sufi’s car. I greeted him and held his arms and took him inside the house. A short while later, my other colleague Mawlānā Hanif Dudhwala arrived with Mufti Muḥammad Taqi Usmani.

After both luminaries met, Mufti Muḥammad Taqī Ṣāḥib took permission from Mufti Saʿīd Ṣāḥib to sit on the sofa to eat lunch. During lunch, he said to him,

“I have benefited from your commentary on Ḥujjat Allah al-Bāligah”, referring to Raḥmat Allah al-Wāsiʿah.

Prior to this, Mufti Muḥammad Taqī Ṣāḥib had mentioned to my father in Uzbekistan that he was very moved by Mufti Saʿīd Ṣāḥib’s letter to him following the assassination attempt on him three months before and in particular the line, “May 1000 lives be sacrificed for you”. During lunch, my respected father reminded both respected Muftis about the letter and this line, however, Mufti Muḥammad Taqī Ṣāḥib said out of humility, “leave it” meaning there is no need to repeat the words (A copy of the letter is on this link).

After lunch, both respected Muftis moved from the back room into the front room and sat there for a short while. My respected father mentioned to Mufti Muḥammad Taqī Ṣāḥib that Allah Almighty has taken great work from Mufti Saʿīd Ṣāḥib, particularly in India. Then, gifts were exchanged. Mufti Aḥmad Ṣāḥib had left by then, so Mufti Muhammad Taqi Usmani gave his gift to Mufti Mahmood Bardoli to pass on to him and said, “You are his deputy”. Mufti Saʿīd gave a copy of his booklet on Taʿziyat gatherings to Mufti Muhammad Taqi Ṣāḥib.

It was during this visit that Mufti Muḥammad Taqi Usmani’s respected wife (Khala) ate lunch at my house which is adjacent to my father’s house. Following lunch, Mufti Muḥammad Taqi Ṣāḥib returned to his hotel and just before this, he gifted £20 to my small Faṭimah.

Mufti Saʿīd Ṣāḥib and we all returned to Darul Uloom Blackburn for Ṣalāh. In the office, Mufti Ṣāḥib asked me about the Kalām Allah issue. I promised to send him an appendix to the original treatise on the matter. My father also raised with him some inaccuracies in the Taʿziyat booklet of his and requested him to verify the information first. Mufti Ṣāḥib also asked me at some point if I had received the foreword he had written in Arabic for my book ‘al-ʿIqd al-Thamīn fī Ḥubb al-Nabī al-Amīn ﷺ’. I responded in the affirmative. Inshāʾ Allah, this 600-page book will be published soon by Dar al-Samman in Turkey (His foreword is on this link).

Later in the evening, Mufti Ṣāḥib had a programme in Manchester whilst a programme for scholars was convened at Darul Uloom Blackburn, where Mufti Muhammad Taqi Usmani and Mufti Ahmad Khanpuri delivered the keynote speeches (click here to read transcript). In Manchester, Mufti Ṣāḥib also met ʿAllāmah Khālid Maḥmūd Ṣāḥib (d. 1441/2020) who passed away a few days ago (refer to this link for his obituary).

Some further opinions

Mufti Ṣāḥib was an ocean of knowledge. It is therefore appropriate to further mention some of his discourses and views. As mentioned above, differences of opinion exist on many of these issues, so consult your local Muftis in the first instance. Our purpose is to provide a glimpse into some of Mufti Ṣāḥib’s views:

