Introduction

In the name of Allah, the Most Compassionate, the Most Merciful. We praise Him and invoke blessings upon His noble Messenger. To proceed: After the Noble Qur’an, the Hadith of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) is the second source of Islamic knowledge and the foundation of the Islamic way of life. The believer’s life revolves around the Hadith of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him). Without Hadith, understanding and implementing the Qur’an is not easy either. Taking advantage of this natural love and reliance upon Hadith, many forgers are spreading various fabricated statements in society under the name of “Hadith.” In every age, scholars have identified these forged and fabricated statements through examination and made Muslims aware of them.

Although the reading, teaching, and practice of Hadith have continued in our country for generations, considerable neglect is observed in distinguishing authentic, weak, and fabricated Hadith. For generations, countless fabricated, baseless, and false statements have been, and continue to be, circulated in our society as Hadith. Through this, we are becoming immersed in the grave sin of attributing lies to the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him). In addition, we are being harmed in two ways. First, these fabricated Hadith have kept us from learning, practicing, and acting upon authentic Hadith. Second, by acting upon them, we are making ourselves liable for punishment instead of reward from Allah.

Since 1998, my respected father-in-law, the Pir of Furfura, Hazrat Mawlana Abu al-Ansar Siddiqi al-Quraishi (may Allah preserve him), has been instructing me to write a book about fabricated and forged Hadith prevalent in society. Following his instruction, I wrote and submitted some material. In 2002–2003, I wrote some articles on this subject in several issues of Nida-e Islam. However, because of limitations in ability, lack of time, and other reasons, I was unable to publish the subject in book form. Finally, through Allah’s boundless mercy, I have been able to publish this book, and I offer Him countless thanks.

Two kinds of confusion prevail concerning forged Hadith. Many people think that “Hadith” means the words of the Messenger (peace be upon him). Therefore, considering a Hadith weak supposedly means showing disregard for the words or statements of the Messenger (peace be upon him). Some think that no matter how weak it may be, since it is a statement of the Messenger (peace be upon him), it must be accepted and followed. This notion is undoubtedly erroneous.

Yet an even more serious confusion exists among many people in opposition to this. Many “ignorant” scholars think that since Hadith were transmitted orally through chains of transmitters and were written down and compiled several hundred years after the Messenger (peace be upon him), they contain widespread errors. Therefore, Hadith cannot be relied upon. Others think that since there are many forged statements among Hadith, we may accept some and reject others according to our own reason and judgment.

The cause of all these confusions is ignorance of the precise and scientific methods used by the Companions and the later Hadith scholars of the Muslim Ummah to examine chains of transmission and determine the reliability of Hadith. For this reason, in the first part of this book I have attempted to discuss in detail the definition of Hadith, the ruling on lying in the name of Hadith, its history, the methods used by the Companions and later Hadith scholars to verify Hadith, the results of their examination, the types of lies, the classification of lying transmitters, and methods for identifying forged Hadith. I hope this discussion will remove readers’ doubts and obscurities and make clear to them the extraordinary qualities of the Muslim Ummah in preserving the authenticity of Hadith.

In the second part, I have discussed thematically a number of baseless, fabricated, and forged Hadith prevalent in our society. It should be noted that I have generally not expressed my own opinions concerning forged Hadith. From the Imams among the Followers and the Followers of the Followers in the second Islamic century through the countless Hadith scholars of later times, scholars compiled all Hadith circulated in the name of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) and, through deep examination and verification, offered judgments concerning the Hadith and transmitters. I have relied principally upon those judgments and have cited their opinions. Where Hadith scholars differed concerning a Hadith, I have mentioned their disagreement. In some cases, I have tried to explain the matter through somewhat detailed discussion.

In one or two cases, I found that certain books prevalent in our society contain statements presented as Hadith that cannot be found in any book with an authentic, weak, or fabricated chain of transmission. These are fabricated and baseless. In such cases I have expressed my own opinion. In later volumes, God willing, I shall attempt to discuss this type of Hadith in greater detail.

It should be mentioned here that many such statements are directly presented as Hadith. Many other statements are generally made as causes of reward, virtue, blessing, or harm, but readers or listeners understand them as words of Allah and His Messenger (peace be upon him). Many such statements are found in various religious books prevalent in our country, and I have occasionally discussed them as well.

To demonstrate their prevalence, I have sometimes quoted from common religious books. In all such cases, my purpose is to show that the statement is widespread. Criticizing or belittling the author or book is not my purpose. Rather, while acknowledging their service, my purpose is to warn readers about fabricated statements circulated in the name of Hadith. All authors will receive reward from Allah for their sincere efforts. We pray to Almighty Allah for all these authors: may He accept their great service, grant them the best reward, and forgive our mistakes and theirs.

One reason for the book’s increased size is that, when discussing fabricated Hadith on almost every subject, I have also shed some light on the authentic Hadith narrated concerning that subject. This was necessary for two reasons. First, forgers often attach some words and sentences from authentic Hadith to a forged Hadith when composing it. Moreover, because of translation, the meanings of forged and authentic Hadith may sometimes appear similar. Thus, if only the forged Hadith is mentioned, an ordinary reader may think that all Hadith on the subject are forged—or may ask how a Hadith with this meaning found in a certain book could be forged.

Second, our purpose is not merely to identify forged Hadith. Our purpose is to abandon forged Hadith in belief and practice, act upon authentic Hadith, and strive for our salvation. Therefore, when mentioning forged Hadith, I have said at least something briefly about the authentic Hadith concerning the same subject.

I wish to caution the honored reader about one matter. We know that criticizing others is much easier than acting ourselves and is more pleasing to human nature. Therefore, when we learn something new, we often use that new knowledge to find fault with others.

Someone said to me, “Such-and-such people call others to Allah’s path using weak or forged Hadith. I keep telling them to read books of authentic Hadith, but they do not listen.” I replied, “They are going from door to door calling people with weak Hadith; how many people’s doors have you visited with books of authentic Hadith?” Mere criticism brings no benefit.

From this book we will learn about many forged Hadith. This knowledge can easily cause us to fall into Satan’s trap. In tea shops, mosques, and sermons, we may criticize various individuals or groups and say that they narrate or practice such-and-such forged Hadith. Through this conduct we will earn sin instead of reward.

That is not the purpose of writing this book. Its purpose is that, instead of relying on unreliable, baseless, and fabricated Hadith, we improve our actions and beliefs by relying on authentic Hadith. We shall personally practice the authentic Hadith we learn and encourage others to practice them. We shall never again present the forged Hadith we learn as Hadith or act upon them. If someone does so, we shall, when possible, try to correct him with love and respect. In every circumstance, we shall pray to the Majestic and Merciful Allah for his forgiveness and acceptance, and for our own forgiveness and acceptance.

Honored reader, I am conscious of my shortcomings. I know that I essentially lack the qualification to write on this subject. Everything I have written is largely borrowed knowledge, and it is natural that it contains mistakes. Therefore, if you point out my errors in any matter, I shall be grateful to you and shall honor you as a teacher.

As I have already said, the person who most encouraged me to write this book was my respected father-in-law, the Pir of Furfura, Mawlana Abu al-Ansar Siddiqi. I pray before Almighty Allah that He grant him the finest reward and protect him, his children, relatives, and devotees. In addition, many friends, colleagues, students, and well-wishers encouraged me. My friends Dr. Muhammad Abu Sina, Dr. Muhammad Aliullah, Mr. A.S.M. Shuaib Ahmad, and Mr. Muhammad Abdul Malek reviewed the manuscript and offered many constructive suggestions. May Almighty Allah grant everyone the best reward.

In spelling, the general practice of the Bangla Academy has been followed. However, for Arabic and Persian words, I have tried to use letters close to the original pronunciation. The matter is difficult. Countless Arabic words have become part of the Bengali language with incorrect pronunciation and transliteration under Persian-Urdu influence. In many cases, they have been retained in that form.

This book is a very modest effort in the service of the Hadith of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him). There are many deficiencies in my work. I humbly pray before Almighty Allah that He graciously forgive my errors, accept this insignificant service, and make it a means of salvation for me, my parents, wife, children, relatives, friends, and all readers. Amen!

Abdullah Jahangir

Part One

Hadith and Fraud in the Name of Hadith

1.1. Revelation and Hadith

1.1.1. Revelation and Its Importance in Preserving Humanity
Almighty Allah loves the human race, His creation, immensely. He created human beings as the finest of creation. He gave them knowledge, conscience, reason, and judgment, which guide them toward continual growth and welfare. Human knowledge, however, has limits. Through knowledge, conscience, and judgment, people can learn many things about the various matters of the worldly realm and advance toward improvement and prosperity, but they cannot know what lies beyond their senses. Therefore, concerning matters beyond the senses, human knowledge, conscience, and reason are similarly unable to reach a correct solution. We can understand this simply by looking at history.

People learn worldly matters through experience and research: how to cultivate crops for a better harvest, how to build a more durable house, how to drive a vehicle faster, how to cook while preserving more nutritional value, how to conduct business for greater profit or greater security of capital, how to treat illness to increase the possibility, certainty, or rate of recovery, and so forth. Such matters can be known through human experience, research, reason, and thought.

But knowledge concerning religious belief, action, and conduct can never be acquired through experience or sensory knowledge. What belief should one hold concerning Allah? How should one believe in the prophets and messengers? What is the correct belief about the Hereafter? How should one call upon Allah? Which actions bring more of His mercy and blessing? How should one live to increase the possibility of salvation in the Hereafter? By what method can one quickly attain Allah’s friendship? Which deeds earn greater reward? Through which actions are sins forgiven? Most such religious and theological matters can never be known conclusively through experience or research, nor can problems concerning them be finally resolved through research or experiential knowledge.

For this reason, even after creating human beings as the finest of creation with knowledge, intellect, and conscience, Allah sent prophets and messengers throughout the ages to guide them. From among different nations and peoples, He chose great individuals and sent His word, revelation, or divine communication to them. Through revelation He taught matters that people cannot know, or about which they cannot reach final conclusions, through reason, intellect, conscience, research, and experience. He also revealed the degrees, importance, and methods of practicing matters that people can recognize through intellect and conscience as good or bad.

Without preserving and following the knowledge received through revelation, the preservation of humanity and human civilization is impossible. To remove conflicts of interest, violence, and selfishness and to develop genuine love, service, and human values, we must depend upon revealed knowledge. Whatever is said about belief, honesty, sin, virtue, the Creator, the Hereafter, and similar matters outside revelation in the light of human conscience, experience, or research only increases debate, conflict, and division. For in these matters, ultimate truth can never be known through human effort without revelation. Reviewing the history of human civilization, we see that nations were led astray because the knowledge received through revelation was distorted or lost.

1.1.2. Causes of the Distortion or Loss of Revelation
From the accounts in the Qur’an and Hadith and from the history of various religions, we see that there are two principal causes for the loss of knowledge received through revelation:
1. Revealed knowledge or scripture being lost or destroyed through neglect, failure to memorize it, or failure to preserve it.
2. Passing off human statements as revelation, or mixing human statements or knowledge with revelation. (Khondkar Abdullah Jahangir, Islamic Creed in the Light of the Qur’an and Sunnah, pp. 11–15.)

In the first stage, the knowledge of revelation disappears completely. In the second stage, some knowledge remains preserved under the name of revelation, but human knowledge-based statements are preserved within it as well. There is no means of knowing or separating which statements are revelation and which are human. Consequently, the book or knowledge preserved under the name of “revelation” becomes worthless.

Most earlier nations distorted the knowledge of revelation through the second method. Among Jews, Christians, and most followers of other religions, certain books have been preserved under names such as “religious scripture” and Divine Scripture. Countless human statements, narratives, and opinions have been mixed into them. There is no way to separate revelation from human statements, nor any way to extract the teaching of revelation from them in an unadulterated form.

1.1.3. Two Types of Revelation: the Qur’an and Hadith
It is repeatedly stated in the Noble Qur’an that the Majestic Allah gave His great Messenger two things: one, the “Book” or “Scripture,” and the second, “Wisdom.” (Surah al-Baqarah 2:129, 151, 231; Surah Al ‘Imran 3:164; Surah al-Nisa’ 4:113; Surah al-Ahzab 33:34; Surah al-Jumu‘ah 62:2.) This Book or Scripture is the Noble Qur’an, compiled exactly in the words and sentences of revelation. Wisdom is the additional practical knowledge conveyed through revelation and compiled under the name Hadith. Thus, in Islam revelation is of two types: the Qur’an and Hadith. Special measures were taken to preserve these two fundamental sources of Islam. On the one hand, instructions were given to memorize the Qur’an and Hadith verbatim, word for word, so that the knowledge of revelation would be preserved in its pure form. On the other hand, it was emphatically prohibited to attribute to Allah and His Messenger any statement that had not been established with certainty.

1.1.4. The Practical Definition of Hadith
Hadith means the words, actions, or approvals of the Messenger (peace be upon him). That is, whatever the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) said, did, or approved in light of the knowledge received through revelation is called Hadith.

In the terminology of the Hadith scholars, any statement, action, approval, or description that has been circulated or claimed to be that of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) is known as Hadith. The words, actions, or approvals of the Companions and Followers are also called Hadith. A Hadith consisting of an action, statement, or approval of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) is called a marfu‘ Hadith. A Hadith related as an action, statement, or approval of a Companion is called a mawquf Hadith, while one related as an action, statement, or approval of a Follower is called a maqtu‘ Hadith. [‘Iraqi, Zayn al-Din ‘Abd al-Rahim ibn al-Husayn (d. 806 AH), al-Taqyid wa’l-Idah, pp. 66–70; Fath al-Mughith, pp. 52–63; Sakhaqi, Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Rahman (d. 902 AH), Fath al-Mughith 1:8–9, 177–155; Suyuti, Jalal al-Din ‘Abd al-Rahman ibn Abi Bakr (d. 911 AH), Tadrib al-Rawi 1:183–194.]

It should be noted here that, in the terminology of the Hadith scholars, any action, statement, approval, or description claimed or stated to belong to the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) is considered a Hadith. The Hadith scholars have examined whether it truly is a statement of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) and, on the basis of reliability, classified Hadith into various types and levels. We shall explain these in later discussions.

1.1.5. The Importance of Hadith in the Islamic Way of Life
Discussing the importance of Hadith in the Islamic way of life may seem unnecessary. The many commands of the Noble Qur’an, the countless instructions of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him), and the practice of the Companions prove beyond doubt that Hadith is the second source and foundation of the Islamic way of life. In fact, people of every age of the Muslim Ummah agree on this. From the age of the Companions onward, efforts have continued in every age to learn, compile, explain, and guide human life in accordance with Hadith. In this way, an enormous treasury of knowledge concerning Hadith developed.

Nevertheless, certain Jewish and Christian Orientalists and some scholars of the Muslim Ummah have, at various times and in various ways, attempted to deny the importance of Hadith. We may divide the proofs presented in support of their claims into four categories:
(1) On the basis of some verses of the Noble Qur’an, it is claimed that “everything is explained in the Qur’an”; therefore Hadith is unnecessary.
(2) By raising objections concerning the transmission and compilation of Hadith, it is claimed that much forgery entered Hadith; therefore it cannot be relied upon.
(3) By citing certain Hadith, attempts are made to prove that Hadith contains statements opposed to science or knowledge, or contradictions.
(4) From certain Hadith they present “proof” that the Messenger of Allah and the Companions prohibited giving importance to Hadith.

A detailed discussion of this subject is not possible within the scope of this book. However, in this book we have discussed forgery in Hadith and the separation of forged Hadith from authentic Hadith. The foundation of all our discussion, and of all the efforts of the Muslim Ummah from the age of the Companions until today, is that without following the Hadith of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him), one cannot practice the Qur’an, practice Islam, or be a Muslim. The Hadith of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) is one of the essential provisions for our journey through life. However, we must rely upon authentic and established Hadith.

Without Hadith, there is no way to accept the Qur’an or practice Islam. We may discuss the first of the arguments raised by these people against Hadith. We shall see that accepting Hadith is essential in order to accept the Qur’an. Consider the following points:

(1) The highest model for the practical application and observance of the guidance received by humanity through revelation is the prophets who received revelation and the disciples and companions who were granted their company. Their model lives are essentially the only driving force for others to follow and practice revelation. Therefore, members of all communities preserve and teach the lives, actions, and examples of religious preachers, their disciples, messengers, and companions as the principal source of religious practice. The life, actions, sacrifices, patience, love for humanity, fear of Allah, steadfastness upon truth, and so forth, of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) cannot be known without Hadith. Separating a Muslim from Hadith means separating him from the actual life of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him). In this way, it becomes very easy to separate him from the Qur’an and from Islam.

(2) Without relying on Hadith, it is entirely impossible to know the Qur’an’s background and identity. No information about the life, identity, trustworthiness, honesty, or prophethood of Muhammad (peace be upon him) can be known except through Hadith. How he received, taught, and compiled the Qur’an, and so on, cannot be known without the information of Hadith.

(3) Without relying on Hadith, it is also impossible to practice the Qur’an. The Noble Qur’an contains an account of everything, but all of it is in the form of “general principles” or “basic instructions.” Most Qur’anic commands are basic instructions that cannot be practiced without explanation. The greatest and highest act of Islam is salat, or prayer. The Noble Qur’an commands prayer in more than a hundred places, but it does not explain the method of prayer. In various places it commands bowing and prostration. It says, “Perform prayer as I have taught you to pray,” yet nowhere in the Qur’an is this method of prayer taught. What is salat or prayer? When must it be performed? How many rak‘ahs are to be performed at each time? How is each rak‘ah performed? How is Qur’an recited in each rak‘ah? How many bowings and prostrations are there? How are bowing and prostration performed? None of these matters is taught in the Qur’an. We cannot perform the Qur’an’s greatest command without relying on Hadith. Likewise, most of the Qur’an’s commands cannot be practiced without the explanation provided by Hadith.

(4) Some commands in the Noble Qur’an appear to contradict one another. For example, in one place wine, gambling, and similar things are mentioned as permissible, while elsewhere they are mentioned as prohibited. In one place fighting against unbelievers is commanded, while elsewhere people are instructed to refrain from every type of opposition and warfare. Without the guidance of Hadith, it cannot be known which of these commands came first, which came later, or how they should be practiced. Thus, if Hadith is discarded, it becomes easy to mislead people through arbitrary and invented interpretations of these verses.

This is essentially why Jewish, Christian, Qadiani, Baha’i, and similar groups conduct sweeping propaganda against Hadith. Their purpose is to distance the Muslim Ummah from the Qur’an and Islam. They too know that the Qur’an cannot be practiced in any way without the help of Hadith. They invoke the name of the “Qur’an” mainly to deceive simple-hearted Muslims.

(5) We have seen that Allah gave His Messenger (peace be upon him) two things: the Book and Wisdom. Naturally, the Qur’an itself is also wisdom. However, from its repeated separate mention we learn that Allah gave His beloved Messenger (peace be upon him) additional wisdom or knowledge beyond the Qur’an, and that through this wisdom he gave humanity many additional teachings. We know that these additional teachings from the Qur’an were compiled as Hadith. There is no other way to know and follow his wisdom apart from Hadith. Therefore, in accordance with the Qur’an’s instructions, we must conduct our lives by following both the Qur’an and Hadith.

(6) The Qur’an commands obedience to the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him). It also commands following him in addition to obeying him. [The Arabic Qur’anic verse is preserved in the source.] “Say: If you love Allah, then follow me; Allah will love you and forgive you your sins.” (Surah Al ‘Imran 3:31.) We know that obedience means carrying out commands and avoiding prohibitions. Following someone means acting exactly as he acted. Without relying on Hadith, it is in no way possible to follow the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him). Although commands and prohibitions are mentioned in the Noble Qur’an, the Messenger’s actions and way of life are not discussed anywhere in it. Therefore, it is utterly impossible to follow the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) by looking only at the Qur’an. To gain Allah’s love and forgiveness in accordance with the Qur’an’s instruction, we must follow the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) according to the accounts in Hadith.

(7) The Noble Qur’an states: [The Arabic Qur’anic verse is preserved in the source.] “Indeed, in the Messenger of Allah you have an excellent example.” (Surah al-Ahzab 33:21.) The actual way of life of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) in personal, family, social, governmental, and other spheres is not described in the Qur’an. From this we understand that, in order to follow the example of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) as commanded by the Qur’an, we must rely upon Hadith.

(8) The Noble Qur’an states: [The Arabic Qur’anic verse is preserved in the source.] “Whatever the Messenger gives you, take it, and whatever he forbids you, abstain from it.” (Surah al-Hashr 59:7.) We know that during his long prophetic life the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) gave his Companions many teachings and detailed guidance concerning various matters of life. These teachings and instructions are also included in “whatever the Messenger has given you.” Therefore, to accept everything the Messenger has given, we must rely upon Hadith along with the Qur’an.

We shall learn about their other objections concerning the compilation, writing, transmission, and forgery of Hadith from other discussions in this book. Here, however, we understand that, in accordance with the Qur’an’s guidance, we must shape our lives in the light of Hadith, follow the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) precisely in the light of Hadith, build our lives according to his example in the light of Hadith, and carry out the Qur’an’s instructions on the basis of Hadith. We also see that without Hadith it is impossible under any circumstances to practice the Qur’an or establish an Islamic way of life.

The Muslim Ummah is essentially unanimous concerning this importance of Hadith. That is why its scholars followed the finest methods of examination and judgment to resist forgery and falsehood in the name of Hadith. Before discussing their methods of examination and judgment, we shall discuss the definition of falsehood and the ruling on falsehood in the name of revelation. I pray to Almighty Allah for success.قُلْ إِن كُنتُمْ تُحِبُّونَ اللَّهَ فَاتَّبِعُونِي يُحْبِبْكُمُ اللَّهُ وَيَغْفِرْ لَكُمْ ذُنُوبَكُمْ ۗ“Say: If you love Allah, then follow me; Allah will love you and forgive you your sins.” (Surah Al ‘Imran 3:31.)
We know that obedience means carrying out commands and avoiding prohibitions. Following someone means acting exactly as he acted. Without relying on Hadith, it is in no way possible to follow the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him). Although the Noble Qur’an mentions commands and prohibitions, it nowhere discusses the actions and way of life of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him). Therefore, it is utterly impossible to follow the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) by looking only at the Qur’an. To gain Allah’s love and forgiveness in accordance with the Qur’an’s instruction, we must follow the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) according to the accounts in Hadith.

(7) The Noble Qur’an states:لَّقَدْ كَانَ لَكُمْ فِي رَسُولِ اللَّهِ أُسْوَةٌ حَسَنَةٌ“Indeed, in the Messenger of Allah you have an excellent example.” (Surah al-Ahzab 33:21.)
The actual way of life of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) in personal, family, social, governmental, and other spheres is not described in the Qur’an. From this we understand that, in order to follow the example of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) as commanded by the Qur’an, we must rely upon Hadith.

(8) The Noble Qur’an states:وَمَا آتَاكُمُ الرَّسُولُ فَخُذُوهُ وَمَا نَهَاكُمْ عَنْهُ فَانتَهُوا“Whatever the Messenger gives you, take it, and whatever he forbids you, abstain from it.” (Surah al-Hashr 59:7.)
We know that during his long prophetic life the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) gave his Companions many teachings and detailed guidance concerning various matters of life. These teachings and instructions are also included in “whatever the Messenger has given you.” Therefore, to accept everything the Messenger has given, we must rely upon Hadith along with the Qur’an.

1.2. Falsehood and Falsehood in the Name of Revelation

1.2.1. Definition of Falsehood
It is difficult to define something famous and well known. What is the definition of falsehood? Falsehood is the opposite of truth. Whatever is not true is false. Saying something that is not actually correct or true is false.
1.2.1.1. Intentional versus Unintentional Falsehood
The matter is clear. However, Muslim scholars have differed somewhat regarding intentional and unintentional falsehood. The scholars of the Mu‘tazilah believed that if someone mistakenly said something contrary to reality, it would not be considered falsehood in the terminology of the Shariah. Only knowingly speaking falsely would be considered falsehood. The scholars of Ahl al-Sunnah wa al-Jama‘ah have rejected this view. According to them, even speaking falsely unknowingly or mistakenly is considered falsehood in the terminology of the Shariah.
Imam Abu Zakariyya Yahya ibn Sharaf al-Nawawi (676 AH) said: “The view of the scholars who follow the truth is that intentionally, unintentionally, mistakenly, or out of ignorance, saying anything contrary to reality is falsehood.” [Al-Nawawi, Yahya ibn Sharaf (676 AH), Sharh Sahih Muslim 1/94]
He also said: “According to our scholars who follow Ahl al-Sunnah, falsehood means saying anything contrary to reality, whether intentionally or mistakenly. According to the Mu‘tazilah, only intentional lying is considered falsehood.” (Al-Nawawi, Sharh Sahih Muslim 1/69).
1.2.1.2. Unintentional Falsehood in the Light of Hadith
From the use of hadith, we become certain that saying anything contrary to reality—intentionally, unintentionally, out of ignorance, or for any other reason—is considered falsehood.
1. Jabir ibn Abdullah (RA) said: Arabic (******)
—A slave of Hatib ibn Abi Balta‘ah (RA) came to the Messenger (PBUH) and said: “O Messenger of Allah! Surely Hatib will enter Hell.” The Messenger of Allah (PBUH) said: “You have lied. He will not enter Hell, because he was present at Badr and Hudaybiyyah.” (Muslim, al-Sahih 4/1942).
Here the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) deemed the statement of this slave of Hatib to be false. He had not intentionally lied about anything in the past. Rather, he had expressed an opinion about the future. He said what he believed. But since his prediction was contrary to reality, the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) called him a liar. From this we understand that if any report about the past or future is contrary to reality, it will be considered falsehood. The reporter’s intention, lack of intention, ignorance, or any other matter is not relevant here. However, the sin or crime of falsehood is connected with intention.
2. The Tabi‘i Salim ibn Abdullah said: I heard my father, Abdullah ibn Umar (RA), say: Arabic (*****)
—“This is your plain of Baida, concerning which you falsely attribute something to the Messenger of Allah (PBUH)” (you say that he began his ihram for Hajj from this place), “whereas the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) assumed ihram for Hajj near the mosque in the plain of Dhu al-Hulayfah.” (Muslim, al-Sahih 2/843).
Naturally, Ibn Umar (RA) was not accusing these Companions and Tabi‘is of intentionally lying. The Messenger of Allah (PBUH) performed Hajj with more than one hundred thousand Companions during the Farewell Hajj. He left Madinah, spent the night in the plain of Dhu al-Hulayfah, and assumed ihram for Hajj there the following morning. The plain of Baida lies adjacent to the plain of Dhu al-Hulayfah. Those Companions who were some distance away did not hear him say the talbiyah from Dhu al-Hulayfah; rather, they heard him reciting the talbiyah in the plain of Baida. They thought that he had begun his ihram from Baida itself. Thus, it became widely circulated that the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) had begun his ihram from the plain of Baida. Since Abdullah ibn Umar was nearby, he knew what had actually happened.
Thus, we see that the report about assuming ihram from Baida was an unintentional mistake. Those who conveyed the report spoke truthfully according to their knowledge. But because the report was contrary to reality, Ibn Umar called it falsehood.

1.2.1.3. Falsehood versus ‘Mawdu‘’ (Mawdu‘) and ‘Batil’
(In the original Arabic pronunciation, we are accustomed to saying Mawdu‘. In Bengali usage influenced by Persian and Urdu, however, we usually say Mawzu‘.)
In hadith terminology, and in the terminology of the Companions and Tabi‘is during the first century, a false statement attributed to the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) was called a “false hadith.” Abu Umamah (RA) said that the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) said: Arabic (*******)
—“Whoever intentionally reports a ‘false hadith’ in my name will have to reside in Hell.” (Al-Tabarani, Sulayman ibn Ahmad (360 AH), al-Mu‘jam al-Kabir 8/122)
Even when something the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) had not said was attributed to him, the Companions would say, “This hadith is false,” “a false hadith,” or use similar expressions. Regarding such people, they used expressions such as “liar” and “he lies.” [Ibn Abi Hatim, Abd al-Rahman ibn Muhammad (327 AH), al-Jarh wa al-Ta‘dil 1/349, 350, 351, 3/407, 6/212, 8/16, 52, 325; al-Dhahabi, Muhammad ibn Ahmad (748 AH), Mizan al-I‘tidal 1/271, 285, 2/80, 109, 122, 241, 3/4, 50, 375, 467, 475, 4/31, 91, 178, 191, 420, 428, 437, 5/3, 29, 52, 54, 88, 128, 169, 207, 220, 6/24, 55, 138, 246, 249, 534, 545, 566, 7/219, 341, 393, 8/162, 182, 196; Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, Ahmad ibn Ali (852 AH), Fath al-Bari 13/113; al-Munawi, Muhammad Abd al-Ra’uf (1031 AH), Fayd al-Qadir 1/540, 3/219, 5/300, 6/15, 216, 221, 353.]
From the second century of the Hijrah, as falsehood in the name of hadith spread, the hadith scholars began using another word synonymous with falsehood to identify these liars. The word is Arabic (*****). Its basic meanings are to lower, drop, give birth, or produce. It is also used in the sense of fabricated. [Ibn Durayd, Muhammad ibn al-Hasan (321 AH), Jamhara al-Lughah 3/95; al-Jawhari, Isma‘il ibn Muhammad (393 AH), al-Sihah 3/1299; Ibn Faris, Ahmad (395 AH), Mu‘jam Maqayis al-Lughah 6/117–118; Ibn al-Athir, Muhammad ibn al-Mubarak (606 AH), al-Nihayah 5/197–198; Ibn Manzur, Muhammad ibn al-Mukarram (711 AH), Lisan al-Arab 8/396–397; Fallata, Umar ibn Hasan, al-Wad‘ fi al-Hadith 1/108]
In English: To lay, lay off, lay down, put down, set up, give birth, produce, humiliate, to be low, humble (Hans Wehr, A Dictionary of Modern Written Arabic, p. 1076).
In later times, this word became widespread in the terminology of the hadith scholars. In their terminology, lying in the name of hadith is called wad‘, and this type of false hadith is called mawdu‘. In Bengali pronunciation influenced by Persian and Urdu, we generally say mawzu‘.
Many hadith scholars did not distinguish between intentional falsehood and unintentional falsehood or error. They called both types of false hadith mawdu‘ hadith. In Bengali, mawdu‘ may be translated as forged or fabricated.
The hadith scholars defined mawzu‘ hadith in two ways. Many scholars stated in their definition: “A fabricated, forged hadith is called a mawzu‘ hadith.” Here they defined it by considering the nature of the hadith.
Other hadith scholars stated: “A hadith narrated only by a liar narrator is a mawzu‘ hadith.” Here they considered the general identification of a mawzu‘ or forged hadith. We shall see in the following discussion that the hadith scholars primarily verified a narrator’s truthfulness or falsehood through comparative examination (cross-examination).
Some hadith scholars distinguished between intentional and unintentional falsehood. They referred to unintentional falsehood as batil and intentional falsehood as mawzu‘ or mawdu‘. If comparative examination and verification by the hadith scholars proved that the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) had not said a statement but that it had been attributed to him by mistake, they called that hadith batil. If examination showed that the narrator had intentionally or knowingly attributed the statement to the Messenger of Allah (PBUH), they called it a mawzu‘ hadith.
In compiling false hadith, the hadith scholars followed the first method. They regarded every type of falsehood, intentional and unintentional, as mawzu‘. Their purpose was to identify statements the Noble Messenger (PBUH) had not made and actions he had not performed but which had been attributed or publicized in his name, thereby preventing forgery in the name of revelation. Whether the narrator had lied intentionally or by mistake was not their concern. A separate system exists in the sciences of rijal and al-jarh wa al-ta‘dil for considering this matter. (Al-Mu‘allimi, Muqaddimat al-Fawa’id, p. 57).

1.2.2. The Ruling on Falsehood
Before discussing the ruling on lying in the name of revelation or hadith, we wish to discuss the ruling on falsehood in general. Hating falsehood is part of human nature. Therefore, in every human society, falsehood is regarded as sin, wrongdoing, and something hateful. Falsehood has been emphatically prohibited in the Noble Qur’an and the Noble Hadith. In various verses of the Noble Qur’an, believers have been commanded to be truthful in all circumstances. At the same time, falsehood has been described as a detestable sin and a cause of severe punishment.
Commanding constant truthfulness, it is stated:يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا اتَّقُوا اللَّهَ وَكُونُوا مَعَ الصَّادِقِينَ [٩:١١٩—O believers, fear Allah and be among the truthful. (Surah al-Tawbah: 119)
Regarding the terrible punishment for falsehood, it is stated:فِي قُلُوبِهِم مَّرَضٌ فَزَادَهُمُ اللَّهُ مَرَضًا ۖ وَلَهُمْ عَذَابٌ أَلِيمٌ بِمَا كَانُوا يَكْذِبُونَ [٢:١٠—There is a disease in their hearts, so Allah increased their disease, and for them is a painful punishment because they used to lie. (Surah al-Baqarah: 10)
Elsewhere it is stated:فَأَعْقَبَهُمْ نِفَاقًا فِي قُلُوبِهِمْ إِلَىٰ يَوْمِ يَلْقَوْنَهُ بِمَا أَخْلَفُوا اللَّهَ مَا وَعَدُوهُ وَبِمَا كَانُوا يَكْذِبُونَ [٩:٧٧—So He placed hypocrisy in their hearts until the Day they meet Him, because they broke their promise to Allah and because they used to lie. (Surah al-Tawbah: 77)
In another verse it is stated:إِنَّ اللَّهَ لَا يَهْدِي مَنْ هُوَ مُسْرِفٌ كَذَّابٌ [٤٠:٢٨—Allah does not guide one who is excessive and a liar. (Surah Ghafir: 28)
Countless hadiths mention falsehood as a terrible sin. In one hadith, Abdullah ibn Mas‘ud (RA) said that the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) said: Arabic (********)
—Truthfulness is righteousness. Truthfulness leads to righteousness, and righteousness leads to Paradise. A person who continually strives to speak the truth is eventually recorded by Allah as a siddiq, or supremely truthful person. Falsehood is sin. Falsehood leads to sin, and sin leads to Hell. A person who lies or continually strives to lie is eventually recorded as a great liar. [Al-Bukhari, Muhammad ibn Isma‘il (256 AH), al-Sahih 5/2261; Muslim ibn al-Hajjaj (262 AH), al-Sahih 4/2012–2013].
In the Noble Hadith, lying is regarded as one of the signs of hypocrisy. It has even been stated that a believer may commit many wrongs, but can never speak a lie. Sa‘d ibn Abi Waqqas (RA) said that the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) said: Arabic (*******)
—A believer may possess every habit in his nature, but treachery and falsehood cannot be part of it. [Al-Bazzar, Abu Bakr Ahmad ibn Amr (292 AH), al-Musnad 3/341; al-Haythami, Ali ibn Abi Bakr (807 AH), Majma‘ al-Zawa’id 1/92]

1.2.3. Falsehood in the Name of Revelation
Falsehood is always hateful. But if it is in the name of revelation, it is even more hateful and harmful. Generally, falsehood causes worldly harm to individuals or human society. Falsehood in the name of revelation, however, causes lasting worldly and otherworldly harm and destruction to human society. People then engage in various humanly devised practices in the name of religion and fall into worldly and otherworldly ruin.
We can see this clearly by looking at earlier religions. We have already said that presenting words derived from human knowledge as revelation is the cause of the distortion and disappearance of religion. Generally, the learned scholars of these religions presented such statements as revelation for the sake of the religion’s welfare. They thought that if they presented their words, explanations, and opinions as revelation, people’s ‘religiosity’ and ‘devotion’ would increase and Allah would be pleased. In this way, however, they distorted their religion and misled its adherents. They did not understand that if people could comprehend these matters through human intellect, revelation would not be needed.
A very familiar example of this is Christianity. According to the account of the commonly used, corrupted Bible, ‘Jesus Christ’ instructed his followers to worship Allah alone, observe the ten basic principles of Judaism, circumcise themselves, follow all the laws of the Torah, refrain from eating pork, and perform similar actions. The liar Saul, taking the name Paul, began preaching ‘for the propagation of Christianity and the increase of devotion among people’ that merely believing in and venerating ‘Jesus Christ’ was sufficient and that these actions need not be performed. He used to say, “I lie to every nation according to my preference, so that God’s honor may increase.”
In this way, he initiated the most shameful chapter in the history of humanity. Gradually, this Pauline religion of devotion without deeds spread among Christians. As a result, billions of human beings throughout the world became involved in shirk, kufr, and sin. Since belief alone was considered sufficient for Heaven, human-destructive sins, corruption, and crimes could not in any way be reduced in Christian societies through religious preaching.
Because falsehood in the name of revelation is the gravest form of falsehood, the Noble Qur’an and the Noble Hadith have emphatically prohibited speaking falsely, saying anything doubtful, or speaking conjecturally in the name of revelation, or in the name of Allah and His Messenger (PBUH). Comprehensive measures have been taken so that both forms of revelation sent down upon Muhammad, the Messenger of Allah (PBUH), remain preserved without alteration for all people until the Day of Resurrection.

1.2.4. Qur’anic Guidance for Protecting Revelation from Falsehood
There are two stages in spreading falsehood or conjecture-based statements in the name of revelation: first, speaking falsely in the name of revelation oneself; and second, accepting and propagating another person’s falsehood. To block both paths, the Noble Qur’an prohibits speaking falsely or conjecturally in the name of Allah. On the other hand, it prohibits accepting information spread by anyone without examining and verifying it.
1.2.4.1. Prohibition of Speaking Falsely or Conjecturally in the Name of Allah
In the Noble Qur’an, Almighty Allah has repeatedly and emphatically prohibited speaking falsely in His name. Likewise, He has emphatically prohibited saying anything about Allah without knowledge, based on guesswork, assumption, or conjecture. Lying in the name of the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) means lying in the name of Allah, because the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) speaks only on Allah’s behalf. Like the Qur’an, hadith is also Allah’s revelation. The people of the world received both forms of revelation solely through the Messenger of Allah (PBUH). Therefore, saying any false, fabricated, conjectural, or assumption-based statement in the name of the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) means lying in the name of Allah or saying something about Allah without knowledge. The Noble Qur’an repeatedly gives instructions concerning this. Here are several statements.
1. The Noble Qur’an repeatedly states:وَمَنْ أَظْلَمُ مِمَّنِ افْتَرَىٰ عَلَى اللَّهِ كَذِبًا—Who is a greater wrongdoer than one who fabricates a lie against Allah or about Allah? (Surah al-An‘am: 21, 93, 144; Surah al-A‘raf: 37; Surah Yunus: 17).
2. It is also stated:قَالَ لَهُم مُّوسَىٰ وَيْلَكُمْ لَا تَفْتَرُوا عَلَى اللَّهِ كَذِبًا فَيُسْحِتَكُم بِعَذَابٍ ۖ وَقَدْ خَابَ مَنِ افْتَرَىٰ [٢٠:٦١—Woe to you! Do not fabricate lies against Allah, lest He destroy you with punishment. Whoever fabricates lies has indeed failed. (Surah Ta-Ha: 61)

3. The Noble Qur’an repeatedly prohibits speaking about Allah, Allah’s religion, His laws, and similar matters without knowledge, based on guesswork, or relying on conjecture. For example, it states in one place:يَا أَيُّهَا النَّاسُ كُلُوا مِمَّا فِي الْأَرْضِ حَلَالًا طَيِّبًا وَلَا تَتَّبِعُوا خُطُوَاتِ الشَّيْطَانِ ۚ إِنَّهُ لَكُمْ عَدُوٌّ مُّبِينٌ [٢:١٦٨]
إِنَّمَا يَأْمُرُكُم بِالسُّوءِ وَالْفَحْشَاءِ وَأَن تَقُولُوا عَلَى اللَّهِ مَا لَا تَعْلَمُونَ [٢:١٦٩—O mankind, eat from whatever is lawful and pure on earth, and do not follow the footsteps of Satan. Surely he is your clear enemy. He only commands you to evil and immorality and to say about Allah what you do not know. (Surah al-Baqarah: 168–169)
4. Elsewhere it is stated:قُلْ إِنَّمَا حَرَّمَ رَبِّيَ الْفَوَاحِشَ مَا ظَهَرَ مِنْهَا وَمَا بَطَنَ وَالْإِثْمَ وَالْبَغْيَ بِغَيْرِ الْحَقِّ وَأَن تُشْرِكُوا بِاللَّهِ مَا لَمْ يُنَزِّلْ بِهِ سُلْطَانًا وَأَن تَقُولُوا عَلَى اللَّهِ مَا لَا تَعْلَمُونَ [٧:٣٣—“Say: My Lord has only prohibited immoralities, apparent and hidden, sin, unjust aggression, associating with Allah that for which He has sent down no authority, and saying about Allah what you do not know.” (Surah al-A‘raf: 33)
Thus, the Qur’an provides guidance for protecting the knowledge of revelation from every adulteration and falsehood. Speaking falsely, fabricating, guessing, or making conjecture-based statements about Almighty Allah, His great Messenger (PBUH), His religion, His laws, and similar matters has been emphatically prohibited.

1.2.4.2. Command to Verify Before Accepting Any Information
Just as speaking falsely in one’s own name or in the name of Allah or His Messenger (PBUH) is prohibited, accepting another person’s unreliable, false, or conjectural report or statement is also prohibited. The Noble Qur’an has instructed the Muslim Ummah to remain cautious when accepting any report or statement. It states:يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا إِن جَاءَكُمْ فَاسِقٌ بِنَبَإٍ فَتَبَيَّنُوا أَن تُصِيبُوا قَوْمًا بِجَهَالَةٍ فَتُصْبِحُوا عَلَىٰ مَا فَعَلْتُمْ نَادِمِينَ [٤٩:٦—“O believers, if a sinful person brings you any news, verify it, lest you harm a people unknowingly and then become regretful for what you have done.” (Surah al-Hujurat: 6).
In light of this instruction, if anyone gives testimony or information, it is obligatory for a Muslim to verify that person’s personal integrity and accuracy in providing information before accepting it. Even greater caution and examination are necessary when accepting a report or statement concerning the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) than in all worldly matters. Relying on incorrect information or testimony in worldly matters may harm people’s property, honor, or lives. But carelessness regarding the hadith of the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) or knowledge of revelation can result in damage to faith and destruction in the eternal life of the Hereafter. For this reason, the Muslim Ummah has always examined and accepted all information, hadiths, and reports only after verification.

