Muhammad bin Awf narrated from Abdullah bin
Yazeed al-Muqri, who narrated from Haywat bin Shurayh, from Abu Sakhr Humayd
bin Ziyaad, from Yazeed bin Abdullah bin Qusayt from Sayyidunah Abu Hurayrah
(radiallah anhu) from the Messenger of Allaah (peace be upon him) that:
مَا مِنْ أَحَدٍ يُسَلِّمُ عَلَيَّ ، إِلَّا رَدَّ اللَّهُ عَلَيَّ
رُوحِي حَتَّى أَرُدَّ عَلَيْهِ السَّلَامَ
“No
one gives greetings of salaam, except that Allah will restore my soul to me, so
that I may reply to him with the greeting of salaam.”
Authenticity of
this hadeeth:
Introduction of
Narrators:
1-
Muhammad bin
Awf –
Imaam Dhahabi said regarding him that: "He is al-Imaam al-Haafidh
al-Mujawwid Muhaddith of Hims", and then he narrates the praises of
scholars regarding him [See: Siyar A'laam al-Nabula: 12/613]. Imaam Abu Haatim
said: "He is Sudooq" [al-Jarh: 241]. Imaam Nasaa'ee said: "He is
Thiqah" [al-Mu'jam al-Mushtamal: 930]. Imaam Ibn Hibbaan mentioned him in
his book of Thiqah narrators and said: "He is Saahib-e-Hadeeth,
memorizer" [9/143]. Abu Ali al-Jiyaani said: "He is Thiqah"
[Tasmiyah Shuyookh Abi Dawood: 92]. Haafidh Ibn Hajar said: "He is Thiqah
Haafidh" [Taqreeb]
2-
Abdullah bin
Yazeed al-Muqri – Imaam Dhahabi said concerning him that: "He is al-Imaam
al-Haafidh al-Aalim al-Muqri al-Muhaddith al-Hujjah Shaikh ul-Haram...."
[Siyar: 10/166]. Imaam Abu Haatim said: "He is Sudooq" [al-Jarh wat
Ta'deel: 939]. Imaam Ibn Sa'd said: "He is Thiqah Katheer ul-Hadeeth"
[Tabaqaat al-Kubra: 5/501]. Imaam Ibn Hibbaan mentioned him in his book of
Thiqah narrators. [8/342]. Haafidh Ibn Hajar said: "He is Thiqah"
[Taqreeb: 1/330]
3-
Haywat bin
Shurayh –
Imaam Ahmed bin Hanbal said: "He is Thiqah Thiqah (twice)" [al-Jarh
wat Ta'deel: 1366]. Imaam Yahya ibn Ma'een said: "He is Thiqah"
[al-Jarh: 1366]. Imaam Abu Haatim said: "He is Thiqah" [al-Jarh:
1366]. He is also declared Thiqah by Imaam Ibn Sa'd, Imaam al-Ijlee, Imaam Ibn
Hibbaan, Ibn Khalfoon, Dhahabi and Ibn Hajar.
4-
Abu Sakhar
Humayd bin Ziyaad – Imaam Ahmed bin Hanbal said: "There is nothing wrong in
him" [al-Jarh: 975]. Imaam Yahya ibn Ma'een said: "He is Thiqah there
is nothing wrong in him" [Taareekh Ibn Ma'een by Ad-Daarimi: 260]. Imaam
Ibn Adee said: "He is Saalih al-Hadeeth" [al-Kaamil: 236]. Imaam
Daaraqutni said: "He is Thiqah" [Sawalaat al-Barqaani: 93]. Imaam
Dhahabi included him among those narrators who are criticized but they are
Thiqah in reality. [Man Takallam feehi Wahuwa Mawthaq by Imaam Dhahabi: 1/73]. Ibn
Hajar said: "He is Sudooq Yahhum" [Taqreeb: 1/181]
Imaam Nasaa'ee said: "He is Da'eef" [al-Kaamil: 236]
This Jarh is unacceptable due to two reasons: 1) Imaam Nasaa'ee is known for his strictness, 2) This Jarh is against the Jumhoor.
Imaam Nasaa'ee said: "He is Da'eef" [al-Kaamil: 236]
This Jarh is unacceptable due to two reasons: 1) Imaam Nasaa'ee is known for his strictness, 2) This Jarh is against the Jumhoor.