1. Tasmiyah loudly between two Sūrahs: Mufti Ṣāḥib was of the view that Tasmiyah should be recited loudly in Ṣalāh between two Sūrahs (Tuḥfat al-Almaʿī, 2:492).
2. Combining prayers: Mufti Ṣāḥib was against the combining of prayers and was of the view that where there is an urgent need, one will make up for the Ṣalāh later. [Note: refer to this link for more detail].
3. Aʿdal al-Ayyām: Mufti Ṣāḥib disagreed with the Aʿdal al-Ayyām view for Fajr Ṣalāh during days of persistent twilight in the UK.
4. Gold Niṣāb: Mufti Ṣāḥib was of the view that the Gold Niṣāb should be considered due to the low value of silver.
5. Sadaqat al-Fiṭr: Mufti Ṣāhib advised that one should give one Ṣāʿ of wheat due to its low cost (Tuḥfat al-Almaʿī, 2:605).
6. Moon-sighting in the UK: Mufti Ṣāḥib was extremely critical and opposed to Muslims in the UK following Saudi Arabia for moon-sighting.
7. Iḥrām from Jeddah: Mufti Ṣāḥib was of the view that Iḥrām is permissible from Jeddah although his own practice was to enter into Iḥrām before arriving into Jeddah (Tuḥfāt al-Almaʿī, 3:228; also see Tuḥfat al-Qārī, 4:538) [Note: Mufti Rashīd Aḥmad Ludyānwī (d. 1422/2002) has discussed this in detail in Aḥsan al-Fatāwā (4:565) and concluded that Iḥrām cannot be entered into at Jeddah, this is the preferred view].
8. Women attending Masjids: Mufti Ṣāḥib was of the view that women can attend the Masjids in western countries.
9. Purpose of looking at prospective bride: The following is from an answer of mine: ‘Mufti Saīʿd Pālanpūrī Ṣāḥib explains in Raḥmat Allah al-Wāsiʿah (5:38) that there are two aspects of a person: firstly, the physical appearance and beauty (ṣūrat), and secondly, the character and lifestyle of a person (sīrat). The rationale for the permission to look at a prospective bride is to ascertain the former and not the latter, and the permission has been granted due to necessity. The purpose of the meeting is not to ascertain the character and lifestyle of the prospective bride; even several encounters may not achieve this. The most effective method of ascertaining this is through her peers, neighbours, relatives and other associates.’
10. Ḥijāb from non-Maḥram family members in the same house: If there are non-Maḥram family members living in the same home, there will be slight flexibility in the rules pertaining to Ḥijāb although spending time alone is prohibited and caution must be exercised (Tuḥfat al-Almaʿī, 4:185).
11. Female travel without maḥram: Mufti Ṣāḥib agreed with the position of ʿAllāmah Anwar Shāh Kashmīrī (d. 1352/1933) that it is permissible for a woman to travel without maḥram if there is no fear of fitnah. Thus, he explains that that it is permissible for a woman to travel to America on the plane with a group of trustworthy women if her Maḥram or husband is in America to receive her (Tuḥfat al-Almaʿī, 3:608; also see Tuḥfat al-Qārī, 3:420). [This is not the preferred view as I have outlined in several Arabic and English articles, however, where there is a compelling need, this can be considered in exceptional circumstances].
12. Watching sports: Watching Football, Cricket and similar sports is unlawful (Tuḥfat al-Almaʿī, 4:208).
13. Digital images: Digital photography is prohibited according to Mufti Ṣāḥib.
14. Stay away from management: Mufti Ṣāḥib advised my dear friend from Panama, Mawlānā Afẓal Patel Ṣāḥib that teach as many books, however, do not get involved in niẓāmat (management and administrative matters).
15. Marriage tip for ʿAlimāt: Mufti Ṣāḥib would recommend fathers of female scholars to marry them to scholars so that their knowledge is preserved.
16. Desire to train ʿAlimāt to tackle Fitnah: It was Mufti Ṣāḥib’s desire to train the female scholars of Canada over several days on how to tackle the challenge of Farhat Hashmi. Mufti Ṣāḥib said, “Our ʿAlimāt will need to learn to tackle the challenge using her method, mere refutations will not be effective.” This desire of Mufti Ṣāḥib was not realised.

Final moments and demise

On 25 March 2020, India announced a nationwide lockdown without any notice due to Covid-19. Mufti Ṣāḥib was in Mumbai at the time and was unable to return to Deoband as a result. The lockdown is still ongoing. He remained in Mumbai and during the month of Ramadan continued benefiting the Ummah through his lectures.

A few days ago, he fell ill and was hospitalised. Water entered into his lungs and his situation worsened. Eventually he passed away earlier today. The news shocked the many thousands of admirers and students of Mufti Ṣāḥib and Muslims in general. Condolences started to pour in from all quarters.