1.2.5. Hadith Guidance for Protecting Revelation from Falsehood
To protect His words or hadith from every kind of intentional or unintentional distortion, error, or falsehood, the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) gave his Ummah various instructions. Among them are:

1.2.5.1. Instruction to Memorize and Transmit Hadith Precisely
In various hadiths, the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) instructed his followers to memorize his hadiths or statements exactly and accurately and to transmit them. Jubayr ibn Mut‘im (RA) said that the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) said: Arabic (*****)
—“May Allah illuminate the face of the person who hears one of my statements, then fully grasps and memorizes it, and conveys it to someone who did not hear it.” [Al-Tirmidhi, Muhammad ibn Isa (279 AH), al-Sunan 5/33–34; Abu Dawud, Sulayman ibn al-Ash‘ath (275 AH)]
Many other hadiths with this meaning have been narrated and compiled from many other Companions.
1.2.5.2. Prohibition of Lying in the Name of the Messenger of Allah (PBUH)
On the other hand, so that no human statement could be publicized in his name, he emphatically prohibited them from speaking false or additional words in his name. Ali (RA) said that the Noble Messenger (PBUH) said: Arabic (*****)
—“Do not lie in my name, for whoever lies in my name will have to enter Hell.” [Al-Bukhari, Muhammad ibn Isma‘il (256 AH), al-Sahih 1/52, Fath al-Bari 1/199].
Al-Zubayr ibn al-Awwam (RA) said that the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) said: Arabic (******)
—“Whoever lies in my name, his abode will be Hell.” (Al-Bukhari, al-Sahih 1/52)
Salamah ibn al-Akwa‘ (RA) said that the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) said: Arabic (******)
—“Whoever attributes to me something I did not say, his abode will be Hell.” (Al-Bukhari, al-Sahih 1/52)
In this way, nearly one hundred Companions, including the Asharah Mubashsharah, narrated the Messenger of Allah’s (PBUH) warning to this effect. No other hadith has been narrated by such a large number of Companions. [Al-Nawawi, Yahya ibn Sharaf (676 AH), Sharh Sahih Muslim 1/68; Ibn al-Jawzi, al-Mawdu‘at]
1.2.5.3. Prohibition of Narrating Excessive Hadith or Narrating Without Memorization
There is a possibility of error when one narrates many hadiths. Therefore, the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) instructed people to be cautious in this matter. He prohibited narrating any hadith without complete certainty regarding its accurate memorization and precision. Abu Qatadah (RA) said that the Messenger of Allah (PBUH), standing on the pulpit, said: Arabic (*****)
—“Beware! Refrain from narrating many hadiths in my name. Whoever says something in my name should say what is correct. Whoever says in my name something I did not say will have to reside in Hell.” [Ibn Majah, al-Sunan 1/14; al-Albani, Muhammad Nasir al-Din, Sahih Sunan Ibn Majah 1/29; al-Mustadrak 1/194].
Abdullah ibn Abbas (RA) said that the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) said: Arabic (********)
“Refrain from narrating hadiths from me except what you know.” (Al-Tirmidhi, al-Sunan 5/183).
Abu Musa Malik ibn Ubadah al-Ghafiqi (RA) said that the Messenger of Allah (PBUH), giving us his final advice and instruction, said: Arabic (******)
—“Hold firmly to and follow the Book of Allah. Soon you will encounter people who love to narrate hadiths in my name. If anyone has memorized something, he may say it. But whoever says in my name something I did not say will have to take his abode in Hell.” (Muslim, al-Sahih 1/12)
Thus, in various hadiths we see that the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) instructed his Ummah to memorize his hadiths exactly and accurately and to transmit such memorized hadiths. Conversely, he prohibited narrating a hadith if it had not been completely memorized or if there was even slight hesitation. For saying in his name, intentionally or unintentionally, something he did not say is prohibited and is among the gravest sins. To prevent even accidental alteration of his hadiths, he prohibited narrating them without complete memorization. We shall see that the Companions were extremely cautious in this matter.
1.2.5.4. Warning Against Narrators of False Hadiths
Just as speaking falsely in the name of the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) on one’s own authority is prohibited, accepting another person’s fabricated falsehood is also prohibited. He warned the Ummah that people who falsely narrated hadiths would arise among the Muslim Ummah. Abu Hurayrah (RA) said that the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) said: Arabic (******)
—“In the latter days, some people from my Ummah will tell you hadiths that neither you nor your fathers and grandfathers ever heard. Beware! Keep away from them and remain distant from them.” (Muslim, al-Sahih 1/12).
Wathilah ibn al-Asqa‘ (RA) said that the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) said: Arabic (*****)
—“Before the Day of Resurrection, Satan will wander through markets and gatherings, narrating hadiths and saying: ‘So-and-so, the son of so-and-so, told me this hadith about such-and-such.’” (Ibn Adi, Ahmad, al-Kamil fi Du‘afa al-Rijal 1/115).
Abdullah ibn Mas‘ud (RA) said: Arabic (******)
—“Satan assumes human form, comes among people, and narrates false hadiths to them. After hearing the false hadith, the gathered people disperse. Then they narrate those hadiths, saying: ‘I heard a man narrate this hadith. I recognize his face, but I do not know his name.’” (Muslim, al-Sahih 1/12)

1.2.5.5. Prohibition of Accepting Doubtful or Unreliable Reports
The Messenger of Allah (PBUH) prohibited accepting any hadith without verification. If someone accepts and narrates whatever he hears as hadith without verifying it, he will be guilty of the sin of lying in the name of hadith because of his negligence in verifying the hadith. The hadiths state that a person need not intentionally fabricate a false hadith; merely accepting a hadith without verifying whether it is true or false is sufficient to make him a liar. Moreover, if someone narrates a hadith despite having doubts about its authenticity and accuracy, he too will be regarded as a liar and will be guilty of the sin of speaking a false hadith.
Abu Hurayrah (RA) said that the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) said: Arabic (*******)
—“It is sufficient sin for a person that he narrates everything he hears.” (Muslim, al-Sahih 1/10).
Samurah ibn Jundub (RA) and al-Mughirah ibn Shu‘bah (RA) said that the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) said: Arabic (****)
—“Whoever narrates any hadith in my name while having doubts in his mind that the hadith is false is also a liar.” (Muslim, al-Sahih 1/9).

1.2.6. The Ruling on Lying in the Name of Hadith
1.2.6.1. Lying in the Name of Hadith Is the Gravest Major Sin
In light of the verses and hadiths mentioned above, we can understand very easily that lying in the name of hadith and passing off people’s words as hadith is the most heinous sin and crime. There is no doubt or uncertainty whatsoever about this among the Muslim ummah. In the following discussion, we shall see that the Companions of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) would refrain from narrating hadiths out of fear of the slightest inadvertent or careless mistake. They regarded even an unintentional mistake as a terrible sin and carefully avoided it. Moreover, they regarded narrating a fabricated hadith made by someone else as the same crime as fabricating a hadith.

In discussing the hadiths mentioned above, Imam Abu Zakariyya Yahya ibn Sharaf al-Nawawi (676 AH) says: These hadiths show that lying in the name of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) is the gravest of prohibitions, the most dreadful major sin, and the most heinous and destructive crime. The Muslim ummah is unanimously agreed on this. However, according to the majority of scholars, no one may be declared a kafir for this crime. If a person tells a lie in the name of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), he cannot be declared a kafir so long as he does not regard that lie as lawful. He is a sinful Muslim. But if he regards this gravest sin as lawful, then he is considered a kafir. Muhammad al-Juwayni and a few other imams, however, considered this crime to be kufr. Juwayni said that whoever deliberately lies in the name of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) is to be considered a kafir and must be sentenced to death.

These hadiths show that every lie attributed to the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) is equally unlawful, regardless of the subject. Whether concerning the rulings of the Shariah, virtues, encouragement to good deeds, warnings against sin, or any other matter, attributing any lie to him is the gravest prohibition and the most dreadful major sin. There is consensus of the Muslim ummah on this matter. All those qualified to express opinions, and whose opinions may be accepted, agree on this. (Al-Nawawi, Sharh Sahih Muslim 1/69).

1.2.6.2. Mentioning or Circulating a Mawdu‘ Hadith Is Also the Gravest Prohibition
Imam al-Nawawi also says: It is unlawful to narrate knowingly any false or fabricated hadith, regardless of its meaning. However, it is permissible to narrate a false hadith in order to identify it as false. (Al-Nawawi, Taqrib, with Tadrib al-Rawi 1/274).

Elsewhere he says: If someone knows that a hadith is mawdu‘, meaning false or fabricated, or has a strong suspicion that it is fabricated, then it is unlawful for him to narrate it. If someone knows that a hadith is false and nevertheless narrates it without mentioning that it is fabricated, he too will be regarded as a fabricator of hadith and will be included among the terrible punishments mentioned in these hadiths. (Al-Nawawi, Sharh Sahih Muslim 1/71).

Imam Zayn al-Din Abd al-Rahim ibn al-Husayn al-Iraqi (806 AH) says: A mawdu‘ or fabricated hadith is unlawful to relate, whatever its subject or meaning. Whether it concerns legal rulings, stories, virtues, encouragement to good deeds, warnings against sin, or any other matter, whoever knows it to be mawdu‘ may not narrate it, circulate it, use it as evidence, or preach through it. However, it may be related if it is stated that the hadith is fabricated or forged. (Al-Iraqi, Fath al-Mughith, pp. 120–121).

1.2.6.3. The Ruling on the Repentance of a Fabricator of Hadith
There is a particular difference between lying in the name of hadith and lying about other matters: according to the muhaddithun, the repentance of one who lies in the name of hadith is not acceptable. If it is established concerning a person that he falsely attributed or publicized a statement as the words of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), and he then repents, Allah may forgive him; however, he will not regain acceptability among the muhaddithun merely because of his repentance. The muhaddithun will never regard a hadith narrated by that person as true and reliable.

Ahmad ibn Thabit, Khatib al-Baghdadi (463 AH), one of the greatest muhaddiths and jurists of the fifth century, says: The hadith of one who lies to people is not acceptable. Imam Malik, however, mentioned that if he repents and his honesty is established, his hadith may be considered acceptable. But if someone fabricates a hadith, tells a lie within a hadith, or claims to have heard what he did not hear, then the hadith narrated by him cannot be regarded as true or sound. The scholars have stated that even if he later repents, none of the hadiths narrated by him may be regarded as true.

Imam Ahmad (241 AH) was asked: A man lied regarding a single hadith, then repented and abandoned lying. What should be done concerning him? He replied: His repentance is between him and Allah. Allah may accept it if He wills. But none of the hadiths narrated by him may ever again be accepted as sound, nor may reliance ever be placed on his narration. Imam Sufyan al-Thawri (161 AH), Abdullah ibn al-Mubarak (181 AH), and other imams said the same.

Abdullah ibn al-Zubayr al-Humaydi (219 AH), one of Imam al-Bukhari’s foremost teachers, says: If someone says while narrating a hadith, “I heard this hadith from so-and-so,” and it is subsequently established that he did not hear the hadith from that person, or if his lying in hadith narration is exposed in any other way, then none of the hadiths narrated by him may any longer be regarded as sound or reliable. Khatib al-Baghdadi says that this ruling applies when deliberate lying is discovered. [Khatib al-Baghdadi, Ahmad ibn Ali ibn Thabit (463 AH), Al-Kifayah fi Ilm al-Riwayah, pp. 117–118].

Shaykh Abd al-Haqq al-Muhaddith al-Dihlawi (1052 AH) says: If it is established that a person deliberately lied even once in his life while narrating a hadith, then no hadith narrated by him will be regarded as sound or reliable, even if he repents. (Abd al-Haqq al-Dihlawi, Muqaddimah fi Usul al-Hadith, pp. 63–64).

1.2.7. The Emergence of Lying in the Name of Hadith
We know that in every society, nation, and religion, lies and liars are despised. Truthfulness is praised everywhere and at all times. For this reason, even in the age of ignorance in Arabia, the incomparable truthfulness of Muhammad, the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), was praised. He was called al-Amin and al-Sadiq: the trustworthy and the truthful.

Muhammad, the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), the greatest truthful person of all time, cultivated his Companions upon matchless and incomparable truthfulness. Their truthfulness was uncompromising. No hardship or danger caused them to abandon the truth and resort to falsehood. Moreover, he specifically prohibited lying in the name of revelation and in the name of hadith, and repeatedly warned of its severe punishment.

In the following discussion, we shall see that the Companions regarded not only deliberate lies in the name of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), but even the slightest inadvertent error or distortion, as the gravest sin and avoided it.

Thus, we find that neither during the lifetime of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) nor after his death did any incident ever occur among his Companions of lying in his name under any circumstances. Rather, we find that most of the Companions would not narrate any hadith in the name of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) out of fear of making an inadvertent mistake.

During the lifetime of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), some hypocrites lived in the society of Madinah. Lying was customary among them. However, they were very few in number, and their lying was known in society. Therefore, they had no credibility. No one believed what they said, and they never had the courage or opportunity to lie in the name of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him).

It is related that a young man sought to marry a young woman. The woman’s relatives refused to give their daughter in marriage to him. Later, the young man went to them and said that the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) had instructed him to choose and marry any girl from their family. The young man remained there. In the meantime, one of them went to the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) and asked about the truth of the matter. He said that the young man had lied. “If you find him alive, execute him. … However, I do not think you will find him alive.” They returned and found that the young man had died from a snakebite. …

If this report is reliable, it shows that an incident of deliberately lying in the name of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) occurred during his lifetime. However, the chain of transmission of this report is extremely weak. The incident was transmitted through several narrators accused of lying and extremely weak narrators. (Al-Dhahabi, Mizan al-I‘tidal 3/401–402; Ibn Adi, Al-Kamil 4/54).

Generally, we find that no incident of lying in the name of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) occurred as long as the Companions remained predominant in Muslim society after his death.

With the passage of time, circumstances began to change. This change began during the second half of the first Hijri century. Many Companions died during this period. Countless new Muslims entered under the shelter of Islam. It was among these people that lying in the name of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) first emerged. It gradually spread.

In 23 AH, Dhu al-Nurayn Uthman ibn Affan (may Allah be pleased with him) assumed the office of caliphate. He served as caliph for approximately twelve years, until 35 AH. During this period, Islam spread to various regions of Asia and Africa along with the Islamic conquests. Countless people entered under the shelter of Islam. Most of them lived far from Madinah, the heartland of Islam, in regions such as Egypt, Kairouan, Kufa, Basra, Syria, Palestine, and Khurasan. They were also deprived of the Companions’ company.

Many of them were unable to fully develop genuine Islamic faith, character, and conduct. Because of their ignorance, the influence of previous religions, hostility toward Islam or the Arabs, and other factors, various lies and false propaganda began to spread among them. Many enemies of Islam, having failed to defeat Islam on the battlefield, began attempting to destroy it through lies and false propaganda. The most serious and enduring lies were those circulated in the name of revelation or hadith. The enemies of Islam resorted to such lies.

At this time, these people began making countless statements concerning the status and authority of the descendants of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), particularly the status, special knowledge, special powers, miraculous abilities, and the necessity of placing Ali ibn Abi Talib (may Allah be pleased with him) in power, as well as statements condemning Uthman ibn Affan (may Allah be pleased with him). They expressed most of these ideas through argument and debate. They also began fabricating some statements, indirectly and by implication, in the name of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him). Although these sinful people had not yet developed the audacity to lie directly in the name of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), countless Companions were still alive, and there was a strong possibility that lies would be exposed. Nevertheless, the tendency toward lying began to develop.

The eminent jurist, muhaddith, and historian of the third and fourth Hijri centuries, Allamah Muhammad ibn Jarir al-Tabari (310 AH), says while discussing the events of 35 AH that Abdullah ibn Saba was a Jew from Yemen. He embraced Islam during the time of Uthman (may Allah be pleased with him). He then traveled from city to city and settlement to settlement spreading various misleading ideas. He could not make much headway in the Hijaz, Basra, Kufa, and Syria, so he went to Egypt. He began to preach: “It is astonishing to consider that someone believes that Jesus (peace be upon him) will return to earth, yet does not believe that Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him) will return to earth. He accepts Jesus’ return as true, but considers talk of Muhammad’s return to be false. … Thousands of prophets have passed away. Every prophet appointed one person from his ummah to assume responsibility through a bequest. The person appointed through the bequest and responsibility given by Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him) is Ali ibn Abi Talib. … Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him) is the final prophet, and Ali is the final person entrusted with a bequest and responsibility. … Who could be a greater wrongdoer than the person who did not accept the Messenger of Allah’s bequest and appointment of responsibility, but took power for himself?” [Al-Tabari, Muhammad ibn Jarir (310 AH), Tarikh al-Umam wa al-Muluk 2/647].

Here we see that Abdullah ibn Saba, besides presenting his deviations under the guise of reasoning, also attributed some statements indirectly to the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him). He said that Ali had been entrusted with responsibility by the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), and that failing to entrust him with responsibility was oppression, and so forth.

In the following discussion, we shall see that when this kind of weakness in truthfulness appeared among the Muslim population, the Companions adopted special measures and procedures to prevent lying in the name of the hadiths of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him).

Toward the end of the first Hijri century, the tendency to fabricate hadiths in the name of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) to prove various deviant views increased. The tendency to lie in the names of the Companions also increased. At the same time, the Muslim ummah’s precautionary measures also expanded.

Mukhtar ibn Abi Ubayd al-Thaqafi (1–67 AH) was a tabi‘i contemporary of the Companions. After the martyrdom of Imam Husayn (may Allah be pleased with him) at Karbala in 60 AH, he went to Kufa in 64–65 AH on behalf of the ruler of Makkah, Abdullah ibn al-Zubayr (1–73 AH). In Kufa, he began capturing and killing those involved in the murder of Imam Husayn. He then repudiated allegiance to Abdullah ibn al-Zubayr and claimed to be the representative of Muhammad ibn al-Hanafiyyah, the son of Ali. He subsequently began claiming to receive inspiration from revelation, to be the special representative of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), to be a caliph, and so on. Finally, in 67 AH, he was defeated and killed by the forces of Abdullah ibn al-Zubayr.

To prove the truth of these claims, he ordered, requested, and encouraged several people to fabricate and narrate hadiths on his behalf.

Abu Anar al-Harrani says that Mukhtar ibn Abi Ubayd al-Thaqafi said to a hadith narrator: “Fabricate a hadith in the name of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) on my behalf, stating that I will come after him as his successor and avenge the killing of his descendants. For this, I will give you ten thousand dirhams, riding animals, slaves, and clothing as gifts.” The hadith narrator replied: “I cannot fabricate a hadith in the name of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him). However, a statement could be fabricated in the name of one of the Companions. For that, you may reduce your gift as you wish.” Mukhtar said: “If it is in the name of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), it will have greater importance.” The man replied: “Its punishment will also be more severe.” (Ibn al-Jawzi, Al-Mawdu‘at 1/16–17).

Mukhtar made such requests to many people. When necessary, he also threatened or killed them. Salamah ibn Kathir says that Ibn Rab‘ah al-Khuza‘i had lived during the time of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him). He said: “I once went to Kufa. I was taken to Mukhtar al-Thaqafi. He sat with me privately and said, ‘Sir, you lived during the time of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him). If you say something in the name of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), people will believe you. Strengthen my position by narrating a hadith in the name of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him). These seven hundred gold coins are for you.’ I replied: ‘The consequence of lying in the name of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) is certainly Hell. I cannot say it.’” [Al-Bukhari, Muhammad ibn Isma‘il (256 AH), Al-Tarikh al-Kabir 8/438; Al-Tarikh al-Saghir 1/147].

Mukhtar also ordered Muhammad ibn Ammar, the son of the Companion Ammar ibn Yasir (may Allah be pleased with him), to fabricate and circulate hadiths on his behalf through his father, Ammar. When he refused, Mukhtar killed him. [Al-Bukhari, Al-Tarikh al-Saghir 1/147; Al-Jarh wa al-Ta‘dil 8/43].

From the end of the first Hijri century, the tendency to lie in the names of prominent Companions began to appear. In particular, some followers of Ali ibn Abi Talib (may Allah be pleased with him) began to lie in his name. They began circulating various fabricated statements: that he inwardly disliked or condemned Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him) and Umar (may Allah be pleased with him), that he performed miraculous deeds, that he possessed miraculous powers, and so forth.

The renowned tabi‘i Ibn Abi Mulaykah, Abdullah ibn Ubaydullah (117 AH), says: “I wrote to Abdullah ibn Abbas (68 AH), requesting that he write down some selected matters of importance for me. He said: [Arabic (********)]—‘A trustworthy and well-wishing young man. I shall select and write some matters especially for him and omit what is unnecessary.’ He then requested the written manuscript of Ali’s judgments. He wrote some matters from it. After reading certain passages, he said: ‘By Allah, Ali could never have made this judgment. No one could make this judgment unless he had gone astray.’” (Muslim, Al-Sahih 1/13).

In other words, some excessively zealous and devoted companions of Ali wrote certain false statements in his name in these manuscripts, which degraded his honor, even though they had added them with the intention of increasing his honor.

Regarding this, another tabi‘i, Tawus ibn Kaisan (106 AH), says: [Arabic (********)]—“The manuscript of Ali’s judgments was brought to Ibn Abbas (may Allah be pleased with him). He erased everything in the manuscript except the length of a handspan.” (Muslim, Al-Sahih 1/13).

The renowned tabi‘i Abu Ishaq al-Sabi‘i (129 AH) says: “When these excessively devoted followers of Ali invented these new fabricated statements after his death, one of Ali’s followers said: ‘May Allah destroy them! What a great amount of knowledge they have ruined!’” (Muslim, Al-Sahih 1/13).

The tabi‘i Mughirah ibn Miqsam al-Dabbi (136 AH) says: [Arabic (******)]—“[Lying spread so extensively among the followers of Ali that] a person other than one who had accompanied Abdullah ibn Mas‘ud was not regarded as reliable and sound when narrating hadiths from Ali (may Allah be pleased with him).” (Muslim, Al-Sahih 1/13).

Thus, we have seen that from the middle of the first Hijri century onward, the tendency to lie in the name of hadith gradually appeared among people for various interests and purposes. This tendency increased with the passage of time. From the second Hijri century, the number of liars gradually increased, and the types and methods of lying also multiplied. In the next chapter, we shall discuss the identities and classifications of the lying fabricators and the causes of fabrication. Before that, however, we wish to discuss the methods adopted by the Muslim ummah to resist falsehood.

The Companions and the Muslim scholars of the generations after them adopted highly effective and scientific methods to keep authentic hadiths separate from every kind of falsehood. Here we wish to discuss their methodology.

1.3. The Companions’ Efforts to Prevent Falsehood

In light of the Qur’an’s and hadith’s overall instructions concerning the accurate and unadulterated preservation of revealed knowledge, the terrible consequences of lying or speaking conjecturally in the name of revelation, the Messenger of Allah’s (peace and blessings be upon him) specific instructions concerning the accurate and unadulterated preservation of hadith, and the prohibition against lying in the name of hadith, the Companions adopted various methods to protect the hadiths of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) from every kind of inadvertent, ignorance-based, or deliberate error, distortion, and falsehood. On the one hand, they themselves exercised caution when narrating hadiths. Unless they were completely certain that they had memorized a hadith fully and accurately, they would not narrate it. On the other hand, they instructed and encouraged everyone to memorize hadiths in full, verbatim, and accurately before narrating them. Thirdly, whenever they had the slightest doubt about the accuracy of a hadith narrated by any Companion or tabi‘i, they would accept it only after verifying it through various methods of examination.

It is noteworthy that there was no possibility of deliberate error in their era. No one lied even in people’s worldly conversations and transactions. Honesty and trustworthiness were their defining qualities. Despite this, when one observes their efforts to protect the hadiths of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) from the slightest inadvertent, ignorance-based, or careless error, one is left astonished.

1.3.1. Protecting oneself from unintentionally telling a lie
We know that a lie may be intentional or unintentional. An unintentional mistake is also considered a lie. In narrating Hadith themselves, the Companions made every effort to protect themselves from unintentional ‘lying’ by narrating the Hadith accurately and literally. Countless incidents of their caution in narrating Hadith have been recorded in the Hadith collections. Here I shall mention a few incidents.

The Tabi‘i ‘Amr ibn Maymun al-Azdi (74 AH) says:
—I used to visit ‘Abdullah ibn Mas‘ud (RA) every Thursday. In the course of his speech, he never used the words, “The Messenger of Allah (PBUH) said.” One afternoon he said, “The Messenger of Allah (PBUH) said,” and then lowered his head. I looked at him and saw that he was standing. The buttons of his shirt were open. His eyes had become red, and the veins in his neck had swelled. He said, “The Messenger of Allah (PBUH) said something less than this, or more than this, or something similar to this, or words close to this.” (Ibn Majah, al-Sunan 1/10–11; al-Sunan 1/88; al-Mustadrak 1/194.)

The Tabi‘i Masruq ibn al-Ajda‘ Abu ‘A’ishah (61 AH) says:
—One day ‘Abdullah ibn Mas‘ud (RA) narrated a Hadith from the Messenger of Allah (PBUH). At that point he began to tremble, so much so that the trembling could be seen in his clothing. Then he said, “Or he said something similar.” (al-Hakim, al-Mustadrak 1/193.)

The Tabi‘i Muhammad ibn Sirin (110 AH) says:
Whenever Anas ibn Malik (RA) narrated a Hadith, after completing the narration he would say, “Or this is what the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) said”—meaning that there might be a mistake in my narration. (Ibn Majah, al-Sunan 1/11.)

When narrating Hadith, the Companions would not knowingly change even a single word. They narrated them verbatim. The Tabi‘i Sa‘d ibn ‘Ubaydah al-Sulami (103 AH) says that the Companion ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Umar (73 AH) said that the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) said:
—Islam is founded upon five things: worshipping Allah alone, or Tawhid; establishing Salah; paying Zakah; fasting Ramadan; and performing Hajj.
At that point a man said, “Hajj and fasting Ramadan.” He replied, “No, fasting Ramadan and Hajj. This is how I heard it from the Messenger of Allah (PBUH).” (Muslim, al-Sahih 1/45.)

The Tabi‘i named Ya‘fur ibn Ruzi says: I heard the renowned Tabi‘i and famous preacher of Makkah, ‘Ubayd ibn ‘Umayr (72 AH), say one day during a sermon that the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) said:
—The example of a hypocrite is like that of a she-goat situated between two flocks of goats.
Hearing this, the Companion ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Umar (73 AH) said:
—Woe to you! Do not tell lies in the name of the Messenger of Allah (PBUH). The Messenger of Allah (PBUH) said: “The example of a hypocrite is like that of a she-goat wandering between two flocks of goats.” (Muslim, al-Sahih 1/45.)

In order to ensure caution and complete accuracy in narrating Hadith, most of the Companions refrained from narrating Hadith in the name of the Messenger of Allah (PBUH). They would relate only those statements or incidents that they were certain they had memorized with complete accuracy. Many of them never said anything in the name of the Messenger of Allah (PBUH). We can understand this by comparing the number of Companions with the number of Companions who narrated Hadith. More than one hundred thousand Companions had gained greater or lesser companionship of the Messenger of Allah (PBUH). The number of famous Companions whose names and identities are known exceeds ten thousand. Yet the number of Companions who narrated Hadith is only about fifteen hundred.

The most famous and largest Hadith collection compiled according to the names of the Companions is Musnad Ahmad. Imam Ahmad compiled in it all Hadith that could generally be accepted, as well as weak Hadith. Hadith narrated by 904 Companions were compiled in it. If all the Companion narrators of Hadith—known and unknown, reliable and unreliable—are counted together, the number is 1,565.

It is also noteworthy that, among the more than one thousand Companions who narrated Hadith, most narrated only between one and twenty or thirty Hadith. Only thirty-eight Companions narrated more than one hundred Hadith. Of them, more than one thousand Hadith were narrated from only seven Companions. The remaining thirty-one Companions narrated from one hundred to several hundred Hadith.

Many incidents have been narrated of Companions refraining from narrating Hadith out of fear of unintentional error.

Sa‘id ibn Yazid (91 AH) was a Companion. As a child, he enjoyed the companionship of the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) during the Farewell Hajj. In later life, he spent his life among the Companions. He says:
—I spent time in the company of such Companions as ‘Abd al-Rahman ibn ‘Awf (RA), Talhah ibn ‘Ubaydullah (RA), Sa‘d ibn Abi Waqqas (RA), and al-Miqdad ibn al-Aswad (RA). I never heard any of them narrate a Hadith from the Messenger of Allah (PBUH). I heard only Talhah ibn ‘Ubaydullah speak about the Battle of Uhud. (Ibn ‘Adi, al-Kamil fi Du‘afa’ al-Rijal 1/93.)

He also says: “I traveled from Madinah to Makkah in the company of Sa‘d ibn Malik (RA). Throughout that long journey and the extended time it took, I did not hear him narrate even a single Hadith in the name of the Messenger of Allah (PBUH).”

The renowned Tabi‘i of the first Hijri century, al-Sha‘bi (204 AH), says: “I stayed with ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Umar (RA) for a year, yet I never heard him say anything from the Messenger of Allah (PBUH).” Elsewhere he says: “I sat with ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Umar (RA) for two years, or a year and a half. During this long period, I heard him narrate only one Hadith……” (al-Bukhari, al-Sahih 6/2652; Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani, Fath al-Bari 13/243.)

The Companion ‘Abdullah ibn al-Zubayr (RA) says: I asked my father, al-Zubayr ibn al-‘Awwam (RA), “Why do I not hear you narrate Hadith as some other Companions do?” He replied: “Know that, since accepting Islam, I have never been away from his companionship. But I heard him say: ‘Whoever deliberately tells a lie against me must reside in Hell.’” (al-Bukhari, al-Sahih 1/52; Ibn Majah, al-Sunan 1/14.)

Thus, the reason al-Zubayr ibn al-‘Awwam (36 AH) did not narrate Hadith was not ignorance. He accepted Islam in the early years of his youth, at the beginning of the Prophethood. He then spent nearly twenty years in the companionship of the Messenger of Allah (PBUH). After his death, he lived for approximately twenty-five years. Yet the number of Hadith narrated by him was fewer than forty. Musnad Ahmad contains thirty-six Hadith narrated from him. Ibn Hazm mentions that the total number of Hadith narrated in his name through reliable and unreliable chains was only thirty-eight. (Ibn Hazm, Asma’ al-Sahabah al-Ruwat, p. 95.)

We have seen that he refrained from narrating Hadith out of fear of unintentional error. This was because the punishment for lying in the name of the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) is Hell. An unintentional mistake or verbal alteration may also amount to lying in his name. Therefore, he refrained from narrating Hadith most of the time.

Other Companions likewise refrained from narrating Hadith out of fear of unintentional error. The Tabi‘i ‘Abd al-Rahman ibn Abi Layla (83 AH) says: “We said to the Companion Zayd ibn Arqam (68 AH), ‘Narrate to us the Hadith of the Messenger of Allah (PBUH).’ He replied: ‘We have grown old and have been afflicted by forgetfulness. Narrating Hadith in the name of the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) is a very serious responsibility.’”

The Companion Suhayb ibn Sinan (RA) used to say: “Come, I shall narrate to you stories of battles and warfare. But under no circumstances shall I say, ‘The Messenger of Allah (PBUH) said.’” (Ansab al-Ashraf 1/183.)

The Tabi‘i Hashim al-Hurmudzi says that Anas ibn Malik (RA) used to say: “I fear that I may make an unintentional mistake. If I did not have this fear, I would tell you much of what I heard him say. But he said: ‘Whoever deliberately tells a lie against me must reside in Hell.’” (Ahmad, al-Musnad 3/172.)

In this way, the Companions refrained from narrating Hadith out of fear of unintentional error. It is noteworthy here that both Anas ibn Malik and Abu Qatadah said that the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) described the punishment for intentionally narrating Hadith in his name. Yet they avoided narrating in his name out of fear of unintentional error. For to fail to take precautions despite knowing that a mistake might occur means “deliberately allowing the opportunity for an unintentional mistake.” Failing to take every precaution against unintentional error means giving encouragement to deliberate distortion. Therefore, whoever makes a mistake because he did not guard against unintentional error has deliberately lied in the name of the Messenger of Allah (PBUH). No believer can be careless regarding the Hadith of the Messenger of Allah (PBUH).

1.3.2. Accepting the Hadith narrated by others after verification
Thus, we have seen that, when narrating Hadith themselves, the Companions made every effort to narrate them literally and accurately, and if they had any hesitation or doubt, they would not narrate the Hadith. Their second method of preserving the authenticity of Hadith was to exercise similar caution when others narrated Hadith. If they had the slightest doubt regarding the literal accuracy or correctness of a Hadith narrated by another Companion or by a contemporary Tabi‘i, they would not accept it without verification.

In other words, just as they made every effort to protect themselves from ‘unintentional lying’ when narrating Hadith themselves, so they would verify whether there was any lie or error in a Hadith narrated by another person before considering it correct. They regarded this subtle verification and scrutiny as one of the duties prescribed by Allah and His great Messenger (PBUH) for safeguarding the authenticity and dignity of Hadith. Therefore, no one ever objected to it or felt insulted by it.

1.3.2.1. Comparative examination for determining accuracy
From the preceding discussion, we learned that lies may be either intentional or unintentional. The noble Companions took stringent measures to protect Hadith from both types of lies or errors.

During their era, no Companion would tell a lie, nor would any Companion fail in trying to narrate Hadith accurately. Nevertheless, whenever they suspected that a Companion who narrated a Hadith might have made an error, they would verify his narration through comparative examination before accepting it.

There were various forms of comparative examination:

1. Presenting the narrated Hadith—that is, the statement, instruction, or report—to the original speaker in order to determine its correctness and accuracy.
2. Comparing the narrated statement, instruction, or report (Hadith) with the narration of one or more other persons in order to determine its correctness and accuracy.
3. Comparing the narrated statement, instruction, or report (Hadith) with the narrator’s reports from different periods in order to determine its correctness and accuracy.
4. Determining the correctness or accuracy of the narration by asking the narrator various questions about the narrated Hadith or having him swear an oath.
5. Comparing the meaning of the narrated statement, instruction, or Hadith with the well-known meanings and instructions of the Qur’an and Hadith.

Through all these examinations, they verified whether the Hadith narrator had been able to memorize and narrate the Hadith correctly. From the era of the Companions through all subsequent eras, examination by these methods was the principal method of the Muhaddithun for determining the accuracy and authenticity of Hadith narration. We know that this same method is followed in all courts of law in all countries of the world to determine the correctness and accuracy of testimony. This is the scientific method for determining the authenticity and accuracy of any report or testimony. Here we shall discuss some examples from the era of the Companions.

1.3.2.2. Questioning the original speaker
The best way to verify the truth or falsity of any testimony or report is to question the person who made the statement. During the lifetime of the Messenger of Allah (PBUH), if a Companion had doubts about the accuracy of a Hadith narrated by another Companion, he would question the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) and satisfy himself regarding its accuracy. Many such incidents have been narrated in various Hadith. Here I shall mention a few.

1. Jabir ibn ‘Abdullah (RA) says in his account of the Farewell Hajj:
—[(Before the Farewell Hajj, the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) sent ‘Ali (RA) to Yemen as its administrator. Consequently, ‘Ali (RA) came from Yemen to Makkah for Hajj. When he arrived in Makkah, he found that Fatimah (RA) had performed ‘Umrah and had become halal. She was wearing colored, perfumed clothes and using kohl. When ‘Ali objected to this, she said, “My father instructed me to do this.” ‘Ali said, “I complained to the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) about Fatimah, told him that she was attributing this instruction to the Messenger of Allah (PBUH), and also mentioned my objection.” …Then the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) said, “She has spoken correctly; she has spoken the truth.”] (Muslim, al-Sahih 2/886–892.)

Here we see that ‘Ali (RA) had doubts about the correctness of Fatimah’s (RA) narration. He did not doubt her truthfulness. Rather, he doubted whether she had correctly understood and narrated the statement of the Messenger of Allah (PBUH). That is, he had doubts concerning unintentional lying. Therefore, he verified its accuracy by questioning the Messenger of Allah (PBUH).

2. Ubayy ibn Ka‘b says:
—One day the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) stood in the Friday sermon, recited Surah Tabarak (Surah al-Furqan), and preached to us about Allah’s blessings and peace. In that situation, Abu al-Darda’ or Abu Dharr gently pressed my body and said, “When was this surah revealed? I am hearing it for the first time just now.” Ubayy then gestured to him to remain silent. After the Salah, he (Abu Dharr or Abu al-Darda’) said, “I asked you when the surah was revealed, yet you did not tell me anything!” Ubayy replied, “You have gained no reward from your Salah today except for the words you spoke”—because speaking during the sermon causes the reward of the Salah to be lost. He then went to the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) and told him about the matter. He said, “Ubayy has spoken the truth.” (Ibn Majah, al-Sunan 1/352–353.)

3. ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Amr ibn al-‘As (RA) says:
—I was told that the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) had said, “If a person performs Salah sitting, it will be half a Salah.” I then went to him and saw that he was performing Salah sitting. I placed my hand on his head. He said, “O ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Amr, what is the matter with you?” I said, “O Messenger of Allah, I was told that you said, ‘If a person performs Salah sitting, it will be half a Salah,’ yet you are performing Salah sitting.” He said, “Yes, I said that, but I am not like you.” (Muslim, al-Sahih 1/507.)

Thus, in many incidents we find in the Hadith that whenever the Companions had doubts about the correctness or accuracy of someone’s narration, they would question the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) and verify its correctness. They did not question the narrator’s honesty. Rather, they verified whether he had correctly understood the statement and narrated it accurately. In this way, they prevented ‘unintentional lying’ in the name of Hadith or accidental distortion.

1.3.2.3. Questioning others
The second method for determining the correctness of testimony or a statement is to investigate whether anyone else heard the statement and how they heard it. This is a universal method for determining the accuracy of any testimony or statement. In all courts, judges issue judgments through comparative examination of the testimony of multiple witnesses. Agreement among multiple witnesses proves the truth of the matter, while disagreement destroys its evidentiary value.

After the death of the Messenger of Allah (PBUH), the Companions adopted this method. If any of them had doubts about the correctness or accuracy of a Hadith narrated by a Companion, they would ask other Companions or ask the narrator to bring a witness. When one or more people stated that they too had heard that Hadith from the mouth of the Messenger of Allah (PBUH), they would accept it. Abu Bakr al-Siddiq (RA) initiated this method. The subsequent Caliphs and the Muhaddithun of every era followed it. Here I shall mention several incidents from the era of the Companions.

1. The Companion Qabisah ibn Dhu’ayb (84 AH) says:
—A grandmother came to Abu Bakr (RA) claiming her share of the inheritance of her deceased grandson. Abu Bakr (RA) said to her, “There is nothing for you in the Book of Allah regarding the inheritance of a grandmother. Nor do I know of anything for you in the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah (PBUH). Come later, so that I may ask others and learn about this matter.” He then asked people about it. The Companion al-Mughirah ibn Shu‘bah (RA) said, “In my presence, the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) gave a grandmother one-sixth of the estate.” Abu Bakr (RA) asked, “Is there anyone else with you?” The other Companion Muhammad ibn Maslamah al-Ansari (RA) stood up and said the same as al-Mughirah. Abu Bakr al-Siddiq (RA) then ordered that the grandmother be given one-sixth. [Malik ibn Anas (179 AH), al-Muwatta’ 2/513.]

Here we see Abu Bakr al-Siddiq (RA) teaching the utmost caution in accepting Hadith. He could have relied solely on the report of al-Mughirah ibn Shu‘bah, because he was a famous Companion and a highly respected leader of the Quraysh. At every level of society, his testimony alone would have been regarded as conclusive. Nevertheless, Abu Bakr (RA) exercised caution. Although al-Mughirah’s reliability was beyond question, his memory might fail him or he might have misunderstood. Therefore, he asked whether anyone else knew the Hadith. He accepted the Hadith on the basis of the report of two people.

For this reason, the Muhaddithun have called Abu Bakr (RA) the father of Hadith criticism. The scholar al-Hakim al-Naysaburi (405 AH) said regarding him: “He was the first to take measures to prevent the narration of false Hadith in the name of the Messenger of Allah (PBUH).” (Muhammad Mustafa al-A‘zami, Manhaj al-Naqd ‘inda al-Muhaddithin, p. 10.) The scholar Muhammad ibn Tahir ibn al-Qaysarani (507 AH), while discussing the biography of al-Siddiq al-Akbar, said: “He was the first to exercise caution in accepting Hadith.”

2. The second Caliph, ‘Umar (RA), followed his predecessor al-Siddiq al-Akbar in this matter. On various occasions, he would ask the Companions to bring another Companion as a witness for a Hadith they narrated. Here are some such incidents.

Abu Sa‘id al-Khudri (RA) says:
—I was sitting in a gathering of the Ansar when Abu Musa al-Ash‘ari (RA) came there. He appeared disturbed or anxious. He said, “I sought permission three times to enter ‘Umar’s (RA) house. When permission was not granted, I was returning.” ‘Umar (RA) called me and said, “Why are you returning?” I replied, “I sought permission three times, but permission was not granted. The Messenger of Allah (PBUH) said: ‘If you seek permission three times and permission is not granted, then return.’” ‘Umar (RA) said, “By Allah, you must produce testimony for this report.” Abu Musa said, “Has anyone among you heard this Hadith from the Messenger of Allah (PBUH)?” Ubayy ibn Ka‘b (RA) said, “The youngest among us will go with you.” Abu Sa‘id al-Khudri says, “I was the youngest of those present. I went with Abu Musa (RA) and told ‘Umar (RA) that the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) had said this.” (al-Bukhari, al-Sahih 5/2305; Muslim, al-Sahih 3/1694.)

3. The Tabi‘i ‘Urwah ibn al-Zubayr (94 AH) says:
—‘Umar ibn al-Khattab (RA) asked the people whether anyone knew what ruling the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) had given concerning the blood money or compensation when an unborn child died as a result of an injury. Al-Mughirah ibn Shu‘bah (RA) said, “I heard him prescribe the payment of a male or female slave in this matter.” ‘Umar (RA) said, “Bring someone who can testify with you regarding this.” Muhammad ibn Maslamah then said, “I testify that the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) gave such a ruling.” (al-Bukhari, al-Sahih 6/2531; Muslim, al-Sahih 3/1311.)

4. The Companion ‘Amr ibn Umayyah al-Damri (RA) says:
—He was bargaining over the price of a shawl he wished to purchase. At that time, ‘Umar ibn al-Khattab (RA) passed by him. ‘Umar asked, “What is this?” He replied, “I want to buy this shawl and give it as charity.” He then bought it and gave it to his wife, saying, “I heard the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) say: ‘Whatever you give to your wives is also considered charity.’” ‘Umar asked, “Who is your witness?” He then went to ‘A’ishah (RA) and stood outside the door. ‘A’ishah asked, “Who is it?” He replied, “I am ‘Amr. Did you hear the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) say, ‘Whatever you give to your wives is charity’?” ‘A’ishah replied, “Yes.” [al-Bayhaqi, Ahmad ibn al-Husayn (458 AH).]

5. The Tabi‘i named al-Walid ibn ‘Abd al-Rahman al-Jurashi says:
“The Companion ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Umar (RA) was passing by the other Companion Abu Hurayrah (RA). At that time Abu Hurayrah (RA) was narrating Hadith from the Messenger of Allah (PBUH). During his narration he said: ‘If anyone follows the funeral procession of someone and participates in the Salah, he will earn the reward of one Qirat. If he is present at the burial, he will earn the reward of two Qirat. One Qirat is greater than Mount Uhud.’ ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Umar said, ‘Abu Hurayrah, consider carefully what you are saying in the name of the Messenger of Allah (PBUH).’ Abu Hurayrah (RA) then went with him to ‘A’ishah (RA) and said to her, ‘O Mother of the Believers, I ask you by Allah, did you hear the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) say, “If anyone follows the funeral procession of someone and participates in the Salah, he will earn the reward of one Qirat, and if he is present at the burial, he will earn the reward of two Qirat”?’ She replied, ‘Yes, certainly I heard it.’” (Ahmad, al-Musnad 2/2; al-Mustadrak 3/584.)

1.3.2.4. Comparing Narrations from Different Times
Another method of determining the accuracy of a testimony or statement is to question a person about the same matter at different times. If the answer given the second time exactly matches the first answer, his accuracy is established. But contradiction between the two proves its inadmissibility. The Companions followed this method to determine the accuracy of hadith. Consider an example.

The Tabi‘i ‘Urwah ibn al-Zubayr said:
“My maternal aunt ‘A’ishah (may Allah be pleased with her) told me: ‘Nephew, I have heard that the Companion ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Amr ibn al-‘As (may Allah be pleased with him) will pass through our area on his way to Hajj. Meet him and learn by asking him questions, for he acquired much knowledge from the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him).’ ‘Urwah said: I then met him and asked him about various matters. Regarding those matters, he narrated hadith from the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him). Among the things he said was that the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) had said: ‘Indeed, Allah will not snatch knowledge away from people. Rather, He will seize the scholars—taking them through death—and knowledge will depart with them. Ignorant leaders will remain among the people; they will issue fatwas without knowledge, thereby going astray themselves and leading others astray.’

‘Urwah said: When I told ‘A’ishah (may Allah be pleased with her) this, she refused to accept it. She said: ‘Did he tell you that he heard this from the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him)?’ ‘Urwah said: The following year, ‘A’ishah (may Allah be pleased with her) said to me: ‘‘Abdullah ibn ‘Amr has arrived. Go with him and speak to him. During the conversation, also ask him about the hadith concerning knowledge departing.’ ‘Urwah said: I then met him and questioned him. He narrated the hadith exactly as he had narrated it the previous time. ‘Urwah said: When I informed ‘A’ishah (may Allah be pleased with her), she said: ‘I now understand that ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Amr spoke correctly. I saw that he neither added anything nor omitted anything.’ (Muslim, al-Sahih, 4/2058–2059.)