5-
Yazeed bin
Abdullah bin Qusayt – Imaam Yahya ibn Ma'een said: "He is Saalih, there is nothing
wrong in him" [al-Jarh: 1152]. Imaam Ibn Adee said: "He is Saalih
ur-Riwayaat" [al-Kaamil: 245]. Imaam Ibn Hibbaan mentioned him in his book
of Thiqah narrators [5/543]. Imaam Ibn Sa'd said: "He is Thiqah Katheer
ul-Hadeeth" [Tabaqaat al-Kubra: 9/204]. Imaam Ibn Abdul Barr also declared
him Thiqah. Imaam Ibn Hajar said: "He is Thiqah" [Taqreeb: 1/602]. Imaam
Dhahabi mentioned him among those who are criticized but they are Thiqah in
reality. [Man Takallam feehi wahuwa Mawthaq: 1/200]
The chain of this hadeeth is declared
“Saheeh” by Haafidh Nawawi [Khulasat ul-Ahkaam: 1/441], Shaikh ul-Islaam Ibn
Taymiyyah [Iqtida as-Siraat al-Mustaqeem: P. 324], Haafidh Ibn al-Qayyim [Jalaa
ul-Afhaam: 1/53], Haafidh Ibn al-Mulqan [Tuhfat ul-Muhtaaj: 2/190], and others.
Haafidh Iraaqi [Takhreej Ahadeeth al-Ahya:
1013], Haafidh Ibn Abdul Haadi [al-Saarim al-Munki: 1/114], and others have
declared it to be “Jayyid (Strong)”.
Moreover, Haafidh Sakhaawi [al-Maqaasid
al-Hasanah: 1/587], Haafidh Ajlooni [Kashf al-Khafa: 2/194] and others have
declared the hadeeth to be “Saheeh”.
This hadeeth is Hasan but this chain is
Munqati’, because the narrator Yazeed bin Abdullah bin Qusayt, who is Katheer
ul-Irsaal, did not hear this hadeeth directly from Abu Hurayrah (radiallah
anhu), rather he narrates it from Abu Hurayrah (radiallah anhu) with the
reference of another narrator in between, which is present in al-Mu’jam
al-Awsat by Tabaraani [3/262 H. 3092 - Source], and its
chain is Hasan.
In this narration, the teacher of Imaam
Tabaraani, “Bakr bin Sahl ad-Dimyaati” is Thiqah according to the Jumhoor,
because Imaam Daya al-Maqdisi [al-Mukhtaarah: 159], and Imaam Haakim
[al-Mustadrak Ala as-Saheehayn: 4/177, 643, 646] has done his tawtheeq, and
Imaam Dhahabi followed him.
Moreover, his narrations are also present in
Mustakhraj Abu Nu’aym [583, 586, etc] and Mustakhraj Abi Awaanah [2524, 6903],
which is a clear proof of him being a Thiqah.
Allaamah Haythami writes: “Nasaa’ee declared
him Da’eef, but others have declared him Thiqah” [Majma az-Zawaaid: 4/117]
Imaam Dhahabi declared him: “Mutawassit”
which means the narrator of a middle level. [al-Mughni: 978]
Moreover he said: “Muhadditheen have taken
narrations from him, and he is Muqaarib ul-Haal (Hasan ul-Hadeeth). Imaam
Nasaa’ee said, he is Da’eef” [Meezaan ul-I’tidaal: 2/62]
While grading a hadeeth in which Bakr bin
Sahl was also present, Haafidh Ibn Hajar said: “All its narrators have been
declared Thiqah, except Sulemaan bin Abi Kuraymah, and there is some criticism
on him” [al-Amaali al-Mutlaqah: 1/121]
Even though Haafidh Ibn Hajar had also
narrated the Jarh of Imaam Nasaa’ee concerning Bakr bin Sahl in Lisaan
al-Meezaan, still he deemed him to be Thiqah [2/51]
This proves that even according to Imaam
Dhahabi and Imaam Ibn Hajar, the Jarh of Imaam Nasaa’ee on Bakr bin Sahl is not
acceptable, rather he is Thiqah due to the tawtheeq of Jumhoor.
From this Tahqeeq it gets proven that the
saying of Shaikh Albaani regarding Bakr that: “Imaam Nasaa’ee declared him
Thiqah, and no one declared him Thiqah” [Silsilah ad-Da’eefah: 4/562] is wrong.
As for the criticisms of Imaam Nasaa’ee and
Maslamah bin Qaasim narrated by Ibn Hajar in Lisaan al-Meezaan then their
explanation is as follows:
1-
The
criticism of Imaam Nasaa’ee – The answer to this criticism is that Imaam
Nasaa’ee sometimes is too strict concerning the narrators. That’s why his
criticism is not accepted against the tawtheeq of Jumhoor.