Mufti Ṣāḥib was buried in Jogeshwari West Islamic Cemetery in Mumbai at 5pm. He passed away at approximately 8.30am. His first Janāzah Ṣalāh was led in the Masjid area adjacent to the hospital by his son Mawlānā Waḥīd Aḥmad in which 60 people participated. The second Janāzah Ṣalāh took place at the cemetery led by his other son Mawlānā ʿAbdullāh in which 25 other people participated. This is due to lockdown restrictions, otherwise thousands would have attended.

May Allah Almighty grant Mufti Ṣāḥib an abode in Jannatul Firdaws and accept his life-long service. May Allah Almighty continue to benefit the Ummah through his works and make them a Ṣadaqah Jāriyah for him. Āmīn.

Mufti Ṣāḥib leaves behind 9 sons and 2 daughters: (1) Mawlānā Waḥīd Aḥmad (2) Mawlānā Ḥasan Aḥmad (3) Mufti Ḥusayn Aḥmad (4) Mawlānā Muḥammad Ibrāhīm (5) Mawlānā Muḥammad Qāsim (6) Ḥāfiẓah ʿĀʾishah (7) Mawlānā Muḥammad (8) Mawlānā Aḥmad (9) Ḥāfiẓah Fāṭimah (10) Mawlānā ʿAbdullāh (11) Ḥāfiẓ ʿUbaydullāh.

Prior to this, three children of Mufti Ṣāḥib passed away during his life: (12) Mufti Rashīd Aḥmad, passed away in 1415 (1995). (13) ʿĀʾisha, passed away when she was nearly two years old in 1393 (1973) (14) Ḥāfiẓ Saʿīd Aḥmad, passed away last year. Mufti Ṣāḥib’s wife passed away on 23 May 2011 (1432). What is remarkable is that Mufti Ṣāḥib first made his wife memorise the Quran, and thereafter both made all their children memorise the Quran. Mufti Ḥusayn Aḥmad established a Darul Iftāʾ in Deoband under the instruction of his father and assisted him with several of his works. May Allah Almighty bless the entire family and benefit the Ummah through them.

Mufti Mahmood Bardoli mentioned something very interesting. Mufti Ṣāḥib was very close Mawlānā Riyāsat ʿAlī Bijnorī (d. 1438/2017) as both taught in Darul Uloom Deoband for several decades. The news of his demise came when Mufti Ṣāḥib was in Blackburn in May 2017 and I recall Mufti Ṣāḥib saying he was a giant of Deoband. The interesting point is that Mufti Ṣāḥib and he married on the same day, and both their wives passed away on the same day, and they both had eye operations on the same day. May Allah Almighty grant them all Jannat al-Firdaws.

May Allah Almighty reward the following for providing some of the information in this obituary: Mufti Mahmood Bardoli (India), Mawlānā Dr Mohammad Shakaib Qasmi (India), Mufti Ismail Kotwal (Canada), Hafiz Abdurrahim Mulla (London) and Mawlānā Siraj (Barbados). Some of the information has also been sourced from the introduction to al-Khayr al-Kathīr (p.43).

Yusuf Shabbir

26 Ramadan 1441/19 May 2020 (In India and also some parts of the UK, it is 25 Ramadan)

The article was updated and completed on 27 Ramadan 1441/20 May 2020

Courtesy of Islamic Portal

By Mawlana Abu ’l-Hasan ‘Ali al-Nadwi

The fast of ‘Ashura [on the 10th of Muharram] was prescribed before the fasts of Ramadan. The Jews observed it and so did the people of Arabia before the dawn of Islam.

It is related by Imam Bukhari (may Allah have mercy on him) on the authority of Ibn ‘Abbas (may Allah be pleased with him) that when the Prophet (upon him blessings and peace) came to Madinah he found that the Jews observed the fast of ‘Ashura. He enquired about it from them and was told that it was the day on which God had delivered the Children of Israel from the enemy and Moses (upon him be peace) used to keep a fast on it as an expression of gratitude to the Almighty. The Prophet (upon him blessings and peace) thereupon, remarked that “Moses has a greater claim upon me than upon you,” and he fasted on that day and instructed his followers to do the same.