Here too we see an astonishing example of the Companions’ caution in accepting hadith. ‘A’ishah (may Allah be pleased with her) did not doubt ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Amr’s honesty or truthfulness. Yet even an honest and truthful person may make a mistake. Therefore, they did not wish to accept anything without examination. They did not lovingly place any hadith attributed to the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) in their hearts before investigating it.

1.3.2.5. Making the Narrator Swear an Oath
When necessary, a narrator or witness is made to swear an oath in order to verify the accuracy of a narration or testimony. A truthful and God-fearing person does not deliberately lie. However, his memory may deceive him, or he may fall into an unintentional error. But when required to swear by Allah, he will never say anything without being completely certain. Thus, making a truthful person swear an oath is an effective method of verifying the accuracy of testimony or a statement. An oath, however, is not sufficient in the case of a liar. In his case, the correctness of his statement must be verified through various questions and cross-examination.

All the Companions were truthful and extremely God-fearing people. Nevertheless, to eliminate the possibility of unintentional error, the Companions would sometimes make a Companion who narrated a hadith swear an oath. ‘Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) said:
“I was such a man that when I heard something directly from the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), Allah enabled me to benefit from it as He willed. But if one of his Companions narrated a hadith to me, I would make him swear an oath. If he swore, I accepted his narration as true.” (al-Tirmidhi, al-Sunan, 1/446.)

1.3.2.6. Semantic and Factual Examination
The knowledge of revelation is beyond human knowledge, but it is never contrary or opposed to human knowledge. Similarly, the revelation received through hadith may explain, complete, or add to the revelation received through the Qur’an, but it can never contradict or oppose the Qur’an.

From the practice of the Companions, we see that they examined the meanings of narrated hadith on the basis of this principle. We have seen that, in general, they sought hadith for meanings additional and complementary to the Qur’an. They wanted to know whether the Qur’an contained information on a matter not mentioned there. At the same time, they examined the meaning of the information presented. Their method of semantic examination was as follows:

(1) The first consideration regarding a hadith is whether it is proven that the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said it. If it is established with certainty through the narrator’s narration, an oath, or other testimony that the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said it, then their principle was to accept it as supplementary guidance to the Qur’an and interpret the Qur’an in its light. We saw this earlier concerning the inheritance of a grandmother and seeking permission to enter a house. The Qur’an says nothing about a grandmother; in this case, the hadith is an additional ruling. Regarding seeking permission, the Qur’an says: ‘If you are told, “Go back,” then go back.’ (Surah al-Nur 24:28.)

In this case, the hadith’s instruction apparently contradicts this Qur’anic instruction, because it partially modifies the Qur’anic instruction by saying that after seeking permission three times, one must leave even if one is not told, ‘Go back.’ The Companions accepted both hadith as explanations of the Qur’an.

(2) If it was proven, or strongly suspected, that the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) had not said something, they rejected it without considering any possible meaning. We have seen that when they doubted a narrator’s trustworthiness and reliability, they rejected his narration without considering its meaning.

(3) Sometimes a narrated hadith appeared acceptable because of the narrator’s trustworthiness, yet there was a strong possibility that the narrator had made an unintentional error. In that case, they reviewed the meaning of the hadith in light of the Qur’an and the hadith known to them; if its meaning was clearly contrary to the Qur’an and the established Sunnah, they rejected it.

Consider several examples of this kind of semantic judgment and examination:

1. The Tabi‘i Abu Hassan al-A‘raj said:
“Two men went to ‘A’ishah (may Allah be pleased with her) and said: ‘Abu Hurayrah (may Allah be pleased with him) has said that the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said: “There is bad luck and ill omen in women, animals or mounts, and houses.”’ Upon hearing this, ‘A’ishah (may Allah be pleased with her) became so angry that it seemed her body would be torn apart by anger and scattered through the air. She said: ‘By Him Who revealed the Qur’an, he did not say this. The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said: “The people of the Age of Ignorance used to say: There is bad luck in women, houses, and animals or mounts.”’ Then ‘A’ishah (may Allah be pleased with her) recited the Qur’anic verse: ‘No disaster befalls the earth or yourselves except that it is recorded before We bring it into existence.’ (Surah al-Hadid 57:22.)” (Ahmad, al-Musnad, 6/150, 246.)

Here ‘A’ishah (may Allah be pleased with her) did not accept the narration of Abu Hurayrah (may Allah be pleased with him). In light of what she had heard from the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) and the Qur’anic verse she recited, she rejected this narration.

2. ‘Umrah bint ‘Abd al-Rahman said:
“It was mentioned to ‘A’ishah (may Allah be pleased with her) that ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) narrated from the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him): ‘The dead person is punished because of the weeping of the living.’ ‘A’ishah (may Allah be pleased with her) said: ‘May Allah forgive Ibn ‘Umar. He did not lie, but he forgot or made a mistake (according to another narration: people often make mistakes in hearing). The actual matter is that the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) passed by a Jewish woman’s grave while her family was weeping for her. He then said: “They are weeping for her, while she is being punished in her grave.”’ Allah has said: ‘No soul bears the burden of another soul’s sin.’ (Surah al-An‘am 6:164; Surah Fatir 35:18.)” (Muslim, al-Sahih, 2/640–643.)

3. A female Companion named Fatimah bint Qays (may Allah be pleased with her) said that her husband had divorced her three times. The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) then said that she would not receive housing or maintenance expenses during her ‘iddah. Hearing this, the Caliph ‘Umar ibn al-Khattab (may Allah be pleased with him) said: ‘We cannot abandon the Book of Allah and the Sunnah of His Noble Messenger because of the statement of one woman. We do not know whether she remembered the matter correctly or forgot it. A woman who has been given three divorces will also receive housing and maintenance during her ‘iddah. The Almighty Allah has said: “Do not expel them from their homes, nor should they leave, unless they commit a clear indecency.”’ (Surah al-Talaq 65:1.) (Muslim, al-Sahih, 2/1118; al-Sunan, 2/297.)

1.3.3. Preventing the Possibility of Deliberate Falsehood
In the early period of the Companions’ era, the Companions themselves narrated hadith. One Companion would teach hadith to another Companion, or to the Tabi‘un of the next generation. Within twenty or twenty-five years of the death of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), many Companions passed away, while many others began narrating and teaching hadith. As we discussed earlier, from this period a tendency toward deliberate lying appeared among some new-Muslim Tabi‘un. The Companions then became even more cautious regarding the acceptance of hadith.

When one Companion narrated a hadith from another Companion, the Companion listening or learning did not doubt the narrator’s personal honesty and truthfulness, nor did he question whether the narrator had personally heard the hadith from the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) or whether someone else had told it to him. All those who had the companionship of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) were great people illuminated by his light and uncompromising in truthfulness. Nevertheless, since forgetfulness, unintentional error, or error resulting from incomplete understanding could occur, they verified the accuracy of narrated hadith through the various methods mentioned above.

When accepting hadith narrated by Tabi‘i narrators, they added two further matters to the examinations described above. First, they investigated the narrator’s personal truthfulness and reliability. Second, they wanted to know from whom the narrator had heard the hadith—that is, its reference.

During the caliphate of the third Rightly Guided Caliph, ‘Uthman (may Allah be pleased with him) (23–35 AH), misleading propaganda among new Muslims living far from the center of Madinah caused confusion and conflict within the Muslim ummah, and a decline in truthfulness appeared among the new Muslims. From that time onward, the Companions adopted the two methods mentioned above.

The famous Tabi‘i of the first Hijri century, Muhammad ibn Sirin (110 AH), said: ‘They—the Companions—did not ask about the chain of transmission or source. But when the fitnah and disorder occurred, they said: “Name the people who narrated hadith to you.” For it had to be determined that if they belonged to Ahl al-Sunnah, the followers of the Sunnah, their hadith would be accepted; but if they belonged to Ahl al-Bid‘ah, the followers of religious innovation, their hadith would not be accepted.’ (Muslim, al-Sahih, 1/15.)

The renowned Companion ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Abbas (may Allah be pleased with him) (68 AH) said: ‘We used to memorize hadith, and the hadith of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) was memorized from any narrator. But since you have traveled every path, through ravines and over good and bad roads, the possibility of accepting anything now—without examining the narrator—has become extremely remote.’

The Tabi‘i Mujahid (104 AH) said: ‘An early Tabi‘i named Bashir ibn Ka‘b al-‘Adawi came to ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Abbas (may Allah be pleased with him) and began narrating hadith. He kept saying, “The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said,” and “The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said.” But Ibn ‘Abbas neither listened to him nor looked at him. Bashir said: “What is the matter with you, Ibn ‘Abbas? Have you heard my hadith? I am narrating to you the hadith of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), yet you are not listening.” Ibn ‘Abbas (may Allah be pleased with him) then said: “There was a time when, upon hearing someone say, ‘The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said,’ our eyes would turn toward him and we would listen to him with full attention. But when people began traveling every path, through ravines and over good and bad roads, we no longer accepted anything from people except matters that were well-known and established.”’ (Muslim, al-Sahih, 1/13.)

1.3.4. Instructions to Be Cautious in Narrating and Accepting Hadith
Thus the Companions exercised the utmost caution in narrating and accepting hadith. At the same time, they encouraged and instructed everyone else to exercise such caution. They tolerated no negligence or laxity in this matter. They prohibited accepting hadith without verification. Often, if there was a possibility that someone might make an unintentional error while narrating hadith, or that the listeners might misunderstand, they prohibited him from narrating hadith. Here are several examples.

1. Abu ‘Uthman al-Nahdi said that ‘Umar ibn al-Khattab (may Allah be pleased with him) said: ‘For a person to be considered a liar, it is sufficient that he narrates everything he hears.’ (Muslim, al-Sahih, 1/11.)

2. Abu al-Ahwus said that ‘Abdullah ibn Mas‘ud (may Allah be pleased with him) said: ‘For a person to be considered a liar, it is sufficient that he narrates everything he hears.’ (Muslim, al-Sahih, 1/11.)

3. The renowned Medinan scholar, jurist, and hadith expert Ibrahim ibn ‘Abd al-Rahman (95 AH), son of the Companion ‘Abd al-Rahman ibn ‘Awf (may Allah be pleased with him), said: ‘‘Umar ibn al-Khattab (may Allah be pleased with him) summoned ‘Abdullah ibn Mas‘ud (may Allah be pleased with him), Abu al-Darda’ (may Allah be pleased with him), and Abu Mas‘ud (may Allah be pleased with him). He said to them: “Why are you narrating so many hadith from the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him)?” Then he instructed them to remain in Madinah. They remained in Madinah until his martyrdom.’ (al-Tabarani, al-Mu‘jam al-Awsat, 4/86, no. 3449.)

These three Companions were extremely cautious in narrating hadith. ‘Umar ibn al-Khattab (may Allah be pleased with him) did not have the slightest doubt about their ability or qualification to narrate accurate hadith. However, if too many hadith are narrated, some unintentional errors may occur. In particular, in remote areas such as Kufah or Syria, where most of the new Muslims during the early days of the Islamic conquests were non-Arabs, there was a concern that if too many hadith were narrated among them, many listeners would be unable to understand and memorize them correctly. Therefore, to preserve the authenticity of hadith, ‘Umar ibn al-Khattab instructed them to remain in Madinah.

On another occasion, we see that ‘Umar ibn al-Khattab (may Allah be pleased with him) himself wished to discuss certain matters of the Qur’an and hadith publicly in Makkah during the Hajj season. But the Companion ‘Abd al-Rahman ibn ‘Awf (may Allah be pleased with him) told him that the countless non-Arab and new-Muslim pilgrims present in Makkah might not understand his words properly. This would create an opportunity for misunderstanding and misinterpretation. Therefore, he should discuss the matters after returning to Madinah. Following this advice, ‘Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) abandoned his decision to discuss the matters in Makkah. ( al-Bukhari, al-Sahih, 6/2503–2504.)

1.4. The Muslim Ummah’s Measures to Prevent Fabrication

From the discussion above, we can clearly see that the measures adopted by the Companions to preserve authentic hadith in an untainted form from every kind of deliberate, unintentional, interpretive, or careless falsehood were, on the one hand, rational, practical, scientific, and meticulous, and on the other hand, unique and unparalleled in the history of human civilization. The followers of no other religion adopted such measures to preserve the fundamental teachings or revelation of their religion. Whatever was circulated was compiled. Eventually, through the mixing of human knowledge with revelation, revelation was distorted and lost.

From the era of the Tabi‘un onward, the hadith scholars of the Muslim ummah, following in the footsteps of the Companions, remained uncompromising in verifying the authenticity of hadith. They sacrificed every comfort of their lives to preserve hadith and distinguish authentic hadith from fabricated statements.

In this chapter, we will briefly discuss their basic principles.

1.4.1. Learning and Preserving Hadith
The Almighty Allah granted the people of the early Muslim community an appropriate and timely ability to preserve the hadith of His महान Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him). From the first Hijri century, the Companions, Tabi‘un, and scholars of subsequent generations traveled through every village, town, and settlement of the Muslim world, collecting information about all hadith and narrators. Learning hadith, writing it down, teaching it, and engaging in hadith-centered discussion were among the principal activities, passions, occupations, and joys of people during the first three or four centuries of Islam.

From the era of the Tabi‘un, or approximately the middle of the first Hijri century, through the following nearly three centuries, we find that hadith narrators were of two kinds. Many hadith narrators, or rawis, learned hadith from the rawis or hadith scholars of their own region and, when possible, from some hadith scholars of other countries. They then devoted themselves to narrating and teaching hadith. Whoever came to learn from them was taught those hadith. Such people were generally known as rawis or narrators.

On the other hand, during these periods many hadith scholars, after learning and recording hadith from all the rawis in their own regions, set out to travel through every settlement of the Muslim world of that time. Each of them spent several years or even several decades visiting every settlement, hearing and recording hadith from all the rawis and hadith scholars there. To hear and collect a single hadith of a Companion or Tabi‘i from the mouths of different rawis, they traveled to countless cities such as Makkah, Madinah, Khurasan, Samarqand, Marw, Wasit, Basrah, Kufah, Baghdad, Damascus, Aleppo, Cairo, and Sana‘a. They collected the same hadith through hundreds of chains and, by comparison, distinguished accurate narrations from erroneous ones.

Consider an example. The famous hadith scholar of the third Hijri century, Ibrahim ibn Sa‘id al-Jawhari al-Baghdadi (247 AH), was asked about a hadith narrated from Abu Bakr al-Siddiq (may Allah be pleased with him). His contemporary, the hadith scholar ‘Abdullah ibn Ja‘far ibn Khaqan, said: ‘I asked Ibrahim ibn Sa‘id about a hadith narrated from Abu Bakr al-Siddiq (may Allah be pleased with him). He told his servant: “Go into the library and bring the twenty-third volume of the compilation of hadith from Abu Bakr al-Siddiq (may Allah be pleased with him).” I said: “There are not even twenty hadith from Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him) available with an authentic chain. How did you compile his hadith in twenty-three volumes?” He replied: “If I cannot collect a particular hadith through at least one hundred chains, I consider myself an orphan with regard to that hadith.”’ (al-Dhahabi, Mizan al-I‘tidal, 1/154–155.)

When accepting hadith, they questioned the relevant rawi in various ways in an attempt to verify the accuracy of his narration. At the same time, they questioned the renowned scholars, hadith experts, and students of that area about his personal honesty, his teachers, and the other rawis of his region. Through comparative examination of all the information collected in this way, they issued precise judgments concerning every rawi and every hadith narrated by them. These examining and critical hadith specialists were known, on the one hand, as rawis or hadith narrators and, at the same time, as naqqads, or hadith critics, and imams of hadith. During the first four centuries of Islam, we find more than a hundred such imams and naqqads. Their labor and sacrifice in serving the hadith of the Messenger are unprecedented in world history. They deserve to be recorded in letters of gold in the history of knowledge and civilization. There is not even the slightest example of this in the history of any other nation. Even a brief account of their work would require the composition of hundreds of pages.

Through collecting and preserving all hadith and related information in this manner, these naqqad hadith scholars and imams established a system for preserving the hadith of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) in an authentic and untainted form. They identified deliberate and unintentional falsehood in hadith narration, identified liars, and separated authentic hadith from false and questionable narrations. They adopted the following measures:

1. Preserving the chains, sources, or references of all hadith.
2. Collecting all information about every narrator in the chain, including personal identity, birth, death, education, teachers, students, occupation, travels, and so forth.
3. Verifying the personal honesty, reliability, and truthfulness of the narrators.
4. Examining and verifying the meaning of the narrated hadith.
5. Verifying whether each narrator mentioned in the chain had personally heard the hadith from the narrator above him.
6. Separating accurate narrations from deliberate and unintentional falsehood through comparative examination of all collected hadith.
7. Publicizing the falsehood of those narrators whose lies were uncovered through the collected information and comparative examination.
8. Compiling all collected hadith together with their chains.
9. Compiling information concerning the accuracy or falsehood of narrators.
10. Compiling authentic hadith in separate books.
11. Compiling false and fabricated hadith in separate books.
12. Establishing rules by which fabricated or false hadith could be easily recognized.

We will discuss all these matters below.

1.4.2. Preserving the Chain of Transmission
We have seen that the Companions established the practice of mentioning the chain of transmission, or source, when narrating hadith, so that the truth or falsehood of a hadith could be verified by examining its source. In later generations, great importance was attached to preserving the chain of transmission. Regardless of how famous, honest, respected, or learned a hadith narrator might be, the hadith scholars never regarded his narration as reliable if he did not mention from whom he had heard the hadith and through what source he was reporting it. Moreover, they verified whether he and every narrator in his chain had personally heard the hadith from the succeeding narrator. They made many statements explaining the importance of the chain.

The famous Tabi‘i of the first Hijri century, Muhammad ibn Sirin, said: ‘This knowledge is religion. Therefore, consider from whom you take your religion.’ (Muslim, al-Sahih, 1/14.)

Sufyan ibn ‘Uyaynah (198 AH) said: ‘One day Ibn Shihab al-Zuhri (125 AH) was narrating hadith. I said: “Narrate this hadith without a chain.” He replied: “Do you want to climb onto a roof without a staircase?”’ (al-Suyuti, Tadrib al-Rawi, 2/160.)

One of the prominent hadith scholars of the second Hijri century, Sufyan ibn Sa‘id al-Thawri (161 AH), said: ‘The chain of transmission is like a believer’s weapon.’ (al-Suyuti, Tadrib al-Rawi, 2/160.)

‘Utbah ibn Abu Hakim (140 AH) said: One day I was present with Ishaq ibn ‘Abdullah ibn Abi Farwah (144 AH). Ibn Shihab al-Zuhri (125 AH) was also present. Ibn Abi Farwah began narrating hadith, saying, ‘The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said,’ and ‘The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said,’ and so on. Ibn Shihab al-Zuhri then said to him: ‘O Ibn Abi Farwah, may Allah destroy you! How audacious you are to speak in Allah’s name! You are narrating hadith without mentioning its chain. You are giving us hadith without reins.’ (al-Dhahabi, Mizan al-I‘tidal, 1/344.)

The renowned Tabi‘ al-Tabi‘i ‘Abdullah ibn al-Mubarak (181 AH) said: ‘Narrating and preserving the chain is an inseparable part of religion. If there were no system of reporting chains, anyone would say whatever he wished.’ (Muslim, al-Sahih, 1/15.)

The hadith scholar of the third Hijri century, Abu Ishaq Ibrahim ibn Ishaq ibn ‘Isa (215 AH), said: I said to ‘Abdullah ibn al-Mubarak (181 AH): ‘A hadith says: “Offering prayer for one’s parents along with your prayer, and fasting on behalf of one’s parents along with your fast, are among righteous deeds.”’ He said: ‘From whom did you hear this hadith?’ I said: ‘From Shihab ibn Khirash.’ He said: ‘Shihab is a reliable person. From whom did he hear it?’ I said: ‘From Hajjaj ibn Dinar.’ He said: ‘Hajjaj is a reliable person. From whom did he hear it?’ I said: ‘He said, “The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said.”’ Ibn al-Mubarak said: ‘O Abu Ishaq, there is a vast distance between Hajjaj ibn Dinar and the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), a distance that requires many mounts to cross. In other words, Hajjaj was a Tabi‘ al-Tabi‘i of the latter part of the second Hijri century. He could not reach the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) without at least two or three intermediaries. Since he did not mention the rest of the chain, the hadith is not acceptable.’ (Muslim, al-Sahih, 1/16.)

Thus, from the first Hijri century, the Muslim ummah regarded mentioning the chain of transmission as indispensable when narrating hadith. In the terminology of hadith scholars, hadith refers to a composite of two parts. The first part is the source or chain of the hadith, and the second part is the main statement or matn of the hadith.

Consider an example. Imam Malik ibn Anas (179 AH) was a renowned compiler of hadith of the second Hijri century. In his book al-Muwatta’, he said:
‘Malik, from Abu al-Zinad (130 AH), from al-A‘raj (117 AH), from Abu Hurayrah (59 AH): The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), mentioning Friday, said: “There is a period during this day in which, if a Muslim happens to supplicate Allah while standing in prayer, Allah will grant him what he asks.” The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) indicated with his hand that this opportunity is brief.’ [Malik ibn Anas (178), al-Muwatta’, 1/108.]

The first part of the hadith above—‘Malik, from Abu al-Zinad … from Abu Hurayrah’—is the chain or source of the hadith. The words of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) mentioned at the end are the matn, or text, of the hadith. In the terminology of hadith scholars, hadith does not mean only the final statement; rather, the combined form of the chain and the matn is called a hadith. If the same statement is narrated through two separate chains, it is counted as two hadith. Sometimes the chain alone is called a hadith. (Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani, Lisan al-Mizan, 3/253.)

1.4.3. Isnād versus Written Manuscripts

From the hadiths above and the countless similar hadiths compiled in hadith books, someone may assume that the Companions, Tābiʿūn, and Tābiʿ al-Tābiʿūn perhaps did not record or compile hadiths, but only memorized and transmitted them orally. Perhaps this is why the hadith scholars compiled hadiths by mentioning the isnād in this manner. Many people believe that hadiths were recorded or compiled only in the third or fourth Hijri century and that before then they circulated orally.

That is not the case at all. Ignorance or superficial, shallow knowledge of the method of transmitting or compiling hadiths has given rise to this serious misconception. In reality, the hadith scholars of the Muslim ummah followed the most precise scientific methods in transmitting and compiling hadiths. By combining oral transmission with written manuscripts, they prevented errors from entering hadith transmission. In hadith teaching, collection, and isnād transmission, they always relied on writing and manuscripts alongside oral transmission and audition. Similarly, they relied on manuscripts in examining hadiths and determining fabrications.

1.4.3.1. Manuscripts in Hadith Teaching, Collection, and Isnād Transmission

The Companions generally memorized hadiths and sometimes wrote them down. The Companions did not have much need to write down hadiths. As we mentioned earlier, most Companions narrated no more than twenty or thirty hadiths. They did not need to write down twenty or thirty, one hundred, or even a thousand events or statements from their memories of the days they spent in the company of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him). Moreover, they had no other major concern in their lives. Recalling the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him), following his instructions exactly, imitating him precisely, and conveying his words to people were among the principal tasks of their lives. No other worldly preoccupation could occupy their minds. What is constantly alive in the mind and present in one’s actions does not need to be written on separate sheets of paper. Nevertheless, many Companions wrote down the hadiths they had memorized and preserved written manuscripts. (Muhammad Ajjaj al-Khatib, al-Sunnah Qabl al-Tadwin, pp. 303–321.)

From the period of the Companions’ students, the Tābiʿūn, preserving written manuscripts was an integral part of the hadith-learning process. Most Tābiʿūn and hadith scholars of later generations heard, wrote down, and memorized hadiths. They would teach them to their students while keeping the manuscript before them or after memorizing them from the manuscript. Their students would write them in their own manuscripts as they listened and compare them with the teacher’s manuscript. From the period of the Tābiʿūn—that is, from the latter part of the first Hijri century—recording every hadith studied in this manner became an integral part of the hadith educational system. Countless reports on this subject are recorded in books on hadith. Consider one or two examples.

The Tābiʿi ʿAbdullah ibn Muhammad ibn ʿAqil (d. 140 AH) said: “Abu Jaʿfar Muhammad al-Baqir (d. 114 AH) and I used to go to the Companion Jabir ibn ʿAbdullah (d. 70 AH). We took small boards or slates with us on which we recorded hadiths.” [al-Ramahurmuzi, Hasan ibn ʿAbd al-Rahman (d. 360 AH)]

The Tābiʿi ʿAmir ibn Sharahil al-Shaʿbi (d. 102 AH) said: “Record everything you hear from me. If necessary, write it down even on the wall.” (Ibid., p. 376.)

The Tābiʿi Abu Qilabah ʿAbdullah ibn Zayd (d. 104 AH) said: “Writing something down is more beloved to me than forgetting it.” (Ibn Rajab, Sharh ʿIlal al-Tirmidhi, p. 57.)

The Tābiʿi al-Hasan al-Basri (d. 110 AH) said: “We have manuscripts that we regularly consult and preserve.” (al-Ramahurmuzi, al-Muhaddith al-Fasil, pp. 370–371.)

The renowned Tābiʿ al-Tābiʿi ʿAbdullah ibn al-Mubarak (d. 181 AH) said: “If we had not written hadiths down in manuscript form while learning them, we would not have been able to memorize them.” (Ibn Rajab, Sharh ʿIlal al-Tirmidhi, p. 57.)

Recording the countless reports on this subject would require a separate book.

Thus we have seen that, from the period of the Tābiʿūn, hadith scholars wrote down hadiths as they learned them. When teaching hadiths, the Tābiʿūn and Tābiʿ al-Tābiʿūn generally read and taught them while consulting manuscripts. Sometimes they taught hadiths from memory, but kept the manuscript in their custody so that they could consult it when necessary.

During the period of the Tābiʿūn and afterward, there were some hadith scholars who memorized and narrated hadiths without manuscripts. In most cases, they were proven weak in hadith narration. Later hadith scholars established through comparative examination that, because they did not rely on manuscripts, they sometimes made errors in narration. In reality, reliable narration is possible only through oral audition and preservation of manuscripts. Therefore, hadith scholars regarded the hadiths of those narrators who relied only on manuscripts or only on memory as weak or unreliable. Comparative examination revealed errors and inconsistencies in their narrations. We find countless accounts of this kind in books on rijal and al-jarh wa al-taʿdil. Consider one or two examples.

Abu ʿAmmar ʿIkrimah ibn ʿAmmar al-ʿIjli (d. 160 AH) was a renowned Tābiʿi hadith scholar of the second century. He was famous for memorizing hadiths. However, he did not record his memorized hadiths and preserve them in manuscript form, and consequently could not consult them when needed. As a result, some errors were found in his narrations. Imam al-Bukhari (d. 156 AH) said: “He had no manuscript; therefore, inconsistencies were found in his hadiths.” (al-Dhahabi, Mizan al-Iʿtidal 5/114.)

Jarir ibn Hazim ibn Zayd (d. 170 AH) was a renowned hadith narrator and scholar of the second Hijri century. Ibn Hajar said concerning him: “He is reliable. … However, when he narrated hadiths relying only on his memory without consulting a manuscript, he made mistakes.” (Ibn Hajar, Taqrib al-Tahdhib, p. 138.)

ʿAbd al-ʿAziz ibn ʿImran ibn ʿAbd al-ʿAziz (d. 170 AH) was a narrator of the second Hijri century. He lived in Madinah and was a descendant of the Companion ʿAbd al-Rahman ibn ʿAwf. The hadith scholars regarded him as weak and unacceptable because errors were widespread in his narrations. The reason for these errors was that he narrated from memory without manuscripts. The Medinan hadith scholar and historian ʿUmar ibn Shabbah (d. 262 AH), in his History of Madinah, said concerning him: “He made many errors in narrating hadiths because, after his manuscripts were burned, he narrated memorized hadiths relying on his memory.” (Ibn Hajar, Tahdhib al-Tahdhib 6/312.)

In the words of Ibn Hajar al-ʿAsqalani: “He is an abandoned narrator. His manuscripts were burned. Therefore, he narrated hadiths relying on his memory, and he made very many errors.” (Ibn Hajar, Taqrib al-Tahdhib, p. 358.)

The renowned hadith scholar Hajib ibn Sulayman al-Manbiji (d. 265 AH) was a scholar of the third century and a teacher of Imam al-Nasaʾi. Despite being reliable in hadith narration, he made mistakes because he had no manuscripts. Imam al-Daraqutni (d. 385 AH) said: “He would narrate hadiths from memory and relied entirely on his memory. He had no manuscript; therefore, errors appeared in his hadiths.” (al-Dhahabi, Mizan al-Iʿtidal 2/164.)

Muhammad ibn Ibrahim ibn Muslim, Abu Umayyah (d. 273 AH), was a renowned hadith scholar of the third century. His student Muhammad ibn Hibban (d. 354 AH) said concerning him: “He was from Tarsus and was reliable. He came to Egypt and narrated some hadiths from memory without any manuscript, and he made errors in those narrations. Therefore, I do not wish to accept any of the hadiths he narrated as evidence. Only those hadiths that he narrated while consulting a manuscript may be accepted.” (Ibn Hibban, Muhammad (d. 354 AH), al-Thiqat 9/137.)

Imam al-Shafiʿi (d. 204 AH) was one of the eminent scholars of the second Hijri century. He wrote: “The hadith of a scholar who makes many errors and has no sound written manuscript must not be accepted.” (al-Shafiʿi, al-Risalah, p. 382.)

Thus we have seen that, from the second Hijri century onward, preserving accuracy in hadith learning and teaching depended on combining oral audition from the teacher with preservation of written manuscripts. Even the renowned hafiz-hadith scholars, who spent their entire lives learning and teaching hadiths and had memorized hundreds of thousands of hadiths, would neither teach nor narrate hadiths without consulting manuscripts.

The prominent hadith scholar ʿAli ibn al-Madini (d. 234 AH) of the third century said: “Among our companions, no one was greater or more capable than Ahmad ibn Hanbal (d. 241 AH) in memorizing hadiths. Yet he would not narrate hadiths without keeping a manuscript before him. In him we have an excellent example.” (al-Dhahabi, Siyar Aʿlam al-Nubalaʾ 11/213.)

On the other hand, Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal (d. 241 AH) said: “Some people narrated hadiths to us from memory, and some narrated hadiths to us from manuscripts. The narrations of those who narrated while consulting manuscripts were more accurate.” (Ibn Rajab, Sharh ʿIlal al-Tirmidhi, p. 57.)

Thus we have seen that, from the second Hijri century, hadith scholars considered it essential to combine three things in hadith learning: first, hearing the hadith verbally from the teacher, or reading it aloud to him; second, writing down the hadith studied by one’s own hand; and third, comparing one’s manuscript with the teacher’s manuscript and correcting it. They objected to accepting hadiths taught by a scholar who had merely consulted a manuscript without hearing them directly, or who taught memorized hadiths without a manuscript.

ʿAbdullah (d. 290 AH), the son of Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal, said: “Imam Yahya ibn Maʿin (d. 233 AH) said: Imam ʿAbd al-Razzaq al-Sanʿani (d. 211 AH) said to me, ‘Accept at least one hadith from me without a written manuscript.’ I replied, ‘Never! I am not willing to accept even a single letter relying solely on oral transmission without the evidence of a written manuscript.’” (Ahmad, al-Musnad 3/297.)

Imam Yahya ibn Maʿin was unwilling to accept even one hadith from the renowned and reliable hadith narrator ʿAbd al-Razzaq al-Sanʿani without the combined support of a written and preserved manuscript!

Consider their principle on this matter. Imam Yahya ibn Maʿin, one of the leading hadith scholars and hadith critics of the third century, said: “If there is doubt as to whether a narrator has correctly memorized and narrated his hadiths, he must be asked for his old manuscript. If he can produce the old manuscript, he cannot be considered someone who made deliberate errors. But if he says, ‘My original ancient manuscript was destroyed; I have only a copy of it,’ his statement must not be accepted. Likewise, if he says, ‘I cannot find my manuscript,’ his statement must not be accepted. Rather, he should be understood to be a liar.” (al-Khatib al-Baghdadi, al-Kifayah fi ʿIlm al-Riwayah, p. 117.)

1.4.3.2. The Meaning and Context of Auditory Transmission in the Isnād

From the preceding discussion, we understand that hadiths were written down and memorized from the latter half of the first Hijri century onward. Hadith scholars narrated hadiths while consulting written manuscripts, examined them, verified their authenticity, and each recorded the hadiths he had heard. The question now is: Why, when narrating hadiths, did they rely only on oral transmission without giving a reference to a written book? Why did they say, “He told me,” or “He informed me,” and so forth? Why did they not say, “This statement is written in such-and-such a book,” and so on?

The actual fact is that, from the time of the Companions, greater importance was given to the person than to the book. To eliminate dependence on manuscripts and the possibility of errors connected with them, hadith scholars placed special emphasis, alongside manuscripts, on hearing the narrated hadith directly from the teacher who transmitted it. Therefore, in teaching hadiths, it was not customary to cite a book or manuscript. Rather, it was customary to mention the name of the transmitting teacher. In the terminology of hadith scholars, the expression “haddathana akhbarana,” meaning “he told me,” means: I read his book in his presence or before one of his students, heard it directly, and quoted the hadith from it. Although some said, “I heard him read,” or “I read,” they generally presented the matter in a single phrase by saying “haddathana,” “akhbarana,” or “he told us.”

We can therefore understand that the isnād of the Muwattaʾ mentioned above does not mean that Malik heard only an oral transmission from Abu al-Zinad, who heard an oral transmission from al-Aʿraj, who heard an oral transmission from Abu Hurayrah. Rather, the purpose of mentioning the isnād here is that every narrator in this chain heard the hadith from his teacher, wrote it down, and compared the written manuscript with the oral transmission.

The renowned hadith scholar Muhammad ibn Ismaʿil al-Bukhari (d. 256 AH) of the third century quoted this hadith from the Muwattaʾ.

He said: “ʿAbdullah ibn Maslamah told us, from Malik, from Abu al-Zinad, from al-Aʿraj, from Abu Hurayrah, that the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) mentioned Friday and said: ‘There is a time during this day when, if a Muslim happens to be standing in prayer and asks Allah for something, Allah grants it to him.’ The Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) indicated with his hand that this opportunity is brief.” (al-Bukhari, Muhammad ibn Ismaʿil, al-Sahih 1/316.)

Here Imam al-Bukhari quoted the hadith from the Muwattaʾ verbatim. However, he did not cite the Muwattaʾ itself. Rather, he stated that he had heard the hadith from one of Imam Malik’s students. Outwardly, a reader might think that Imam al-Bukhari relied principally on audition. But the actual matter is not at all so. More than a hundred students heard the entire Muwattaʾ from Imam Malik and wrote it down. The written copies of the Muwattaʾ transmitted by them were available in the markets of that time in the shops of warraqs, or dealers in handwritten books. If Imam al-Bukhari had bought such a manuscript and cited it as the source of the hadith, hadith scholars would have regarded his citation as weak and unacceptable, because reliance on a manuscript involves various possibilities of error. Therefore, Imam al-Bukhari went to those hadith scholars who had heard Imam Malik’s Muwattaʾ from beginning to end from his own mouth, compared it with a manuscript, and transmitted an accurate manuscript.

Imam al-Bukhari quoted hadiths from the Muwattaʾ in various places in his book, but he never cited the book itself. Instead, he gave the chain of those from whom he had studied it. Thus, here he mentioned the chain through ʿAbdullah ibn Maslamah. His statement means: “I heard this hadith, read aloud, from the book of Imam Malik in the presence of ʿAbdullah ibn Maslamah.”

Imam Muslim (d. 262 AH), another leading hadith scholar of the third century, also quoted this hadith from the Muwattaʾ.

He said: “Qutaybah ibn Saʿid told us, from Malik, from Abu al-Zinad, from al-Aʿraj, from Abu Hurayrah, that the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) mentioned Friday and said …” (Muslim ibn al-Hajjaj, al-Sahih 2/583.)

Here too Imam Muslim cited the transmitter of the book rather than citing the book itself. The celebrated hadith scholar Imam al-Bayhaqi, Ahmad ibn al-Husayn (d. 458 AH), quoted the hadith in his hadith collection entitled al-Sunan al-Kubra.

He said: “ʿAli ibn Ahmad ibn ʿAbdan told us; Ahmad ibn ʿUbayd al-Saffar told us; Ismaʿil al-Qadi told us; ʿAbdullah ibn Maslamah al-Qaʿnabi told us, from Malik, from Abu al-Zinad, from al-Aʿraj, from Abu Hurayrah, that the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) mentioned Friday and said …” (al-Bayhaqi, al-Sunan al-Kubra 3/249.)

Seeing this isnād, someone might think that until the fifth century hadith scholars relied only on oral transmission when narrating hadiths. There are eight narrators between the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) and the book. All of them relied only on oral transmission and audition! Thus, the possibility of errors must be very great!

But the actual situation is completely different. The meaning of Imam al-Bayhaqi’s isnād is this: “I heard the written Muwattaʾ of Imam Malik read to me by ʿAli ibn Ahmad ibn ʿAbdan. He read it to Ahmad ibn ʿUbayd al-Saffar. He read the book to Ismaʿil al-Qadi. He read the book to ʿAbdullah ibn Maslamah al-Qaʿnabi. He read it from Malik …” By this he proved that he had not bought the Muwattaʾ from the market and collected hadiths from it by reading it himself. Rather, he acquired a manuscript of the Muwattaʾ and read it to a person who had himself mastered the book through an accurate reading, continuing in this manner to the end. Al-Bayhaqi mentioned this isnād through many other chains as well. In every chain he mentioned oral transmission and audition. He essentially stated that he had accurately read and heard Imam Malik’s Muwattaʾ through different chains from different teachers. (al-Bayhaqi, al-Sunan al-Kubra 3/249.)

Thus we have seen that, to combine written manuscripts with oral transmission and audition, hadith scholars established the practice of citing the chain of audition instead of citing a manuscript or book. Their method was extremely precise and scientific. In the present age, citing a book by giving its name, page number, and so forth as a “reference” is less safe and rational than giving the teacher’s name as the reference. In the age of handwritten books, merely citing a book allowed for the possibility of errors in reading it, additions by others, and copyists’ mistakes. But when a book was received in written form after being read aloud from beginning to end, these possibilities of error or alteration did not remain.

The Jews and Christians wrote their scriptures relying on manuscripts. This made alteration of the Bible easy. Jewish and Christian scholars unanimously acknowledge that the Bible in circulation contains millions of alterations. They refer to these as errors (errata) or various readings. (T. H. Horne, An Introduction to the Critical Study and Knowledge of the Holy Scriptures 2/325; Rahmatullah Kairanawi, Izhar al-Haqq 2/542.)

The hadith scholars of the Muslim ummah were able to prevent and remedy such alterations and errors by emphasizing oral transmission and audition.

We also understand that it is mistaken to think that hadiths were compiled in the third century or afterward. In reality, hadiths were compiled from the first century onward. Later compilers compiled in their books the books compiled by earlier compilers. However, hadith scholars never cited manuscripts as the source of information for hadith transmission. Rather, alongside manuscripts, they placed special emphasis on oral transmission and audition.

1.4.4. Verifying Personal Integrity

The second step taken by hadith scholars to distinguish authentic and proven hadiths from deliberate or inadvertent errors and falsehoods attributed to the hadith was to collect personal information about all the narrators mentioned in the isnād and ascertain their personal integrity, justice, and piety. In this matter, they themselves observed the narrator’s conduct and, when necessary, questioned contemporary scholars, hadith scholars, and students.

The famous Tābiʿi Abu al-ʿAliyah Rufayʿ ibn Mihran (d. 90 AH), a contemporary of the Companions from the first Hijri century, said: “When I learned that someone was narrating or teaching hadith in a certain place, I would travel a long distance to go to him in order to collect hadiths. After arriving there, I would observe his prayer. If I saw that he performed the prayer properly and completely, I would stay with him and write hadiths from him. But if I saw negligence in his prayer, I would return without learning hadiths from him. I would say: Whoever can be negligent regarding prayer will be even more negligent regarding other matters.” (Ibn Hadi, al-Kamil 1/132.)

They did not observe only the outward actions of the hadith narrator; they also tried to learn about his conduct, character, honesty, trustworthiness, and other qualities. The renowned Tābiʿi ʿAsim ibn Sulayman al-Ahwal (d. 140 AH) said: “I heard Abu al-ʿAliyah (d. 90 AH) say: ‘You—meaning the Tābiʿūn of the second century—perform more prayer and fasting than your predecessors, but falsehood has begun to flow from your tongues.’” (Ibn ʿAdi, al-Kamil 1/133.)

They would also ask the narrator various questions and compare his oral narration with his manuscript in order to ascertain his honesty. Alongside their own observation, they primarily sought to learn about a narrator’s reliability through the opinions of contemporary scholars. Yahya ibn al-Mughirah (d. 253 AH) said: “I asked the renowned Tābiʿ al-Tābiʿi Jarir ibn ʿAbd al-Hamid (d. 188 AH) about his brother Anas ibn ʿAbd al-Hamid. He said: ‘Do not write his hadiths, because he lies in his conversations with people. He learned hadiths from such hadith scholars as Hisham ibn ʿUrwah and ʿUbaydullah ibn ʿUmar. But since he has the habit of lying in his conversations with people, do not accept his hadiths.’” (Ibn Abi Hatim, al-Jarh wa al-Taʿdil 2/289.)

Nevertheless, the basis of their final judgment in every case was comparative examination of the information provided by the individual. Thus, in countless cases we find that a hadith scholar, having heard much praise of a narrator, went to learn hadiths from him with admiration and enthusiasm. But as soon as he detected deliberate or inadvertent falsehoods and errors in the hadiths narrated by him, his judgment concerning that person changed.

ʿAbdullah ibn al-Muharrir al-Jazari was a scholar and eminent religious man of the second century. During the rule of Caliph al-Mansur (136–158 AH), he also served as a judge. However, he was extremely weak in hadith narration. He would lie, deliberately or inadvertently. The renowned hadith scholar ʿAbdullah ibn al-Mubarak (d. 181 AH) said: “When I heard of ʿAbdullah ibn al-Muharrik’s righteous deeds, eminence, and fame, I developed such admiration for him that, if I had been given the choice between entering Paradise and meeting ʿAbdullah ibn al-Muharrik, I would have chosen to meet him first and then enter Paradise. But when I met him and saw the abundance of falsehood in the hadiths he narrated, all the admiration in my heart disappeared. Even a goat’s dry dung is more beloved to me than he is.” (Ibn ʿAdi, al-Kamil 4/132.)