Moreover, this
Jarh is not even proven from Imaam Nasaa’ee himself, as it is narrated from his
son Abdul Kareem, whose tawtheeq is not proven from anyone. Wallahu a’lam.
2-
As for the
Jarh of Maslamah bin Qaasim that: “People have criticized him” [Lisaan al-Meezaan: 2/51],
this Jarh is unacceptable due to many reasons:
i-
Maslamah bin Qaasim himself was
an unreliable person, therefore, his Jarh is of no use.
ii-
No one’s Jarh on Bakr is proven
except the Jarh of Imaam Nasaa’ee, which means the “people” Maslamah is
pointing towards are Majhool.
iii-
The third reason is that Maslamah
bin Qaasim often uses these words for those narrators who are Hasan ul-Hadeeth
according to himself. For example: see Lisaan al-Meezaan [6/262]
Note: In the chain of Tabaraani, there is a
narrator named “Abdullah bin Yazeed al-Askandari”. However, the correct name is
“Abdullah bin Yazeed al-Muqri” as affirmed by Shaikh Albaani [Silsilah
as-Saheehah: 5/338]. We will not go into its details.
In short, this narration is Authentic, and no
criticism on this hadeeth is valid.
Explanation:
This hadeeth is concerning the salaam of
after the Prophet’s death, as if this is an answer to some question [posed to
the Prophet] which the narrator did not mention while narrating this hadeeth.
Meaning, Some Sahaabi might have asked this question to the Prophet (peace be
upon him) that now we say salaam to you and you reply to us, how would our
salaam be after your death and how would your answer be? Upon which, the
Prophet (peace be upon him) would have said this hadeeth.
Some people try to deduce from this hadeeth
the issue of Hayaat un-Nabi saying that, if anyone says salaam to the Messenger
of Allaah (peace be upon him) then his soul returns to him and he (peace be
upon him) answers his salaam, this proves his permanent life [in grave],
because there is never an inqita (disconnection) of salaam, every time, at some
place, people are sending salaam on the Prophet (peace be upon him). There is
not a single moment which is free from this act; therefore, this proves that
the Messenger of Allaah (peace be upon him) is permanently alive.
However, the base from which this deduction
is taken, is very weak & feeble; and the building which is built on this
base can easily be demolished by merely paying a little attention; because the
base of this deduction is on the theory that the process of salaam never
disconnects, and neither is there any disconnection from him (peace be upon
him) in its answer, whereas, this idea is absolutely wrong, because:
1-
This hadeeth does not prove at
all that the Prophet (peace be upon him) answers every single person who sends
salaam, no matter if he says salaam from nearby or from far away, rather this
hadeeth is only concerning the one, who sends salaam to him from nearby.
Because he (peace be upon him) has himself affirmed regarding the one sending
salaam from far away that it is the angels that bring his salaam to him, and
the reply to this salaam is also not proven from him. Therefore, it is narrated
from Abu Hurayrah himself, who is the narrator of this hadeeth also, that the
Messenger of Allaah (peace be upon him) said: “The Messenger of Allaah (peace be
upon him) said: “Do not take your houses as graves and do not take my grave as
a place of festivity (which you visit repeatedly). Send blessings upon me for
your greeting will reach me no matter where you are” [Musnad Ahmed: 2/367,
Sunan Abu Dawood: 2041, Chain Hasan]
Moreover, Sayyidunah Abdullah bin Mas’ood
(radiallah anhu) narrates: The Messenger of Allaah (peace be upon him) said: “Allaah has angels who go around on earth, conveying to
me the salaam of my ummah.” [Narrated by al-Nasaa’ee, 1282; classed
as Saheeh by al-Albaani in Saheeh al-Targheeb, 1664]
These ahadeeth explicitly prove that the one
who sends salaam from far away does not come under the same ruling as the one
who sends salaam from nearby, because there is no mention that he (peace be
upon him) would also answer the salaam of one who sends salaam from far away,
whereas, the proof is established regarding the one sending salaam from nearby.
The affirmations of Muhadditheen and Aimmah
are also in accordance to this.
Moreover, if you read the hadeeth of Abu
Talhah (radiallah anhu), which we will mention ahead, it gets very clear that
Allaah gives the answer to this salaam in the form of 10 blessings on that
person.