It is also mentioned in Sahih Muslim that it is a most important day. On this day God had delivered Moses (upon him be peace) and his followers and drowned Pharaoh and his men. Moses (upon him be peace) fasted on it in thanksgiving. Imam Bukhari (may Allah have mercy on him) adds that it is related by Abu Bishr: “We also keep fast as a token of respect to Moses (upon him be peace).”

But the celebrated mathematician Abu Rayhan Beruni challenged the veracity of these reports on the basis of a comparative study of the Jewish and Arabian calendars. He writes:

It is said that ‘Ashur is a Hebrew word which became ‘Ashura in Arabic. It stands for the tenth day of the Jewish month of Tisri. The fast observed on this day is called Yom Kippur. It came to be incorporated in the Arab Calendar and the name was given to the tenth day of the first month of their year in the same way in which it denoted the tenth day of the first month of the Jewish calendar. It was instituted as a day of fasting among the Muslims in the first year of Migration. Later, when fasting was enjoined in the month of Ramadan it was dropped. A tradition has it that when the Prophet (upon him blessings and peace) came to Madinah and saw that the Jews observed the fast of ‘Ashura he enquired about it and was told that it was the day on which God had drowned Pharaoh and his people and delivered Moses (upon him be peace) and his followers from them, and that Moses (upon him be peace) used to fast on it in thanksgiving. The Prophet, then, remarked that Moses (upon him be peace) had a greater claim upon him than upon them and he fasted on that day and instructed his followers to do the same. When the fasts of Ramadan were prescribed, the Prophet neither enjoined the fast of ‘Ashura nor forbade it.

But this report is fallacious and does not stand the test of enquiry. The first day of the month of Muharram in the first year of hijrah (Migration) was Friday, which corresponds to the 16th of Tamuz, 933 (A.E.). As against it, the first day of that year among the Jews was Sunday, the 12th of Awwal which corresponds to the 29th of Safar. Hence, the fast of ‘Ashura should have fallen on Tuesday, the 9th of Rabi‘ al-Awwal, while the Migration had taken place during the first half of that month. The two dates, at any rate, do not correspond to each other.

He then adds:

The contention that on this day God drowned the Pharaoh, too, is not supported by what is given in the Torah. The event of the drowning of the Pharaoh had taken place, according to Torah, on the 21st of Nisan, which is the seventh day of the festival of Passover. The first Jewish fast of Passover, after the arrival of the Prophet (upon him blessings and peace) in Madinah, occurred on Tuesday, the 22nd of Azhar 933 which corresponds to the 17th of Ramadan. This report also is, therefore, without a foundation.

With due respect to the scholarship of Beruni, it is clear that he has built his thesis wholly on conjecture. He has, for instance, surmised that the conversation reported by Ibn ‘Abbas and other Companions had taken place on the very first day of the Prophet (upon him blessings and peace)’s arrival in Madinah as is evident from his observation, “when the sacred Prophet came to Madinah or entered it.”

This misconception is due to the ignorance of the Science of Traditions and of the holy Companion’s mode of narration, innumerable instances of which are available in the hadith tradition. For example, it is related by Anas ibn Malik (may Allah be pleased with him):

When the Prophet (upon him blessings and peace) came to Madinah and (saw that) there were two days which the people of that place celebrated as festivals he enquired about their significance. (The people of Madinah) told him, “These were our days of fun and entertainment during the days of Paganism.” The Prophet, thereupon, observed, “God has given you two better days in their place, Eid al-Fitr and Eid al-Adha.”

Now, will it be proper for anyone to infer from the above Tradition that the arrival of the Prophet (upon him blessings and peace) in Madinah took place on the same day of celebration in that town, and to proceed to question the veracity of the Tradition on the ground that it was not chronometrically possible? Similar errors of interpretation have been made in respect of other traditions as well, like the one relating to pollination of date palms.