1.4.5. The Integrity of the Companions
In this way, the muhaddiths of the Muslim ummah examined and verified, with extraordinary precision, the personal integrity and accuracy of transmission of every hadith narrator. Nothing—including a narrator’s personal renown, reputation, or fame—could prevent them from conducting this verification and scrutiny.
In the following discussion, we shall see that, on the basis of verification and scrutiny, they declared many highly renowned and nationally celebrated individuals unacceptable for transmitting hadith. The only exception in this regard was the Companions. In the case of the Companions alone, the muhaddiths did not investigate personal integrity and trustworthiness. They accepted all the Companions as personally honest and truthful.
Jewish and Christian scholars and the Shiites criticize this principle of the muhaddiths. They did not believe in the integrity of the Companions. Rather, they accuse the Companions themselves of fabrication.
It is not possible to discuss here in detail the integrity and trustworthiness of the Companions. Nor will I discuss here the hadith-based evidence concerning their integrity. Here I shall discuss the integrity of the Companions in the light of reason, conscience, and the Qur’an.
(1) Regarding the Companions, the muhaddiths of the Muslim ummah essentially worked on the basis of a ‘universal’ human principle. The principle recognized everywhere in the world is that, until falsehood is proven against a person, he must be regarded as truthful and his testimony accepted. In other cases, his report or information cannot be rejected merely on the allegation that ‘he has a lawsuit or enmity with his brother.’ It was on the basis of this principle that the Muslim ummah accepted the reports of the Companions. The Companions fought one another and faced various conflicts and worldly difficulties, but it was never established in any way that any one of them had lied in the name of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) under any circumstances. Those who vilify the Companions have not been able to present even a single proof that a particular Companion was proven to have lied in the name of hadith on a particular occasion. Many things have been written in history against the Companions. But no information has been proven that they lied in the name of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him). Therefore, there is no alternative but to accept the information they provided. No one’s testimony can be rejected on the basis of a general suspicion or the assumption that perhaps he lied.
(2) We have seen that the Companions scrutinized hadiths when accepting and evaluating them. They often verified the reports of other Companions. In not a single incident was any falsehood or fabrication detected in anyone. Rather, the truthfulness and integrity of the Companions, and their uncompromising firmness in this matter, are renowned in history. Their caution in transmitting and accepting hadith was unparalleled.
(3) The views and identity of any religious preacher or founder of an ideology can be known only through his companions. For this reason, in every religion the companions of prophets, messengers, or religious founders are accorded special status. Without relying on them, it is in no way possible to know the words, statements, and model of a prophet or messenger. Doubting and distrusting the Companions means denying the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) and erasing Islam from practical life. For we received the Qur’an, hadith, and Islam altogether through these Companions.
(4) Disbelief in the integrity of the Companions means denying the prophethood of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him). Those who believe that most of the Companions were selfish, unbelieving, or apostate undoubtedly believe that Muhammad, the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him), was an unsuccessful prophet—God forbid. In a society of hundreds of thousands of people, it is not impossible for two or four unknown and obscure hypocrites to exist. But if someone claims that even those who remained in the company of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) for a long time and became renowned as Companions were deceivers, then he is essentially claiming that the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) was unsuccessful.
If a religious preacher cannot make the hearts of his companions religious, how can he make others religious? If people cannot acquire ‘integrity’ even after hearing his model, seeing it implemented in practice, and remaining in his company, then imagining that later people can acquire integrity merely by hearing that model is sheer absurdity.
Today, someone who believes that he learned integrity by reading the Qur’an, yet claims that Abu Huraira could not learn integrity by reading the Qur’an with Muhammad, the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him), and by remaining in the company of the living Qur’an, is in fact denying the prophethood of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). Human weakness, anger, factionalism, and the like are one matter, while deception or fabrication is another. Fabrication in the name of religion is an even graver matter. If a religious founder cannot rescue his followers from the filth of this gravest sin, he cannot in any way be called successful. Just as a school’s success depends on its students’ passing rate, a religious preacher’s success depends on the piety of those who receive his companionship.
(5) Above all, no Muslim who believes in the Qur’an can ever doubt the integrity of the Companions. The Qur’an has repeatedly testified to the piety of the Companions. Here I shall mention a few verses on this subject.
The Glorious Allah has said: Arabic(*********)
—“The first forerunners among the Muhajirun and the Ansar, and those who followed them with sincerity—Allah is pleased with them, and they are pleased with Him. He has prepared for them gardens beneath which rivers flow, where they shall remain forever. That is the supreme success. (Surah 9, al-Tawbah: 100).
Here the Companions have been divided into three groups: first, the foremost Muhajirun; second, the foremost Ansar; and third, those who followed them sincerely. The Companions of the first two categories have been mentioned as the standard of success and exemplary models. Most of the Companion hadith narrators belonged to these two groups.
In many other places in the Noble Qur’an, all the Muhajirun and all the Ansar have been described as ‘true believers’ and inhabitants of Paradise (Surah al-Anfal: verses 72 and 74; Surah al-Hashr: verses 8, 9, and 10).
Regarding the Bay‘at al-Ridwan on the plain of Hudaybiyyah, it is said:لَّقَدْ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنِ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ إِذْ يُبَايِعُونَكَ تَحْتَ الشَّجَرَةِ فَعَلِمَ مَا فِي قُلُوبِهِمْ فَأَنزَلَ السَّكِينَةَ عَلَيْهِمْ وَأَثَابَهُمْ فَتْحًا قَرِيبًا [٤٨:١٨]
“The believers pledged allegiance to you beneath the tree, and Allah was pleased with them.” (Surah 48, al-Fath: 18).
All the renowned Companions who transmitted hadith participated in this pledge. Not a single hypocrite participated in it.
In praise of all the Companions who participated in the Battle of Tabuk, it is said:لَٰكِنِ الرَّسُولُ وَالَّذِينَ آمَنُوا مَعَهُ جَاهَدُوا بِأَمْوَالِهِمْ وَأَنفُسِهِمْ ۚ وَأُولَٰئِكَ لَهُمُ الْخَيْرَاتُ ۖ وَأُولَٰئِكَ هُمُ الْمُفْلِحُونَ [٩:٨٨]
“But the Messenger and those who believed with him strove with their wealth and their lives in the way of Allah; for them are the good things, and they are the successful.” (Surah 9, al-Tawbah: 88).

All the renowned Companions who transmitted hadith participated in this battle. Not a single hypocrite participated in this battle. In praising all the Companions of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) without exception, and declaring without exception their piety, integrity, and trustworthiness, it is said:وَاعْلَمُوا أَنَّ فِيكُمْ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ ۚ لَوْ يُطِيعُكُمْ فِي كَثِيرٍ مِّنَ الْأَمْرِ لَعَنِتُّمْ وَلَٰكِنَّ اللَّهَ حَبَّبَ إِلَيْكُمُ الْإِيمَانَ وَزَيَّنَهُ فِي قُلُوبِكُمْ وَكَرَّهَ إِلَيْكُمُ الْكُفْرَ وَالْفُسُوقَ وَالْعِصْيَانَ ۚ أُولَٰئِكَ هُمُ الرَّاشِدُونَ [٤٩:٧]
“But Allah has made faith beloved to you and adorned it in your hearts, and He has made disbelief, sin, and disobedience hateful to you. Such are the rightly guided.” (Surah 49, al-Hujurat: 7).
Elsewhere, both categories of Companions—those who accepted Islam before and those who accepted Islam after the Conquest of Makkah—have been given, without exception, the glad tidings of goodness or Paradise.وَمَا لَكُمْ أَلَّا تُنفِقُوا فِي سَبِيلِ اللَّهِ وَلِلَّهِ مِيرَاثُ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالْأَرْضِ ۚ لَا يَسْتَوِي مِنكُم مَّنْ أَنفَقَ مِن قَبْلِ الْفَتْحِ وَقَاتَلَ ۚ أُولَٰئِكَ أَعْظَمُ دَرَجَةً مِّنَ الَّذِينَ أَنفَقُوا مِن بَعْدُ وَقَاتَلُوا ۚ وَكُلًّا وَعَدَ اللَّهُ الْحُسْنَىٰ ۚ وَاللَّهُ بِمَا تَعْمَلُونَ خَبِيرٌ [٥٧:١٠]
“Those among you who spent and fought before the Conquest are not equal to those who spent and fought afterward; they are greater in rank than those who spent and fought afterward. Yet Allah has promised the best to both.” (Surah 57, al-Hadid: 10).
It should be noted here that all the renowned Companions who transmitted hadith accepted Islam and strove before the Conquest of Makkah.
There are many more verses in the Noble Qur’an praising the Companions and testifying to their integrity, trustworthiness, faith, and being inhabitants of Paradise.

Among the renowned Companions in hadith transmission were Abu Huraira, Abdullah ibn Umar, Anas ibn Malik, Aisha, Abdullah ibn Abbas, Jabir ibn Abdullah, Abu Sa‘id al-Khudri, Abdullah ibn Mas‘ud, Abdullah ibn Amr, Ali ibn Abu Talib, Umar ibn al-Khattab, Umm Salamah, Abu Musa al-Ash‘ari, Bara ibn Azib, Abu Dharr al-Ghifari, Sa‘d ibn Abi Waqqas, Abu Umamah al-Bahili, Hudhayfa ibn al-Yaman, Sahl ibn Sa‘d, Ubadah ibn al-Samit, Imran ibn Husayn, Abu al-Darda, Abu Qatadah, Abu Bakr al-Siddiq, Ubayy ibn Ka‘b, Mu‘adh ibn Jabal, Uthman ibn Affan, and other renowned Companions.
All of them were renowned companions of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him), had accepted Islam before the Conquest of Makkah, participated in the Battle of Tabuk, participated in the Bay‘at al-Ridwan, or were among the foremost Muhajirun and Ansar.
To doubt the integrity of one whom the Qur’an testifies to be righteous, faithful, and successful, and for whom the Qur’an promises goodness, means denying the testimony of the Qur’an.

1.4.6. Comparative Scrutiny
One of the methods of the muhaddiths for determining the authenticity of hadith or distinguishing authentic hadith from inauthentic hadith was comprehensive scrutiny (cross-examination). In this, they primarily followed the practice of the Companions.
1.4.6.1. The Basic Process of Comparative Scrutiny
The venerable Abu Huraira (may Allah be pleased with him) was a Companion. Many Followers learned hadith from him. Some of them remained with him for a long time, while others remained only briefly. No Companion or muhaddith taught one hadith to one student and another hadith to another student. They taught all their students the hadiths they had collected. Consequently, in general, most of Abu Huraira’s students heard all the hadiths he narrated. They narrated the same hadiths on Abu Huraira’s authority. The muhaddiths collected and compiled the hadiths narrated by all of Abu Huraira’s students and scrutinized them by comparing them with one another.
If it was found that thirty Followers narrated a hadith from Abu Huraira, and twenty or twenty-five of them had memorized and recorded it word for word as Abu Huraira had said it, while the remaining few could not preserve it accurately, this demonstrated weakness in their memory and retention.
If one of Abu Huraira’s students learned and narrated one hundred hadiths from him, and could accurately narrate all or most of them after memorizing them word for word in this manner, that proved his acceptability. Conversely, if a Follower narrated most of one hundred hadiths in a manner that did not agree with the narrations of the other Followers, it would be understood that he did not record hadiths properly and could not retain them. Such a narrator lost his acceptability and was identified as a da‘if, or weak, narrator.
The degree of weakness was understood according to the amount and extent of the errors. If his life and the contradictory hadiths he narrated proved that he had intentionally added to or omitted from hadiths narrated from the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him), or had deliberately fabricated statements in the name of hadith, he was identified as a lying narrator. A hadith narrated solely by such a lying narrator was never accepted as a statement of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him). Rather, it was identified as a false or mawdu‘ hadith.
Sometimes a student of Abu Huraira would be found to narrate one or more hadiths that no other student narrated. In such cases, the muhaddiths scrutinized the matter according to the above rules. If it was found that the Follower student had spent more time in Abu Huraira’s company than the others, that scrutiny had established that he correctly recorded and memorized most of the hadiths he narrated, and everyone acknowledged his integrity and piety, then his additional hadiths were accepted as sahih (authentic) or hasan (good and acceptable) hadiths.
But if the comparative scrutiny described above established that most or many of his hadiths differed, to a greater or lesser extent, from those of acceptable narrators, then this additional hadith narrated by him too was classified as weak and false according to the above rules.
Generally, a Follower did not learn hadith from only one Companion. In most cases, every Follower tried to learn hadith from as many Companions as possible. For this reason, they traveled to every city in the Muslim world of that time where a Companion lived. Following the above method, the muhaddiths gathered the hadiths of all the Companions, all the hadiths of the Followers from them, and the hadiths of the Followers of the Followers transmitted from them, then determined the acceptability of hadith through comparative scrutiny and in light of the narrators’ personal lives, integrity, piety, and so forth.
This practice continued in the following centuries. On the one hand, the muhaddiths compiled, with their chains of transmission, all hadiths attributed to the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him). On the other hand, they determined the truth or falsehood of the narrators’ reports through comparative discussion and recorded their findings. (Details on this subject have been compiled in all works on al-jarh wa al-ta‘dil. In particular, see: Muslim ibn al-Hajjaj, Kitab al-Tamyiz; Ibn Adi, al-Kamil fi Du‘afa al-Rijal; Dr. Muhammad Mustafa al-A‘zami, Manhaj al-Naqd ‘inda al-Muhaddithin.)
Imam al-Tirmidhi, Abu Isa Muhammad ibn Isa (275 AH), said: Ali ibn Hujr told us; Hafs ibn Sulayman told us; he narrated from Kathir ibn Zadhan, from Asir ibn Damurah, from Ali ibn Abu Talib, that the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) said: “Whoever recites and memorizes the Qur’an, observes what the Qur’an declares lawful as lawful, and avoids what it declares unlawful as unlawful, Allah will admit him into Paradise and accept his intercession for ten members of his family, each of whom had been destined for the punishment of Hell.”
After compiling the hadith in this manner, Imam al-Tirmidhi mentioned its weakness and unacceptability and said: “This hadith is gharib (weak or unacceptable). It is known through no chain other than this one. Its chain is not sahih. Hafs ibn Sulayman (180 AH) is weak with regard to hadith.”
Imam al-Tirmidhi gave this opinion on the basis of his own scrutiny and that of countless muhaddiths over three long centuries. The concise stages of their scrutiny were as follows:
1. They collected all hadiths narrated by Hafs ibn Sulayman.
2. They collected the reports of the other students of the teachers from whom Hafs narrated hadith, or of the narrator-companions of Hafs, and compared those reports with his.
3. They collected all hadiths narrated through Hafs’s teacher, Kathir ibn Zadhan, in this hadith and compared them with Hafs’s narration.
4. They collected all hadiths narrated by Kathir’s teacher, Asim ibn Damurah, through his other students and compared them with Hafs’s narration.
5. They collected and compared all hadiths narrated through Ali’s other students.
6. They compared this narration with hadiths narrated from Companions other than Ali.
Through this scrutiny they found the following:
a. This hadith was not narrated through any chain other than this single chain. No one narrated it from any other Companion. None of Ali’s other students narrated it from Ali. None of Asim’s other students narrated it from him. None of Kathir’s other students narrated it. Thus they found that, toward the end of the second Islamic century, Hafs ibn Sulayman claimed that he had heard this hadith through this chain. No witness could be found to establish the truth of his claim.
b. Through this process, the hadith became subject to doubt regarding its acceptability. Normally, it does not happen that a hadith narrated by Ali would be known by none of his students except Asim; that Asim would teach a hadith known by no one except Zadhan; and that Zadhan would teach a hadith known by no one except Hafs.
c. It was then necessary to examine the condition of the other hadiths narrated by Hafs. Through scrutiny, the muhaddiths found that nearly all the hadiths Hafs narrated through his teacher Zadhan and all his other teachers were full of errors. They therefore became certain that although Hafs was a great Qur’an reciter and scholar, he was weak in hadith transmission. Even if he did not deliberately lie, he made a great many unintentional false statements or errors. They consequently regarded him as weak and abandoned. (Muslim ibn al-Hajjaj, al-Tamyiz, p. 169.)
Many people cannot understand this subtle scientific method of determining the accuracy of a hadith narrator’s, or ‘rawi’s, transmission. Consequently, when a muhaddith issued a ruling concerning a narrator or hadith, they were surprised or objected. Some said, “This is audacity in judging the words of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him).” Others said, “This is criticism of pious people without cause, knowledge, or evidence.” Many people held this view not only in the present age but also in the earliest periods of Islam. (Muslim ibn al-Hajjaj, al-Tamyiz, 169.)
From the discussion above, we understand that all the rulings and hadith-related opinions of the hadith imams concerning criticism of narrators and hadith were based on this scrutiny. When a muhaddith says of a narrator or hadith narrator that he is reliable, an exceptionally precise memorizer, a memorizer, truthful, acceptable, weak, prone to many errors, a narrator of objectionable hadith, abandoned, a liar, or a fabricator of hadith, and so forth, it must be understood that this ‘brief opinion’ is the result of his lifelong tireless effort, collection of hadith, and comparative scrutiny.
Likewise, when he says of a hadith that it is sahih, da‘if, objectionable, fabricated, mursal, or sahih meaning that it is a statement of a Companion, and so forth, we can understand that he has given us the essence of his lifelong endeavor.
Thus we have learned about the working method of the muhaddiths. We shall now discuss the important aspects of this method.

1.4.6.2. Investigative Questioning
Through investigative questions, the muhaddiths tried to verify a narrator’s deliberate or unintentional falsehood. Consider one or two incidents concerning this:
1. A Follower of the second Islamic century, Ufair ibn Ma‘dan, said: “Umar ibn Musa al-Wajihi came to us in the city of Hims. We gathered around him in the mosque of Hims to study hadith. He began saying, ‘Your pious shaykh narrated hadith to us.’ We asked, ‘Whom do you mean by the pious shaykh?’ He said, ‘Khalid ibn Ma‘dan.’ I asked, ‘In what year did you hear hadith from him?’ He said, ‘I studied hadith with him in 108 AH.’ I asked, ‘Where did you meet him?’ He said, ‘During the war in Armenia.’ I said, ‘Fear Allah and refrain from lying. Khalid ibn Ma‘dan died in 104 AH. Thus it appears that you studied hadith from him four years after his death. Moreover, he never went to fight in Armenia. He participated only in battles against the Byzantine state.’ (Ibn Abi Hatim, al-Jarh wa al-Ta‘dil 6/133; al-Dhahabi, Mizan al-I‘tidal 5/217.)
Because this narrator’s lying was thereby proven, the muhaddiths classified him as an abandoned and lying narrator. Abu Hatim al-Razi said: ‘Umar ibn Musa is abandoned; he fabricated false hadiths.’ al-Bukhari said: ‘The hadiths he narrated are objectionable and unacceptable.’ Ibn Ma‘in said: ‘The man is not reliable.’ Ibn Adi said: ‘The man fabricated chains of transmission and texts for hadith.’ The muhaddiths al-Daraqutni, al-Nasa’i, and others said: ‘He is abandoned.’ (The preceding reference.)
2. Abu al-Walid al-Tayalisi, Hisham ibn Abd al-Malik (227 AH), said: “I began recording hadith from Amir ibn Abi Amir al-Khazzaz. One day, in the chain of a hadith, he said, ‘Ata ibn Abi Rabah (114 AH) told us.’ I asked, ‘In what year did you hear hadith from Ata?’ He said, ‘In 124 AH.’ I said, ‘But Ata died in 113/114 AH.’”
Thus falsehood was detected in his narration. This falsehood may have been intentional or unintentional. Imam al-Dhahabi (748 AH) said: “If he said this intentionally, then he is a liar and a fabricator of hadith. But if he mistakenly confused another Follower named Ata ibn al-Sa’ib (136 AH) with Ata ibn Abi Rabah, then it must be understood that he was an extremely careless, ignorant, and rejectable narrator.” (al-Dhahabi, Mizan al-I‘tidal 4/18.)
3. A narrator of the first Islamic century was Suhayl ibn Dhakwan Abu Sinni al-Wasiti. He claimed to have heard hadith from Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her). His falsehood was exposed through the investigative questions of the muhaddiths. Yahya ibn Ma‘in said: Abbad told us: “We asked Suhayl ibn Dhakwan, ‘Did you see Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her)?’ He said, ‘Yes, I saw her.’ We asked, ‘Tell us, what did she look like?’ He said, ‘Her complexion was black.’ Suhayl further claimed that he had seen Ibrahim al-Nakha‘i, whose two eyes were very large.
This statement by Suhayl exposed his falsehood, because Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her) was fair-complexioned, while Ibrahim al-Nakha‘i was blind. (Ibn Adi, al-Kamil 4/521–522.)

1.4.6.3. Verbal and Meaning-Based Scrutiny
When collecting and scrutinizing hadith, the muhaddiths paid particular attention to the wording, sentence structure, and meaning of hadith. They considered whether the words used in a narrated hadith and its expressions were consistent with the language and meaning of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him). They also considered whether the meaning of the narrated hadith conflicted with human reason, knowledge, and conscience, or clearly contradicted well-known statements of the Qur’an and hadith. Consequently, they sometimes rejected a hadith as false or fabricated even when the narrator’s personal integrity had been established. In the following discussion, the reader will see many examples of this.
1.4.6.4. Questioning the ‘Rawi’s’ Teacher
After collecting a hadith from a narrator, the muhaddiths tried to verify the report by going to the teacher through whom he had narrated it and questioning that teacher directly. When necessary, they undertook the hardship of traveling thousands of miles for this purpose. If questioning the teacher was impossible because he had died, they collected and compared the reports of his other students. I shall mention one such incident.
A Follower and hadith narrator of the second Islamic century was the ‘rawi’ Hasan ibn Umarah al-Bajali (153 AH). He was a great scholar and jurist and served for some time as a judge in Baghdad. However, he was extremely weak in hadith transmission. The contemporary critical hadith imams, or critics, established his weakness through comparative scrutiny. Concerning this, one of the greatest muhaddiths, critics, and imams of the second Islamic century, the eminent scholar Shu‘bah ibn al-Hajjaj (160 AH), said: “Hasan ibn Umarah told me seven hadiths. He said that he had heard those hadiths from al-Hakam ibn Utaybah (113 AH), who had heard them from Yahya ibn al-Jazzar. I met al-Hakam ibn Utaybah and asked him about them. He said, ‘I did not state a single one of these hadiths.’” (Ibn Adi, al-Kamil fi Du‘afa al-Rijal 2/283.)
Abu Dawud al-Tayalisi, Sulayman ibn Dawud (204 AH), said: “Shu‘bah told me: Hasan ibn Umarah told me; al-Hakam ibn Utaybah told me; Abd al-Rahman ibn Abi Layla told me; Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) said: ‘The martyrs of Uhud were washed, shrouded, and the funeral prayer was performed over them.’ I then went to al-Hakam and asked him about the martyrs of Uhud. He said, ‘They were not washed or shrouded.’ I said, ‘Then Hasan ibn Umarah has narrated all this from you?’ He said, ‘I never told him this hadith.’” (The preceding reference, 2/284.)
Abu Dawud al-Tayalisi further said: “Shu‘bah told me: Go to Jarir ibn Hazim (170 AH) and tell him, ‘It is not permissible for you to narrate hadith from Hasan ibn Umarah, because he lies.’ Al-Tayalisi said: I asked, ‘How did you know that?’ He said, ‘He narrated many hadiths to me through al-Hakam ibn Utaybah, but I found no basis for them.’
Al-Tayalisi said: I asked, ‘What are they?’ Shu‘bah said: I asked al-Hakam, ‘What is your view concerning an illegitimate child?’ He said, ‘The funeral prayer should be performed over them.’ I asked, ‘From whom was this hadith narrated?’ Al-Hakam said, ‘It was narrated from Hasan al-Basri.’ Yet Hasan ibn Umarah says that al-Hakam narrated the hadith to him from Yahya ibn al-Jazzar, through Ali. (Muslim, al-Sahih 1/23–24.)
Thus we can see that Shu‘bah presented the hadiths narrated by Hasan ibn Umarah to his teacher and proved the inaccuracy of Hasan’s narration and his intentional and unintentional errors or falsehood. We find countless such incidents in the books of rijal. In fact, a major portion of the journeys of the muhaddiths was devoted to presenting compiled hadiths to the narrators’ teachers and verifying their accuracy.

1.4.6.5. Comparing the Narrations of Different Narrators
One of the important aspects of the muhaddiths’ scrutiny was collecting and comparing the narrations of a narrator’s contemporaries or fellow students in order to determine their accuracy. This process of comparison and examination was a principal feature of their constant study of hadith. As soon as they heard a hadith, they compared it with the hadith narrated by others and preserved in their memories. Then, whenever necessary and possible, they questioned other narrators, compared their narrations with this narration, and matched them with manuscripts as needed.

Abu Dawud al-Tayalisi (204 AH), a celebrated muhaddith of the second Islamic century, says: One day we were sitting with our teacher Shu‘bah ibn al-Hajjaj (160 AH). At that time, a contemporary narrator, Hasan ibn Dinar, arrived. Shu‘bah said to him, “Sit here.” He sat down and said from the hadith: “Hamid ibn Hilal told us; he narrated from Mujahid (21–104 AH), who heard Umar ibn al-Khattab (21 AH) say…” Upon hearing the hadith, Shu‘bah expressed amazement and said, “Did Mujahid hear any hadith from Umar? How could that be possible?” At this, Hasan ibn Dinar got up and left.

Another narrator, Abu al-Fadl Bahr ibn Qunays al-Saqqa (160 AH), then arrived. Shu‘bah said to him, “Abu al-Fadl, did you hear any hadith from Hamid ibn Hilal?” He replied, “Yes, I did.” He said, “Hamid ibn Hilal told us that a scholar named Abu Mujahid of the Banu Adi tribe told us that he heard Umar ibn al-Khattab say…” Shu‘bah then said, “So this is what actually happened.” (Ibn Adi, al-Kamil 3/117.)

Hasan ibn Dinar made a mistake in narrating the hadith. The renowned narrator Mujahid was born two or three years before the martyrdom of Umar ibn al-Khattab (may Allah be pleased with him). He did not hear any hadith from Umar. Intentionally or unintentionally, he attributed the narration to the wrong narrator. By comparing it with the narration of Bahr al-Saqqa, Shu‘bah understood where Hasan ibn Dinar’s error lay: he had not properly remembered the name of Hamid ibn Hilal’s teacher. This proves that although he did not deliberately tell a lie, he made an inadvertent false attribution. He was unable to retain or narrate hadith accurately.

Imam Yahya ibn Ma‘in (233 AH), one of the greatest critical muhaddiths of the third century, went to Musa ibn Isma‘il (223 AH) and expressed his desire to read the manuscripts of the hadiths narrated by Hammad ibn Salamah ibn Dinar (167 AH). Musa asked, “Have you not heard these manuscripts from anyone else?” Yahya replied, “Previously I read to seventeen of Hammad’s students the manuscripts of the hadiths narrated by Hammad that they had compiled. You are the eighteenth person to whom I wish to read Hammad’s hadiths.” Musa asked, “Why?” Yahya replied, “Because Hammad ibn Salamah used to make mistakes in one or two places when narrating hadith. Therefore, I want to distinguish between his mistakes and the mistakes of his students. If I find that all of Hammad’s students narrated it in the same way, I will understand that Hammad said it that way, and that any error in this case was Hammad’s own. But if I find differences among the students’ narrations, I will understand that the error belonged to the student himself. In this way I can distinguish Hammad’s own mistakes from those of his students.” (Al-Dhahabi, Siyar A‘lam al-Nubala 7/456.)

Imam Muslim has mentioned numerous examples and explanations of the comparative scrutiny of the muhaddiths in detail in his book al-Tamyiz. I present here one example in his own words. He says: In the narration of a hadith, an error may occur in its chain of transmission or in its text. Here is an example of an error in the text. Hasan al-Hulwani and Abdullah ibn Ubaydullah al-Darimi told me; Kathir ibn Zayd told us; Yazid ibn Abi Ziyad told us, from Kurayb ibn Abi Muslim (98 AH), from Ibn Abbas, who said: “I spent the night in the house of my maternal aunt, the Prophet’s wife, Maymunah. The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) rose at night, performed ablution, and stood for prayer (tahajjud). I stood to his right. He took hold of me and made me stand to his left…”

Imam Muslim says: This hadith is erroneous, because reliable narrators have narrated the opposite in authentic reports. They mentioned that Ibn Abbas stood to the left of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), after which he made him stand to his right. I shall mention here the narrations of Kurayb ibn Abi Muslim’s other students, followed by those of Ibn Abbas’s other students who were Kurayb’s fellow students and narrated in the same manner as he did.

1. Ibn Abi Umar told us; Sufyan al-Thawri told us, from Amr ibn Dinar, from Kurayb, from Ibn Abbas, that he spent the night in Maymunah’s house. The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) rose at night, performed ablution, and stood for prayer. Ibn Abbas said: “I then rose, performed ablution in the same manner as the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) performed ablution, came to him, and stood to his left. He then made me stand to his right.”
2. Makhrah ibn Sulayman narrated similarly from Kurayb, from Ibn Abbas.
3. Salamah ibn Kuhayl narrated similarly from Kurayb, from Ibn Abbas.
4. Salith ibn Abi al-Ja‘d narrated similarly from Kurayb, from Ibn Abbas.
5. Hushaym, from Abu Bishr, from Sa‘id ibn Jubayr, from Ibn Abbas.
6. Ayyub al-Sakhtiyani, from Abdullah ibn Sa‘id ibn Jubayr, from his father Sa‘id ibn Jubayr, from Ibn Abbas.
7. Al-Hakam ibn Utaybah, from Sa‘id ibn Jubayr.
8. Ibn Jurayj, from Ata ibn Abi Rabah, from Ibn Abbas.
9. Qays ibn Sa‘d, from Ata ibn Abi Rabah, from Ibn Abbas.
10. Abu Nadrah (Mundhir ibn Malik), from Ibn Abbas.
11. Al-Sha‘bi, from Ibn Abbas.
12. Tawus, from Ikrimah, from Ibn Abbas.

Imam Muslim says: Thus it was established through authentic narrations from Kurayb and from Ibn Abbas’s other students that the narration stating that the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) made Ibn Abbas stand to his left is unquestionably erroneous. (Muslim, al-Tamyiz, pp. 62–63.)

Reader, observe here the depth and reliability of Imam Muslim’s scrutiny. He collected this one hadith from Ibn Abbas through thirteen routes and, by comparative examination, distinguished the correct narration from the erroneous or false one.

First, he mentioned the narration transmitted through a narrator named Yazid ibn Abi Ziyad: Kurayb told him that Ibn Abbas told him that he stood to the right of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), and that the Messenger made him stand to his left. He then compared it with the narrations of the other students of Yazid’s teacher, Kurayb. Three other renowned students of Kurayb—Makhramah, Salamah, and Salim—narrated the opposite of Yazid’s report. All three stated that Kurayb said Ibn Abbas stood to the left and that the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) made him stand to the right. This proved that Yazid ibn Abi Ziyad had been unable to retain the hadith accurately.

Imam Muslim did not stop there. Besides Kurayb, he collected the hadith’s narrations from five other students of Ibn Abbas—Sa‘id ibn Jubayr, Ata ibn Abi Rabah, Abu Nadrah, al-Sha‘bi, and Ikrimah—and compared them with the report above. The narrations of these five also prove that Yazid ibn Abi Ziyad narrated the hadith incorrectly. It was thus established beyond doubt that Ibn Abbas told all his students that he first stood to the left, after which the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) made him stand to the right. Like all of Ibn Abbas’s students, Kurayb also narrated this from him to his students. Yazid, however, narrated the hadith incorrectly because of the weakness of his memory.

The muhaddiths conducted this kind of extensive comparison and examination for every hadith. Every opinion they gave concerning hadith and narrators was based on such deep and comprehensive comparison and scrutiny.

Consider another example. Abu Abd al-Rahman Abdullah ibn Lahi‘ah Uqbah al-Hadrami al-Ghafiqi (174 AH) was a renowned Egyptian scholar, jurist, and muhaddith of the second Islamic century. He was a famous hadith narrator and narrated many hadiths. After comparatively examining all the hadiths he narrated, the muhaddiths found that the number of errors in his narrations was very high. The critical muhaddiths collected the hadiths he narrated from him or from his students. They then collected the same hadiths from the other students of the teachers through whom he narrated. After observing differences in the chains and texts of these reports, they classified Ibn Lahi‘ah as weak in hadith narration.

As an example of Ibn Lahi‘ah’s serious error, Imam Muslim says: Zuhayr ibn Harb told us; Ishaq ibn Isa told us; Abdullah ibn Lahi‘ah told us; Musa ibn Uqbah (141 AH) wrote to me; Busur ibn Sa‘id told me, from Zayd ibn Thabit (may Allah be pleased with him), who said: “The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) underwent cupping in the mosque, that is, he had blood drawn from his body by cupping.” Ibn Lahi‘ah’s student Ishaq ibn Isa said: “I asked Ibn Lahi‘ah, ‘Was it in a place of prayer in his house?’ He replied, ‘In the Prophet’s Mosque.’”

Imam Muslim says: The narration of this hadith is distorted in every respect. There is a serious error both in its chain and in its text. Ibn Lahi‘ah altered the wording of the text and made an error in the chain. I shall mention the authentic version of this hadith.

Muhammad ibn Hatim told me; Bahaz ibn Asad told us; Uhayb ibn Khalid ibn Ajlan (165 AH) told us; Musa ibn Uqbah told me; I heard Abu al-Nadr Salim ibn Abi Umayyah (129 AH) say, from Busur ibn Sa‘id, from Zayd ibn Thabit: “The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) made a small room in the mosque with a reed mat and prayed in it for several nights…”

Imam Muslim says: “Muhammad ibn al-Muthanna told me; Muhammad ibn Ja‘far told us; Abdullah ibn Sa‘id ibn Abi Hind al-Farazi (145 AH) told us; Abu al-Nadr Salim told us, from Busur ibn Sa‘id, from Zayd ibn Thabit, who said: ‘The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) made a room in the mosque with a reed mat…’”

Imam Muslim says: Thus we find the correct narration through Uhayb ibn Khalid (165 AH), from Musa ibn Uqbah, from Abu al-Nadr. I have also mentioned the narration of Abdullah ibn Sa‘id ibn Abi Hind al-Farazi (145 AH), in the second instance, from Abu al-Nadr. Ibn Lahi‘ah made an error in narrating the text of the hadith because he did not hear it directly from Musa. He relied only on the manuscript that had been sent to him, as he himself mentioned. Consequently, he read the words meaning “he made a room” as meaning “he drew blood.” We fear this kind of distortion in the case of all those who narrate hadith relying solely on written manuscripts without hearing them directly from the muhaddith or reading them to the muhaddith himself.

The error in the chain is that Musa ibn Uqbah received the hadith from Abu al-Nadr Salim, and Abu al-Nadr learned it from Busur ibn Sa‘id. But in narrating the chain, Ibn Lahi‘ah omitted the name of Abu al-Nadr and said that Musa heard the hadith from Busur. (Muslim, al-Tamyiz, pp. 187–188.)

It is noteworthy that Imam Muslim made the comparison in two stages. First, he compared Ibn Lahi‘ah’s narration with the narration of Uhayb, another student of Ibn Lahi‘ah’s teacher Musa. Both narrations proved that Ibn Lahi‘ah had made a serious error in narrating the chain and mentioning the text.

1.4.6.6. Comparing Narrations Given at Different Times
One of the methods for verifying the accuracy of testimony or narration is to question the narrator about the same matter at different times. The Companions used this method to verify the accuracy of the narrations of hadith transmitters. Later muhaddiths also used it. Here I shall mention two examples.

1. Abu al-Zu‘ayzah, the secretary of the Umayyad ruler Marwan ibn al-Hakam (65 AH), says: One day Marwan told me, “Bring Abu Hurayrah (may Allah be pleased with him).” When Abu Hurayrah arrived, Marwan began asking him hadiths concerning various matters and instructed me to sit behind a curtain and write them down. After a year had passed, Marwan again summoned Abu Hurayrah and told me to sit behind the curtain with the manuscript I had written the previous year. He asked Abu Hurayrah about those same matters again, and Abu Hurayrah repeated the hadiths he had narrated the previous year. I compared them and found that he had neither added nor omitted anything, nor had he placed any word before or after another. (Al-Hakim, al-Mustadrak 3/583.)

2. Umarah ibn al-Qa‘qa‘ says: Ibrahim al-Nakha‘i (96 AH) told me, “Narrate a hadith to me from Abu Zur‘ah ibn Amr ibn Jarib.” The evidence of Abu Zur‘ah’s reliability is that I questioned him about a hadith. Then, two years later, I asked him about the same hadith. The second time he narrated it exactly as he had the first time; he had not added or omitted even one letter. (Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, Tahdhib al-Tahdhib 12/109.)

1.4.6.7. Comparing Manuscripts with Memory and Hearing
We have already seen that, from the time of the Followers, narrators and muhaddiths generally preserved in separate manuscript form the hadiths they learned from each teacher. They compared their memorized narrations with the manuscripts to verify their accuracy. When necessary, they examined the handwriting, ink, and other features of the manuscripts. I shall mention several examples of using manuscripts to verify the authenticity of narrated hadiths.

(1) Khalifah ibn Musa, a muhaddith of the second Islamic century, says: I went to study hadith with a muhaddith named Ghalib ibn Ubaydullah al-Jazari. He began dictating hadiths to us, looking at his manuscript and saying, “Mak-hul told me… Mak-hul told me…” In this way he continued dictating hadiths through Mak-hul. At that point he needed to urinate and got up. I then looked at his manuscript and saw written there: “Aban ibn Abi Ayyash (140 AH) told me, from Anas; Aban said, from so-and-so…” I left him and departed. (Muslim, al-Sahih 1/18.)

In other words, this narrator had heard and written his hadiths from Aban. But Aban was known to the muhaddiths as weak and unreliable. Therefore, when narrating the hadiths, he omitted Aban’s name and attributed them to the famous Follower Mak-hul. Khalifah took advantage of the opportunity to compare his oral narration with the written manuscript and exposed his fraud.

(2) The critical imam Abd al-Rahman ibn Mahdi (198 AH) of the second century says: One day, while Sufyan al-Thawri (161 AH) was narrating a hadith, he said, “Hammad ibn Abi Sulayman (120 AH) told me this hadith, from Amr ibn Atiyyah al-Taymi, a Follower who died around 100 AH, from Salman al-Farisi (34 AH).”

Abd al-Rahman says: I said, “Hammad ibn Abi Sulayman narrated this hadith from Rib‘i ibn Hirash (100 AH), from Salman al-Farisi.” In other words, “There is an error in your chain: Hammad’s teacher was not Amr ibn Atiyyah, but Rib‘i ibn Hirash.” Sufyan al-Thawri said, “Who told you this chain?” I replied, “Hammad ibn Salamah (167 AH) told me; he mentioned this chain from Hammad ibn Abi Sulayman.” Sufyan said, “Write what I am saying.” I said, “Shu‘bah ibn al-Hajjaj (160 AH) also gave me this chain.” He said, “Write what I am saying.” I said, “Hisham al-Dastuwa’i (154 AH) also gave me this chain.” He said, “Hisham?” I replied, “Yes.” He remained silent for a few moments and then said, “Write what I am saying. I heard Hammad ibn Abi Sulayman say: ‘I heard this hadith from Amr ibn Atiyyah.’”

Abd al-Rahman says: I became firmly convinced that Sufyan al-Thawri had made a mistake here. For a long time I held the view that Sufyan al-Thawri had erred in narrating this hadith. Then one day, among the written manuscripts of the hadiths I had heard through my teacher Muhammad ibn Ja‘far Ghundar (193 AH) from Shu‘bah ibn al-Hajjaj, I found that Shu‘bah had said: “Hammad ibn Abi Sulayman told me; Rib‘i ibn Hirash told him, from Salman al-Farisi.” Shu‘bah had also said: “Hammad sometimes said that he heard this hadith from Amr ibn Atiyyah.”

Abd al-Rahman says: After seeing the manuscript, I understood that Sufyan al-Thawri had been correct. Because of his deep confidence in his own memory, he had not paid attention to the objections of others. (Ibn Abi Hatim, al-Jarh wa al-Ta‘dil 1/64–65.)

(3) One of the greatest muhaddiths and jurists of the second century, Abdullah ibn al-Mubarak (181 AH), says: If the muhaddiths disagree about the correct narration of a hadith transmitted from Shu‘bah ibn al-Hajjaj (160 AH), then the manuscript of Muhammad ibn Ja‘far Ghundar (193 AH) will settle the matter among them. The version in Ghundar’s manuscript will be accepted as correct and accurate. (Ibn Abi Hatim, the work cited above, 1/271.)

(4) Three muhaddiths of the third century—Muhammad ibn Muslim ibn Uthman al-Razi (270 AH), Fadl ibn Abbas, and Abu Zur‘ah al-Razi Ubaydullah ibn Abd al-Karim (264 AH)—were sitting together discussing hadith. Muhammad ibn Muslim narrated a hadith, and Fadl objected. Muhammad gave another narration, and the two disputed about the hadith. They accepted Abu Zur‘ah as arbitrator. Abu Zur‘ah was reluctant to express an opinion, but Muhammad ibn Muslim continued pressing him. He said, “Your silence has no meaning. If I am mistaken, say so; and if he is mistaken, say so.” Abu Zur‘ah then ordered that his manuscript be brought. He told his student Abu al-Qasim, “Enter the library, leave out the first, second, and third rows, then count the books in the next row, leave the first sixteen volumes, and bring the seventeenth.” The student went, brought the manuscript according to the description, and gave it to Abu Zur‘ah. Abu Zur‘ah turned through the pages and eventually found the hadith. He then handed the manuscript to Muhammad ibn Muslim. Muhammad read the hadith recorded in it and said, “Yes, then I was the one who was mistaken. Mistakes can happen.” (Ibn Abi Hatim, the work cited above, 1/337; Ibn Hajar, Tahdhib al-Tahdhib 7/30.)

(5) A renowned muhaddith of the third Islamic century, Abd al-Rahman ibn Umar al-Isfahani Rustah (250 AH), once narrated a hadith in the presence of Abu Zur‘ah al-Razi (264 AH) and Abu Hatim al-Razi Muhammad ibn Idris (277 AH). He said, “Abd al-Rahman ibn Mahdi told us, from Sufyan al-Thawri, from al-A‘mash, from Abu Salih, from Abu Hurayrah, that the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said: ‘Delay the noon prayer and perform it when it is cooler, for the severity of the heat is from the breath of Hell.’” Abu Zur‘ah al-Razi immediately objected. He said, “You are mistaken. Everyone narrates this hadith from Abu Sa‘id al-Khudri, not from Abu Hurayrah.” Abd al-Rahman was deeply affected by this. He returned home, examined the manuscript he had kept, and wrote to Abu Zur‘ah:

“I narrated a hadith in your presence through Abu Hurayrah. You said that my narration was mistaken and that everyone narrated the hadith through Abu Sa‘id. Your words deeply affected me, and I could not forget them. When I returned home, I examined the manuscript preserved with me and found that the hadith was indeed narrated through Abu Sa‘id. If it causes you no difficulty, please inform Abu Hatim and all the other companions that I had made a mistake. May Allah reward you. Acknowledging a mistake and being embarrassed or humiliated is better than burning in the Fire of Hell by concealing a mistake.” (Ibn Abi Hatim, al-Jarh wa al-Ta‘dil 1/336.)

(6) One of the eminent muhaddiths of the third century, Sulayman ibn Harb (224 AH), says: When I discussed various hadiths with the renowned critical muhaddith Yahya ibn Ma‘in (233 AH), my contemporary, he would sometimes say, “This hadith is erroneous.” I would ask, “What is its correct form?” He would say, “I do not know.” I would then consult my manuscript and find that he was correct: the hadith had been written differently in the manuscript. (Ibn Abi Hatim, the work cited above, 1/314.)

(7) Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal (241 AH) was asked, “Is Abu al-Walid completely reliable?” He replied, “No. His manuscripts had neither dots nor vowel marks. However, the hadiths he heard and wrote from Shu‘bah ibn al-Hajjaj, he narrated accurately.” (Ahmad ibn Hanbal, al-Ilal wa Ma‘rifat al-Rijal 2/369.)

(8) Ya‘qub ibn Humayd ibn Kasib (240 AH) was a hadith narrator of the third century. Imam Abu Dawud (275 AH) says: I found many hadiths among those narrated by Ya‘qub that no one else narrated in that manner. We therefore asked him to show us his original manuscript. For several days he ignored our request. Then he brought out his manuscript and showed it to us. We saw that many hadiths in it had been written in fresh, new ink. The difference between the old and new writing was clear. We found that the names of narrators were absent from the chains of many hadiths, and that he had inserted the names of narrators there later. In some hadiths he had added extra words or sentences to the text. For this reason, we refrained from accepting his hadiths. (Al-Dhahabi, Mizan al-I‘tidal 7/276–277; Siyar A‘lam al-Nubala 11/159.)

(9) Abu Ahmad Abdullah ibn Adi (365 AH), one of the leading muhaddiths of the fourth Islamic century, says: A man named Muhammad ibn Muhammad ibn al-Ash‘ath lived in Egypt and narrated hadith. During one of my journeys to collect hadith, I went to him in Egypt. He brought out a manuscript for us. Its ink was fresh and its paper was also new. It contained nearly one thousand hadiths, which he claimed to have heard from Musa ibn Isma‘il ibn Musa ibn Ja‘far al-Sadiq ibn Muhammad al-Baqir ibn Zayn al-Abidin ibn Husayn ibn Ali, a descendant of Ali, through his father and grandfathers, from the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him). Almost all these hadiths were unknown; no one else had narrated them through this chain or through any other chain. Some of their texts were found in other authentic hadiths, but not through this chain.