Shaikh ul-Islaam Ibn Taymiyyah writes: “The scholars
have understood [from this hadeeth] that this salaam [regarding which it is
said that Prophet’s soul returns to his body] is only that which is said near
the Prophet’s grave, this hadeeth is not a proof for the one [sending salaam]
from far away” [Ar-Radd Ala al-Bakri: 1/107]
He further said: “This is the hadeeth upon which the
Scholars like Ahmed and Abu Dawood trusted on the issue of saying salaam from
near the Prophet’s grave.” [Ar-Radd Ala al-Bakri: 1/107]
Imaam Ibn Abdul Haadi also considers this
hadeeth on saying salaam from nearby according to many Scholars. [As-Saarim
al-Munki: 1/115]
What is meant by nearby is only the apartment
of Aa’ishah (radiallah anha), where he (peace be upon him) is buried. This is
why, whenever Sayyidunah Abdullah bin Umar (radiallah anhu) would return from a
journey, he would come near the grave of the Prophet (peace be upon him) and
say: “Peace
be upon you O Messenger of Allaah, peace be upon you O Abu Bakr, Peace be upon
you O My Father (Umar)” [Fadhal as-Salaat ala an-Nabi by Qaadhi
Ismaa’eel bin Ishaaq (Pg 81-82), Al-Sunan al-Kubra by Bayhaqi (5/245), Chain
Saheeh]
This proves that the returning of soul is
only related to the person who says Salaam standing right next to the grave, as
Allaamah Shanqeeti writes: “All [Scholars] are agreed upon that this [Prophet’s
returning of Salaam] is only achieved by one who says salaam to him from
close….” [Adhwaa ul-Bayaan: 8/838]
Haafidh Ibn Katheer etc have also established
the relationship of this hadeeth with the one who says salaam to the Prophet
(peace be upon him) from close by; it has nothing to do with those who say
salaam from far away, the answer to which Allaah gives with 10 blessings.
Abu Tayyib Shams ul-Haqq al-Adheemaabaadee
(rahimahullah) writes: “The correct opinion is that this hadeeth is concerning the
one who visits the [grave of the] Prophet (peace be upon him), as for those who
are far away, then the angels convey his salaam to him (and answers this salaam
with 10 blessings).” [Awn al-Ma’bood fi Sharh Sunan Abi Dawood:
6/22]
Abul Hassan Ubaydullah bin Muhammad Rehmaani
al-Mubaarakpoori (rahimahullah) writes: “The correct opinion is that what is
meant from this hadeeth is the salaam that is said close to the grave of the
Prophet (peace be upon him), as is understood by many other Scholars.”
[Mir’aat ul-Mafateeh Sharh Mishkaat ul-Masabeeh: 3/263]
The most explicit of all proofs is that Imaam
Abu Dawood (rahimahullah) has brought this hadeeth under the chapter heading “Visit of the
Grave”.
When it becomes clear that the returning of
soul and its answer which is mentioned in this hadeeth is concerning the one
who says salaam standing in front of the apartment of Aa’ishah (radiallah anha)
and not regarding every person who says salaam or durood in the world, so now
it should be kept in mind that there has not been any period from the death of
the Prophet (peace be upon him) till today in which salaam is being said in
front of Aa’ishah’s apartment every single moment. Therefore, the deduction of
the permanent life of the Prophet (peace be upon him) from this hadeeth is
Baatil (Void).
2-
The words of this hadeeth are
also against the mas’ala of Hayaat (life), as explained and refuted by Imaam
Ibn Abdul Haadi (rahimahullah), he writes:
وليس هذا المعنى المذكور في الحديث،
ولا هو ظاهره، بل هو مخالف لظاهره، فإن قوله: ((إلا رد الله علي روحي)) بعد قوله:
((ما من أحد يسلم علي)) يقتضي رد الروح بعد السلام، ولا يقتضي استمرارها في الجسد
. وليعلم أن رد الروح إلى البدن وعودها إلى الجسد بعد الموت لا يقتضي استمرارها
فيه، ولا يستلزم حياة أخرى قبل يوم النشور نظير الحياة المعهودة، بل إعادة الروح
إلى الجسد في البرزخ إعادة برزخية، لا تزيل عن الميت اسم الموت. وقد ثبت في حديث
البراء بن عازب الطويل المشهور في عذاب القبر ونعيمه في شأن الميت وحاله أن روحه
تعاد إلى جسده، مع العلم بأنها غير مستمرة فيه وأن هذه الإعادة ليس مستلزمة لإثبات
حياة مزيلة لاسم الموت، بل هي أنواع حياة برزخية
“This above mentioned
meaning [of Hayaat un-Nabi] is not mentioned in this hadeeth, and neither is
this the apparent meaning of the hadeeth, rather it is against its apparent
meaning, for verily his saying ((except that Allaah will restore my soul to
me)) after his saying ((no one gives greetings of salaam…)) demands the return
of soul after the salaam, and these words do not demand the presence of soul in
the body permanently. It should be known that the return of soul to the body,
and its return towards the body after the death does not prove its presence in
there permanently, and neither is it a proof of a second life before the day of
resurrection, which is like the worldly life. On the contrary, the return of
soul in Barzakh is a Barzakhi return, which does not remove the name of death
from the deceased. In the lengthy hadeeth of Bara’ bin Aazib (radiallah anhu) ([1])
concerning the punishment and rewards of grave, it is said that the soul of a
deceased is returned to his body, whereas, we know that this soul does not
remain in the body permanently, and neither is it a proof of a life which would
remove the name of death from the deceased, rather it is a type of a Barzakhi
life….”