Commenting on the argument advanced by Beruni, ‘Allamah Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani (may Allah have mercy on him) says,

He found it difficult to accept the tradition due to the misunderstanding that when the Prophet (upon him blessings and peace) arrived in Madinah he saw the Jews in the state of keeping the fast of ‘Ashura while, in fact, it was in the month of Rabi‘ al-Awwal that the Prophet arrived in Madinah. The answer to this is that he erred in the interpretation of the tradition. What the tradition actually means is that the Prophet (upon him blessings and peace) came to know of the fast of ‘Ashura only when he had migrated to Madinah and made his enquiry, for the first time, after he had reached there. In other words, the Prophet (upon him blessings and peace), when he came to Madinah and stayed there till ‘Ashura, found that the Jews fasted on that day.

There is left no chronological contradiction after ‘Allamah Ibn Hajar (may Allah have mercy on him)’s explanation of the hadith regarding the fast of ‘Ashura.

The second misconception under which Beruni labors is that the fast of ‘Ashura mentioned in the hadith signifies the tenth day of the Jewish month of Tisri which is also known as Yom Kippur, or the Fast of Atonement, and is observed by them with greater ceremony than any other fast. But there is nothing in the tradition to warrant such a conclusion, and it is also not supported by the Torah because the Fast of Atonement was instituted in expiation of a mortal sin and observed as a day of penance and mourning.

The Day of Atonement, which is the tenth day of the seventh month of Tisri, is referred to in these words in the Third Book of Moses called, Leviticus:

And this will be a statute for ever unto you; that in the seventh month, on the tenth day of the month, ye shall afflict your souls, and do no work at all, whether it be one of your own country, or a stranger who sojourneth among you: for on that day shall the priest make an atonement for you, to cleanse you, that ye may be clean from all your sins before the Lord. It shall be a sabbath of rest unto you, and ye shall afflict your souls, by a statute forever. (Lev. 16:29-31)

At another place, in the same Book, it is said:

And the Lord spoke unto Moses, saying, also on the tenth day of this seventh month there shall be a day of atonement: it shall be a holy convocation unto you; and ye shall afflict your souls, and offer an offering made by fire unto the Lord. And ye shall do no work in that same day; for it is a day of atonement to make an atonement for you before the Lord your God. (Lev. 23:26-28)

Similarly, in the Book of Numbers, it is set forth: “And ye shall have on the tenth day of this seventh month a holy convocation; and ye shall afflict your souls; ye shall not do any work therein.”

On the other hand, it explicitly occurs in the traditions that the day of ‘Ashura (on which the Muslims are enjoined to fast) was a day of rejoicing among the Jews. As Imam Bukhari (may Allah have mercy on him) has related it on the authority of Abu Musa al-Ash‘ari (may Allah be pleased with him), the Jews regarded it to be a day of Eid and it was on seeing it that the Holy Prophet (upon him blessings and peace) advised his Companions (may Allah be pleased with him) also to keep fast on it.

In Sahih Muslim, also, it is related from Qays ibn Muslim that men of good-doing observed the fast of ‘Ashura and celebrated it as the day of Eid, with their women wearing the best of clothes and ornaments. The Prophet (upon him blessings and peace), on seeing it, said to us, “You should also fast on this day.”

It is, further, related by Kurayb ibn Sa‘d from ‘Umar ibn al-Khattab (may Allah be pleased with him) that, “On the Day of Judgment God will ask you only about two fasts, the fasts of Ramadan and the fast of the day of adornment (i.e., ‘Ashura).”

In the light of the facts given above, it will be incorrect to say that ‘Ashura is the Day of Atonement. Were it so, it would have been a day of lamentation and mortification while ‘Ashura, as mentioned in the tradition, is a day of merriment and decoration.

The same fallacy is shared by a number of Western scholars as well. For instance, Abraham Katish observes about the Day of Atonement in his book entitled Judaism in Islam that “Mohammad, in the beginning, instituted it as a day of fasting for Muslims.”

The assertion of the Jews themselves about ‘Ashura that it was the day on which God had delivered the Israelites from their enemies is enough to set at rest all doubts in this connection. In the Torah it has been repeatedly mentioned as Abib which later came to be known as Nisan. About Abib, we read in Da’irat al-Ma‘arif, “It is a Hebraic word which means ‘green’. It is the name of the first month of the Hebraic year. This name was given to it by Moses and it corresponds nearly to the month of April. When the Jews were exiled in Babylon they changed its name to Nisan, meaning ‘the month of flowers.’ Their Eid al-Fatir (Passover) is also held in the middle of it.”