I then asked Husayn ibn Ali, one of the contemporary leaders of the Alid family, about Musa ibn Isma‘il, who was mentioned in the chain. He said, “This Musa was my neighbor in Madinah for forty years. He never once said that he had heard or narrated any hadith through his father and grandfathers or through any other chain.” Ibn Adi says: We found no basis for the hadiths in this manuscript. It appears that he fabricated them. (Ibn Adi, al-Kamil 6/301–302; Ibn al-Jawzi, al-Du‘afa 3/43, 97.)

1.4.7. Classification of Hadiths on the Basis of Examination
On the basis of examination, the muhaddiths have basically divided hadiths into three categories: sahih, or authentic hadith; hasan, or good—meaning generally acceptable; and da‘if, or weak. Weak hadiths are divided in various ways according to the cause and degree of their weakness.

Here I shall try to explain these simply for the understanding of ordinary readers. Suppose a judge has examined the evidence brought against a person accused of murder. The charge is that he deliberately killed a person in cold blood according to a prior plan. On the basis of the evidence presented, the judge may give one of four possible verdicts: 1. the death penalty; 2. life imprisonment; 3. imprisonment for several years; or 4. acquittal. Broadly speaking, similar levels exist concerning the reliability of hadith.

1.4.7.1. Sahih, or Authentic, Hadith
In the terminology of the muhaddiths, a hadith in which five conditions have been fulfilled is called sahih. 1. ‘Adalah: all the narrators of the hadith are proven to be completely upright and trustworthy. 2. Dabt: all the narrators are proven to possess full capacity for accurate narration. 3. Ittisal: every narrator in the chain is proven to have heard the hadith directly from the narrator above him. 4. Freedom from shudhudh: the hadith is proven not to contradict other authoritative narrations. 5. Freedom from ‘illah: the hadith is proven to contain no subtle defect in its chain or meaning. (Al-Iraqi, al-Taqyid, pp. 23–25; Fath al-Mughith, pp. 7–8; al-Sakhawi, Fath al-Mughith 1/25–31; al-Suyuti, Tadrib al-Rawi 1/63–74; Mahmud Tahhan, Taysir Mustalah al-Hadith, pp. 34–36.)

The first three conditions concern the chain, while the last two essentially concern the meaning. A detailed explanation of these is unnecessary here. For ordinary readers, however, we may say that when the level of certainty concerning the evidence is sufficient for a judge to impose the death penalty or life imprisonment, and one can be similarly certain that the narrated hadith was truly spoken by the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), the muhaddiths classify it as sahih, or authentic. To indicate the reliability of narrators whose hadiths are judged, through examination, to possess this level of accuracy or authenticity, the muhaddiths use Arabic terms meaning reliable, authoritative, and so forth.

1.4.7.2. Hasan, or Good or Acceptable, Hadith
In the terminology of the muhaddiths, the presence of the five conditions mentioned above is also essential in a hasan hadith. However, if the slightest weakness is found in the second condition, the hadith is called hasan. That is, the narrators in the chain are personally upright; each is proven to have heard the hadith directly from the narrator above him; and the hadith contains neither shudhudh nor ‘illah. However, the capacity for accurate narration, or dabt, of one of the narrators in the chain is understood to be somewhat weak. Some inadvertent errors and defects are noticed in the hadiths he narrates. A hadith narrated by such a narrator is classified as hasan. (Al-Iraqi, al-Taqyid, pp. 45–61; Fath al-Mughith, pp. 32–48; al-Sakhawi, Fath al-Mughith 1/76–110; al-Suyuti, Tadrib al-Rawi 1/153–178; Mahmud Tahhan, Taysir Mustalah al-Hadith, pp. 45–50.)

A detailed explanation of the terminology is unnecessary here. For ordinary readers, however, we may say that when the evidence is sufficient for a judge to impose a definite punishment on someone accused of murder, but not the death penalty or life imprisonment, the muhaddiths classify a hadith as hasan on the basis of a comparable level of evidence. To indicate the acceptability of narrators whose narrated hadiths have been proven to be hasan, or acceptable, the muhaddiths use Arabic terms meaning truthful, unobjectionable, satisfactory, and similar expressions.

1.4.7.3. “Da‘if,” or Weak Hadith
A hadith in which any one of the conditions of a hasan hadith is absent is called a “da‘if” hadith in the terminology of the muhaddiths. That is, if a hadith contains any one of the following matters—deficiency in the narrator’s reliability; deficiency in his accurate transmission or memory; proof, or strong suspicion, that he did not hear the hadith directly or with his own ears from one of the narrators in the isnad or from an earlier narrator; the presence of shudhudh or ‘illah in the hadith; and so on—the hadith is considered da‘if. (Al-‘Iraqi, al-Taqyid, p. 62; Fath al-Mughith, p. 49; al-Sakhawi, Fath al-Mughith 1/111; al-Suyuti, Tadrib al-Rawi 1/179; Mahmud Tahhan, Taysir Mustalah, pp. 62–63.)

The muhaddiths have divided da‘if hadith into various categories on the basis of five conditions. A detailed explanation of them is irrelevant here. However, we can understand that considering a hadith da‘if means that it appears not to be a statement of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him). The muhaddiths used various terms to indicate the weakness of narrators, such as: weak, nothing, worthless, unknown, a vile and confused hadith narrator, abandoned, liar, and so forth.

There are three degrees of weakness in a “da‘if,” or weak, hadith.
1.4.7.3.1. Somewhat Weak
The narrator appears to have made mistakes because a considerable number of the hadiths he transmitted contain errors. However, it is established that he did not make mistakes intentionally. If such a da‘if hadith is established through one or more other chains that are somewhat weak, it is considered a hasan, or acceptable, hadith.
1.4.7.3.2. Extremely Weak (Da‘if Jiddan, Wahi)
If a comparative examination of all the hadiths transmitted by the narrator of such a hadith establishes that most or all of his hadiths are filled with countless errors—errors more serious than those normally made unintentionally—then his transmitted hadith is considered abandoned, completely unacceptable, or extremely weak. Such a weak hadith does not become acceptable even if it is transmitted through another similar weak chain.
1.4.7.3.3. Mawdu‘, or Fabricated, Hadith
If it is established that the narrator of such a weak hadith deliberately circulated it among society in the name of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him), or deliberately added to or omitted from the hadith’s chain of transmission (isnad) or wording, then the hadith he transmitted is considered mawdu‘, or fabricated. A fabricated hadith is the most despicably weak kind of hadith. (For details, see: Hakim al-Naysaburi (405 AH), Ma‘rifat ‘Ulum al-Hadith, pp. 14–17, 36–40, 52–62, 112–151; al-‘Iraqi, Fath al-Mughith, pp. 7–51, 138–178; al-Taqyid wa al-Idah, pp. 23–63, 133–157, 420–421; Dr. Mahmud Tahhan, Taysir Mustalah al-Hadith, pp. 33–125, 144–155).

1.4.8. Compilation and Preservation of Hadith in Book Form
One of the major efforts of the muhaddiths to protect hadith from fabrication and falsehood was to compile all hadith, together with their isnads, in book form. We have seen that from the age of the Tabi‘un, or at least from the second half of the first Hijri century, hadith were written down for the purposes of study, memorization, and teaching. However, systematic compilation of hadith in book form began in the second Hijri century. This work reached completion in the third Hijri century. The practice of compiling hadith with their isnads continued during the following two centuries, and several books were compiled. The muhaddiths of each period compiled, with their isnads, the hadith compiled by the muhaddiths of earlier periods. In addition, they traveled throughout the Muslim world on expeditions to collect hadith, gathering and compiling, with their isnads, every hadith attributed to the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him). These books were compiled in various ways:
1. Compiling all circulating hadith with their isnads.
2. Compiling only authentic or generally acceptable hadith.
3. Compiling the hadith transmitted by narrators together with biographical information about them.
4. Compiling only unreliable or fabricated hadith.

The principal purpose of the hadith-compilation tradition that began in the second Hijri century and continued for approximately the next four centuries was to compile every hadith attributed to and circulated in the name of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him), so that the muhaddiths of the Muslim ummah could select the sound and accurate hadith from among them according to the principles of critical examination. Many compiled hadith according to the names of the narrator or the Companion narrator. The fundamental purpose of all of them was to compile everything circulating under the name of hadith.

Thus we find that most hadith books contain every type of hadith: sahih, da‘if, and mawdu‘. Here many people, because of ignorance, fall into a misconception. From the discussions above concerning the Companions’ and later muhaddiths’ evaluation of hadith, examination of isnads, and critical scrutiny, some people assume that the muhaddiths neither accepted nor compiled the hadith of narrators whose errors or lies were detected through these evaluations and examinations. Consequently, they think that the very inclusion of a hadith in a hadith book means that the muhaddith compiled it because examination had proved it authentic.

This notion is entirely based on ignorance and completely contrary to the actual situation. Apart from a few compilers, no compiler wrote a book solely to compile authentic or reliable hadith. Most muhaddiths, mufassirs, scholars, and imams compiled hadith with their isnads in order to gather every type—sahih, da‘if, and fabricated—so that everything attributed to or circulated in the name of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) would be preserved. They did not directly present any hadith as a statement or act of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him). Rather, they cited the isnad and stated who had narrated the hadith to them, and through whose authority. Essentially, they said: “So-and-so said that ‘this statement is a hadith’; I have compiled it with its isnad.” Now, readers who love hadith may distinguish the sahih, da‘if, and fabricated hadith. Some of these compilers also discussed the isnad while transmitting the hadith. Others discussed the isnad and stated its weakness or strength.

Only a small number of compilers attempted to compile exclusively authentic hadith. Among them were the most famous muhaddiths of the third century, Imam Muhammad ibn Isma‘il al-Bukhari (256 AH) and Imam Muslim ibn al-Hajjaj al-Qushayri (261 AH). After them, ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Ali ibn al-Jarud (307 AH), Muhammad ibn Ishaq ibn Khuzaymah (311 AH), Ahmad ibn Muhammad ibn al-Sharqi (325 AH), Qasim ibn Yusuf al-Bayqani (340 AH), Sa‘id ibn ‘Uthman ibn al-Sakan (353 AH), Abu Hatim Muhammad ibn Hibban al-Busti (354 AH), Abu ‘Abdullah Muhammad ibn ‘Abdullah al-Hakim al-Naysaburi (405 AH), and Diya’ al-Din Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Wahid al-Maqdisi (643 AH), among other muhaddiths, wrote works called Sahih in an attempt to compile only authentic hadith. (Al-Kattani, al-Risalah al-Mustatrafah, pp. 20–26.)

However, through the meticulous analysis of later muhaddiths, all the hadith in only the two books of al-Bukhari and Muslim have been established as authentic. It has not been established that all the hadith in any other book are authentic. Rather, it has been established that some books contain da‘if, invalid, and false hadith.

The eminent scholar of the twelfth Hijri century, Imam Shah Waliullah al-Dihlawi (1176 AH/1762 CE), divided the hadith books into five levels. The first level contains three books: Sahih al-Bukhari, Sahih Muslim, and the Muwatta of Imam Malik. Every hadith narrated in these three books with its complete isnad has been established as acceptable.

The second level contains books whose hadith have generally been found acceptable, although they also contain some unreliable hadith. The Muslim ummah has, broadly speaking, accepted these books, and they have become famous among Muslims. This level includes three books: Sunan Abu Dawud, Sunan al-Nasa’i, and Sunan al-Tirmidhi. Imam Ahmad’s Musnad is nearly at the same level.

The third level contains books compiled before or after the era of Imam al-Bukhari, Imam Muslim, and other such muhaddiths, but which contain every kind of hadith—authentic, weak, false, and erroneous. Consequently, no one except specialist muhaddiths can benefit from these books. They did not become particularly famous among the muhaddiths. This level includes Musnad Abi Ya‘la, Musannaf ‘Abd al-Razzaq, Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah, Musnad ‘Abd ibn Humayd, Musnad al-Tayalisi, the hadith works compiled by Imam al-Bayhaqi—such as al-Sunan al-Kubra, Dala’il al-Nubuwwah, and Shu‘ab al-Iman—and the hadith works compiled by Imam al-Tahawi—such as Sharh Ma‘ani al-Athar and Sharh Mushkil al-Athar—as well as al-Tabarani’s hadith works, such as al-Mu‘jam al-Kabir, al-Mu‘jam al-Awsat, and al-Mu‘jam al-Saghir. The purpose of the compilers of these books was to compile whatever they found. They did not concern themselves with examination and verification.

The books of the fourth level are those compiled several generations later. Their compilers mainly collected the following lower-level hadith: (1) hadith that had not been included in earlier books because they were unknown or unfamiliar in earlier times; (2) hadith contained in an obscure book; (3) various statements circulated orally or preached by preachers that had not been included in any hadith book; (4) statements circulating among various weak and deviant sects; (5) statements that were actually sayings of Companions or Tabi‘un, Jewish stories, or sayings of wise people of earlier times, but which a narrator mistakenly or deliberately transmitted as hadith; (6) statements resembling explanations of the Qur’an or hadith that a pious or ascetic person mistakenly transmitted as hadith; (7) meanings inferred from hadith that some people deliberately passed off as hadith; or (8) the wording of various hadith transmitted through different isnads that was presented as one hadith. Notable compilations of this type include al-Du‘afa’ by Ibn Hibban, al-Kamil by Ibn ‘Adi, and the works compiled by al-Khatib al-Baghdadi, Abu Nu‘aym al-Isfahani, Ibn ‘Asakir, Ibn al-Najjar, and al-Daylami. The Musnad of Imam Abu Hanifah compiled by al-Khwarizmi also approximately belongs to this level. The hadith in the works of this level are either weak or fabricated.

The books of the fifth level contain hadith circulating among jurists, Sufis, and historians and found in books written by them—hadith that have no existence in the books of the preceding four levels. Among these hadith are some fabricated by a sinful, apostate, linguistically skilled scholar. For his fabricated hadith he constructed an isnad whose defect was difficult to detect, and he made the wording of the fabricated hadith so beautiful that people would readily believe it to be a statement of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him). These fabricated hadith have created far-reaching danger and fitnah within Islam. However, specialist muhaddiths possessing profound mastery of hadith scholarship have been able to discover their defects through comparative study of the wording and chains of transmission.

Shah Waliullah (may Allah have mercy on him) says: The muhaddiths relied only on the hadith books of the first and second levels. No one can benefit from the books of the third level except specialist muhaddiths who possess profound mastery of hadith scholarship and are experts in ‘ilm al-rijal and ‘ilal, because only they can distinguish fabricated hadith from reliable hadith among the hadith compiled in these books. Compiling or reading the hadith books of the fourth level is nothing but a form of intellectual indulgence. Indeed, Rafidis, Mu‘tazilis, and followers of all other heretical and false doctrines can very easily extract from these books various hadith supporting their views. Therefore, establishing a doctrine or presenting evidence for a doctrine through the hadith of these books is, according to the scholars, absurd and unacceptable. (Shah Waliullah, Hujjat Allah al-Balighah, 1/385–391.)

It should be noted here that, in preserving the authenticity of hadith and distinguishing authentic hadith from weak and mawdu‘ hadith, the firmness of the muhaddiths of the Muslim ummah was uncompromising and unyielding. No imam, muhaddith, jurist, or scholar in any era ever said that a hadith could be called authentic merely because it was narrated in a hadith book: “Since such-and-such scholar compiled it, the hadith must perhaps be authentic.”

Likewise, regardless of how respected a compiler was, they never hesitated to state clearly that a hadith he compiled might contain weakness or the possibility of deliberate or inadvertent falsehood. They placed preservation of the authenticity of hadith above all personal love and respect.

Because of this powerful determination to identify every falsehood and error attributed to the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) and to keep authentic hadith distinct from erroneous and false “hadith,” the muhaddiths never accepted anyone’s claim without verification. They never believed that because some great personality had declared a hadith authentic, his opinion should be accepted without examination.

The muhaddiths examined and verified, with extreme care and thoroughness, the isnad of every hadith compiled in all the books of “authentic” hadith mentioned above, including Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim, over the course of the following several centuries. Through this examination they declared that al-Bukhari and Muslim had succeeded in achieving their objective. The reason all the hadith compiled in Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim are accepted as “authentic” is not that Imam al-Bukhari and Imam Muslim declared them authentic; their personal status is entirely irrelevant here. The actual matter is that they claimed the hadith were authentic, and over the following centuries the muhaddiths examined the isnads of the hadith they compiled, and the truth of their claim was established.

Other authors also wrote books intending to compile only sahih, or sahih and hasan, hadith. Some announced that they would compile sahih and da‘if hadith while omitting fabricated and mawdu‘ hadith. Later muhaddiths never accepted their claims without verification. Rather, they examined all the hadith they compiled and issued judgments concerning their books. These examinations showed that most authors and compilers had failed to fulfill their declarations and intentions. The muhaddiths accepted no one’s claim without verification.

1.4.9. Preserving Narrators’ Biographies in Book Form
From the preceding discussion we can see that, beginning in the second Hijri century, the muhaddiths compiled all hadith together with their isnads so that, by examining the isnads, authentic hadith could be distinguished from false or erroneous reports.

Beginning in the second Hijri century, alongside compiling hadith, the muhaddiths also began compiling in book form information concerning the acceptability of narrators, so that the isnads of the hadith compiled in hadith books could be evaluated in light of this information. The writing of this type of book also underwent gradual development.

From the middle of the second Hijri century, the muhaddiths first began compiling together the biographies of all reliable and unreliable narrators. Muhaddiths such as Imam al-Layth ibn Sa‘d (175 AH) and ‘Abdullah ibn al-Mubarak (181 AH) began writing this type of work from the middle of the second Hijri century. These books compiled the biographies of all narrators, reliable and unreliable, some of the hadith they transmitted, and judgments concerning their acceptability or unacceptability based on examination of their transmitted hadith. The practice of writing such works continued in later centuries. In the third Hijri century, Ahmad ibn Hanbal, ‘Ali ibn al-Madini, al-Bukhari, Muslim, al-Tirmidhi, al-Nasa’i, and countless later muhaddiths wrote works of this type.

In the second phase, the muhaddiths began writing separate books concerning only muhaddiths and lying narrators. The famous muhaddith of the second century, Imam Yahya ibn Sa‘id al-Qattan (198 AH), was the first to begin writing a work of this type, called al-Du‘afa’. The practice of writing such works continued in later centuries. These books compiled the weak and lying narrators, some of the hadith they transmitted, and the opinions of the imams concerning them. Alongside these, from the third Hijri century some muhaddiths began writing separate books concerning only reliable and trustworthy narrators.

Indeed, collecting and compiling information about narrators was an unparalleled achievement of the muhaddiths of the Muslim ummah. From the first Hijri century and for the following six hundred years, the muhaddiths traveled throughout every region of the Muslim lands, preserving in detail the name, lineage, birth, death, education, work, teachers, students, and every other personal detail of each narrator, together with examinations of the hadith he transmitted and the opinions of contemporary and later muhaddiths about him based on those examinations. In order to preserve the hadith of the Messenger from distortion and fabrication, they thus preserved information about approximately fifty thousand people. There is no parallel to this in the history of human civilization. On the basis of this information, any researcher in any era has been able to evaluate and examine the isnad of any hadith.

1.4.10. Preserving Fabricated Hadith in Book Form
1.4.10.1. Writing Books Based on the Biographies of Lying Narrators
One of the major measures taken to identify falsehood in the name of hadith was to compile the fabrications of liars separately. The first method in this regard was the compilation of books concerning weak and lying narrators.

The first centuries of Islam were the golden age of Islamic learning, particularly the study of hadith. Thousands of students studied hadith. Hundreds of muhaddiths and imams were present in society. Everyone listened to and taught hadith with their isnads. If they did not know the identity of anyone mentioned in an isnad, they found it out. In that era, simply knowing the names and identities of lying narrators made it possible to protect oneself from their falsehood and fabrications. Many hadith books compiled in the second, third, and fourth Hijri centuries were arranged not by subject but according to the names of narrator or Companion narrators, because the acceptability of a hadith depends on its narrator. Moreover, everyone studied all hadith; there was no tendency at that time to study only hadith on a particular subject.

Thus we find that, for four centuries—from the second Hijri century until the sixth Hijri century—one of the major efforts to identify deliberate and inadvertent falsehood circulated in the name of hadith was to write separate books on weak and lying narrators. These books compiled the names and identities of such narrators, some erroneous or false hadith transmitted by them, and the results and opinions of the muhaddiths’ comparative examination of them.

1.4.10.2. Compilation of False or Fabricated Hadith
Until the sixth Hijri century, books of this type were the principal source for learning about falsehood and false claimants in the name of hadith. The writing of such books continued after the sixth century as well. However, a new trend arose in the process of identifying fabricated hadith.

With the passage of time, stagnation appeared in the Muslim ummah in the pursuit of knowledge, including the study of hadith. Interest in learning the identities of narrators declined. A tendency developed to learn anything in little time and with little effort. The time and interest available for learning false hadith from books arranged according to the names of narrators decreased. Therefore, the muhaddiths began compiling fabricated and false hadith by subject, so that readers could easily learn whether a hadith on a particular matter was fabricated. The writing of such books began in the fifth Hijri century. In the sixth century, this trend gained particular momentum through the work of Ibn al-Jawzi, and it has continued to the present day. At first, the muhaddiths cited these mawdu‘ hadith with their isnads and demonstrated their falsehood by discussing the isnads. Later, fabricated hadith alone were compiled together without citing their isnads.

Some of these books are arranged by subject. Some are arranged alphabetically according to the first letter of the hadith. Most muhaddiths compiled only mawdu‘ hadith. Some gathered hadith circulating in society and explained which were authentic and which were fabricated. Some compiled weak hadith in addition to fabricated hadith. Through various methods, more than fifty books on this subject were written during the past nine centuries. Here I mention the principal works of this type and their authors:

1. Al-Mawdu‘at, Abu Sa‘id Muhammad ibn ‘Ali al-Naqqash (414 AH).
2. Dhakhirat al-Huffaz, Muhammad ibn Tahir ibn al-Qaysarani (507 AH).
3. Al-Abatil wa al-Manakir, Husayn ibn Ibrahim al-Juzqani (543 AH).
4. Kitab al-Qussas wa al-Mudhakkirin, Abu al-Faraj ‘Abd al-Rahman ibn ‘Ali, Ibn al-Jawzi (597 AH).
5. Al-Mawdu‘at, Abu al-Faraj Ibn al-Jawzi (597 AH).
6. Al-‘Ilal al-Mutanahiyah, Abu al-Faraj Ibn al-Jawzi (597 AH).
7. Al-Ahadith al-Mawdu‘ah fi al-Ahkam al-Mashru‘ah, Abu Hafs ‘Umar ibn Badr al-Mawsili (622 AH).
8. Al-Mughni ‘an Hifz al-Kitab, ‘Umar al-Mawsili (622 AH).
9. Al-Wuquf ‘ala al-Mawquf, ‘Umar al-Mawsili (622 AH).
10. Al-Mawdu‘at, Hasan ibn Muhammad al-Saghani (650 AH).
11. Al-Durar al-Multaqit, al-Saghani (650 AH).
12. Ahadith al-Qussas, Ahmad ibn ‘Abd al-Halim Ibn Taymiyyah (728 AH).
13. Mukhtasar al-Abatil, Muhammad ibn Ahmad al-Dhahabi (748 AH).
14. Tartib Mawdu‘at Ibn al-Jawzi, al-Dhahabi (748 AH).
15. Al-Mawdu‘at fi al-Masabih, ‘Umar ibn ‘Ali al-Qazwini (750 AH).
16. Al-Manar al-Munif, Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyyah (751 AH).
17. Al-Ahadith Allati la Asla Laha fi al-Ihya’, ‘Abd al-Wahhab ibn ‘Ali al-Subki (771 AH).
18. Al-Tadhkirah fi al-Ahadith al-Mushtahirah, Muhammad ibn Bahadur al-Zarkashi (794 AH).
19. Tabyin al-‘Ajab fi ma Warada fi Shahr Rajab, Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani, Ahmad ibn ‘Ali (852 AH).
20. Al-Maqasid al-Hasanah, Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Rahman al-Sakhawi (902 AH).
21. Al-La’ali al-Masnu‘ah, Jalal al-Din ‘Abd al-Rahman al-Suyuti (911 AH).
22. Al-Ta‘aqqubat ‘ala al-Mawdu‘at, al-Suyuti (911 AH).
23. Al-Durar al-Muntashirah, al-Suyuti (911 AH).
24. Tahdhir al-Khawass min Ahadith al-Qussas, al-Suyuti (911 AH).
25. Al-Ghammaz ‘ala al-Lammaz, ‘Ali ibn ‘Abdullah al-Samhudi (911 AH).
26. Tamyiz al-Tayyib min al-Khabith, ‘Abd al-Rahman al-Zabidi (944 AH).
27. Al-Shadharah fi al-Ahadith al-Mushtahirah, Muhammad ibn ‘Ali al-Dimashqi (953 AH).
28. Tanzih al-Shari‘ah, ‘Ali ibn Muhammad ibn ‘Iraq (963 AH).
29. Tadhkirat al-Mawdu‘at, Muhammad Tahir al-Fattani (986 AH).
30. Al-Asrar al-Mرفu‘ah, Mulla ‘Ali al-Qari (1014 AH).
31. Al-Masnu‘ fi Ma‘rifat al-Mawdu‘, Mulla ‘Ali al-Qari (1014 AH).
32. Mukhtasar al-Maqasid, Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Baqi al-Zurqani (1122 AH).
33. Al-Jadd al-Hathith fi Bayan ma Laysa bi-Hadith, Ahmad ibn ‘Abd al-Karim al-‘Amiri (1143 AH).
34. Kashf al-Khafa’ wa Muzil al-Ilbas, Isma‘il ibn Muhammad al-‘Ajluni (1162 AH).
35. Al-Kashf al-Ilahi ‘an Shadid al-Da‘f wa al-Mawdu‘ wa al-Wahi, Muhammad ibn Muhammad al-Tarabulsi (1177 AH).
36. Al-Nawafih al-‘Atirah, Muhammad ibn Ahmad al-San‘ani (1181 AH).
37. Al-Nukhbah al-Bahiyyah, Muhammad ibn Muhammad al-Sabnawi (1232 AH).
38. Al-Fawa’id al-Majmu‘ah, Muhammad ibn ‘Ali al-Shawkani (1250 AH).
39. Asna al-Matalib, Muhammad ibn Sayyid Darwish (1276 AH).
40. Husn al-Athar, Muhammad Darwish (1275 AH).
41. Al-Athar al-Mرفu‘ah, ‘Abd al-Hayy al-Laknawi (1304 AH).
42. Al-Lu’lu’ al-Marsu‘, Muhammad ibn Khalil al-Mashishi (1305 AH).
43. Tahdhir al-Muslimin, Muhammad ibn Bashir al-Madani (1329 AH).

Many books on this subject have also been written, and continue to be written, in the present century. Dear reader, we may now wonder: why are so many books on the same subject necessary?

The actual matter is that, after the beginning of the second Hijri century, attempts at fabrication in the name of hadith never stopped. In the following section, in the discussion of fabricators and the identification of fabrications, we will learn these matters in detail. Just as deliberate and inadvertent falsehood continued, efforts to identify such falsehood and separate it from authentic hadith also continued. New statements were circulated in the name of hadith in various Muslim countries. The learned muhaddiths of those countries then determined their authenticity or falsity through research. They established whether these statements had been narrated with an isnad in any hadith book, how acceptable the isnad was, whether another hadith with the same meaning had been narrated, and other such matters. In addition, later authors discussed any errors in the conclusions of earlier researchers. Thus writing and research on this subject continued.

In this way we have seen that, throughout every era and century of the past fifteen hundred years, the muhaddiths of the Muslim ummah have remained constantly vigilant, like wakeful sentinels guarding the hadith of the Messenger. They have always tried to identify every attempt at falsehood in the name of the hadith of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) and protect the Muslim ummah from the trap of false statements bearing the name of hadith. May Almighty Allah grant these people the finest reward.

1.5. Causes of Falsehood and Categories of Liars

The Emergence of Falsehood in the Name of Hadith

In our discussion of the emergence of falsehood in the name of Hadith, we saw that the hidden enemies of Islam were the first to spread false statements in the Muslim community in the name of Hadith in order to create confusion. Religion is founded upon revelation. Therefore, any statement that can be established through revelation gains acceptance in the Muslim community. Since the Qur’an is memorized by countless people, there was never any opportunity to directly attribute something false or fabricated to the Qur’an. For this reason, they tried to tell lies in the name of Hadith.

Gradually, many more people began to tell lies in the name of Hadith for various purposes. In addition, many people falsely attributed statements to Hadith out of ignorance, negligence, or carelessness. Someone heard a good saying from another person, an ancient wise statement, or something heard from a Companion or a Tabi‘i, and liked it. Later, when relating it, he attributed it to the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him). Thus, fabrication in the name of Hadith continued for various reasons.

We have seen that falsehood is of two types: intentional and unintentional. The primary causes of unintentional falsehood are memory lapses, negligence in memorizing Hadith, or carelessness in receiving Hadith. The cause of intentional falsehood is mostly to harm or benefit religion (!).

We know that revelation is connected with religion. Therefore, all purposes behind lying in the name of revelation are centered on religion. Some fabricated Hadith in the name of religion in order to harm religion. Some fabricated Hadith in the name of religion in order to earn a livelihood or strengthen their own fatwa, group, or lineage. Some fabricated Hadith in the name of religion in order to establish their own opinions. Some fabricated Hadith selflessly (!) to encourage people toward good deeds and discourage them from evil deeds. We can divide these causes into three categories: 1. harming religion, 2. benefiting religion, and 3. achieving one’s worldly objectives.

Regarding the causes of falsehood and the categories of liars, the renowned seventh-century Hijri hadith scholar, Allamah Ibn al-Salah Abu ‘Amr ‘Uthman ibn ‘Abd al-Rahman (643 AH), says: The fabricators and forgers of Hadith are of various kinds. Among them, the most harmful are a group of people known in society as pious and ascetic mystics. Because of their ignorance and deviation, they used to spread fabricated statements in society in the name of Hadith, hoping to gain reward. Seeing their outward piety, ascetic lifestyle, and so forth, people naively believed them and accepted these fabricated statements as Hadith. Then the experienced imams of Hadith detected and exposed their lies and fabrications through meticulous investigation. …………Some of this type considered it permissible to spread false and fabricated statements concerning the virtues of righteous deeds and the punishment for sinful deeds as Hadith, with the aim of gaining reward. (Iraqi, al-Taqyid, pp. 128–129; Suyuti, Tadrib al-Rawi 1/281–284).

Allamah Zayn al-Din Iraqi (806 AH) says: The fabricators of Hadith are of various types according to the purposes and causes of their fabrications.

1. Many Zindiqs fabricated Hadith in order to mislead people. Hammad ibn Zayd said: The Zindiqs fabricated ten thousand Hadith in the name of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him).
2. Some people fabricated Hadith to support their own religious opinions.
3. Some people fabricated Hadith on subjects pleasing to caliphs and amirs in an attempt to become their favorites.
4. Some people fabricated Hadith with the intention of earning money by delivering sermons and telling stories.
5. Some people were themselves good, but their sons or another member of their family would write false Hadith in their manuscripts. They would then relate them carelessly.
6. Some fabricated Hadith to establish evidence for their own fatwas or legal issues.
7. Some created various unfamiliar chains of transmission and texts in order to establish novelty and innovation.
8. Some people considered fabricating false Hadith in this manner to be religious devotion. Because of their deviation, they believed that it was permissible to lie in order to reform people and call them to the right path. They were known in society as pious, world-renouncing elders. Their harm in the field of Hadith fabrication was the most severe, because they considered this grave sin a righteous and meritorious deed. Therefore, they could not be restrained from it in any way. People were also influenced by their outward piety, ascetic lifestyle, and mysticism, and accepted and spread their lies as truth. For this reason, Imam Yahya ibn Sa‘id al-Qattan (198 AH) used to say: I have not seen anyone who lied more concerning Hadith than a pious elder. (Muslim, al-Sahih 1/17–18).

By pious elders, he meant those ignorant people who considered themselves pious and followed the path of spiritual eminence, but did not understand what was lawful and unlawful. (Iraqi, Fath al-Mughith, p. 122–124).

Here we shall discuss in some detail the principal causes of fabrication in the name of Hadith and the people involved in it.

1.5.1. The Zindiqs and the Hidden Enemies of Islam

During the first half-century of Islamic history, the extensive regions of Asia and Africa entered the Islamic state through Islamic conquests. Many non-Muslim citizens of these lands voluntarily accepted Islam. Others continued to follow their former religions. The Islamic state provided them with security. On the other hand, some people publicly claimed to accept Islam despite their loyalty and love for their former religions and beliefs. Although they were regarded as Muslims in society, their actual objective was to destroy the beliefs and practices of the Muslim community by spreading confusion and informational terrorism. In most cases, people of this class were called ‘Zindiqs.’ To accomplish their vile objectives, they spread countless false statements in society as Hadith. We have seen that it was people of this class, led by Abdullah ibn Saba’, who first began spreading fabricated Hadith.

Sometimes these hypocritical Zindiqs pretended to be devotees of ‘Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) and spread fabricated Hadith in support of him and his family. At other times, they deceived people by posing as Sufi ascetics and fabricated Hadith in support of the asceticism and monk-like mysticism of Persians or Jews and Christians. Their principal objective was to destroy Islamic belief and present it as ridiculous and irrational.

It should be noted here that they fabricated Hadith with chains of transmission. At that time, there was no way to relate a Hadith without a chain. They knew the names of famous hadith scholars and reliable narrators. They had memorized the chains of various authentic Hadith. They fabricated Hadith under the names of these chains.

It was very easy to deceive ordinary people with these. However, this deception had no effect on the critical hadith scholars. Through the investigations described above, they would detect the fabrications. For example, someone might say: Yahya ibn Sa‘id al-Qattan told me, from Sufyan al-Thawri, from Ibn Sirin, from Anas ibn Malik, from the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) ……… Then they would compare it, using the method described above, with the Hadith narrated by all the other students of every narrator in the chain. At the same time, by examining this person’s other narrations and conduct, they could easily detect the fabrication.

Consider one Hadith fabricated by them:

A man named Muhammad ibn Shu‘jah said: Hibban ibn Hilal told me, from Hammad ibn Salamah, from Abu al-Mahzam, from Abu Hurayrah: The Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) was asked, “O Messenger of Allah, from what was our great Lord created?” He said: “He created a horse, then drove the horse. From the sweat that came out of the horse’s body, He created Himself.” (God forbid!) (Ibn al-Jawzi, al-Mawdu‘at 1/64).

We can clearly understand that the purpose of this fabrication was to portray Muslim belief concerning Almighty Allah as ridiculous and turn Muslim belief into an object of mockery.

These fabricators would often boast about their fabrications. Abd al-Karim ibn Abi al-Awja was one such fabricator of the second Hijri century. The contemporary administrator Muhammad ibn Sulayman ibn ‘Ali ordered his execution for crimes including apostasy and fabrication. Before his punishment, he said: “By Allah, I have fabricated four thousand false Hadith and spread them among the Muslims.” (Ibn al-Jawzi, al-Mawdu‘at 1/15).

The third Abbasid caliph, al-Mahdi (reigned 158–169 AH), said: “A Zindiq confessed to me that he had fabricated 400 Hadith that are now circulating among the people.” (Ibn al-Jawzi, al-Mawdu‘at 1/15).

1.5.2. Followers of Religious Sects and Factions

Generally, people do not want to acknowledge their own smallness and limitations. From ancient times until today, countless people have tried, and continue to try, to remove the weakness (!) and incompleteness (!!) of ‘revelation’ through their own intellect, conscience, judgment, and wisdom. Everyone thinks: Why was this statement not included in revelation? Without this statement, religion is not becoming complete. All right, I will state this in the name of revelation. Then religion will attain completeness!!!

Many of them created or followed some self-invented religious doctrine and fabricated ‘revelation’ in support of that doctrine. Before half a century had passed after the death of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him), new religious doctrines began to emerge in Muslim society under the influence of the previous religions among new Muslims, the propaganda of Islam’s hidden enemies, and the literature, philosophy, and so forth of various societies. The Kharijite doctrine was established with the zeal to wage jihad against ‘Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) and all the Companions and to establish a self-invented Islam. The Shi‘ite doctrine was established, under the guise of devotion and love for ‘Ali (may Allah be pleased with him), to spread the doctrines of Jews, Christians, and fire worshippers among Muslims. The Qadariyya doctrine was established under the false claim of protecting the honor of Almighty Allah; it denied Almighty Allah’s knowledge concerning destiny or human fate. The Jabariyya doctrine was established through excess in proving Almighty Allah’s power; it denied human free will and capacity for action. The Jahmiyya, Mu‘tazila, and other doctrines were established through self-invented claims to affirm the oneness of Almighty Allah, and they denied the attributes of Almighty Allah.

The Companions of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) believed in and followed the guidance of the Qur’an and Hadith exactly and literally. The Companions must be loved, and the descendants of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) must also be loved. There is no contradiction between the two, nor any room for excess. Just as Allah’s knowledge and determination concerning human destiny are true, so too are human free will and capacity for action true. They simply believed in all the verses and Hadith concerning both matters. They saw no contradiction among them.

However, the innovators of new doctrines, while trying to follow some of the directives of the Qur’an and Hadith, rejected or interpreted the rest. Each regarded his own opinion as correct. Each believed that his opinion supported Allah and His Messenger (peace be upon him), and that fabricating Hadith in support of this opinion was equivalent to fabricating Hadith in support of Allah and His Messenger (peace be upon him). If some fabricated or false statements are presented in the name of revelation or Hadith to strengthen the ‘correctly preferred!! opinion’ of Allah and His Messenger, what harm is there?! It should be considered a good deed. For this reason, when some of them found no clear Hadith supporting their opinion, they fabricated and spread Hadith when necessary in support of themselves and against their opponents. False Hadith were also sometimes produced concerning differences of opinion in fiqh and legal matters. (Falata, ‘Umar ibn Hasan, al-Wad‘ fi al-Hadith 1/223–263).

The Shi‘ites were the most prominent in this regard. In the name of devotion to the Prophet’s family, they made countless fabricated statements part of their religious beliefs. Then they fabricated and spread countless Hadith in support of them. They spread countless fabricated statements as Hadith concerning ‘Ali’s superiority over all people after the prophets, ‘Ali’s countless miraculous powers, ‘Ali’s return to the world, the virtues of the family of ‘Ali, the oppression and punishment of those who became caliphs while excluding him and his descendants, the terrible fate and punishment of those who opposed him, and the terrible punishment of those who did not regard him as the greatest or who loved the other Companions.

Their fabrications were so extensive that even their scholars were forced to acknowledge it. The renowned seventh-century Hijri Shi‘ite scholar Ibn Abi al-Hadid, ‘Abd al-Hamid ibn Hibatullah (656 AH), commentator on Nahj al-Balagha, the compilation of the speeches of ‘Ali (may Allah be pleased with him), says: “In the matter of Hadith concerning virtues and merits, the first falsehoods began with the Shi‘ites. They first fabricated and spread various Hadith in support of their leader. Intense hostility and jealousy toward their opponents drove them to this.” …… (Muhammad ‘Ajjaj al-Khatib, al-Sunnah Qabl al-Tadwin, p. 195).

1.5.3. Pious, World-Renouncing, Simple-Minded Elders

In telling and spreading false statements in the name of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him), the most severe and detestable role was played by the ‘desire to guide people to the right path’ of certain religious people who were ignorant of the teachings of the Qur’an and Sunnah. Countless Hadith were fabricated for this purpose concerning the virtues of the Qur’an, the virtues of various surahs, the virtues of various types of prayer at different times or on different days, the virtues of various forms of dhikr, every kind of righteous deed, and the punishment for various sins or wrong actions. (Falata, al-Wad‘ 1/263–269).

These pious people were the most harmful in creating and spreading fabricated Hadith. They may be divided into two groups. Some pious people lied unintentionally. In the name of their simplicity, they believed and narrated whatever they heard in the name of Hadith. Often, when they heard a beautiful saying or a statement of wisdom, they carelessly narrated it as a Hadith. Others known as pious people lied intentionally.

1.5.3.1. The Unintentional Lies of the Pious

Sufi ascetics and people devoted to Allah are simple-hearted, good people. Their practice is to trust everyone simply and show mercy. The work of the hadith scholars, on the other hand, is like that of a police inspector. An ascetic begins with trust, while a police inspector begins with distrust. If someone speaks of a danger he faced or offers an excuse for a crime, simple-hearted people generally believe him. But a police inspector begins by distrusting him. He asks him various questions to determine whether he is deceiving people or telling the truth. Then he believes him.

In light of the countless instructions of the Noble Qur’an and the Noble Hadith, from the time of the Companions onward, the Companions and later hadith scholars have remained vigilant guardians, or inspectors, responsible for preserving the authenticity of revelation and the Hadith of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him). Without meticulous examination and verification, they did not accept as correct anything attributed to the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him).

In contrast, simple-hearted, world-renouncing zahid ascetics would usually become emotional as soon as they heard any statement attributed to the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him). They never considered that someone might lie in the name of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him). They heard everything with the heart of a devotee, accepted it in simple faith, acted upon it, and encouraged others to act upon it. For this reason, from the era of the Tabi‘ al-Tabi‘in, hadith scholars did not accept the Hadith narrated by such pious ascetics. Imam Malik (179 AH) said: “There are many ascetics in Madinah to whom I would be willing to entrust one hundred thousand [units of currency], but I am not willing to accept even one Hadith narrated by them.” (Dr. Amin Abu Labi, ‘Ilm Usul al-Jarh wa al-Ta‘dil, 166–167).

Yahya ibn Sa‘id al-Qattan (198 AH) said: “Pious elders tell more lies concerning the Hadith of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) than they do concerning anything else.” Imam Muslim (261 AH) explained this statement: “These pious people do not lie intentionally, but they fall into falsehood through carelessness. They cannot memorize Hadith correctly, mix them up, and most of the time relate Hadith based on their own estimation; consequently, they fall into falsehood unintentionally.” (Muslim, al-Sahih 1/17–18).

Ibn al-Salah (643 AH), Nawawi (676 AH), Iraqi (806 AH), and other hadith scholars presented an example of an unintentional lie. Imam Ibn Majah recorded this unintentionally false Hadith in his Sunan. He said: Isma‘il ibn Muhammad al-Talhi told us; Thabit ibn Musa Abu Yazid told us; from Sharik, from al-A‘mash, from Abu Sufyan, from Jabir (may Allah be pleased with him), who said: The Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) said: “The more a person performs night prayer, the more beautiful his face will be during the day.” (Ibn Majah, al-Sunan 1/422).

Through comparative examination, the hadith scholars established with certainty that this statement was fabricated in the name of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him). However, they differed over whether it was an intentional or unintentional lie.

Ibn Majah’s teacher Isma‘il and many hadith scholars heard and recorded this Hadith from Abu Yazid Thabit ibn Musa ibn ‘Abd al-Rahman (229 AH). He alone narrated this Hadith. He claimed that Sharik ibn ‘Abdullah (178 AH) had told it to him.

The hadith scholars gathered and compared the Hadith of all of Sharik’s students, all the Hadith of the students of Sharik’s teacher Sulayman ibn Mihran al-A‘mash (147 AH), all the Hadith of the students of al-A‘mash’s teacher Abu Sufyan Talhah ibn Nafi‘, and the Hadith of Jabir’s other students. They became certain that no one other than Thabit had narrated this Hadith. They observed that Thabit was not such a close student or long-term companion of Sharik that Sharik would have told this Hadith only to him and to no one else. Through this comprehensive examination, they became certain that Thabit had lied, whether intentionally or unintentionally.

Thabit ibn Musa was a pious worshipper and world-renouncing ascetic of the third Hijri century. Because of his piety, the hadith scholars generally held a favorable opinion of him. However, through comparative examination, they found that several of the Hadith he narrated were proven to be erroneous or false. None of the long-term special students or other students of the teachers through whom he narrated these Hadith narrated them. For this reason, some hadith scholars called him a liar. Imam Yahya ibn Ma‘in (233 AH) said of Thabit: “He is a liar.” (Dhahabi, Mizan al-I‘tidal 2/89; Ibn Hajar, Tahdhib al-Tahdhib 2/14).