[Saarim
al-Munki: 1/222-223]
If we consider this return of soul as the
life of this world then according to the above mentioned hadeeth, the soul of
every person, no matter Muslim or a Kaafir, returns to his soul, so would all
of them also live a worldly life? If the return of soul here is not meant to be
the worldly life, then why is it so in this case?
In fact, on the contrary to this deduction,
this hadeeth is against those who hold the view of Prophet’s eternal life after
his death, as Maulaana Ubaydullah Rehmaani al-Mubaarakpoori (rahimahullah)
writes:
“This hadeeth is
against those who are of the opinion that the souls of the Prophets have been
returned to them after their [worldly] death and they now live like the
martyrs. The reason of Ashkaal is that the return of soul to its body demands
that it is separate from it, and this is what is called ‘Death’, this condition
does not fit [the claim] of his (peace be upon him) being alive all the time….”
[Mir’aat
ul-Mafateeh: 3/269]
3-
If someone tries to prove from
this hadeeth that the salaam said from close by is heard by the Messenger of
Allaah (peace be upon him) himself, and tries to prove the issue of Hayaat
un-Nabi (Sallallahu Alaihi wasallam) then – first of all – this is not affirmed
in any authentic hadeeth.
Secondly, we can know reality from the
following saying of Allaah The Most High:
“Verily, Allah makes whom He wills to hear, but you
cannot make hear those who are in graves.”
[Faatir:
22]
If listening from near the grave is the proof
of Aqeedah Hayaat un-Nabi (Sallallahu Alaihi wasallam), then if Allaah wishes
he can make hear any Muslim, in fact, he can even make the Kuffaar to hear some
sound from near the grave, as reported by Sayyidunah Anas (radiallah anhu) that
the Messenger of Allaah (peace be upon him) said:
“When a person is placed in his grave and his companions depart
from him, he hears the sound of their sandals.”
[Saheeh
Bukhaari: 1338; Saheeh Muslim: 287]
So those who make the hearing of salaam that
is said near his grave to be the proof of Aqeedah Hayaat un-Nabi, would they
also make this hadeeth [of Anas] to be a proof for the Hayaat (life) of all
Muslims, in fact, of all Bani Aadam (every human) in the grave???
Similarly, the Kuffaar (disbelievers) of
Makkah who were killed in the battle of Badr, The Prophet (peace be upon him)
addressed them and said:
“Verily, they now hear everything what I say”
[Saheeh
Bukhaari: 3980; Saheeh Muslim: 2874]
So those who hold the view of “Hayaat
un-Nabi” because of his hearing the salaam from near the grave, would they also
hold the view of “Hayaat ul-Kaafireen” because of the address of the Prophet
(peace be upon him) to them???
The gist of the story is that if Allaah
wishes, he can make any deceased person to hear, even if it be a Kaafir.
Therefore, if we accept – for the sake of argument – concerning the salaam said
near the grave, that it is heard by the Messenger of Allaah (peace be upon him)
himself then it still cannot become the proof of Hayaat un-Nabi, because Allaah
sometimes even makes the Kuffaar and common deceased people to hear. So would
this also prove the Hayaat of common deceased people?? NO!
Moreover, He (peace be upon him) answers this
salaam. The relation of this answer is also with the world of Barzakh, which is
why it cannot be heard from normal ears. Therefore, it is not correct to prove
the aqeedah of Hayaat un-Nabi from this.
Ø Moreover,
this is also to be understood that Salaam is of two types:
One is Salaam Ma’moor – This is the salaam
concerning which Allaah has commanded Muslims that:
O ye that believe! Send ye blessings on him, and
salute him with all respect.
[Ahzaab:
56]
And the second is Salaam Tahiyyah – This is
the salaam which is said upon meeting anyone as a greeting.