Beruni, also, has admitted that it is wrong to suppose that the Day of Atonement signified the day on which God had drowned Pharaoh and his men. He says, “Their contention that on this day God had drowned Pharaoh is opposed to what is stated in the Torah because the event of drowning took place on the 21st of Nisan, which is the seventh day of Ayam al-Fatir (Passover). It is set forth in Torah (Ex. 12: 18): ‘In the first month, on the fourteenth day of the month at even, ye shall eat unleavened bread, until the one and twentieth day of the month at even’.”

We, therefore, conclude that ‘Ashura, which is mentioned in the traditions related by Ibn ‘Abbas (may Allah be pleased with him) and others and on which day the Muslims have been exhorted to fast and was included among the near-obligatory duties in Islam before the fasts of Ramadan were prescribed, corresponds, in the largest measure, to the day which falls in the middle of the Hebraic month of Abib, whose name was changed to Nisan by the Jews during the period of their exile in Babylon and was celebrated by them as an Eid and an event of fasting and entertainment. It was on this day that the Israelites had come out of Egypt and the Pharaoh was drowned. In the second Book of Moses it is related: “And Moses said unto the people, Remember this day in which ye came out from Egypt, out of the house of bondage; for by strength of hand the Lord brought you out from this place; there shall no leavened bread be eaten. This day came ye out in the month of Abib.” (Ex. 13: 3-4)

In summary, the general consensus among Muslim theologians and religious scholars is that ‘Ashura fell on the tenth day of the Arab month of Muharram in the second year of Migration and that it was later annulled by Ramadan.

Besides, any attempt to make the Lunar Arabian Calendar correspond to the Solar Jewish Calendar can, at the best, be only hypothetical. The ancient custom of nasi has also taken a hand in adding to the confusion. This practice was quite common in Arabia, both before and after the advent of Islam, till it was prohibited by the Qur’anic injunction which reads: “Postponement of a month is only an excess of disbelief, whereby those who disbelieve are misled.” (9:37)

On the occasion of the Farewell Hajj, the Holy Prophet (upon him blessings and peace) had declared, “Time has returned to the original state that obtained when the heavens and the earth were created.” These words were of divine inspiration for the Arab arrangement of time into days, weeks, months and years had been changed so frequently that it could not be relied upon nor restored to its original form through mathematical calculation. It is, therefore, incorrect to question the authenticity of successive traditions merely on the basis of an erratic and inconstant calendar.

It is also possible that the Jews of Madinah were different from other Jewish communities where the fast of ‘Ashura was concerned and observed it with greater enthusiasm and regularity, and, in this respect, they were similar to the Arabs who, seeing that so many important events had taken place on that day, fasted on it out of reverence.

It is related by Umm al-Mu’minin ‘A’ishah (may Allah be pleased with her), “The Quraysh fasted on the day of ‘Ashura during the Period of Ignorance and the Prophet (upon him blessings and peace) also kept it.” (Muslim) Further, the days of fasting among the Jews living in different countries differed from one another. We have seen how in the Jewish Encyclopedia it is indicated that apart from the fixed fast-days many fasts of a local or national character had become established among the Jews from the early days which varied from place to place. Private fasts were also common among the Jews and one could take it upon oneself to fast on certain days in memory of certain events or at the time of adversity to arouse God’s mercy. In these circumstances, it is quite possible that the fast of ‘Ashura, on the tenth day of the first month of the Arab Calendar, was peculiar to the Jews living in Arabia alone. Perhaps, it is for this reason that the Talmud and the Jewish Calendar are silent on this score. Some historians have treated it as identical to the Fast of Atonement which all the Jews, wherever they be, consider obligatory. Thus, those who subscribe to this view are inclined to doubt the veracity of the aforementioned traditions. But their judgment is influenced by the ignorance of the habits and practices of the Jews living in various parts of the world, especially in Arabia where they had been settled for generations as a distinct community, possessing their own beliefs and customs and receiving local impressions in the historical course of things.