On the other hand, hadith scholars such as Abu Hazim al-Razi (277 AH) and Ibn ‘Adi (365 AH) regarded Thabit’s lie as unintentional. They said that Thabit was not actually a narrator of Hadith; he was an ordinary worshipper. He narrated only seven or eight Hadith in total. Apart from two of them, he narrated the rest correctly. This suggests that his mistake was unintentional. Therefore, rather than explicitly calling him a ‘liar,’ they called him ‘weak.’ (Ibn ‘Adi, al-Kamil 2/99; Dhahabi, Mizan al-I‘tidal 2/89).

Some hadith scholars mentioned the reason for Thabit’s unintentional lie. Muhammad ibn ‘Abdullah ibn Numayr (234 AH) said: “The Hadith is invalid. Thabit narrated it without realizing what he was doing.” Sharik ibn ‘Abdullah liked joking and joking around. Sharik ibn ‘Abdullah liked joking and joking around. Thabit, however, was a pious worshipper. It is possible that Sharik was narrating a Hadith when Thabit entered. Sharik was saying: “Al-A‘mash told us, from Abu Sufyan, from Jabir (may Allah be pleased with him), from the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him).” At that moment, Thabit entered. Seeing Thabit, Sharik stopped narrating the Hadith and, noticing his bright face marked by simplicity, said: “The more a person performs night prayer, the more beautiful his face will be during the day.” Thabit inadvertently thought that Sharik’s statement was the Hadith transmitted through the chain mentioned above. Thus, by mistake, he narrated one of Sharik’s statements as a statement of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him). For this reason, Ibn al-Salah, Nawawi, Iraqi, and other hadith scholars presented this Hadith as an example of an unintentional lie. (Ibn ‘Adi, al-Kamil 2/99; Dhahabi, Mizan al-I‘tidal 2/88; Iraqi, al-Taqyid, p. 129; Fath al-Mughith, pp. 127–128).

1.5.3.2. The Unintentional Lies of the Pious
Some people known as pious engaged in an even more heinous practice. They deliberately attributed fabricated statements to the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him). In the fabrication of Hadith, they were the most dangerous and harmful.
There are many sound Hadith on many of the subjects for which they fabricated Hadith. However, these pious people felt that the wording of those sound Hadith, and the rewards and punishments mentioned in them, did not stir people’s emotions. Thus they fabricated Hadith in stronger language and greater detail, speaking of countless rewards and the severest punishments, so that people would be influenced merely by hearing them. In this way, they sought to remedy the perceived incompleteness (!) of Revelation through human intellect (!). The most serious matter was that, because of their religiosity (?), many people in society fell into the trap of these fabrications. They believed them to be Hadith. Only critical muhaddiths detected their fabrications through comparative examination.
Satan made them believe that they were not speaking against the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), but in his support. Without such lies, it was impossible to guide people. Therefore, lying with a good intention was not merely permissible; it was a good deed.
Satan did not let them understand that all their thinking had flowed in the wrong direction. To think that people cannot be brought to the right path without lies means that Revelation is incapable of guiding people. The Noble Qur’an and authentic Hadith have lost their effectiveness. Therefore, people must be guided through bizarre lies! What a vile notion!
Who gave them the right to claim that these concocted statements were in support of Revelation, Allah, or His Messenger? What they regarded as being in Islam’s interest always caused Islam the greatest harm. Bizarre stories, unimaginable rewards for minor deeds, severe punishments for minor wrongs or sins, imaginary tales about various aspects of creation, imaginary miraculous stories, stories of various fabricated virtues, and the like diverted the Muslim ummah from Islam’s basic teachings. Countless superstitions spread among them. Fabricated fables about the rewards of voluntary worship made the Muslim ummah forget its obligatory duties. Countless invented practices distanced Muslims from the deeds and responsibilities described in the Qur’an and sound Hadith. We shall see many examples of these when we discuss fabricated Hadith in the following chapter.
All religions have been distorted throughout the ages because of lying in support of Revelation. A prime example of being misled by lying in support of Revelation is Saul, known as Paul, the distorter of Christianity, and his Christian followers. To exalt the status of God, to exalt the status of Jesus, and to bring greater numbers of people to the right path, they lied in the name of Revelation. They thought that since they were speaking in support of God or Jesus, there was no harm in this lie. But in reality they served Satan. Therefore, the Glorious Allah said in the Noble Qur’an:
[Arabic]
“Say: O People of the Book! Do not exceed the limits in your religion unjustly, and do not follow the desires of a people who went astray before, led many others astray, and themselves strayed from the straight path.” (Surah 5, al-Ma’idah: 77).
A similar community that fabricated Revelation according to its misguided whims also emerged among the Muslim ummah. However, their fabrications were exposed because of the system of isnad and isnad criticism.
These ‘pious fabricators’ fabricated Hadith in various ways.
a. Some people fabricated Hadith by describing ‘countless’ imaginary rewards for reciting the Qur’an and reciting its various surahs.
b. Others narrated Hadith describing the rewards of various famous and customary righteous deeds. For example, authentic Hadith mention many rewards for acts of worship such as tasbih, dhikr, tahajjud, and chasht. They thought that these Hadith could not attract people’s hearts. Therefore, they fabricated appealing (!) Hadith about such matters. Similarly, many authentic Hadith support the Sunnah and oppose bid‘ah. These fabricators were not satisfied with them. They fabricated many Hadith concerning the reward and status of the Sunnah, and the sin of bid‘ah and the severe consequences and terrifying punishment of those who practice it.
c. Some fabricated various kinds of righteous practices and then fabricated Hadith about their virtues. For example, special forms of salah in particular months, special salah for each day of the week, and special salah for various purposes, such as seeing Allah in a dream, seeing the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) in a dream, or seeing one’s place in Paradise. Similarly, they invented various salawat, dhikr, supplications, and munajat, then fabricated Hadith mentioning their fictitious virtues. They invented countless such acts of ‘worship’ and, by launching the balloons of imagination regarding their virtues, told stories of countless rewards and merits.
d. To soften the hearts of many people, they invented stories about renunciation of the world, greed, sacrifice, the virtue of hunger, the virtue of poverty, punishments, rewards, and similar fantasies, and passed them off in the name of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him).
Here I shall mention the confessions of one or two such individuals. These people tried to establish their false isnads before the muhaddiths. Yet, when faced with their investigative questions, they would sometimes admit that they were fabricating Hadith.
Abu Ismah Nuh ibn Abu Maryam (173 AH) was a renowned scholar, ascetic, and jurist of the second Hijri century. Because of his outstanding knowledge in various fields such as Hadith, fiqh, and history, he was called ‘al-Jami‘.’ During the reign of Caliph al-Mansur (136–158 AH), he was appointed judge of the Marw region of Khurasan. He was regarded as one of the leading scholars of that area. He was severe toward the Mu‘tazilah, Jahmiyyah, the jurists of Ahl al-Ra’y, and the people of bid‘ah.
Despite all this, he would tell lies in the name of Hadith. He narrated certain Hadith concerning the virtues of the various surahs of the Qur’an. The muhaddiths asked him: Where did you find the Hadith you narrate from ‘Ikrimah, from Abu ibn ‘Abbas, concerning the virtues of every surah of the Qur’an? None of ‘Ikrimah’s close students, nor any other student, narrates these Hadith; so how did you obtain them? He replied: I saw that people had abandoned the Qur’an. They had become occupied with Abu Hanifah’s fiqh and Ibn Ishaq’s Maghazi. Therefore, I fabricated these Hadith to bring them back to the Qur’an. (Ibn al-Jawzi, al-Mawdu‘at 1/18; al-Dhahabi, Mizan al-I‘tidal 7/55–57).
Ahmad ibn Muhammad ibn Ghalib Ghulam Khalil (275 AH) was a renowned ascetic, scholar, and preacher of the third Hijri century. He was famous as one of Baghdad’s greatest renunciant ascetics. He always ate vegetables, lived an extremely simple life, and delivered highly moving sermons. He was extremely harsh against the jurists described as ‘Ahl al-Ra’y’ (Hanafis), and against the Mu‘tazilah, Shi‘ah, Qadariyyah, Jabriyyah, and other sects of bid‘ah. His preaching had a powerful effect on ordinary people. To soften his listeners’ hearts and guide them, he would fabricate and narrate ever-new stories in the name of Hadith. He would invent isnads in the names of famous muhaddiths and narrate false Hadith.
Abu Ja‘far ibn al-Shu‘ayri said: One day, while Ghulam Khalil was narrating Hadith, he said, ‘Bakr ibn ‘Isa (204 AH) told me, from Abu ‘Awanah….’ I said, ‘Bakr ibn ‘Isa was a very early figure. Imam Ahmad (241 AH) and people of his generation heard Hadith from him. You never saw him alive.’ After I said this, he fell silent and began thinking. I became afraid that he might say something against me. So I said, ‘Perhaps your teacher Bakr ibn ‘Isa was another person.’ He remained silent. The next day he said to me, ‘I thought about it last night and found that I heard Hadith from sixty people named Bakr ibn ‘Isa in Basra.’ (al-Dhahabi, Mizan al-I‘tidal 1/285).
Observe the audacity of lying! Such ‘cool’ lies have no value before the critical imams of Hadith. He had collected and compiled the Hadith narrated by the narrators of Basra, with their names and the periods in which they lived. Therefore, such people were often forced to admit their fabrications.
The eminent fourth-century muhaddith ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Adi (365 AH) said: When I was in the city of Harran during a journey to collect Hadith, Abu ‘Abdullah al-Nahawandi said at Abu ‘Urubah’s gathering, ‘I asked Ghulam Khalil, “Where did you find the Hadith that influence the hearts of your listeners?” He replied, “I fabricated them to soften people’s hearts.”’ (Ibn ‘Adi, al-Kamil 1/195).
All the imams of Hadith scholarship have discussed the harm caused by the fabrications of these pious people. Earlier, we saw the statements of Ibn al-Salah, al-Nawawi, and al-‘Iraqi on this subject. The Hanafi scholar Sayyid Sharif al-Jurjani (816 AH) wrote: “The people who caused the greatest harm through the circulation of fabricated Hadith were the world-renouncing dervishes. They would sometimes fabricate and narrate false Hadith even with the intention of gaining reward.” (Abd al-Hayy al-Laknawi, Zafar al-Amani fi Mukhtasar al-Jurjani, p. 433).
Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani (852 AH) said: “It is reported that some Sufis considered it permissible to fabricate and circulate false Hadith concerning rewards and the punishment of sins.” (Mulla ‘Ali al-Qari, Sharh Sharh Nukhbat al-Fikar, p. 451).
Al-Suyuti (911 AH) said that fabricators are of various types according to their objectives. Among them, the most serious and harmful were people regarded as renunciant, disinterested, and pious. Because of their misguidance, they fabricated false Hadith in hope of receiving reward from Allah. ………… Abu Dawud al-Nakh‘i Sulayman ibn ‘Amr, a renowned dervish of the second century, was unsurpassed in spending nights performing tahajjud and fasting voluntary fasts day after day. Despite this, he fabricated and circulated false Hadith. …… Abu Bishr Ahmad ibn Muhammad al-Marwazi was one of Khurasan’s leading jurists, ascetics, and champions of the Sunnah. He was sword-handed against bid‘ah and its adherents and in support of the Sunnah. Yet he regarded false statements as Hadith. …….. Wahb ibn Yahya ibn Hafs (250 AH) was one of the most pious ascetics and preachers of his time. For twenty years he spoke to no one about worldly matters. He too would tell heinous lies in the name of Hadith. (al-Suyuti, Tadrib al-Rawi 1/281–283).
‘Allamah ‘Ali al-Qari (1014 AH) wrote: The renunciant dervishes who devoted themselves excessively to acts of worship circulated many fabricated statements as Hadith concerning the virtues of the prayer of Shab-e-Barat, the prayer of Rajab, and various other virtues. They thought that this would earn them reward and constitute service to the religion. These people caused the greatest harm to themselves and other Muslims regarding fabricated Hadith. They regarded this work as a righteous and rewardable deed, so it was impossible to stop them by any means. On the other hand, because of their righteous deeds, honesty, worship, and dervishhood, ordinary Muslims and scholars loved and deeply respected them. They eagerly accepted and transmitted their words. At times, even good muhaddiths, deceived by their conduct and character, carelessly accepted their fabricated and false Hadith. (Mulla ‘Ali al-Qari, Sharh Sharh Nukhbat al-Fikar, pp. 447–448).

1.5.4. The Courtiers of the Amirs
The objectives explained above were primarily religious. In addition to religious objectives, many people fabricated Hadith for various worldly purposes: earning money, gaining honor or fame, attracting the attention of kings and rulers, attaining status at court, and establishing political or group dominance. People do many things to gain access to rulers and administrators and become their favorites. In the second Hijri century, some weak-faith ‘scholars’ tried to fabricate Hadith according to the preferences of caliphs or amirs in order to win their favor. Describing one such incident, the renowned third-century muhaddith Zuhayr ibn Harb (234 AH) said: Several muhaddiths came to the court of the third Abbasid caliph, Muhammad al-Mahdi (reigned 158–169 AH). One of them was Ghiyath ibn Ibrahim al-Nakha‘i. Caliph al-Mahdi loved flying high-bred pigeons and arranging pigeon races. Noticing the caliph’s preference, Ghiyath mentioned his isnad and said that the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) had said: ‘There is no competition except in archery, horses, and birds.’ Hearing this, al-Mahdi was pleased and ordered that the muhaddith be given ten thousand in money as a gift. But as Ghiyath was leaving the court, al-Mahdi said, ‘I realize that you have lied. I prompted you to lie.’ He ordered the pigeons to be slaughtered and never again allowed that muhaddith to enter his court. (al-Khatib al-Baghdadi, Ahmad ibn ‘Ali, Tarikh Baghdad 12/323–324).
It should be noted here that the original Hadith is sound; it encourages competition and the awarding of prizes in horse racing, camel racing, and archery. [al-Tirmidhi, Muhammad ibn ‘Isa (279 AH), al-Sunan 4/205]. This man added the word ‘birds’ to entertain the caliph.
The fifth Abbasid caliph, Harun al-Rashid (reigned 193–170 AH), came to Madinah on a state visit. He wished to ascend the pulpit of the Prophet’s Mosque and deliver a speech. He was wearing a black sherwani, and hesitated to ascend the pulpit in that clothing. Wahb ibn Wahb Abu al-Bukhturi, a renowned scholar and judge of Madinah, then said: Ja‘far al-Sadiq told me, from his father Muhammad al-Baqir, that Jibril (peace be upon him) came to the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) wearing a black sherwani. (al-Khatib al-Baghdadi, Tarikh Baghdad 13/452).
Thus, to entertain the caliph, he passed off a false statement as a Hadith. Abu al-Bukhturi was highly skilled in fabricating Hadith.
1.5.5. Storytelling Preachers
Many people inserted fabricated statements into their sermons and presented them as Hadith in order to attract listeners’ attention, entertain them, influence them, and increase their own reputation, fame, and immediate earnings. These preachers and storytellers played a major role in spreading false and fabricated Hadith. They possessed great inventiveness and audacity in fabricating and narrating false statements in the name of Hadith. Many of them quickly invented lies according to the audience’s demands in order to astonish them and empty their pockets. Moreover, whenever a fabricator’s fabricated Hadith or story was appealing, other preacher-fabricators would steal it, create an isnad in their own name, and circulate it. (Fallata, al-Wad‘ 1/272–279).
Observe examples of their cleverness and audacity. Imam Yahya ibn Ma‘in (233 AH) and Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal (241 AH) were two of the greatest muhaddiths of the third Hijri century, renowned in Baghdad and throughout the Muslim world in the first half of that century. One day they both performed salah in a mosque in Baghdad. After the salah, a preacher began to preach. During his sermon he said: Ahmad ibn Hanbal and Yahya ibn Ma‘in both told me; they received it from ‘Abd al-Razzaq, from Ma‘mar, from Qatadah, from Anas, that the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said: “If anyone says ‘La ilaha illallah,’ a bird is created from each of its letters, whose beak is made of gold and whose feathers are precious stones……..” He proceeded to narrate such bizarre stories and imaginary tales of immense rewards. At the end of the sermon, many listeners gave him gifts.
During the sermon, Ahmad and Yahya asked one another in astonishment, ‘Did you tell this man this Hadith?’ Both replied, ‘Today is the first time in my life that I have heard this Hadith.’ After the sermon, when the crowd had thinned, Yahya signaled the man to come closer. Thinking he would receive a gift, the man hurried over. Yahya asked him, ‘Who told you this Hadith?’ The man replied, ‘Yahya ibn Ma‘in and Ahmad ibn Hanbal.’ He said, ‘I am Yahya, and this is Ahmad. Neither of us has ever heard this Hadith, much less taught it to anyone. If you must lie, use someone else’s name; do not use ours.’ The man then said, ‘I always heard that Yahya ibn Ma‘in was a fool; now I have proof.’ Yahya asked, ‘How so?’ He replied, ‘Do you think there is no other Yahya ibn Ma‘in or Ahmad ibn Hanbal in the world besides you? Apart from your companion Ahmad, I studied Hadith with sixteen men named Ahmad ibn Hanbal.’ Hearing this, Ahmad ibn Hanbal covered his face with his cloth and said, ‘Let the man go.’ The man looked mockingly at them both and left. (Ibn al-Jawzi, al-Mawdu‘at 1/21–22).
Abu Hatim Muhammad ibn Hibban al-Busti (354 AH), one of the prominent muhaddiths of the fourth Hijri century, said: During one of my journeys to collect Hadith, I entered a city in Syria called ‘Tajrawan.’ After performing salah in the city’s congregational mosque, a young man stood up and began preaching. During his sermon he said: Abu Khalifah told me, from al-Walid, from Shu‘bah, from Qatadah, from Anas (may Allah be pleased with him), that the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said: If anyone fulfills a Muslim’s need, Allah will grant him such-and-such a reward….. He continued in this manner. After he finished, I called him and asked, ‘Where is your home?’ He said, ‘I am from the Bardaya area.’ I asked, ‘Have you ever been to Basra?’ He said, ‘No.’ I said, ‘Then how are you narrating Hadith from Abu Khalifah when you have never even seen him?’ The young man replied, ‘Asking about this is contrary to manners and etiquette. This is the only isnad I have memorized. Whenever I hear a Hadith or statement from anyone, I place this isnad before it and narrate it.’ Ibn Hibban said: I then left the young man. (Ibn al-Jawzi, al-Mawdu‘at 1/22).
The renowned sixth-century muhaddith Abu al-Faraj Ibn al-Jawzi (597 AH) said: There is a preacher in my region who outwardly appears pious and God-fearing. In his conduct he displays dervishhood and piety. Two highly reliable scholar-friends told me about him that, on one ‘Ashura day, this man said: The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said, ‘Whoever does this on the day of ‘Ashura will receive this reward; whoever does that will receive that reward’…….. He thus narrated Hadith about many rewards for many deeds. We asked him, ‘Where did you memorize these Hadith?’ He said, ‘By Allah, I never learned or memorized these Hadith. They came to my mind at this very moment, and I said them.’ (Ibn al-Jawzi, al-Mawdu‘at 1/20).
Ibn al-Jawzi said: A preacher of my time even wrote a book using these false Hadith. One fabricated Hadith in that book reads as follows: One day, al-Hasan (may Allah be pleased with him) and al-Husayn (may Allah be pleased with him) entered Caliph ‘Umar’s (may Allah be pleased with him) house. ‘Umar was busy. After finishing his work, he raised his head and saw them. He stood, kissed them, gave each of them one thousand coins, and said, ‘Forgive me; I did not realize that you had arrived.’ They returned and told their father, ‘Ali (may Allah be pleased with him), of ‘Umar’s courtesy and humility. ‘Ali then said, ‘I heard the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) say: “Umar ibn al-Khattab is the light of Islam and the lamp of the people of Paradise.”’ The two returned to ‘Umar and told him this Hadith. He asked for paper and ink and wrote: ‘In the name of Allah, the Most Compassionate, the Most Merciful. The two leaders of the youth of Paradise have told me that they received it from their father, ‘Ali al-Murtada, from their grandfather, the Prophet al-Mustafa (peace and blessings be upon him), who said: Umar is the light of Islam and the lamp of the people of Paradise.’ ‘Umar instructed that after his death this paper be placed over his chest inside his shroud. After his death, this was done as instructed. The next morning, everyone found the paper on the grave, bearing the words: ‘Hasan and Husayn spoke the truth; their father spoke the truth; the Messenger of Allah spoke the truth; ‘Umar is the light of Islam and the lamp of the people of Paradise.’
Ibn al-Jawzi said: The most sorrowful and regrettable matter is that he was not content merely to write this vile lie and bizarre tale. He showed it to many scholars of our time. The lack of knowledge among scholars concerning isnads and authenticity was so evident that many scholars cited even this vile lie as authentic. (Ibn al-Jawzi, al-Mawdu‘at 1/20–21).

1.5.6. Regional, Professional, or Ethnic Hostility
People of various lineages, ethnicities, countries, or cities sometimes resorted to fabrication to establish their own superiority or status. Hadith were fabricated in support of the Arab nation and Arabic language and against the Persian language and Persian people. Likewise, Hadith were fabricated in support of Persian and against Arabic. Hadith were fabricated for or against various races or professions. Among these fabricated statements are: ‘The language most hated by Allah is Persian.’ ‘When Allah is angry, He sends down revelation in Arabic; when He is pleased, He sends down revelation in Persian.’ ‘The angels around the Throne speak Persian.’ Similarly, slanderous and disparaging Hadith were fabricated against weavers, goldsmiths, and other professions because of professional rivalry.
Hadith were fabricated praising or condemning various cities, countries, or regions. Indeed, Hadith were fabricated in praise or condemnation of almost every well-known city or country of the third Hijri century. Even for cities such as Makkah and Madinah, for whose virtues there are many authentic Hadith, many captivating fabricated Hadith were invented. (For details, see Ibn al-Jawzi, al-Mawdu‘at 1/357–373, 2/147–161; Fallata, al-Wad‘ 1/260–263).
1.5.7. Desire for Fame
We have already mentioned that in those days the isnad and matn were two inseparable parts of a Hadith. A Hadith was understood to be the combined form of the isnad and matn. Hadith in this combined form were well known to the muhaddiths. Sometimes a muhaddith altered this combined form to gain fame or demonstrate individuality. He would narrate the Hadith of one isnad through another isnad, or attribute the Hadith of one narrator to another narrator. Among the types of lies, we shall mention one or two examples of fabricating false isnads, God willing.

1.6. Types of Lies

In the terminology of the muhaddithun, there are various types and methods of telling lies in the name of hadith. In this section, we shall discuss them briefly, insha’Allah.
1.6.1. Lying in the isnad
The combined form of the isnad and the matn is the hadith. To fabricate a hadith, fabricating an isnad is essential. At times, fabricating the isnad itself was the principal objective of the fabricator. Liars fabricated isnads according to their aims and abilities. These fabrications can be divided into several categories.
1.6.1.1. A fabricated isnad for fabricated words
No hadith was accepted without an isnad. Therefore, to pass off a lie as a hadith, one had to attach an isnad to it. In most cases, fabricators invented isnads in the names of various well-known scholars. Or they would attach an isnad they had memorized to the beginning of various fabricated hadiths. We have seen this in several fabricated hadiths discussed earlier. Thus, the isnads of most fabricated hadiths were also invented. Consider an example:
Imam Ibn Majah said: Sahl ibn Abi Sahl and Muhammad ibn Isma‘il told me; ‘Abd al-Salam ibn Salih Abu al-Salt al-Harawi told them: ‘Ali al-Rida told me—from his father Musa al-Kazim, from his father Ja‘far al-Sadiq, from his father Muhammad al-Baqir, from his father ‘Ali Zayn al-‘Abidin, from his father Imam al-Husayn (may Allah be pleased with him), from his father ‘Ali (may Allah be pleased with him)—that the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: “Faith is knowledge of the heart, speech of the tongue, and acting according to the rules.”
Thus, the collective name for knowledge of the heart, acknowledgment by the tongue, and implementation through deeds is faith. The statement is highly appealing. Many tabi‘un and later scholars defined faith in this way. Imam Malik, al-Shafi‘i, Ahmad ibn Hanbal, and others adopted this view. On the other hand, Imam Abu Hanifah said: Faith is essentially the name for conviction in the heart and acknowledgment by the tongue. Deeds are not part of faith; rather, they are its demand and consequence. Islam consists of faith and deeds together. If this hadith were authentic, it would prove the error of Imam Abu Hanifah’s view. However, the examination of the muhaddithun proved that the hadith is baseless and false.
Reader, take note. The narrators of this hadith were seven of the twelve Imams of the Shi‘i school and among the most eminent members of the family of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him). For this reason, we simple-hearted Muslims are easily deceived. But it was not possible to deceive the muhaddithun entrusted with preserving the Sunnah of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) in this manner. They examined the hadith according to their method. Through their examination, they found that none of the students of the seven famous Imams mentioned in the isnad had narrated this hadith, nor had it been narrated through any other isnad.
Only ‘Abd al-Salam Abu al-Salt claimed that Imam ‘Ali al-Rida (203 AH) had told him this hadith. Thus, we see that this man named Abu al-Salt publicized the hadith two hundred years after the death of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him). Through comparative investigation, the muhaddithun found that this man, ‘Abd al-Salam Abu al-Salt, had studied and narrated many hadiths. However, there were many errors in the hadiths he narrated. He attributed hadiths to various muhaddithun or scholars which none of their other students narrated. This proves that he was unable to memorize hadiths properly. Nevertheless, they differed as to whether he deliberately narrated false hadiths. Yahya ibn Ma‘in and some Imams said that he appeared to be a good man in his personal life. Although he was a Shi‘i, he was not an extremist. Yet he narrated countless confused and baseless (munkar) hadiths that no other narrator had ever narrated. It appears that he did not deliberately lie. On the other hand, Imams such as al-Juzajani and al-‘Uqayli said that he was a liar. (For details, see Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani, Tahdhib al-Tahdhib 6/285–286; Taqrib al-Tahdhib, p. 355.)
Those who judged his errors to have been unintentional called the hadith invalid, baseless, extremely weak, and so forth. Those who regarded him as an intentional liar called the hadith mawdu‘, or fabricated. (Al-Busiri, Zawa’id Ibn Majah, p. 37.)
The famous eighth-century muhaddith Ibn al-Qayyim, Muhammad ibn Abi Bakr (751 AH), followed the Hanbali school and considered deeds to be part of faith. In his view, faith is knowledge of the heart, acknowledgment by the tongue, and observance of the rules. After a lengthy discussion in support of this view, he said: However, the hadith narrated by ‘Abd al-Salam ibn Salih on this subject and compiled by Ibn Majah is mawdu‘; it is not a saying of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him). (Ibn al-Qayyim, Hashiyat Abi Dawud 12/294.)
We see that all the narrators in this isnad were extremely famous and universally respected personalities. This is one characteristic of fabricated hadiths. In most cases, fabricators constructed isnads composed of famous personalities in order to promote their fabrications. Although their fraud deceived ordinary people, it could not deceive the critical muhaddithun, because the fabricator’s name remained in the isnad. The name of the person whom the fabricator claimed as his teacher remained there. By comparing and examining the hadiths narrated by the teacher’s other students with those narrated by the fabricator, the muhaddithun detected the fraud.
Consider another example of fabrication. Isma‘il ibn Ziyad was a hadith narrator of the second Islamic century. He said: Thawr ibn Yazid (155 AH) told me—from Khalid ibn Ma‘dan (d. 103 AH), from Mu‘adh ibn Jabal—that we said: O Messenger of Allah, may we touch the Qur’an without ablution? He said: Yes, but if a ritual bath is obligatory, then do not touch the Qur’an. We said: O Messenger of Allah, then what is the meaning of the Qur’anic statement, “None touch it except the purified” (Surah al-Waqi‘ah 56:79)? He said: Its meaning is that none will receive the reward of the Qur’an except believers.”
The muhaddithun unanimously judged this hadith to be fabricated. The Imams of hadith collected the hadiths narrated by this man named Isma‘il ibn Ziyad (Abu Ziyad) and compared them with all other narrations. They found that none of the hadiths narrated by him was sound. He was a good scholar and served as a judge in the region called Mosul. However, he narrated many hadiths in the names of various famous muhaddithun of that time, such as Shu‘bah (160 AH), Ibn Jurayj (150 AH), and Thawr (155 AH), which they had never said and which none of their students had narrated from them.
For example, here he narrated this hadith in the name of Thawr. Thawr was one of the most famous muhaddithun and jurists of Syria in the second Islamic century. He had countless students. Many studied hadith with him for years. Yet not a single student narrated this hadith from him, while Isma‘il narrated it in his name. Judging from the circumstances, it appears that he deliberately narrated fabricated hadiths in this manner. Imam al-Daraqutni, Ibn ‘Adi, Ibn Hibban, Ibn al-Jawzi, and other Imams discussed these matters in detail and called him a dajjal and a liar. They regarded all hadiths narrated by him alone, which no one else had narrated, as mawdu‘ or fabricated.
Another fabricated and false statement narrated by this Isma‘il as a hadith of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) is the following. He said: Ghalib al-Qattan told me, from Abu Sa‘id al-Maqaribi, from Abu Hurayrah (may Allah be pleased with him), that the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: “The most hateful language to Allah is Persian, and the language of the inhabitants of Paradise is Arabic.” (Ibn ‘Adi, al-Kamil 1/510–511; Ibn Hibban, al-Majruhin 1/129.)
1.6.1.2. A fabricated isnad for a circulating hadith
We have seen that sometimes a fabricator’s aim was to establish his own distinctiveness and special status. For this reason, he would construct a special isnad for a circulating matn or statement. I shall mention an example here.
Imam Malik was one of the leading Imams among the muhaddithun of the second Islamic century. Through his teacher Nafi‘, from ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Umar, he narrated many hadiths from the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him). Therefore, “Malik, from Nafi‘, from ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Umar” is an extremely authentic and very famous isnad. It was preserved by all the muhaddithun who narrated through this isnad.
‘Abd al-Mun‘im ibn Bashir, a narrator of the third Islamic century, said: Malik told me—from Nafi‘, from ‘Abdullah, who said that the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: “O Allah, bless my ummah in all their affairs.” [Al-Khalili, Khalil ibn ‘Abdullah (446 AH), al-Irshad, p. 7.]
The famous fifth-century muhaddith, the eminent scholar Khalil ibn ‘Abdullah al-Khalili (446 AH), said: This is a mawdu‘ or fabricated hadith. This man named ‘Abd al-Mun‘im was a lying fabricator. ‘Abdullah, the son of Imam Ahmad, said: One day I said to your father, “I saw ‘Abd al-Mun‘im ibn Bashir in the marketplace.” He replied, “My son, is that lying fabricator still alive?” This hadith is entirely baseless and nonexistent through this isnad. No one ever narrated it from Malik or from Nafi‘. In reality, this hadith was narrated by a Companion named Sakhr al-Ghamidi from the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him). (Al-Khalili, al-Irshad, p. 7.)
Here we see that the eminent scholar al-Khalili judged the hadith to be mawdu‘. Yet he himself stated that it had been narrated from another Companion. His intention was that, through this isnad, the hadith was mawdu‘. The combined form of this isnad and matn was fabricated. He also briefly stated the result of the muhaddithun’s examination. None of Imam Malik’s countless students narrated this hadith through him with this isnad. Only ‘Abd al-Mun‘im claimed that Imam Malik had told him the hadith. In light of all the other hadiths narrated by ‘Abd al-Mun‘im, the muhaddithun detected his lying and identified him as a liar.
This does not mean, however, that the matn of this hadith is false. The matn was narrated through various other isnads from Sakhr al-Ghamidi and other Companions, and the examination of the muhaddithun proved it to be authentic. (Al-Tirmidhi, al-Sunan 3/517; Ibn Majah, al-Sunan 2/752.)
Thus, we have seen that ‘Abd al-Mun‘im fabricated a highly famous authentic isnad for a circulating and authentic matn. It is impossible for us today to appreciate the importance such a fabricated isnad had for attaining fame in that age. The muhaddithun knew the hadith through Sakhr al-Ghamidi. But whenever they heard that someone in a certain city had narrated the hadith from ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Umar through Malik, they went to him, wrote down his hadith, and examined it. When the man’s fabrication was exposed through examination, they publicized it. Other muhaddithun would again visit him. The man was more or less enjoying himself, thinking, “How many people are coming to hear hadith from me! How I am fooling everyone!” But he did not worry that his fabrication would be exposed. No fabricator commits fraud while thinking about being caught.
Ibrahim ibn al-Hakam ibn Aban was a hadith narrator of the third Islamic century. He sometimes resorted to such fabrications in narrating hadith. Even a famous Imam such as Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal went to him to learn hadith. Imam Ahmad later used to say: “I traveled from Baghdad to Aden in Yemen to learn hadith from Ibrahim ibn al-Hakam. The money for the journey was spent fi sabilillah.” (Ibn al-Jawzi, al-Du‘afa’ wa al-Matrukin 1/30.)

1.6.1.3. Altering the isnad by addition or omission
The words of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) must be transmitted exactly as they were heard. Adding or omitting anything in the isnad is also lying in his name. Therefore, the muhaddithun regarded adding to or omitting from an established isnad as fabrication and fraud. Reporting a mawquf or maqtu‘ hadith—that is, a saying of a Companion or a Tabi‘i—as a marfu‘ hadith or as a saying of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him); reporting a mursal or munqati‘ hadith as muttasil; inserting the name of a famous narrator in place of a weak narrator in an isnad; or altering the isnad of a hadith in any manner is considered lying in the name of hadith. Such fraud may be intentional or unintentional. An intentional fraudster is considered a liar or fabricator. An unintentional fraudster is considered unacceptable, weak, and abandoned. Consider one or two examples of this.
Abu Samarah Ahmad ibn Salim was a narrator of the second and third Islamic centuries. He said: Sharik told us—from al-A‘mash, from ‘Atiyyah, from Abu Sa‘id al-Khudri—that the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: “ ‘Ali is the best of all creatures.”
The Imams of hadith, through examination, found that this Abu Salamah Ahmad ibn Salim was an extremely weak narrator. He narrated hadiths from various scholars and muhaddithun in their names which no one else narrated. This hadith was one of his false or erroneous narrations. Other students of Sharik ibn ‘Abdullah also narrated this hadith. In addition, others besides Sharik narrated from Sharik’s teacher al-A‘mash. But they said: From al-A‘mash, from ‘Atiyyah, who said that Jabir used to say: “We considered ‘Ali the best among us.”
Thus, we have seen that Abu Salamah altered three things, whether intentionally or unintentionally.
First, the hadith was narrated by ‘Atiyyah from Jabir, whereas Abu Salamah mistakenly named ‘Atiyyah’s teacher as Abu Sa‘id al-Khudri. Thus, he changed the name of the Companion in the isnad.
Second, he also changed the isnad or matn of the hadith.
Third, by altering the isnad, he passed off Jabir’s statement as a saying of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him).
The hadith was originally Jabir’s own statement, yet he narrated it as a saying of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him). This is the most serious alteration. For here, something the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) did not say was attributed to him, which is a grave sin. Presenting the statement of a Companion, Tabi‘i, or pious elder, or a wise proverb, as a saying of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) is a particular type of mawdu‘ or fabricated hadith. We shall mention this matter again shortly, insha’Allah. (Ibn ‘Adi, al-Kamil 1/277–278.)
Ibrahim ibn al-Hakam ibn Aban was a narrator of the third Islamic century. He practiced fabrication in narrating hadith—specifically, in the isnad. The third-century muhaddith ‘Abbas ibn ‘Abd al-‘Azim said: Ibrahim ibn al-Hakam learned and wrote down some hadiths from the Tabi‘i ‘Ikrimah, through his father, from the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him). In his manuscript, these hadiths were written in mursal form, with no Companion’s name. Later, he would narrate them while mentioning the names of Companions such as ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Abbas and Abu Hurayrah (may Allah be pleased with them). Because of this fraud in the isnad, he lost his acceptability. (Ibn ‘Adi, al-Kamil 1/241–242.)
1.6.1.4. Stealing an isnad, or hadith theft
One special method used by liars in hadith fabrication is theft. “Hadith theft” means that a lying narrator hears a hadith from another narrator but, instead of narrating it through that narrator, narrates it through a fabricated isnad. Theft may occur in several ways:
a. The “thief” fabricator keeps the original isnad intact. However, instead of naming the person from whom he heard the hadith, he names that person’s teacher and claims that he himself heard it from that teacher.
b. The thief fabricator changes something in the original isnad. He changes the name of one narrator in the isnad and constructs a new isnad.
c. The thief fabricator constructs a new isnad for the matn of the hadith. He hears a hadith narrated by a weak or dishonest narrator, either directly from him or somewhere else, and likes it. Because of its appeal, he also wishes to narrate it. But if he attributes it to the original fabricator, his own prestige will decline; moreover, it will no longer have appeal and novelty. Therefore, he constructs another fabricated isnad for this fabricated hadith.
The matter of theft is extremely important in identifying fabricated hadiths. Various weak or fabricated hadiths are sometimes narrated through ten or fifteen isnads. Seeing so many isnads may sometimes deceive a muhaddith. He may think that although the isnads are weak, the hadith perhaps has some basis because it appears through so many isnads. In this case, he must establish two things. First, he must see whether every isnad contains a lying narrator. If it becomes clear that the hadith gained fame in a particular period through the narration of a particular narrator, and the muhaddithun of that period identified it as that narrator’s hadith, after which some weak or fabricating narrators narrated it from that narrator’s teacher or through another isnad, then it will be understood that the later narrators committed “theft.”
Here I shall mention several examples of theft.
Earlier, as an example of the unintentional lies of pious people, we mentioned a hadith narrated by the famous worshipper Thabit ibn Musa (229 AH), a third-century narrator. It says: “Whoever performs more night prayer (tahajjud) will have a more beautiful face during the day.” Thabit was the first to narrate this hadith. After hearing it from Thabit, the muhaddithun conducted a detailed examination and became certain that no one had narrated it before Thabit. After this hadith became known and famous through Thabit, however, certain weak or dishonest narrators narrated it from Thabit’s teacher Sharik or through other isnads. The muhaddithun identified these as thefts. One of these thief-fabricators was ‘Abd al-Hamid ibn Bahr Abu al-Hasan al-‘Askari. In the period after Thabit, he claimed that he too had heard the hadith from Sharik. The famous fourth-century muhaddith, the eminent scholar Ibn ‘Adi, said: Hasan ibn Sufyan told me; ‘Abd al-Hamid ibn Bahr told me; Sharik told us—from al-A‘mash, from Abu Sufyan, from Jabir—that the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: “If a person performs prayer (tahajjud) at night, his face will become beautiful during the day.” Ibn ‘Adi said: The hadith is famous from Thabit ibn Musa. After him, many weak narrators stole the hadith. ‘Abd al-Hamid was one of them. (Ibn ‘Adi, al-Kamil 5/322.)
Hasan ibn ‘Ali ibn Salih al-‘Adawi was a fabricating narrator of the fourth Islamic century. The eminent scholar Ibn ‘Adi said: I heard and wrote hadiths from this man. He fabricated and stole hadiths. He narrated one person’s hadith in another person’s name. He narrated hadiths in the names of people whose identities were unknown. He then mentioned many examples of hadith theft by this Hasan ibn ‘Ali. In this connection, Ibn ‘Adi said: Hasan ibn ‘Ali al-‘Adawi told me; Hasan ibn ‘Ali ibn Rashid told us—from Sharik, from al-A‘mash, from Abu Sufyan, from Jabir—that the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: “Whoever performs more night prayer will have a more beautiful face during the day.” Ibn ‘Adi said: This is the hadith of Thabit ibn Musa. After Thabit, many weak narrators stole the hadith and passed it off under the names of various narrators. In this isnad, Hasan ibn ‘Ali al-‘Adawi is passing the hadith off in the name of Hasan ibn ‘Ali ibn Rashid. Yet Hasan ibn ‘Ali ibn Rashid was a famous and truthful narrator; he never narrated this hadith from Sharik or through any other isnad. None of his known students narrated the hadith from him. (Ibn ‘Adi, al-Kamil 2/338–341; see also 6/303.)
Hu dhayl ibn al-Hakam was a weak narrator of the second century. He said: ‘Abd al-‘Aziz ibn Abi Rawwad (159 AH) told me—from ‘Ikrimah, from Ibn ‘Abbas—that the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) said: “Death in a foreign land is counted as martyrdom.” This narrator named Huzayl was the sole narrator of the hadith. Through detailed investigation, the muhaddithun of the second and third centuries learned that no narrator other than this man had narrated the hadith from ‘Abd al-‘Aziz or through any other route.
Another narrator of that period was Ibrahim ibn Bakr al-A‘war. He came forward and claimed that he had heard the hadith from ‘Abd al-‘Aziz. He too said: ‘Abd al-‘Aziz told us—from ‘Ikrimah, from Ibn ‘Abbas … . Through examination, the muhaddithun determined that this man named Ibrahim had stolen the hadith. They found that Ibrahim had not heard the hadith from ‘Abd al-‘Aziz. Even when Huzayl narrated the hadith, Ibrahim had not claimed that he had heard it as well. When the hadith became famous among the muhaddithun through Huzayl, he too learned it through Huzayl. But if he narrated it through Huzayl, his status would decline! Therefore, he stole Huzayl’s isnad. Claiming Huzayl’s teacher as his own teacher, he began narrating the hadith. (Ibn ‘Adi, al-Kamil 1/257.)
1.6.2. Lying in the matn
The principal field of fabrication is the matn, or main content, of the hadith. The muhaddithun have stated that false statements circulated in the name of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) are essentially of two types: the fabricator attributes his own invented statement to the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), or he attributes an already circulating statement to him. Both types of false statements may be intentional or unintentional.
1.6.2.1. Passing off one’s own invented statement as a hadith
We often find that a lying narrator passes off his own invented statement as a hadith. The eminent scholar al-Suyuti (911 AH) stated that this type constitutes the majority of mawdu‘ or false hadiths. In most cases, the fabricator invents a statement according to his need and advantage and passes it off as a hadith. (Al-Suyuti, Tadrib al-Rawi 1/287.)
Among the various examples mentioned above, we have seen many fabricated hadiths of this type. Fabricated hadiths made concerning the merits of various surahs of the Qur’an, or in support of or opposition to countries, nations, groups, opinions, and so forth, all belong to the same category.
1.6.2.2. Passing off a circulating statement as a hadith
Sometimes a weak or lying narrator, either mistakenly or deliberately, has narrated a Companion’s or Tabi‘i’s statement, a proverb, a saying of a pious person, a statement circulated in the name of an earlier prophet, a statement from medical science, a saying of a famous scholar, or a similar circulating statement as a “hadith of the Messenger.” The eminent scholar al-‘Iraqi (806 AH) mentioned two examples of this type of mawdu‘ hadith. The first example is: “Love of the world is the root of all sins.” Al-‘Iraqi said that this statement was originally the saying of a pious worshipper. It is also circulated as a saying of Jesus (peace be upon him). However, it has no basis as a saying of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him).
The second example is: “The stomach is the home of disease, and controlling one’s diet is the foundation of every medicine.” This is a statement of physicians. It has no basis as a hadith. (Al-Suyuti, Tadrib al-Rawi 1/287.)
We saw some examples of this type in the section above entitled “Altering the isnad by addition or omission.” We shall see many more examples of this type of falsehood and fabrication in the second chapter. Here I shall mention a hadith of this kind that is widely circulated among scholars in our country.
A statement is commonly circulated in our country as a hadith: “Whatever the Muslims consider good is good in the sight of Allah.”
In our country, the statement is generally known as a Prophetic hadith. In reality, it is a statement of ‘Abdullah ibn Mas‘ud (may Allah be pleased with him). If it is narrated as a saying of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), it is a lie attributed to him. Ibn Mas‘ud (may Allah be pleased with him) said: Allah looked into the hearts of His servants. He found the heart of Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him) to be the best and finest heart among all creation. Therefore, He chose him for Himself and sent him with the responsibility of prophethood. Then, after the heart of Muhammad (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), He looked into the hearts of the other servants. He found the hearts of his Companions to be the best. Therefore, He made them the companions and advisers of His Prophet; they fought for His religion. Thus, whatever the Muslims—that is, the pure-hearted Companions who accompanied and advised the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him)—consider good is also good in the sight of Allah, and whatever they consider bad is also bad in the sight of Allah. (Ahmad, al-Musnad 1/379; al-Hakim, al-Mustadrak 3/83.)
Some jurists or scholars mistakenly mentioned this statement as a Prophetic hadith. Later muhaddithun searched all the hadith books and became certain that the hadith had not been narrated from the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him). The eminent scholar al-Zayla‘i, ‘Abdullah ibn Yusuf (762 AH); Ibn Kathir, Isma‘il ibn ‘Umar (774 AH); Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani, Ahmad ibn ‘Ali (852 AH); al-Sakhawi, Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Rahman (902 AH); and other muhaddithun stated that the hadith was narrated with a hasan isnad as a statement of ‘Abdullah ibn Mas‘ud (may Allah be pleased with him). It was nowhere narrated as a saying of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him).