When this much is understood then it should
also be kept in mind that Salaam Tahiyyah used to be said during the life of
the Prophet (peace be upon him) and he (peace be upon him) used to answer it;
and it is also said today so its answer is also given by the Prophet (peace be
upon him) himself, as is proven from the hadeeth.
This is also made clear that just like Salaam
Tahiyyah used to be said from close during the life of the Prophet (peace be
upon him), similarly, it would also be said to him today from close. You have
already read the action of Ibn Umar (radiallah anhu) that whenever he would
come from a Journey, he would say this salaam in the apartment of Aa’ishah from
close to the grave.
On the contrary, Salaam Ma’moor was used to
be said by all the Sahaabah in the prayer wherever they were, so why was there
a need to come close to the grave upon returning from the journey? If He (peace
be upon him) answered this salaam even from the person far away, then why would
Sayyidunah Ibn Umar (radiallah anhu) come close to the grave of the Prophet
(peace be upon him)??
Salaam Tahiyyah was used to be said to the
Prophet (peace be upon him) even by the non-Muslims, whereas, Salam Ma’moor is
restricted with the Believers, the answer to which is not even given by the
Prophet (peace be upon him) himself, rather Allaah sends 10 blessings to the
person as an answer, as is proven from the Hadeeth reported by Sayyidunah Abu
Talhah Ansaari (radiallah anhu):
“The Messenger of Allah (SAW) came one day with a cheerful
expression on his face, and we said: "We see you looking cheerful".
He said: "The Angel came to me and said: 'O Muhammad, your Lord says:
'Will it not please you (to know) that no one will send salah upon you that I
will send salah upon him tenfold, and no one will send salams upon you but I
will send salams upon him tenfold?”
[Musnad
Ahmed: 4/29, 30; Sunan Nasaa’ee: 1283, 1295, Chain Saheeh] ([2])
This hadeeth clearly proves that there are
two types of Salaam. One is a salaam that is said from the near which is Salaam
Tahiyyah, and whose answer is given by the Prophet (peace be upon him) himself;
while the other salaam is that which is said from far away, the answer to which
is not given by the Prophet (peace be upon him) himself, rather Allaah sends
blessings on that person instead. Therefore, when the soul of the Prophet
(peace be upon him) is not returned upon the salaam of every type, therefore,
the issue of Hayaat un-Nabi cannot be established from this hadeeth.
Imaam Ibn Abdul Haadi explains both these
types in the following words:
والمقصود هنا أن نعرف
ما كان عليه السلف من الفرق بين ما أمر الله به من الصلاة والسلام عليه وبين سلام
التحية الموجب للرد الذي يشترك فيه كل مؤمن حي وميت ويرد فيه على الكافر....
“The purpose here is that we know
the difference between the salaat and salaam ordained by Allaah, and the salaam
of Tahiyyah, the answer to which is obligatory, and in this all living and
deceased Muslims are alike, and in which we are to answer the salaam of even a
Kaafir…”
[Saarim
al-Munki: 1/125]
He further said:
وهذا السلام لا يقتضي رداً من المسلم
عليه، بل هو بمنزلة دعاء المؤمن للمؤمنين واستغفاره لهم، فيه الأجر والثواب من الله،
ليس على المدعو لهم مثل ذلك الدعاء، بخلاف سلام التحية، فإنه مشروع بالنص والإجماع
في حق كل مسلم. وعلى المسلم عليه أن يرد السلام ولو كان المسلم عليه كافراً، فإن
هذا من العدل الواجب،ولهذا كان النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم يرد على اليهود إذا سلموا
بقول ((وعليكم))
“This salaam (salaam Ma’moor) does
not demand an answer for the one who said it, rather it is a Du’aa &
Istighfaar of a Mu’min for other Mu’mineen, there is reward of Allaah in it.
The one for whom this Du’aa is made, it is not necessary for him to return a
du’aa similar to it; as compared to Salaam Tahiyyah for verily it is ordained
upon every Muslim from the Nass [of Qur’aan-o-Sunnah] and the Ijmaa of Ummah,
it is from the right of every Muslim. And for whom Salaam Tahiyyah is said, it
is obligatory for him to reply it, even if he [the one who said the salaam] is
a Kaafir. This is why when the Jews would salute the Prophet (peace be upon
him), he would reply them with ((Alaikum))”
[Saarim
al-Munki: 1/118-119]
He further writes:
فالصلاة والسلام عليه
صلى الله عليه وسلم في مسجده وسائر المساجد وسائر البقاع مشروع بالكتاب والسنة
والإجماع، وأما السلام عليه عند قبره من داخل الحجرة فهذا كان مشروعاً لما كان
ممكناً بدخول من يدخل على عائشة....