1.6.3. Falsehood in Translation, Commentary, and Research
Another major field of falsehood in the name of hadith is translation and commentary. A review of the books in circulation and religious exhortations shows that, generally speaking, we grant ourselves complete, unrestricted freedom when narrating hadith. We translate the basic statement of a hadith with additions and omissions according to our preferences, insert many of our own opinions and explanations into the translation, and pass everything off under the name of “hadith.” Yet the Companions would become extremely distressed over the alteration of even a single word!

Qiyas and ijtihad, in the light of the Qur’an and hadith, are among the principal sources of Islamic jurisprudence. For matters concerning which the Qur’an and hadith have given no clear ruling, rulings must be determined through qiyas and ijtihad. For example, the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) taught the ummah how to perform salah. But he did not explain in detail which acts were fard, which were mustahabb, and so forth. A mujtahid attempts to determine these matters in the light of various hadiths. Likewise, nothing was said in the Qur’an and hadith about microphones, telephones, airplanes, and similar matters. A mujtahid attempts to ascertain their rulings through qiyas and ijtihad in the light of the relevant directives of the Qur’an and hadith.

However, no unseen matter can be known through qiyas or ijtihad, nor can acts of worship be performed thereby. A ruling that ihram may be worn during salah cannot be given by analogy with wearing ihram during Hajj. Similarly, one cannot say, by analogy with the reward of one hundred thousand times for salah in al-Masjid al-Haram, that the reward for giving zakat there will also be multiplied one hundred thousand times. Nor can we say that giving zakat in Ramadan brings seventy times the reward, and giving zakat in al-Masjid al-Haram during Ramadan brings seven million times the reward.

Here I will mention some examples. Imam al-Tirmidhi recorded the following “hasan,” or acceptable, hadith in his Sunan under the chapter on the virtues of jihad. Khuraym ibn Fatik (may Allah be pleased with him) said that the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said: “If someone spends anything in the path of Allah, seven hundred times the reward will be recorded for him.”

A da‘if hadith recorded by Imam Ibn Majah states: “If someone remains at home himself and sends spending to the path of Allah, he will receive seven hundred dirhams (of reward) for every dirham. But if he himself participates in fighting in the path of Allah and spends for this purpose, he will receive seven hundred thousand dirhams (of reward) for every dirham.” Then he recited this verse: “Allah increases for whomever He wills.” (Ibn Majah, al-Sunan 2/922).

The sole narrator of this hadith is Ibn Abi Fudayk. He said: “A man named Khalil ibn Abdullah narrated this hadith from al-Hasan al-Basri.” The muhaddithun did not even learn the identity of this man named Khalil ibn Abdullah, let alone establish his reliability. Therefore, Allamah Busiri said: “This chain is weak, because Khalil ibn Abdullah is of unknown identity.”

The Tabi‘i Mujahid said: Abu Hurayrah (may Allah be pleased with him) was once stationed on border guard duty. Suddenly, people began shouting, thinking that the enemy had arrived. Everyone rushed to the seashore. Then it was announced that there was no cause for concern, and everyone returned. Only Abu Hurayrah remained standing. A man asked him, “Abu Hurayrah, why are you standing here?” He replied, “I heard the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) say: ‘Remaining for a moment in the path of Allah is better than performing qiyam (salah) near the Black Stone on Laylat al-Qadr.’” (Ibn Hibban, al-Sahih 10/462).

The hadiths above mention the reward for spending and remaining in the path of Allah, and so forth. All the scholars of the Muslim ummah agree that “the path of Allah” here means the war or jihad of a Muslim state against a non-Muslim state. All the muhaddithun recorded these hadiths in the chapters on jihad or warfare. Thus, if in translation we say “in the path of Allah” or “jihad,” the hadiths will be translated correctly.

In another sahih hadith, Ka‘b ibn ‘Ujrah (may Allah be pleased with him) says: “A man passed by the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him). Seeing the man’s health, strength, and enthusiasm, the Companions said, ‘O Messenger of Allah, if only this man were in the path of Allah (in jihad)!’ The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said: ‘If he has gone out seeking to earn for his young children, then he is in the path of Allah. If he has gone out seeking to earn for his elderly parents, then he is in the path of Allah. If he has gone out seeking to earn in order to keep himself free from dependence on others, then he is in the path of Allah.’” (Haythami, Majma‘ al-Zawa’id 4/325).

Here, working to earn a living has been called “being in the path of Allah” or “traveling in the path of Allah.” In other hadiths, acts such as learning knowledge, performing Hajj, enjoining good, performing complete wudu in the cold, waiting for salah in the mosque, and striving to keep one’s nafs in the path of Allah have been described as jihad.

After presenting the correct and literal meaning of the hadiths above, we may say that various hadiths have also called lawful earning, learning knowledge, enjoining good, performing Hajj, and similar activities “work in the path of Allah.” Therefore, we hope that people engaged in such activities may also receive the reward of jihad mentioned in these hadiths.

But if, instead, we directly say, “The noble hadith says that remaining for a moment while earning a lawful income is better than performing the salah of Laylat al-Qadr near the Black Stone,” or, “Spending one taka on a rally or procession for enjoining good brings the reward of seventy lakh takas,” then this will be considered falsehood. The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) never said this.

Likewise, the hadiths above mention seven hundred or seven hundred thousand times the reward for spending in warfare in the path of Allah. Another hadith says: “The reward of salah, fasting, and dhikr is increased seven hundred times more than spending in the path of Allah.”

In explaining this hadith, the muhaddithun have said that its apparent meaning is that performing salah, fasting, and dhikr at home brings seven hundred times more reward than spending money for jihad in the path of Allah. Some believe that certain words are omitted here. They say that the meaning of this hadith is that if salah, fasting, and dhikr are performed “while engaged in jihad in the path of Allah,” their reward is increased seven hundred times more than spending money in the path of Allah. (Hashiyat Ibn al-Qayyim 7/127). Our duty here is to state the literal meaning of the hadith and then present our explanation separately.

There are various ways in which falsehood may be spoken in the name of hadith. For example, someone may calculate and say: “Spending money while going for jihad brings seven hundred thousand times the reward, while performing dhikr at home brings seven hundred times that reward. This means that performing dhikr at home brings the reward of forty-nine crore good deeds.” If he gives this explanation separately after correctly translating the hadiths above, there is no problem. But if he presents this statement as the words of the hadith, he has spoken falsely in the name of hadith, because the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) never said this. He did not clarify whether by “a seven-hundred-fold increase over spending in the path of Allah” he meant seven hundred times the original reward or seven hundred times seven hundred. Therefore, what he did not clearly state cannot be attributed to him. It may, however, be mentioned separately as an explanation.

Similarly, if someone says, “The noble hadith says that performing dhikr while working to earn a lawful income, while traveling for Hajj, while learning knowledge, while engaged in da‘wah, while participating in a procession for enjoining good, or while disciplining the nafs brings forty-nine crore times more reward,” then he too has spoken falsely in the name of hadith.

One form of speaking falsely in the name of hadith is to add something of one’s own preference to a translation, or to omit something from it, instead of translating it literally. Another is to make an explanation of what the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said into part of the hadith. Nearly all of us in our society are involved in this offense. For purposes connected with self-purification, pir-muridi, da‘wah and tabligh, politics, and various disputed legal issues, people of every group and viewpoint cite evidence from the Qur’an and hadith. Providing such evidence is entirely natural and is demanded by faith. However, we generally pass off our own explanation under the name of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him).

The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) propagated the religion throughout his life. For the sake of the religion, he and many of his Companions permanently left their homes and performed hijrah. But he never set aside a specific period for da‘wah and traveled to various regions for that purpose. In the present context, although many people do not perform hijrah, they have gone to various places for a few days to engage in da‘wah. But if, regarding this activity, we say that he used to “go out” for da‘wah, the reader or listener will understand that he used to go out for a fixed period. Yet he never engaged in da‘wah in this manner. This would be falsehood attributed to him.

If we say that “the Messenger of Allah and the Companions held milad gatherings,” this too would be falsehood attributed to him. They never held a gathering solely to discuss or celebrate “milad.” However, the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) told the Companions two or three incidents concerning his birth. The Companions related these hadiths to the Tabi‘un. They did not hold any gathering for them or discuss them separately. If today a Muslim were to narrate these hadiths exactly according to the method of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) and the Companions, without any accompanying formalities, no one would say that he had held a milad gathering. Thus, we understand that he did not perform the activity that we all understand by a milad gathering.

Therefore, we should state separately what the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) did or said and what we understood from it. We have seen how terrified the Companions became at the possibility of altering a single word. May Almighty Allah grant us tawfiq.

1.7. Identifying and Recognizing Falsehood

1.7.1. The Principal Methods of Identifying Falsehood
1.7.1.1. The Forger’s Confession

In explaining the recognition and identification of false hadiths, Allamah Ibn al-Salah (643 AH) says: Whether a hadith is mawdu‘ or forged can be known through the forger’s confession or through something equivalent to a confession. The muhaddithun can often detect forgery from the condition of the narrator. At times, they detect it by examining the condition of the narrated hadith. Many great hadiths have been fabricated whose weakness in wording and meaning testifies to their forgery. (Iraqi, al-Taqyid, p. 128).

Allamah Nawawi, Iraqi, Sakhawi, Suyuti, and other muhaddithun have also mentioned the methods of identifying false or forged hadiths.

1.7.1.2. Narrations Without a Chain

Generally, a forger’s confession cannot be obtained. Therefore, the muhaddithun do not rely on it. Through examination of chains, comparative scrutiny, and investigative questioning, they gather “information equivalent to a confession” and determine forgery on that basis. Thus, investigation is the principal method of determining forgery. The muhaddithun primarily consider a hadith fabricated, baseless, forged, or false for two reasons: first, the presence of a liar in its chain; and second, the absence of any chain for the hadith.

Essentially, the first reason is the main means of determining forgery. The second situation was not seen during the first five hundred years of Islam. Until the fourth/fifth century AH, no one would state a hadith without a chain, and if anyone did, no one paid attention to it. Thus, even a vile forger had to fabricate a chain for his lie. In later periods, some statements gradually began to circulate in Muslim society under the name of hadith. Although they were transmitted orally, they could not be found with chains in any book or booklet. Naturally, the scholars of the Muslim ummah unanimously regarded them as false, baseless, and forged.

The scholars of the Muslim ummah were uncompromising in opposing every kind of false or baseless statement circulated in the name of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), and in determining the source and chain of statements attributed to him. Thus, we find that from the seventh/eighth Islamic centuries until the present age, countless courageous muhaddithun devoted their lives to seeking the chains or sources of these circulated statements. They searched for them in every kind of book and booklet—hadith, fiqh, tafsir, history, language, literature, biography, and others—written from the second century onward over nearly the next five hundred years. Even after this search, statements circulated as hadith for which they found no chain were considered by them baseless, without source, fabricated, or false.

1.7.1.3. A Liar’s Narration

One of the ways to recognize a forged or false hadith is that its chain contains a narrator whom the muhaddithun have identified through investigation as a liar, and that the hadith was not narrated through any source other than him. Therefore, in defining a forged or false hadith, the muhaddithun have said: “A hadith narrated solely by a lying narrator is a mawdu‘ hadith.”

It makes no difference that the teachers or earlier narrators of this lying narrator, and his students or later narrators, are trustworthy, truthful, and reliable. If, through investigation, the muhaddithun find that none of the other students of the person whom he named as his teacher narrated the hadith, nor was it narrated through any other source, they become certain that this liar fabricated the chain in his teacher’s name and circulated the false hadith. Later, various muhaddithun obtained the hadith from this liar for the purposes of investigation, review, or compilation.

1.7.1.3.1. Identifying the Liar

The muhaddithun gave various descriptions to narrators whom they recognized as narrators of false hadiths. At times they explicitly called them liars and forgers. At other times, instead of calling them liars or forgers, they used other terms. It should be noted here that the muhaddithun of the first three centuries generally did not readily wish to call anyone a “liar.” In particular, regarding someone whom they believed had lied unintentionally, they used relatively gentle words. We may briefly divide the terminology of the muhaddithun concerning lying narrators into the following categories:

1. Explicitly calling him a liar or forger: To indicate a narrator’s lying, the muhaddithun use expressions such as: liar, vile liar, lies, Dajjal, vile forger, fabricates, accused, has forged a hadith, the greatest liar, a pillar of falsehood, such-and-such a muhaddith called him a forger, such-and-such called him a liar, and so on.

2. Calling him a narrator of invalid hadiths or calamities: Among the expressions used to indicate a narrator’s lying are: he narrates invalid hadiths; he has some invalid hadiths; he has some calamities; among the calamities he narrated is such-and-such hadith; the danger of this hadith is great; he narrates vile hadiths; he steals hadiths; and so on.

3. Calling him munkar (objectionable) or matruk (abandoned): Munkar means denied, objectionable, wrongful, reprehensible, and so forth. The muhaddithun have called narrators and hadiths munkar in various senses. Some have called a weak hadith or weak narrator munkar. Some have called a lying narrator munkar. In particular, Imam Bukhari used extremely mild wording when mentioning defects in narrators. He did not directly call anyone a liar. Rather, if another muhaddith called someone a liar, he would call him munkar, or say matruk, maskut ‘anhu, or manzur fih, meaning “abandoned” or “there is criticism concerning him.”

Another term commonly used among the muhaddithun is matruk, meaning “abandoned” or “to be abandoned.” Generally, the muhaddithun call an extremely weak narrator “abandoned.” However, Imam Bukhari, Nasa’i, Daraqutni, and some other muhaddithun called lying narrators matruk. In particular, when Imam Bukhari and Imam Nasa’i called someone matruk, or abandoned, it meant that they had accused him of lying. Similarly, if the muhaddithun say that it is not permissible to narrate the hadith of a certain person, this also indicates his falsehood.

4. Saying that his hadith is nothing or worthless: To indicate a narrator’s falsehood, some have described the narrator or his narrated hadith as worthless, nothing, not worth accepting even for a penny, or used similar expressions. In this regard, Imam al-Shafi‘i’s statement is noteworthy. Imam Isma‘il ibn Yahya al-Muzani (264 AH) said: “One day I said about a man that he was a liar. Imam al-Shafi‘i (204 AH) said to me, ‘Refine your speech. Instead of saying “liar,” say, “His hadith is nothing.”’”

5. Calling him fallen, ruined, extremely weak, and so forth: Through certain words, the muhaddithun expressed a narrator’s severe weakness, such as fallen, extremely weak, entirely invalid, ruined, his hadith has gone, it has flown away, and so on. Although the hadiths of such narrators may not be intentional lies, they are unintentional falsehoods and entirely unacceptable. Many muhaddithun have also regarded the hadiths of narrators at this level as forged or false.

1.7.1.3.2. Various Names for False Hadiths

It should be noted in this connection that although a forged or false hadith is called mawdu‘, the muhaddithun have several other commonly used terms for indicating a forged hadith. These include:

1. Batil: We have already seen that the muhaddithun sometimes call a false hadith batil instead of calling it mawdu‘ or forged. In particular, many muhaddithun do not wish to call a hadith mawdu‘ when they are not certain that the narrator deliberately lied. In such cases, they use the word batil. That is, the hadith is false and invalid, but it is not certain whether the narrator deliberately forged it.

2. Not sahih: One of the terms used by the muhaddithun to indicate a forged hadith is “the hadith is not sahih.” Some people misunderstand this statement. They think that if the hadith is not sahih, it may perhaps be hasan or da‘if. In fact, this is not the case. In discussions of forged hadiths, when the muhaddithun say that a hadith is not sahih or authentic, they mean that it is unsound, invalid, and baseless. In discussions of fiqh, however, they sometimes use “not sahih” to mean da‘if.

3. It has no basis; it has no source: To indicate a forged or false hadith, the muhaddithun often say that the hadith has no basis or source. Generally, they mean by this that it is merely a statement without a chain circulating among the people; it has no chain or source of any kind—sahih, da‘if, or mawdu‘—and cannot be found with a chain in any book. Sometimes they also describe a hadith with a forged or invalid chain in this way, saying that it has no basis.

4. I do not know it, I have not seen it anywhere, I did not find it: The muhaddithun agree that after hadiths have been compiled, if a commonly circulated statement cannot be found with a chain in any book even after every kind of investigation, then it will undoubtedly be proven to be invalid and baseless. If a muhaddith who spent his life collecting, searching for, verifying, and investigating hadiths says, “I have not seen this hadith anywhere; I have not found it anywhere; I do not recognize it; I do not know it; it is not known,” then his statement proves that this hadith is a baseless and fabricated statement.

5. Gharib (unknown), extremely gharib: The word gharib means an expatriate, an unknown person, or a stranger. In the terminology of the muhaddithun, a hadith narrated at every level by only one narrator is generally called a gharib hadith. According to this terminology, a gharib hadith may be sahih or may be da‘if.

However, some muhaddithun have used this term to indicate a forged hadith. Regarding hadiths about which other muhaddithun said, “I do not know it; it has no basis,” they said gharib or gharibun jiddan, meaning unknown or extremely unknown. Imam Daraqutni, Khatib al-Baghdadi, Dhahabi, and other muhaddithun sometimes used the term in this way. The term was used most frequently by the renowned Hanafi faqih and muhaddith Allamah ‘Abdullah ibn Yusuf al-Zayla‘i (762 AH), who lived in the eighth century.

1.7.2. Linguistic, Semantic, and Intellectual Examination
Alongside verifying the accuracy of a narrator’s transmission, the muhaddithun also examined the meaning of the report. They did not accept as hadith any statement that clearly contradicted the Noble Qur’an, well-known Sunnah, reason and conscience, established historical facts, or established truths of science.
The subject matter, purport, and wording of a hadith also help experienced critical hadith scholars understand whether it is authentic or inauthentic. In light of their lifelong study of hadith, they can sometimes sense merely from the wording, meaning, or subject matter of a hadith that it is fabricated. The matter is not very difficult. A researcher in any field acquires special expertise in that field. If a poem by a later poet were presented to a specialist on Nazrul as a poem by Nazrul, he would detect it. Seeing the poem’s style and language, he would first exclaim, “This cannot be Nazrul’s poem! Where did you find this poem? How?”
Similarly, a researcher closely associated with any person or subject acquires special expertise and sensitivity regarding it, enabling him to make an initial judgment concerning information related to that subject.
The eminent imams of hadith, who spent their entire lives studying, learning by heart, comparing, examining, and teaching hadith, likewise acquired special expertise and sensitivity regarding the commands, prohibitions, advice, descriptions of rewards, descriptions of punishments, word choices, subject matter, purport, meanings, and so forth of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him). On this basis, when they heard a statement or hadith circulated in his name, they could immediately sense whether that subject, wording, word, or meaning could or could not be a hadith of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him). Alongside this, they confirmed its fabrication through other examinations.
In the vast body of hadith-critical literature produced by the muhaddithun, we find countless examples in which, despite the narrator of a hadith not being deemed a liar, the muhaddithun judged the hadith to be “abandoned,” fabricated, or invented because of its wording, purport, and meaning.
When we study the working method of the muhaddithun in this matter, we find that they followed the method of the Companions. We have seen that, in judging any hadith, the first matter to be considered is verifying whether the statement is established as a saying of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him). If established, it must be accepted; if unestablished, it must be rejected; and if there is any doubt, it must undergo further examination. Thus, linguistic and semantic examination has three levels in relation to hadith.
1.7.2.1. Proven Authentic in the Primary Examination
If the testimony of the narrators and all relevant examinations establish that the statement is an action, saying, or tacit approval of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him), it must be accepted as guidance from revelation. Here too, shudhudh (anomalousness) and ‘illah (hidden defect) must be examined, and this involves linguistic and semantic examination. The following points should, however, be noted:
First, no linguistic or semantic weakness or incoherence is found in a hadith proven at this level. This is because transmitting a hadith that is linguistically or semantically incoherent, or that contradicts reason, conscience, scientific facts, or historical information, has been considered a weakness of the narrator. Many honest and renowned narrators were deemed weak and their reports rejected because they transmitted such hadiths. Therefore, no hadith proven sahih through examination of its chain and general meaning (fulfilling the five conditions) contains linguistic or semantic weakness.
Second, in most cases, the guidance of conscience, reason, or ‘aql is relative. One person may regard something as contrary to reason, while another may consider it consistent with reason or intellect. Therefore, the fundamental principle of the Muslim ummah is to accept anything proven to be revelation. For example, the Noble Qur’an prescribes amputation of the hand as the punishment for theft. The matter may seem contrary to reason to some people. Yet a believer never rejects this ruling on that basis. Rather, he tries to understand its wisdom on the basis of reason, conscience, and justice. Believers follow the same principle regarding hadith.
Third, believers follow the same principle concerning scientific or historical information. Naturally, the Qur’an and hadith were not given as textbooks of science or history. However, some statements of this kind have been discussed incidentally. If the apparent meaning of a statement proven to be revelation appears contrary to some historical or scientific fact, they never regard that statement as wrong or false. For example, the apparent meaning of a verse of the Noble Qur’an may seem to indicate that the earth is flat or that the sun revolves around the earth. In such a case, believers try to understand the correct meaning of these statements. They follow the same principle with regard to hadith.
Fourth, no essential contradiction occurs between a hadith proven sahih through examination and another sahih hadith or a Qur’anic verse. If an apparent contradiction appears, the muhaddithun have resolved it through documentary evidence in light of historical and circumstantial information. They have never rejected established information indiscriminately merely because of an apparent contradiction. We have previously seen that there are multiple sahih reports concerning from which place the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) began reciting the talbiyah for Hajj during the Farewell Pilgrimage, and these reports appear to contradict one another. To resolve this apparent contradiction, the muhaddithun considered historical and circumstantial information, which we discussed at the beginning of this book.
Thus, even after a hadith has been proven by documentary examination to be revelation, if it appears to contradict another hadith or verse, the muhaddithun investigated and recorded the history, causes, and resolution of that contradiction.
1.7.2.2. Proven False in the Primary Examination
If it is established concerning a statement that it is not a saying of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him), but that a narrator falsely attributed it to him either mistakenly or deliberately, then the wording or meaning of the statement is not considered. It is rejected without any further consideration. Most fabricated hadiths belong to this category. Fabricators generally tried to invent hadiths with meanings as beautiful as possible.
1.7.2.3. Found Weak in the Primary Examination
If it is established that a narrator was personally honest and truthful but made some mistakes in his transmission, then, according to the degree of his weakness, the hadith he narrated is classified as hasan or da‘if. Even when the identity of a narrator is unknown, the hadith is generally considered weak. Through linguistic and semantic examination, the muhaddithun have judged many hadiths in this category to be fabricated. Books on fabricated hadiths mention many such hadiths whose chains contain no one accused of lying, yet they have been called fabricated. The muhaddithun have also differed concerning some hadiths of this kind. Although some called them weak or hasan because of their apparent chains, others judged them fabricated because of their meanings. Here I mention two examples:
(1) A hadith has been narrated through Anas (may Allah be pleased with him) describing the ‘Arsh. Anas said, “I asked the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) about the Throne of the Glorious Lord. He said, ‘I asked Jibril about the Throne of the Glorious Lord.’ He said, ‘I asked Mika’il about the Throne of the Glorious Lord.’ He said, ‘I asked Israfil about the Throne of the Glorious Lord.’ He said, ‘I asked Rafi‘ about the Throne of the Glorious Lord.’ He said, ‘I asked the Preserved Tablet about the Throne of the Glorious Lord.’ He said, ‘I asked the Pen about the Throne of the Glorious Lord.’ He said, ‘The Throne has 360,000 pillars…’,” and so on.
The chain of this hadith contains a weak narrator named Muhammad ibn Nasar, who was not explicitly called a liar. Nevertheless, the muhaddithun agreed that the hadith is fabricated. Ibn Hajar said: “Its falsehood is obvious. Anyone versed in hadith literature would never disagree about this.” (Ibn ‘Iraq, Tanzih al-Shari‘ah, 1/211).
(2) The tabi‘i al-tabi‘i Fudayl ibn Marzuq (d. 160 AH) narrated from Ibrahim ibn Hasan, from Fatimah bint al-Husayn ibn ‘Ali (d. 100 AH), from Asma bint ‘Umays (may Allah be pleased with her), who said: “Revelation was descending upon the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him), and at that time his head was in the lap of ‘Ali (may Allah be pleased with him). For this reason, ‘Ali could not perform the ‘Asr prayer. The sun then set. He said to ‘Ali, ‘Have you prayed?’ He replied, ‘No.’ He then said, ‘O Allah, if ‘Ali has remained obedient to You and Your Messenger, return the sun for him.’ Asma said, ‘I saw the sun set, and then, after setting, rise again.’”
In this chain, Asma bint ‘Umays is a well-known female Companion. Fatimah bint al-Husayn is a trustworthy and reliable narrator. Fudayl ibn Marzuq was truthful, though he made mistakes. Ibrahim ibn Hasan was somewhat unknown. Little is known about him. However, since no one explicitly declared him unacceptable, Ibn Hibban considered him acceptable.
Thus, as far as the chain is concerned, we have seen that the hadith could be considered hasan. Some muhaddithun expressed this view based on the apparent chain. But Ibn Taymiyyah, Ibn Kathir, al-Dhahabi, and many other muhaddithun judged the matn, or main text, of the hadith to be fabricated.
The substance of their detailed discussion is that the rising of the sun after it had set would be an extraordinary event. Human nature is most interested in narrating unusual and miraculous events. Therefore, it would naturally be expected that it would be narrated by at least several Companions. Yet it was not narrated from any Companion other than Asma bint ‘Umays (may Allah be pleased with her). Such an event would be more astonishing than a solar eclipse. We see that eclipses have been narrated by many Companions, whereas this event is narrated through only this one chain.
Furthermore, Asma (may Allah be pleased with her) had more than twenty well-known students, male and female. It would be expected that most of her students would narrate such an extraordinary event. But that did not happen. It is narrated only through Fatimah’s chain. Ibrahim ibn Hasan, identified as Fatimah’s student, was largely unknown, and it is not known whether he actually heard it from Fatimah. The event is also narrated from Asma bint ‘Umays (may Allah be pleased with her) through another chain. That chain too contains two unknown narrators and one weak narrator. It is difficult to imagine that such a major event would be reported by no one except one or two unknown individuals.
Moreover, the event apparently conflicts with other accounts in the Qur’an and hadith. During the Battle of the Trench, the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him), ‘Ali (may Allah be pleased with him), and all the other Companions failed to perform the ‘Asr prayer. They performed it as a make-up prayer after sunset. On another day, the dawn prayer of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) and the Companions was missed in this way because of sleep. On these two days, the sun was not returned or made to stand still for the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him), ‘Ali, and the other Companions; so why would it be done only for ‘Ali in this incident? Moreover, when prayer time is missed because of a valid excuse, there is no problem. It also does not seem natural that ‘Ali would not pray in congregation with the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him), or that revelation would descend for an hour or an hour and a half from after ‘Asr until sunset, and so forth.
On the basis of these and other considerations, they said that this matn was erroneous or fabricated. Some of these unknown narrators made a mistake, deliberately or unintentionally. (Ibn ‘Iraq, Tanzih al-Shari‘ah, 1/378–382; al-Albani, Da‘ifah, 2/395–401.)
From the discussion above, we understand that the method of the muhaddithun in linguistic, semantic, and intellectual examination is extremely logical and precise. In any court, a judge considers intellectual and circumstantial evidence after documentary evidence. Even if he clearly sees a criminal’s motive and rationale in the case of an accused person, he does not punish him solely on the basis of motive when supporting evidence is absent. Conversely, if he senses that the accused had no rational or conscientious reason to commit the crime, but all documents and testimonial evidence clearly indicate that he is guilty, he is compelled to acknowledge him as guilty. The muhaddithun likewise first examined the documentary evidence and then considered language, meaning, and information. In the second part, we will see some principles of linguistic and semantic examination, God willing.
1.7.3. Differences of Opinion in Identifying Fabricated Hadiths
Occasionally, differences of opinion have arisen among the muhaddithun in identifying fabricated hadiths. These differences are limited and entirely natural. We have seen that verifying the accuracy of a hadith is exactly like establishing the reliability of testimonial evidence presented in court. We find judges differing in various cases. This does not mean that judicial work is uncontrolled and that judges execute people at will or give one person another’s property. The actual matter is that judges may sometimes differ in evaluating testimonial evidence. In examining the accuracy of hadith, we find that the muhaddithun agreed concerning most hadiths. They differed concerning a small number of hadiths. We can divide these differences into two categories: 1. terminological differences and 2. actual differences.
1.7.3.1. A Difference That Is Not Really a Difference
The differences among the muhaddithun are often purely terminological. We saw above that the muhaddithun used the same terminology in identifying lying or fabricating narrators and in identifying fabricated hadiths. Thus, sometimes one muhaddith calls a hadith munkar or batil, while another calls it mawdu‘.
One such terminological issue concerns the use of the word da‘if. In the terminology of the science of hadith, all types of unacceptable hadiths are called da‘if. One type among the various types of da‘if hadith is fabricated or mawdu‘ hadith. Calling a hadith da‘if means that it is weak and unacceptable; it may or may not be fabricated.
We find that many muhaddithun, when compiling and examining hadiths—especially in large works—have described many hadiths as weak or da‘if. Other muhaddithun have called some of these weak hadiths mawdu‘ or fabricated. Although this appears to be a difference of opinion, it is not an actual difference. If one muhaddith says that a hadith is da‘if but not mawdu‘, while another says that it is mawdu‘, then this is a genuine difference. But when a muhaddith generally does not use the term mawdu‘ and simply describes every unreliable hadith as weak, the matter is not considered a difference of opinion in his case.
1.7.3.2. Actual Differences of Opinion
Actual differences of opinion can be found among the muhaddithun concerning some hadiths. In most such cases, their disagreement is “da‘if versus mawdu‘.” One muhaddith says that the hadith is not mawdu‘ but should be considered da‘if, while some others judge it mawdu‘. In a small number of hadiths, there is a disagreement of “sahih versus mawdu‘”: some muhaddithun judge a hadith mawdu‘, while another judges it sahih. Regarding such disagreements, later muhaddithun, through various examinations, gave preference to one of the views. The matter resembles disagreement over a judicial verdict and an appeal.
1.7.3.3. Causes of Differences of Opinion:
These differences arise for several reasons.
1.7.3.3.1. Variation in the Chains
Sometimes one muhaddith identifies a hadith as fabricated on the basis of one or more chains. He did not know that the hadith had been narrated through another chain. Another muhaddith, on the other hand, considers the hadith acceptable because of one or more other chains.
1.7.3.3.2. Differences in Assessing the Status of a Narrator
Comparative examination of the hadiths narrated by a narrator is the principal standard for determining the authenticity of hadith. For this reason, differences sometimes arise in assessing a narrator’s reports. From this perspective, we can divide narrators into three categories: (1) fully acceptable narrators, whose acceptability all muhaddithun agree upon; (2) completely unreliable narrators, regarding whose weakness or fabrication the examining muhaddithun agree; and (3) disputed narrators, concerning whose level of acceptability the muhaddithun disagree.
Sometimes the muhaddithun differed regarding narrators who transmitted some hadiths and whose reports, through comparative examination, were found to contain a number of confused and erroneous narrations as well as some authentic ones. They occasionally differed in determining the proportion of sound and erroneous reports among their narrations, the reasons for them, and whether the falsehood was deliberate or the error unintentional.
Moreover, sometimes a muhaddith gave a judgment based on partial information, which another muhaddith rejected after relying on comprehensive information. For example, after seeing that some of a narrator’s hadiths were authentic or erroneous, one muhaddith might describe him as acceptable or unacceptable. Another muhaddith might reach a different ruling after comparatively examining all the hadiths he transmitted.
It should be noted here that, regarding such differences, later muhaddithun reviewed the matter and formulated principles for deciding disputes on the basis of the balance, discernment, depth, and other qualities of the various opinions expressed by the scholars. (al-‘Iraqi, Fath al-Mughith, pp. 151–170.)
1.7.3.3.3. Methodological or Principled Differences among the Muhaddithun
Sometimes methodological differences appear among the muhaddithun when issuing a ruling about a narrator or hadith. Some were more lenient, while others were stricter. Later muhaddithun resolved these differences after adequate examination and review. For example, the fourth-century muhaddith Ibn Hibban, Abu Hatim Muhammad al-Busti (d. 354 AH), and the sixth-century muhaddith Ibn al-Jawzi, Abu al-Faraj ‘Abd al-Rahman ibn ‘Ali (d. 597 AH), were accused of unfounded strictness. In contrast, the famous third-century muhaddith Imam al-Tirmidhi, Muhammad ibn ‘Isa (d. 279 AH), the fourth–fifth-century muhaddith Muhammad ibn ‘Abdullah al-Hakim al-Naysaburi (d. 405 AH), and the tenth-century muhaddith Jalal al-Din al-Suyuti (d. 911 AH), among others, were known for leniency. Here I mention several examples.
(1) An example of the excessive strictness of Ibn Hibban and Ibn al-Jawzi. The second-century narrator Aflah ibn Sa‘id al-Ansari (d. 156 AH) said: “The freedman of Umm Salamah, ‘Abdullah ibn Rafi‘, told us: I heard Abu Hurayrah (may Allah be pleased with him) say that the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) said: ‘If your life is prolonged, you will very likely see people who have in their hands something like the tails of cattle (sticks or canes). They will remain in Allah’s anger in the morning and in Allah’s anger in the evening.’”
Ibn Hibban and Ibn al-Jawzi judged this hadith invented and fabricated. They claimed that its narrator, Aflah ibn Sa‘id, used to transmit confused hadiths and narrate fabricated hadiths. Later muhaddithun, in light of the views of earlier muhaddithun, found that the opinion of Ibn Hibban and Ibn al-Jawzi was completely wrong. No muhaddith ever said that Aflah narrated fabricated hadiths. Indeed, no one said that Aflah was weak or unreliable. Muhammad ibn Sa‘d (d. 230 AH), Yahya ibn Ma‘in (d. 233 AH), Abu Hatim al-Razi (d. 277 AH), al-Nasa’i (d. 304 AH), and other muhaddithun, after detailed examination, described him as reliable or acceptable. Furthermore, Ibn Hibban and Ibn al-Jawzi could provide no evidence that Aflah narrated any confused report contrary to the reports of other narrators. Above all, this hadith was also narrated through the reliable narrator Abu Hurayrah, apart from Aflah. Therefore, the hadith is unquestionably sahih, and Ibn Hibban and Ibn al-Jawzi were proven mistaken. (Muslim, al-Sahih, 3/1680.)
(2) An example of the error resulting from Imam al-Tirmidhi’s leniency. He said: “Muslim ibn ‘Amr Abu ‘Amr al-Hadhdha’ al-Madani told us: ‘Abdullah ibn Nafi‘ al-Sa’igh told us, from Kathir ibn ‘Abdullah, from his father, from his grandfather (‘Amr ibn ‘Awf), who said: ‘The Noble Prophet pronounced seven takbirs before Qur’an recitation in the first rak‘ah and five takbirs before Qur’an recitation in the second rak‘ah during the two Eid prayers.’” (al-Tirmidhi, al-Sunan, 2/416.)
After mentioning the hadith, Imam al-Tirmidhi said: “The hadith of Kathir’s grandfather is hasan. Of all the hadiths narrated on this subject, this is the most acceptable.” (al-Tirmidhi, al-Sunan, 2/416.)
Thus, he called this hadith acceptable. Not only that, in his view it was the most acceptable hadith on this subject.
The muhaddithun opposed Imam al-Tirmidhi’s strong opinion because they considered the narrator of this hadith, Kathir ibn ‘Abdullah, extremely weak. Moreover, many described him as someone who deliberately narrated false hadiths. Imam Ibn Hanbal said: “He is extremely weak and entirely unacceptable.” Yahya ibn Ma‘in said: “He is weak.” Imam Abu Dawud said: “The man was a vile liar.” Imam al-Shafi‘i said: “He is one of the greatest liars.” Imam al-Nasa’i and al-Daraqutni said: “He is abandoned”—that is, accused of narrating false hadiths. Ibn Hibban said: “He narrated a booklet of false hadiths from his father, from his grandfather. It is not permissible to mention all those hadiths in any book except for the purpose of criticism.” Ibn ‘Abd al-Barr said: “There is consensus that this man is weak.” (Ibn Hajar, Tahdhib al-Tahdhib, 8/377.)
For this reason, Abu al-Khattab ‘Umar ibn Hasan ibn Dahiyyah (d. 633 AH) said: “There is no limit to how many mawdu‘, invented, and extremely weak chains Imam al-Tirmidhi called hasan or acceptable in his book. This hadith is one of them.” [al-Zayla‘i, ‘Abdullah ibn Yusuf (d. 762 AH)].
(3) An example from Imam al-Hakim’s al-Mustadrak. Hakim’s weakness was greatest in declaring hadiths sahih. In his work al-Mustadrak, he declared many fabricated hadiths sahih. Consider one example:
Hakim said: “While I was in Kufa, Abu al-Hasan ‘Ali ibn Muhammad ibn ‘Uqbah al-Shaybani told us: Qadi Ibrahim ibn Abi al-‘Anbas told us: Sa‘id ibn ‘Uthman al-Kharrāz told us: ‘Abd al-Rahman ibn Sa‘id al-Mu’adhdhin told us: Qatār ibn Khalifah told us, from Abu al-Tufayl, from ‘Ali and ‘Ammar (may Allah be pleased with them), who both said: ‘The Prophet recited the basmalah aloud in the obligatory prayers and recited qunut in the Fajr prayer…’”
After mentioning the hadith, Imam al-Hakim said: “The chain of this hadith is sahih. I know of no narrator among them who has been considered weak.” (al-Hakim, al-Mustadrak, 1/439.)
The muhaddithun Imam al-Dhahabi, al-Zayla‘i, Ibn Hajar, and others identified Hakim’s judgment as mistaken. Imam al-Dhahabi said: “This hadith is extremely weak; it appears to be mawdu‘ or fabricated. Two narrators in the chain are extremely weak: (1) Sa‘id ibn ‘Uthman al-Kharrāz and (2) his teacher, ‘Abd al-Rahman ibn Sa‘id al-Mu’adhdhin.” (al-Hakim, al-Mustadrak, 1/439.)
We will see more examples of this kind in the second part, God willing.
(4) Imam Jalal al-Din al-Suyuti, the most renowned muhaddith of the tenth Hijri century. He rendered service in various fields of the science of hadith. Later muhaddithun relied on his books in various ways. In the introductions to the works he authored and compiled—al-Jami‘ al-Saghir, al-Jami‘ al-Kabir, and al-Khasa’is al-Kubra—he stated that he would mention sahih and da‘if hadiths in these works, but no fabricated hadiths. However, later muhaddithun found some fabricated hadiths in these books. In particular, Imam al-Suyuti himself wrote many books on fabricated hadiths. He identified a number of hadiths as fabricated and compiled them in books on fabricated hadiths. Yet he himself also compiled them in al-Jami‘ al-Saghir, al-Jami‘ al-Kabir, and al-Khasa’is al-Kubra.
Consider one example. The famous fifth-century muhaddith Hamzah ibn Yusuf al-Jurjani (d. 427 AH) and Ahmad ibn ‘Ali al-Khatib al-Baghdadi (d. 463 AH) compiled a hadith. In their chain, they narrated it from Ishaq ibn al-Salt, a hadith narrator of the third Hijri century. This Ishaq ibn al-Salt said: “Imam Malik ibn Anas told us: Abu al-Zubayr al-Makki told us: Jabir ibn ‘Abdullah (may Allah be pleased with him) told us: ‘I saw three such extraordinary things from the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) that even if he had not brought the Qur’an, I would have believed in him. Once we went to a distant desert. The Prophet (peace be upon him) took water for istinja’. Seeing two date palms, he said to me, “O Jabir, go to the two trees and tell them to come together.” The two trees came together so completely that they seemed to have grown from a single root. Then the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) completed his istinja’. I quickly brought him water. I said to myself, “Perhaps Allah will show me what comes out of his stomach, and I will eat it.” But I saw that the ground was clean and white. I said, “O Messenger of Allah, did you not perform istinja’?” He said, “Yes, but the earth has been commanded concerning our prophets to conceal whatever excrement and urine comes out from us…”’”
Imam Malik was one of the most renowned muhaddithun of the second Hijri century. Countless muhaddithun learned hadith from him. In fact, all the muhaddithun of that time learned from him. Many stayed in his company for years learning hadith. Yet none of these countless students narrated this hadith. Similarly, it was not narrated through any other chain from the tabi‘i Abu al-Zubayr or the Companion Jabir (may Allah be pleased with him). Only this man named Ishaq ibn al-Salt claimed that Imam Malik had narrated the hadith to him. This man was identified as an extremely weak narrator who transmitted false hadiths. It is also noteworthy that Ishaq’s narration did not gain any fame or recognition in the third or fourth century. No one narrated the hadith in the fifth century. The chain from al-Jurjani and al-Khatib back to Ishaq is also obscure. Therefore, in light of the opinions of the muhaddithun al-Khatib al-Baghdadi, Hamzah ibn Yusuf al-Jurjani, al-Dhahabi, Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani, and others, Imam al-Suyuti himself judged the hadith fabricated and mentioned it in his book on fabrications, Dhayl al-La’ali.
Yet he himself mentioned this hadith in al-Khasa’is al-Kubra, his book on the miracles, supernatural qualities, and distinctive virtues of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him). Although he claimed that he would not mention any mawdu‘ or fabricated hadith in that book, later muhaddithun pointed out this contradiction and his leniency in determining the authenticity of hadith. (Hamzah ibn Yusuf al-Jurjani, Tarikh Jurjan, p. 526; al-Suyuti, Dhayl al-La’ali, p. 50).

1.8. Some Confusions Concerning False Hadiths

1.8.1. Hadith Collections versus Fabricated Hadiths
Many people, out of ignorance, think that if a hadith has been compiled in a hadith collection, this means that the hadith is sahih, or at least that it is sahih according to the compiler of that collection. For example, if a hadith is compiled in the Sunan of Ibn Majah or the Musannaf of Abd al-Razzaq, they assume that it must certainly be sahih; otherwise, why would such eminent muhaddiths as Ibn Majah or Abd al-Razzaq have accepted it? At the very least, they think, the hadith must be sahih according to Ibn Majah or Abd al-Razzaq, for otherwise he would not have included it in his collection.

We have discussed previously that both aspects of this assumption are baseless. Most muhaddiths compiled every type of hadith—sahih, da‘if, and mawdu‘—in their collections. They never claimed, nor did they intend, to compile only sahih hadiths in their books. Therefore, the fact that a hadith is compiled in the Sunan of Ibn Majah or the Musannaf of Abd al-Razzaq does not at all indicate that it is sahih or that it is sahih according to Ibn Majah or Abd al-Razzaq.

If a hadith is found in the collections of Ibn Hibban, Ibn Khuzaymah, Ibn al-Sakan, al-Hakim, or other muhaddiths who attempted to compile only sahih hadiths, we may assume that the hadith was considered sahih by that particular muhaddith. However, this does not prove that the hadith is actually sahih. We have seen in the preceding discussion that the Ummah’s other muhaddiths did not accept any muhaddith’s claim without examination. Therefore, we shall state the ruling on a hadith in light of the examination of the other muhaddiths.