“Salaat
and Salaam upon the Prophet (peace be upon him) in his Mosque, or any other
mosque, or any place of the world is ordained (Mashroo’) due to the proof from
Kitaab, Sunnah, and Ijmaa. As for the salaam upon him close to his grave after
entering the apartment [of Aa’ishah] then it was only ordained for the one who
could enter into the apartment of Aa’ishah.”
[Saarim
al-Munki: 1/119]
If someone does not accept these two types of
salaam and persists on saying that this ruling is for every salaam and the
Prophet (peace be upon him) answers all the salaams by himself, then it would
necessitate the takdheeb (denial) of the hadeeth in which it is said that
Allaah answers the salaam of the person by sending 10 blessings upon him. And
this is also far-fetched from Aql (intelligence), moreover, it is not also
established from any hadeeth.
Moreover, upon the denial of these two types
of salaam, this argument would also hold true that even the Jews &
Hypocrites used to greet the Prophet with Salaam in his lifetime, so would
Allaah send 10 blessings upon those as well?? Whereas, we cannot we imagine the
blessing and rehmah of Allaah upon the Jews and Munaafiqeen in Islaam. This
proves that the salaam that is said in front of him (peace be upon him) –
Salaam Tahiyyah, is different in ruling than the other salaam. This hadeeth [of
Abu Talhah] is concerning the Salaam Ma’moor, which is restricted to the
Believers, this is why, the command of this salaam is only given to the
Believers.
4-
If He (peace be upon him) would
have been alive in his grave just as he was alive before his death, meaning, if
his life was not Brzakhi rather Worldly life and anyone could make him hear his
voice, then the Sahaabah Karaam (radiallah anhum) would certainly have
expressed their difficulties and problems to the Prophet (peace be upon him),
or at-least they would have asked him to make du’aa for them, but there is no
such thing proven from the Sahaabah that they ever requested anything to the
Prophet (peace be upon him) besides saying salaam to him from close or from far
away. On the contrary, there are many occasions which clearly negate it. For
example, Sayyidunah Anas bin Maalik (radiallah anhu) narrates:
“Whenever
drought threatened them, `Umar bin Al-Khattaab used to ask Allah for rain
through Al-`Abbas bin `Abdul Muttalib, saying: ‘O Allah! We used to request our
Prophet to ask You for rain, and You would give us. Now we request the uncle of
our Prophet to ask You for rain, so give us rain.’ And they would be given
rain."
[Saheeh
Bukhaari: 3710]
This proves that the Sahaabah Karaam used to
ask Allaah through the Du’aa of the Prophet (peace be upon him), not through
his Dhaat (personality); otherwise, asking through his Dhaat was also possible
after his (peace be upon him) death, if this Istisqa (asking for rain) was
meant to ask through the Dhaat of Abbaas, then it was clearly a disgrace to ask
through the Dhaat of Abbaas leaving the Dhaat of the Prophet (peace be upon
him), which is improbable to be done by the Sahaabah. On the contrary, this
asking was done through his du’aa which he (peace be upon him) used to do
during his lifetime, but this process disconnected with his death.
The second thing that is proven from this is
that the Aqeedah of Sahaabah Karaam was also that the Prophet (peace be upon
him) does not hear our voice, even if it is from close; otherwise, they would
only have asked from the Prophet (peace be upon him) to make du’aa in times of
affliction.
If his (peace be upon him) life was the
worldly life and he could hear and understand everything then the Noble
Companion of the Prophet (peace be upon him) like Umar ibn al-Khattaab
(radiallah anhu) would never have asked his Ummati, Abbaas (radiallah anhu), to
make du’aa instead of the Prophet (peace be upon him).
Similarly, it is not proven in the whole
encyclopedia of hadeeth that any Sahaabi ever asked from the Prophet (peace be
upon him) for a request or a Du’aa besides saying Salaam.
5-
Moreover, the supporters of
Hayaat un-Nabi also present the following hadeeth as their evidence:
الأنبياء - صلوات الله عليهم - أحياء في قبورهم يصلون
“The
Prophets – May Allaah’s blessings be upon them – are alive in their graves, and
perform prayers”
[Musnad Abu
Ya’la: 6/147; Akhbaar Asfahaan by al-Asbahaani: 2/83; Hayaat ul-Anbiya by
Bayhaqi: H. 1]
Regardless of the authenticity of this
hadeeth, we want to ask such people that if according to your view, salaam is
being said to the Prophet (peace be upon him) every single moment, and he
(peace be upon him) is constantly replying to those Salaams, which proves
Hayaat un-Nabi according to you then is it that the Prophet (peace be upon him)
is replying to those salaams even while performing Salaah in the grave, which
is something prohibited to be done in according to the Ahnaaf??? As it is
written in the famous and reliable book of Ahnaaf “Hidaayah”:
“Praying person will not answer the
salaam with his tongue, because it is speech, and neither would he do that with
[the indication of] his hand, because that is also a salaam in Ma’nawi sense”
[Al-Hidaayah:
1/142]
It is something to ponder upon with cool mind
that if Fiqh Hanafi is Bar-Haqq [based upon Truth] then the opinion of Prophet
(peace be upon him) hearing and replying to the salaam of every person at every
time is Mardoo (rejected), and if this opinion is correct then…. there goes the
funeral of Fiqh Hanafi!
6-
Some people try to deduce the
issue of Hayaat un-Nabi from the hadeeth which says that the Prophet (peace be
upon him) said concerning the second coming of Eesa (peace be upon him) that:
“If
he stood by my grave and said ‘O Muhammad’, then I would certainly answer him”
[Musnad Abu
Ya’la: 6584]
However, the chain of this hadeeth is Da’eef,
because the narrator Abdullah bin Wahb al-Misri is Mudallis and is narrating
with AN, without affirming his hearing.
Moreover, what is meant by standing in this
hadeeth is that he would say Salaam, and what is meant by answer in this
hadeeth is that he (peace be upon him) would give the answer to his salaam, as
is narrated in another chain of the same hadeeth:
“He
would certainly come to my grave to say Salaam, and I will certainly answer his
Salaam”
[al-Mustadrak
Ala as-Saheehayn: 2/651 H. 4162]
This chain is Da’eef as well. Muhammad bin
Ishaaq bin Yasaar in its chain is also a Mudallis and is narrating with AN.
Another hadeeth that is presented on this
issue is that He (peace be upon him) said:
“The
Prophet’s of Allaah are alive and they are given sustenance”
[Sunan Ibn
Majah: 1637]
The chain of this hadeeth is weak due to
being Munqati’ (Disconnected), as Haafidh Ibn Katheer writes: “There is a disconnection
in its chain between Ubaadah bin Nasi and Abu Darda (radiallah anhu), because
he (Ubaadah) did not get the period of Abu Darda (radiallah anhu)” [Tafseer Ibn
Katheer: 3/260, Under Surah Ahzaab: 56]
Moreover, in its chain there is another
Inqita as well, as Imaam Bukhaari said: “The narration of Zayd bin Ayman from
Ubaadah bin Nasi is Mursal” [al-Taareekh al-Kabeer of al-Bukhaari: 3/387]
[2] This hadeeth is declared to be “Saheeh” by Imaam Ibn Hibbaan (915)
and Imaam al-Daya al-Maqdisi (Fath ul-Kabeer by as-Suyooti H. 142), whereas,
Haafidh Iraaqi declared its chain to be Jayyid (Takhreej Ahadeeth al-Ahya H.
1004)
Sulemaan the
client of Hasan bin Ali is Thiqah in its chain. Imaam Ibn Hibbaan, Imaam Haakim
and Imaam Daya al-Maqdisi etc have done his tawtheeq by doing the tasheeh of
his narration
A Shaahid of
this hadeeth is also narrated by Sayyidunah Abdur Rahmaan bin Awf (radiallah
anhu), whose chain is Hasan (Musnad Ahmed: 1/191).
This hadeeth
is declared Saheeh by Imaam Ibn Hibbaan (810), and Imaam Haakim (al-Mustadrak:
1/345) declared it to be authentic upon the conditions of Bukhaari and Muslim
and Imaam Dhahabi followed him in that.
Its narrator
Abul Huwayrath bin Abdur Rahmaan bin Mu’aawiyyah is Hasan ul-Hadeeth according
to the Jumhoor, because compared to the tad’eef of Imaam Maalik (al-Kaamil:
4/309), Imaam Nasaa’ee (Kitaab ad-Du’afa: 365), and Imaam Abu Haatim (5/284):
Imaam Ibn Khuzaymah (1450), Imaam Ahmed bin Hanbal (al-Jarh: 5/284), Imaam Ibn
Hibbaan (Thiqaat: 3060), Imaam Haakim (al-Mustadrak: 3/72), & Imaam Daya
al-Maqdisi (al-Ahadeeth al-Mukhtaara: 930), have done his tawtheeq. Moreover,
the opinion of Imaam Yahya ibn Ma’een that is in accordance with Jumhoor will
be taken i.e. the opinion of Tawtheeq.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.