In our society, six famous collections are widely known as the ‘Sihah Sittah.’ The term Sihah Sittah is an Indian usage. The acceptability of these six books is well known, but the books are not all ‘sahih’; rather, two are sahih and the others are Sunan. Therefore, the well-known term among the muhaddiths is al-Kutub al-Sittah, ‘the six books.’ The term Sihah Sittah is not used anywhere outside the Indian subcontinent. Of the six famous books, apart from the two sahih collections, Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim, the compilers of the remaining four never decided that they would narrate only sahih hadiths. Alongside sahih hadiths, they also compiled many weak and fabricated hadiths in their books. However, because most of the hadiths in their collections are reliable, later muhaddiths generally relied on their books, while also giving specific rulings concerning the weak and fabricated hadiths contained in them. Allamah Abd al-Hayy Lakhnawi (1304 AH) wrote in answer to a question: ‘Not every hadith compiled in these four books is sahih. Rather, these books contain every kind of hadith: sahih, hasan, da‘if, and fabricated.’ (Al-Ajwibat al-Fadilah lil-As’ilat al-‘Asharat al-Kamilah, p. 66.)

We previously examined Shah Waliullah’s account on this subject. We saw that he placed the Sunan of Abu Dawud, the Sunan of al-Nasa’i, and the Sunan of al-Tirmidhi in the third category: books whose hadiths are generally acceptable, though they also contain some unreliable hadiths. However, he did not mention the Sunan of Ibn Majah in this category. The reason is that most muhaddiths did not include the Sunan compiled by Imam Muhammad ibn Yazid Ibn Majah al-Qazwini (275 AH) among the renowned and accepted books. Until the seventh century AH, muhaddiths regarded these three Sunan collections, in addition to Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim, as generally reliable and as foundational texts for the study and teaching of hadith. The fifth- and sixth-century AH muhaddiths Muhammad ibn Tahir al-Maqdisi and Abu al-Fadl Ibn al-Qaysarani (507 AH) added the Sunan of Ibn Majah to them.

Muhaddiths did not accept his view for the following two centuries. The renowned seventh-century muhaddiths Allamah Ibn al-Salah Abu ‘Amr ‘Uthman ibn Abd al-Rahman (643 AH), Allamah Abu Zakariyya Yahya ibn Sharaf al-Nawawi (676 AH), and others mentioned the above five books as the primary sources of hadith. They did not count the Sunan of Ibn Majah among them. Many later critical scholars followed them. On the other hand, Imam Ibn al-Athir Mubarak ibn Muhammad (606 AH) and some other muhaddiths accepted Imam Malik’s Muwatta as the sixth book.

The reason for objecting to placing the Sunan of Ibn Majah alongside the three Sunan collections mentioned above is that Imam Ibn Majah’s method of compilation was not like theirs. The compilers of those three books wrote them with the aim of compiling generally acceptable hadiths. Although they accepted some weak hadiths when required by the subject matter, in most cases they mentioned their weakness. Imam Ibn Majah, on the other hand, followed the general method of compilation of his time. We have seen that most compilers of those eras compiled all circulating hadiths along with their chains. Thus, sahih, da‘if, and mawdu‘ hadiths of every kind found a place in their books. The reliability of a hadith could not be assessed without examining its chain. Imam Ibn Majah basically followed this method. He did not restrict himself to compiling sahih hadiths, nor merely to compiling hadiths. Alongside sahih and hasan hadiths, he compiled many da‘if and some mawdu‘, or fabricated, hadiths. He made no comment concerning these weak and fabricated hadiths.

From the eighth century AH onward, most muhaddiths began to regard the Sunan of Ibn Majah as the fourth Sunan collection. The difference between the Muwatta and the Sunan of Ibn Majah is that the Muwatta contains fewer hadiths, and all the sahih hadiths in it are also compiled in the five books mentioned above. Thus, studying it separately does not provide knowledge of additional hadiths. The Sunan of Ibn Majah, by contrast, contains more than a thousand hadiths in addition to those in the five books above. This is why later muhaddiths accepted it as the fourth Sunan.

A total of 4,341 hadiths were compiled in Imam Ibn Majah’s Sunan. About three thousand of them are also compiled in the five books mentioned above, while roughly fifteen hundred are additional. The ninth-century AH muhaddith Allamah Ahmad ibn Abi Bakr al-Busiri (840 AH) discussed the chains of these additional hadiths of Ibn Majah. Allamah al-Busiri examined the chains of 1,476 hadiths that were not compiled in the five books above and were compiled only by Ibn Majah. Approximately two-thirds of these are sahih or hasan hadiths, and approximately one-third are da‘if. The muhaddiths identified nearly fifty of them as mawdu‘ or fabricated. (Ibn al-Qaysarani, Shurut al-A’immah al-Sittah, pp. 13, 24–26.)

1.8.2. Scholars’ Books versus Fabricated Hadiths
Hadiths are cited not only in hadith collections but also in various other Islamic books. Many more hadiths are cited in books on tafsir, fiqh, preaching, ethics, virtues, tasawwuf, philosophy, language, history, and other subjects. Usually, hadiths are cited in these books without chains of transmission. Many people, out of ignorance, assume that the authors of such books must have cited the hadiths only after verifying them. Would he have written the hadith if it were not sahih?

This assumption is also mistaken, baseless, and even more misleading than the preceding one. Generally, every field of knowledge has its own domain. Therefore, in most cases, a scholar of one subject cannot devote sufficient time to another subject. Mufassirs, jurists, historians, Sufis, preachers, and scholars and elders working in other fields naturally cannot delve deeply into the examination, verification, and analysis of hadith. In general, when citing hadith, they rely on various established books, popular reports, and common usage. Consequently, many baseless, chainless, and fabricated statements are found in their books.

Allamah Nawawi, in his book Taqrib, and Allamah al-Suyuti, in his book Tadrib al-Rawi, have mentioned that some pious dervishes circulated many false statements in society as hadiths concerning the virtues of various surahs of the Noble Qur’an. Some mufassirs, such as Allamah Ahmad ibn Muhammad ibn Ibrahim al-Tha‘labi al-Nishapuri (427 AH) in his tafsir, his student Allamah Ali ibn Ahmad al-Wahidi al-Nishapuri (468 AH) in his tafsir books al-Basit, al-Wasit, and al-Wajiz, Allamah Abu al-Qasim Mahmud ibn Umar al-Zamakhshari (538 AH) in his Kashshaf, and Allamah Abdullah ibn Umar al-Baydawi (685 AH) in his Anwar al-Tanzil, also known as Tafsir al-Baydawi, cited these fabricated hadiths. They erred in doing so. Al-Suyuti says: ‘Al-Iraqi (806 AH) said that the first two—al-Tha‘labi and al-Wahidi—cited these fabricated or forged hadiths with their chains.’ Their excuse may therefore be accepted to some extent, because by giving the chains they directed readers toward examining them. Nevertheless, even when citing a mawdu‘ or false hadith with its chain, it is not permissible to remain silent without immediately identifying it as mawdu‘. But the error of the latter two—al-Zamakhshari and al-Baydawi—is extremely serious, because they did not mention the chains; rather, they directly and explicitly cited these fabricated hadiths as sayings of the Messenger of Allah. (Jalal al-Din al-Suyuti, Tadrib al-Rawi, 1/341.)

Mulla Ali al-Qari wrote, while mentioning some fabricated hadiths: ‘Do not be deceived merely because you find the hadith mentioned in books such as Qut al-Qulub, Ihya’ Ulum al-Din, and Tafsir al-Tha‘labi.’ (Mulla Ali al-Qari, al-Asrar al-Marfu‘ah, p. 289.)

Allamah Abd al-Hayy Lakhnawi, after listing the names and levels of the reliable books of the Hanafi school, said: ‘The hierarchy of reliability that we have mentioned for the books of fiqh applies only to matters of fiqh. This hierarchy is not applicable at all when judging the authenticity or reliability of the hadiths cited in these books. There are many reliable books of fiqh on which great jurists relied, yet they are filled with fabricated and false hadiths, especially books dealing with fatwas. After detailed examination, it has become clear to us that although the authors of these books were complete scholars, they were careless when citing hadith.’ (Abd al-Hayy Lakhnawi, al-Nafi‘ al-Kabir, pp. 12–13.)

For this reason, the muhaddiths carefully examined the hadiths cited in books on fiqh, tafsir, tasawwuf, ethics, and other subjects and composed separate works concerning them. For example, the renowned sixth-century AH Hanafi jurist Allamah Burhan al-Din Abu al-Hasan Ali ibn Abi Bakr al-Marghinani (593 AH) cited many hadiths in his famous book of fiqh, Hidayah. As a jurist, he devoted his attention and every effort to determining and explaining legal issues. When citing hadith, he wrote whatever he had heard or read without discrimination. He did not undertake to comment on whether any hadith was sahih or da‘if. In later generations, muhaddiths such as Allamah Jamal al-Din Abu Muhammad Abdullah ibn Yusuf al-Zayla‘i al-Hanafi (762 AH) and Allamah Ahmad ibn Ali Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani (852 AH) conducted chain-based research on these hadiths and identified among them the sahih, weak, and fabricated reports.

Similarly, Hujjat al-Islam Imam al-Ghazali (505 AH) cited many hadiths at various points in his famous book Ihya’ Ulum al-Din while discussing fiqh and tasawwuf. He was a philosopher and jurist, not a muhaddith. Therefore, without examining the chains, he cited everything he had heard or read. In later generations, Allamah Zayn al-Din Abu al-Fadl Abd al-Rahim ibn al-Husayn al-Iraqi (806 AH) and other renowned muhaddiths critically examined the chains of the hadiths he cited and identified the sahih, fabricated, and false reports among them. In addition, the famous eighth-century AH Shafi‘i jurist and muhaddith Allamah Wahb ibn Ali al-Subki (771 AH) compiled in a separate book several hundred fabricated and baseless hadiths cited in Ihya’ Ulum al-Din. The book is entitled al-Ahadith al-Lati la Asla Laha fi Kitab al-Ihya, meaning ‘The Hadiths Having No Basis in the Book Ihya’ Ulum al-Din.’

1.8.3. Kashf and Inspiration versus Fabricated Hadiths
The greatest problem concerns renowned elders and scholars famous as beloved saints of Allah. Since they were awliya who possessed kashf, people assume that they would not have written anything without verifying the accuracy of information received through kashf. Thus, whatever they wrote or said must be regarded as authentic.

Allamah al-Suyuti (911 AH), Abd al-Hayy Lakhnawi (1304 AH), and other scholars have discussed these matters in detail. While discussing many mawdu‘ or fabricated hadiths cited in Imam al-Ghazali’s Ihya’ Ulum al-Din and other books, and in some books attributed to Hazrat Abd al-Qadir al-Jilani, they say that someone might ask: Such a great scholar and such a great wali possessing kashf—did he not realize that this hadith was fabricated? How could a wali like him cite a mawdu‘ hadith in his own book? Does his citing it not indicate that the hadith is sahih? In response to this doubt, they have offered the following explanations:

1.8.3.1. The Elders Wrote What They Heard
In reality, simple-hearted elders wrote whatever they heard. Therefore, the mention of a hadith in an elder’s book, without his explicit comment, does not mean that he was certain the hadith was sahih. In fact, they merely cited what they had read or heard. They hoped that perhaps it had a chain and that hadith experts would discover it.

1.8.3.2. Kashf Has No Role in Judging Hadith
Kashf has no contribution whatsoever to the assessment of hadith. Kashf, dreams, and similar things are merely blessings granted by Allah and sources of joy and gratitude; they are not matters to be applied at will. Through kashf, Allah showed Umar the condition of the Syrian army hundreds of miles away, yet Umar did not perceive Abu Lu’lu’ah standing behind him to assassinate him.

Moreover, truth and falsehood, or right and wrong, can never be decided through kashf, dreams, or similar means. Various disagreements and problems arose among the Companions, but on no occasion did they attempt to determine truth or falsehood through kashf, inspiration, dreams, or anything similar. Many Companions narrated hadiths before the Rightly Guided Caliphs—Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman, and Ali, may Allah be pleased with them. When they suspected a narrator of error, they asked for a witness or made the narrator swear an oath. Sometimes, when they became more doubtful about a narrator’s error, they did not accept the hadith he narrated. But they never judged the authenticity of a hadith through kashf. For nearly half a century afterward, the Companions narrated and heard hadiths and established the practice of citing chains in order to distinguish sahih, weak, and fabricated hadiths. They accepted hadiths according to the condition of the narrators or rejected them as weak. Yet they never relied on kashf.

Relying on chains to determine the authenticity of hadith is the Sunnah of the Rightly Guided Caliphs and the Sunnah of the Companions. Relying on kashf, inspiration, or dreams in this matter is contrary to the Sunnah, an innovation, and a destructive tendency.

1.8.3.3. Kashf and Inspiration Are Not Means of Knowing Correctness
It is clearly stated in books of Islamic creed that kashf or inspiration is not a criterion for knowing the correctness of anything. Umar ibn Muhammad al-Nasafi (537 AH), one of the eminent Hanafi scholars of the sixth century, wrote in his al-Aqa’id al-Nasafiyyah, and the renowned Shafi‘i scholar Sa‘d al-Din Mas‘ud ibn Umar al-Taftazani (791 AH) wrote in his Sharh al-Aqa’id al-Nasafiyyah: ‘According to the people of truth, ilham, known as an implantation granted in the form of spiritual effusion, cannot be a means of knowing the correctness of anything.’ (Mujaddid Alf Thani, Maktubat Sharif, 1/1, pp. 88, 178, 195, 196…..)

Although some inexperienced elders claim to verify the authenticity of ‘hadith’ on the basis of dreams, kashf, inspiration, and similar things, experienced and learned elders have strongly opposed this. Mujaddid Alf Thani (may Allah have mercy on him), one of India’s greatest elders and reformers, strongly objected to and protested against relying on kashf, inspiration, and similar things to know truth and falsehood or authenticity and inauthenticity. He repeatedly stated that the Qur’an and hadith are the standards for determining whether kashf, inspiration, and similar things are correct or incorrect. Kashf can never be a means of knowing the correctness of a hadith or any opinion.

1.8.3.4. Errors of Saints Possessing Kashf
In reality, we can see that many renowned ascetics whom we know as possessors of kashf have written in their various books many statements that are unquestionably erroneous or unjust. Hazrat Abd al-Qadir al-Jilani (561 AH) wrote that faith increases and decreases. He regarded acknowledging the increase and decrease of faith as a sign of Ahl al-Sunnah wa al-Jama‘ah and the Saved Sect, and regarded denying the increase and decrease of faith as a sign of the people of falsehood. He wrote that a Muslim should not say, ‘Indeed, I am a believer,’ but should say, ‘If Allah wills, I am a believer.’ Since Imam Abu Hanifah (may Allah have mercy on him) and his followers did not acknowledge that faith increases and decreases, did not regard deeds as part of faith, and considered saying ‘If Allah wills, I am a believer’ objectionable, he described him and his followers as a false and hell-bound sect. [Abd al-Qadir al-Jilani, Ghunyat al-Talibin (translated by Nurul Alam Raisi), pp. 6, 7, 149, 151, 152, 155, 211, 227.]

Imam al-Ghazali wrote that music, dancing, and whirling, and similar practices assist in attaining closeness to Allah and constitute a good innovation. He cited many weak and fabricated hadiths in support of music. (Abu Hamid al-Ghazali, Ihya’ Ulum al-Din, 2/292–332.)

Countless examples of this kind are found in their books. Therefore, even if they declare a hadith sahih, it cannot be accepted without examining its chain. Preserving the authenticity of the hadiths of the Messenger of Allah and identifying every fabricated statement is one of the obligatory duties of religion. Even someone who narrates a doubtful hadith in the name of the Messenger of Allah will have to face severe punishment. Therefore, there is no room for leniency in this matter.

1.8.4. Fabrications Attributed to the Elders
Here we should remember another matter: just as fabrications have been made in the name of hadith, many fabrications have also been made in the names of pious elders and saints of Allah. Several points deserve attention:

(1) Fabricators fabricated either to harm religion or to ‘benefit’ religion. In particular, the fabrications of those who wished to remove the alleged deficiencies of religion and make it more attractive and popular were the most harmful. For both groups, especially the second, fabricating in the names of the saints of Allah was easier and more convenient than fabricating in the name of the Messenger of Allah.

(2) Fabrication in the names of elders was more convenient because, among ordinary people, their names have greater influence than ‘hadith.’ It is difficult to convince many ordinary Muslims by saying that something is a ‘hadith.’ If told that the Messenger of Allah did a certain thing or instructed people to do it, they may or may not accept it. But if they are told that Abd al-Qadir al-Jilani, Khwaja Muin al-Din Chishti, or some other saint did or instructed that thing, they can be convinced much more easily and will accept it very quickly. This was the condition of ordinary Muslims throughout the ages after the golden centuries of Islam’s early period. Thus, fabricating in the names of elders was more effective.

(3) Fabricating in the names of the saints of Allah was easier because, unlike the vigilant protection and scrutiny maintained by the dedicated muhaddiths of the Muslim Ummah concerning hadith, there was or is nothing comparable in this field. There was no examination, testing, chain, text, or historical or semantic scrutiny—anyone could say whatever he wished. Thus, fabricators could easily achieve their objectives.

(4) Using the names of these elders was also extremely effective for fabricating hadith. They inserted many fabricated hadiths among the invented statements attributed to these elders. Because of the intense devotion shown to these elders, Muslims readily and reverently swallowed these poisons. In this way, the fabricators achieved two objectives with one stone.

1.8.4.1. The Qadiriyyah Order
Abd al-Qadir al-Jilani (may Allah have mercy on him) was the most renowned figure of the sixth century AH, the twelfth century CE. On one hand, he was a great jurist of the Hanbali school; on the other, he was a renowned ascetic and Sufi. Numerous spiritual orders, sayings, and books are circulated in the Muslim world in his name. Most of these orders, sayings, and books are fabricated. Although some books were written by him, many fabricated statements were inserted into them later. Here we shall examine the Qadiriyyah order and the booklet Sirr al-Asrar, both circulated in his name.

The practices, litanies, spiritual exercises, and other methods of the currently established Qadiriyyah order cannot be found in the books of Abd al-Qadir al-Jilani. Historians state that approximately two hundred years after Abd al-Qadir al-Jilani’s death, one of his descendants, ‘Ghawth of Jilan,’ introduced the Qadiriyyah order in 887 AH (1482 CE). Different practices are followed in different countries under the name of the Qadiriyyah order. The practices and litanies written in the established books authored by Abd al-Qadir al-Jilani himself are absent from the currently established Qadiriyyah order.

From the chain, or shajrah, of the Qadiriyyah order practiced in our country, we see that it was received through Shah Waliullah al-Muhaddith al-Dehlawi (1176 AH/1762 CE). Yet the description of the Qadiriyyah order given by Shah Waliullah in his book al-Qawl al-Jamil differs from the description in Sayyid Ahmad Barelvi’s Sirat al-Mustaqim (1246 AH). Again, many differences are found between the methods taught by these two men and the litanies and spiritual exercises of the Qadiriyyah order currently practiced in our country. There is no way to know which of these were introduced by him and which were introduced later in his name.

1.8.4.2. Sirr al-Asrar
A famous book circulated in the name of Hazrat Abd al-Qadir al-Jilani (may Allah have mercy on him) is Sirr al-Asrar. The book contains many good teachings in the light of the Qur’an and hadith. At the same time, it contains many fabricated hadiths and invented statements. It appears that someone in a later period wrote this book and attributed it to him. Several matters prove this fabrication:

1. In various places, the author quotes sayings and poems of Farid al-Din Attar. For example, in one place he says: ‘Hazrat Shaykh Farid al-Din Attar (may Allah have mercy on him) said…..’ (Abd al-Qadir al-Jilani, Sirr al-Asrar, p. 27.) It should be noted that Farid al-Din Attar was born in 512 AH and died in 626 AH, whereas Abd al-Qadir al-Jilani was born and died in 471 AH and 561 AH respectively. Farid al-Din Attar was forty years younger than him, and at the time of Abd al-Qadir al-Jilani’s death, Farid al-Din Attar was not particularly famous. Thus, it is inconceivable that he would quote Attar by saying ‘Hazrat Shaykh…..’ and similar words.

2. This book quotes Shams Tabrizi. The author says: ‘Hazrat Shams Tabrizi (may Allah have mercy on him) said…………..’ (Abd al-Qadir al-Jilani, Sirr al-Asrar, p. 27.) It should be noted that Shams Tabrizi died in 644 AH. His date of birth is not known with certainty, but it appears that he was born after 560 AH. In other words, at the time of Abd al-Qadir al-Jilani’s death, Shams Tabrizi had not even been born. Yet the author quotes his words.

3. This book repeatedly quotes Jalal al-Din Rumi. For example, the author says: ‘Mawlana Jalal al-Din Rumi, the sovereign of the spiritual world, said in his immortal poem, the Masnavi………..’ (Abd al-Qadir al-Jilani, Sirr al-Asrar, pp. 25, 29.) It should be noted that Jalal al-Din Rumi (604–676 AH) was born nearly half a century after Abd al-Qadir al-Jilani’s death! His Masnavi is being quoted half a century before Rumi was born!

Thus, we understand that this book is either entirely fabricated or that many fabricated statements were inserted into it later. Countless fabricated hadiths and atrocious falsehoods are written in this book. Attributing them to Abd al-Qadir al-Jilani enabled them to gain acceptance in the marketplace very easily.

1.8.4.3. The Chishtiyyah Order
Among the most renowned elders of our country are Hazrat Khwaja Muin al-Din Chishti (633 AH), Qutb al-Din Bakhtiyar Kaki (653 AH), Farid al-Din Mas‘ud Ganj-i Shakar (663 AH), and Nizam al-Din Awliya (725 AH), may Allah have mercy on them. The Chishtiyyah order is associated with their names. Many sayings, actions, and books are also circulated in their names. Among them are many statements that are clearly false and fabricated. Here we shall discuss the Chishtiyyah order and one or two books circulated in their names.

There are many differences among the practices and litanies of the Chishtiyyah order at various spiritual centers in India. None of these orders or methods can be found in the books circulated in the names of the aforementioned elders. Moreover, the accounts of the litanies and spiritual exercises in those books are not found in the Chishtiyyah order currently practiced. In the case of the Chishtiyyah order too, the account given by Shah Waliullah al-Muhaddith al-Dehlawi differs from that of Sayyid Ahmad Barelvi. There are also differences between the methods taught by these two men and the litanies and spiritual exercises of the Chishtiyyah order currently practiced in our country. There is no way to know which of these is original and which is fabricated.

1.8.4.4. Anisul Arwah, Rahatil Qulub, and Others
Several books are in circulation as works of these great shaykhs. They were written as “memories and discussions of companionship with one’s teacher or pir.” Khwaja Muinuddin Chishti recorded his lengthy companionship with his teacher, Usman Haruni, in a book called Anisul Arwah. Khwaja Qutbuddin Bakhtiyar Kaki wrote his memories of companionship with his teacher, Muinuddin Chishti, in Dalilul Arifin. Khwaja Fariduddin Ganj-i Shakkar wrote his memories of companionship with his teacher, Qutbuddin, in Fawaid al-Salikin. Khwaja Nizamuddin Auliya wrote his memories of companionship with his teacher, Fariduddin, in Rahatil Qulub. The famous singer Amir Khusrau wrote his memories of companionship with his teacher, Nizamuddin, in Rahatul Muhibbin.

Reading these books makes it apparent that they are forged books written by people of later generations. Alternatively, those men may have written something, and later forgers inserted many things into their writings as they pleased. These books contain many good statements based on the Qur’an and Hadith. Alongside these, however, they are filled with countless fabricated hadiths and false statements. Moreover, historical information has been recorded incorrectly. They contain errors that become apparent at first sight.

Each saint recorded the dates of his gatherings. The years and dates have been written incorrectly, making it quite clear that these books were forged in their names at a later time. The fourth of Shawwal is given as Thursday and the seventh as Sunday. This means that the beginning of Shawwal was a Monday. Yet the fifteenth of Dhu al-Qadah is given as Monday. This means that the beginning of Dhu al-Qadah was also a Monday. That would be possible only if Shawwal had twenty-eight days. (Khwaja Muinuddin, Anisul Arwah [Fawaid al-Salikin], pp. 135, 143, 144).

Again, the next gathering is said to have taken place on Thursday, the fifth of Dhu al-Hijjah. Regardless of whether the beginning of Dhu al-Qadah was Monday, Tuesday, or Wednesday, the fifth of Dhu al-Hijjah could not possibly have been Thursday. Then the following gathering is said to have been on Saturday, the twentieth of Dhu al-Hijjah! If the fifth was Thursday, how could the twentieth be Saturday? (Ibid., pp. 147, 149).

The twentieth of Rajab is given as Monday and the twenty-seventh as Sunday. The fifth of Shawwal is said to be Saturday, whereas the twentieth of Shawwal is Thursday (Nizamuddin Auliya, Rahatul Muhibbin, pp. 24, 43, 83, 88)—countless inconsistencies of this kind, apparent at first glance.

Kaki (may Allah have mercy on him) mentioned that in 613 AH he became a disciple of his pir, Muinuddin Chishti, in Baghdad. He then remained in Baghdad for several gatherings. After that, he came to Ajmer with his companions. Thus, we know with certainty that Hazrat Muinuddin Chishti came to India after 613 AH. Hazrat Bakhtiyar Kaki further mentioned that while he was staying in Ajmer, Prithviraj, the king of Ajmer, used to conspire against him. At one point he said, “I handed Prithviraj over alive and captive to the Muslims.” A few days later, the troops of Sultan Shihabuddin Ghori defeated and captured Prithviraj. [Anisul Arwah (including Dalilul Arifin and Fawaid al-Salikin), pp. 62, 119, 138].

Yet historians have stated that approximately twenty-five years before 613 AH, in 588 AH, they defeated Prithviraj in the Second Battle of Tarain and captured Ajmer. Moreover, Shihabuddin Ghori died in 603 AH, ten years before Khwaja Muinuddin’s arrival in Ajmer in 613 AH. This shows that all these stories are fabricated. Alternatively, Muinuddin (may Allah have mercy on him) came to India much earlier. In that case, the years, dates, and related information recorded in Anisul Arwah, Dalilul Arifin, Fawaid al-Salikin, and similar books are fabricated.

Thus we have seen that, just as fabrication has occurred in the name of Hadith, extensive fabrication has also occurred in the names of the saints. In the case of Hadith, there is a specific method of examination; since no such method exists for the saints, there is no way to detect fabrications made in their names. Forgers wrote forged books in the names of the saints and cited fabricated hadiths in them, and inserted fabricated hadiths into books written by them. Now, whenever anyone says anything against these fabricated hadiths, ordinary Muslims will say, “This hadith appears in the book of such-and-such saint; how can it be fabricated?!” In this way, the forgers killed two birds with one stone.

1.8.5. Fabricated Hadith versus Weak Hadith
From the preceding discussion, we have seen that a fabricated hadith is a type of weak hadith. The hadith scholars of the Muslim ummah adopted the same degree of strictness regarding weak hadith as they did regarding fabricated hadith; many hadith scholars, however, did not adopt such strictness concerning weak hadith. They strictly prohibited the use or citation of weak hadith in two cases: (1) matters of aqidah, or belief, and (2) matters of the rulings or regulations of the Shariah. In these matters, one must rely solely on authentic hadith. Not only that, but in establishing matters of aqidah or belief, one must essentially rely on mutawatir hadith—hadith narrated by many Companions and Followers and proven to have been widely circulated among the Companions. This is because certainty, or firm conviction, is established only through the Noble Qur’an and such mutawatir hadith. In the second case, one must rely on authentic or hasan hadith. (Suyuti, Tadrib al-Rawi, 1/132; Ibn Jama‘ah, al-Manhal al-Rawi, p. 32).

1.8.5.1. The Areas and Conditions for Weak Hadith
Conversely, many scholars have permitted citing “slightly weak” hadith in three matters: (1) tafsir, or the verbal explanation, of the Noble Qur’an; (2) history or historical accounts; and (3) describing the virtues or rewards of various righteous deeds. In this regard, they have mentioned the following conditions:
(1) The hadith must be only slightly weak, not severely weak.
(2) The weak hadith must describe the virtue of a righteous deed that is good and permissible in light of authentic hadith.
(3) When acting on a weak hadith, one must not believe that the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) definitely said it. One must act cautiously. That is, one must bear in mind that it is more likely that the hadith is not a statement of the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him); however, if it is true, one will receive this reward, so one may act upon it. Even if it is not true, since the basic deed is recommended according to authentic hadith, one will still receive some reward. (For details, see: Abd al-Hayy Lakhnawi, Zafar al-Amani, pp. 209–224.)

Because some people misunderstood this view of certain hadith scholars concerning weak hadith, fabricated hadiths have often become widespread in society through this means. In reality, most of the fabricated and baseless hadiths common in various Muslim societies have entered Muslim society through this route. Several reasons lie behind the spread of countless fabricated hadiths in society:
(1) The sermons, admonitions, and performance of various religious duties by unqualified and ignorant people;
(2) The negligence and laziness of ordinary scholars;
(3) The laxity of renowned and qualified scholars;
(4) The desire to provide guidance; and
(5) The desire to narrate history, the Prophet’s biography, and the miracles of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him).

1.8.5.2. Fabricated Hadiths in the Name of Weak Reports Concerning Guidance and Virtues
The last two reasons have played the greatest role in spreading fabricated hadiths. Out of a desire to provide guidance, many qualified scholars cited numerous weak hadiths alongside authentic hadiths in books on sermons, virtues, spiritual purification, and similar subjects. Many fabricated hadiths among these weak hadiths found their way into their books. In most cases, they did not mention that these reports were fabricated or weak. Consequently, ordinary readers regarded them as “authentic hadiths.”

Judging by the situation, it seems that, even after mentioning so many Qur’anic verses and so many authentic hadiths, they apparently could not make the idea of guidance enter people’s hearts. Apparently, unless some weak or unreliable statements were added, they could not make an impression on people’s hearts. Perhaps the punishments mentioned in the Qur’an and authentic hadith, and the rewards, recompense, and virtues mentioned in the Qur’an and authentic hadith, were not capable of creating in people’s hearts a genuine orientation toward the Hereafter, fear of Allah, and eagerness to perform deeds. This is presumably why, after Qur’anic verses and authentic hadiths, they mention these weak or baseless statements.

1.8.5.3. Fabricated Hadiths in the Name of Weak Reports in History and the Prophet’s Biography
The same situation can be observed concerning history, the Prophet’s biography, and weak reports. Every author on any subject wishes to collect the greatest possible amount of information about it. As a result of this desire to collect information, many scholars accepted somewhat weak hadiths from the earliest period. In later times, however, this desire led to countless baseless fabricated hadiths entering books of the Prophet’s biography.

We learned earlier from Shah Waliullah Dehlawi’s discussion that all hadiths circulated in the name of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) had been compiled by the fourth or fifth century. Most of what was compiled additionally in later periods consisted of fabricated and baseless statements produced in those later periods. He placed books of this type in the fourth and fifth categories.

From this we can also understand the condition of books on history, the Prophet’s biography, and miracles. Among the books of this kind compiled during the first six hundred years are: Ibn Ishaq’s (150 AH) Sirah; Waqidi’s (207 AH) Maghazi; Ibn Hisham’s (218 AH) Sirah; Ibn Sa‘d’s (230 AH) Tabaqat; Khalifah ibn Khayyat’s (240 AH) Tarikh; Baladhuri’s (279 AH) Futuh al-Buldan; Firyabi’s (301 AH) Dalail al-Nubuwwah; Tabari’s (310 AH) Tarikh; Mas‘udi’s (345 AH) Tarikh; and Bayhaqi’s (458 AH) Dalail al-Nubuwwah, among others. Numerous “extremely weak” hadiths and some fabricated hadiths were accepted in these books. Even so, we find that writers of later periods collected many more statements that are not found at all in these books.

Among the renowned books of later periods are Suyuti’s (911 AH) al-Khasa’is al-Kubra; Qastallani’s (923 AH) al-Mawahib al-Ladunniyyah; and Muhammad ibn Yusuf Shami’s (942 AH) Subul al-Huda, or Sirah Shamiyyah. The authors of these books claimed that they would cite weak hadiths in their works but would not cite fabricated hadiths. In reality, however, we find that they cited many hadiths which they themselves elsewhere described as fabricated and false.

Among the books of the period after that are Ali ibn Burhanuddin al-Halabi’s (1044 AH) Sirah Halabiyyah and Zurqani’s (1122 AH) Sharh al-Mawahib, among others. The authors of these books exercised no discrimination whatsoever. Their objective was to collect and arrange as much information as possible. Therefore, without any evaluation or verification, they gathered, mixed together, and arranged every kind of authentic, weak, fabricated, and chainless report. As a result, countless fabricated and baseless reports found their way into these works. Fabricated hadiths also contain more novelty and absurdity. For this reason, these books relied more on fabricated hadiths than on authentic hadiths. Judging by the situation, it seems that proving the prophethood, miracles, and honor of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) with the Noble Qur’an and countless authentic hadiths was apparently not possible, or that descriptions of his honor apparently could not be complete without these false and fabricated reports!

The authors of books in this category did not cite the sources of most reports. Even where they did cite sources, their negligence is unimaginable. I will mention one example. The author of the Sirah Halabiyyah says: “I read a book called Tashrifat fi al-Khasa’is wa al-Mu‘jizat. I could not learn the name of the author of this book. In this book I saw that, narrated from Abu Hurayrah (may Allah be pleased with him), the Noble Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) asked Jibril (peace be upon him), ‘O Jibril, how old are you?’ … Al-Bukhari compiled this hadith.” (Halabi, Ali ibn Burhanuddin, Sirah Halabiyyah, 1/49).

This hadith is not found in any hadith book, let alone in Bukhari. Relying on the report of this anonymous author, the compiler quoted the hadith. He did not take the slight trouble to search Sahih al-Bukhari or the other books written by Imam Bukhari. In this way, he established a lasting means of spreading a heinous falsehood in the name of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) among Muslims of later generations.

The scholars of our country rely precisely on books such as the Sirah Halabiyyah; consequently, countless fabricated statements find their way into their writings and speeches. The renowned scholar and saint Abd al-Khaliq (may Allah have mercy on him) stated in the introduction to his book Sayyid al-Mursalin that he relied essentially on this book, the Sirah Halabiyyah (Sirat-i-Halabi). Naturally, out of respect for the compiler, he did not verify any information. As a result, we find countless fabricated and baseless hadiths in this valuable book.

We have seen that the condition for acting upon a weak hadith being permissible is that the matter must not be believed; only cautious action may be taken. In reality, however, it is difficult to separate belief from action. For the person who acted upon a weak hadith at least believed that such a reward might be obtained for that action. Especially in accounts concerning the life and miracles of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), a believer believes what he hears. Not only that, these “weak” or “fabricated” statements become part of his faith. Thus, his belief becomes founded upon weak or fabricated hadiths.

1.8.6. Verification versus Sweeping and Speculative Statements
The most heinous and dangerous confusion concerning fabricated hadiths is sweeping commentary without verification. We have repeatedly stated earlier, and have understood with certainty from all the preceding discussions, that preserving the purity of revelation or religious teachings and safeguarding their sources is a distinctive characteristic of the Muslim ummah. No other religious community has been equally diligent in preserving the purity of its scriptures or the teachings and instructions of its preachers or founders.

From the era of the Companions onward, Muslim scholars and hadith scholars of every generation accepted every statement circulated in the name of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) only after meticulous examination, observation, and verification. Yet many “Orientalists,” many Muslims influenced by their ideas, and many inexperienced or ignorant Muslim thinkers and researchers make sweeping comments and express sweeping opinions concerning the authenticity and accuracy of hadith. Since fabricated hadiths exist, they say, no hadith is reliable; or since the meaning of a certain hadith is incorrect, it must be considered fabricated—and so on. Some think that hadith scholars probably examined only the chain of transmission and did not examine or scrutinize the meaning, wording, sentence structure, implications, and so forth. All of these are baseless notions and merely barbaric fantasies of fertile minds. The primary cause is unfamiliarity with the hadith scholars’ method of examination. An even greater cause is hostility toward Islam and an intense desire to turn people away from Islam.

In addition to Jewish and Christian Orientalist scholars, non-Muslim communities such as the Qadianis and Baha’is, and the Shi‘a community, certain “sinful scholars” make such sweeping comments against hadith or judge hadith according to meanings that suit them and declare them “fabricated.” They wish to claim to be Muslims but do not wish to practice Islam. They are unwilling to perform any act such as salat, fasting, zakat, hajj, consuming lawful food, or attaining purity. They wish to invalidate the matters mentioned in the Qur’an by interpreting them as they please. But their fear concerns hadith. If hadith remains, arbitrary interpretation becomes untenable. The Messenger of Allah’s (peace and blessings be upon him) explanation is final. Therefore, they wish to reject hadith indiscriminately by declaring it fabricated.

I hope that through the discussion in this book, the reader has understood the true nature of these people’s opinions. We have understood that the hadith scholars’ methods of examination and judgment were extremely precise and scientific. No one except an ignorant fool or a hostile, sinful scholar devoid of knowledge can cast sweeping, evidence-free doubt upon the authenticity and accuracy of the hadiths they identified as authentic on the basis of chains, oral transmission, manuscripts, language, meaning, and all relevant evidence. Likewise, insisting by sheer force that the hadiths they identified on the basis of this examination as fabricated and forged are authentic hadiths is nothing but the terrifying audacity to lie in the name of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him). The door to evidence-based examination, however, is always open.

1.8.7. Some Questions Concerning Fabricated Hadiths
We have completed the discussion of the first part. In the second part, we will mention many fabricated hadiths and baseless statements prevalent in our society. As readers study these fabricated and baseless statements, several questions may repeatedly arise in their minds. We have learned the answers to these questions from the preceding discussion. Nevertheless, we wish to discuss the questions here.

We will see that among the false and forged hadiths are many statements that are extremely beautiful, meaningful, valuable, and moving. Then it may seem to us: “The statement is so beautiful; why call it fabricated?” Or: “Such a beautiful and moving statement could not fail to be a hadith.” Or: “There is nothing wrong with this statement; why object to it?” and so on.

In response, we must understand that the ummah’s first duty is to preserve the teachings and statements of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) exactly and free from adulteration. He repeatedly said that attributing to him any statement he did not say is a certain path to Hell. Therefore, the meaning or substance of a statement can never be our first consideration. The first consideration is to examine whether he said this sentence. No matter how beautiful and moving the meaning of a statement may be, we cannot call it a statement of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) or a hadith until it is narrated from him through an authentic chain. May Allah protect us from the gravest sin of attributing to the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) something we do not know with certainty that he said.

The second matter is that we will often see that many saints have cited in their books as hadiths reports that we have identified as fabricated. In this case, someone may say, “A certain scholar or saint stated this hadith; does that mean he is destined for Hell?”

We have seen that there has been much fabrication in the names of the saints. We do not know whether the saints actually said these hadiths or whether the forgers attributed them to the saints. Even if they did say them, we must understand that some mistakes may occur among a saint’s countless actions. Such mistakes are nothing compared with their countless good deeds. In essence, they were mujtahids. A mujtahid receives a double reward from Allah for a correct judgment and one reward for an incorrect judgment. (Sahih al-Bukhari.) Allah also said: “Indeed, good deeds erase bad deeds.” (Surah Hud: 114.) Thus, the minor mistakes of one who has performed many good deeds will be erased because of his good deeds.

No saint or truly godly person can knowingly attribute a fabricated or false statement to the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him). Someone may perhaps have said it unknowingly. Nevertheless, we cannot knowingly utter a fabricated hadith. Our duty is that if we hear or learn that a hadith is fabricated, we must immediately abandon both saying it and acting upon it. If we have doubts about the matter, we should try to learn the truth by conducting tahqiq, or research, in light of the information provided by the hadith scholars. Almighty Allah will question us about our own deeds; He will not question us about anyone else’s deeds. Therefore, we must protect ourselves from saying anything false or doubtful in the name of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him).

The third question that will arise in our minds is: “All these saints understood nothing; do we now understand more than they did?” My response is that, in declaring the fabricated hadiths discussed in this book to be fabricated, there is no contribution from a humble person like me. I have essentially presented the opinions of earlier hadith scholars. The reader will be able to examine them in detail.

Part Two:

False Hadiths and Baseless Statements in Circulation

2.1. Thematic Principles Concerning Unsound Hadiths

A special method of compiling forged and reliable hadiths is to collect and compile together those subjects concerning which all or most of the hadiths are fabricated or unreliable. This method is particularly important for identifying forged hadiths. As a result, an interested Muslim can easily understand, without the assistance of various books, that a hadith is fabricated, because there is no sahih hadith on the subject about which it is narrated. Among the books written according to this method is Al-Mughni, written by Umar ibn Badr al-Mawsili (557–622 AH), one of the prominent hadith scholars and Hanafi jurists of the seventh Islamic century. In addition, Mulla Ali Qari (d. 1014 AH), one of the greatest Hanafi jurists and hadith scholars of the eleventh Islamic century; Muhammad ibn al-Sayyid Darwish Hut (d. 1276 AH), a renowned Shafi‘i jurist, hadith scholar, and Sufi saint of the thirteenth Islamic century; and other hadith scholars also mentioned some principles related to this subject. 2.1.1. Umar ibn Badr al-Mawsili al-Hanafi Ziya al-Din Abu Hafs Umar ibn Badr ibn Sa‘id ibn Muhammad al-Mawsili al-Hanafi wrote many valuable books on hadith, tafsir, fiqh, and other subjects. One of them is the book entitled “Al-Mughni ‘an al-Hifz wa al-Kitab bi Qawlihim Lam Yasih Shay’un fi Hadh al-Bab.” The meaning of this lengthy title is: “A description of those subjects concerning which the hadith scholars have said that no hadith is authentic.” There will therefore be no need to read or memorize any other book for these subjects.’ In this book, he briefly mentioned 101 subjects concerning which the hadith scholars had stated that all the hadiths narrated were unsound. Where some hadiths on a subject were authentic, he mentioned them and declared all the remaining hadiths unsound. 2.1.2. Subjects concerning which all hadiths are unsound Allama al-Mawsili, on the basis of the examination and detailed research of earlier hadith scholars, stated that all the hadiths narrated on the following subjects are unsound. They are either fabricated or extremely weak and unreliable. 1. The increase and decrease of faith No sahih hadith has been narrated from the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) to the effect that faith increases and decreases, or that it neither increases nor decreases, and that words and deeds are either included in faith or are not included in it. All the hadiths narrated on this subject are fabricated or extremely weak. The imams of the Muslim ummah differed on this matter in light of the relevant guidance of various verses of the Noble Qur’an and various hadiths. However, no direct sahih hadith has been narrated on this subject. 2. The Murji’ah, Jahmiyyah, Qadariyyah, and Ash‘ariyyah sects No sahih prophetic hadith has been narrated from the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) containing a prediction about these sects. The hadiths narrated concerning them are fabricated or extremely weak. The Companions, the Tabi‘un, and the imams spoke about these sects in light of the guidance of the Qur’an and Sunnah. 3. The Word of Allah is uncreated No sahih hadith has been narrated from the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) on this matter. All the hadiths narrated concerning it are fabricated. On the basis of various Qur’anic verses, the relevant guidance of various hadiths, and the opinions of the Companions, the Tabi‘un, the followers of the Tabi‘un, and later imams unanimously held that the Qur’an is the Word of Allah, that it is part of His magnificent attributes, and that it is uncreated. The misguided Mu‘tazilah sect believed that the Qur’an was created. During the second and third Islamic centuries, this was one of the major subjects of controversy in Muslim society. Therefore, many fabricators tried to gain fame by inventing hadiths in the name of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) on this subject. The hadith scholars agreed that the Qur’an is uncreated. However, they vehemently rejected every attempt to fabricate hadiths with this meaning. 4. The creation of angels in a sea of light It is said that Jibril (peace be upon him) dives into the sea of light every day, rises from it, and shakes his body; from every drop of light, seventy thousand angels are created. All hadiths with this meaning and of this type are fabricated and baseless. 5. The virtue of giving the name Muhammad or Ahmad All hadiths circulated regarding the virtue of naming someone Muhammad or Ahmad are fabricated and baseless. Many fabricated hadiths have been circulated on this subject. Various statements have been invented and publicized in the name of hadith, such as: Allah will not punish those named Muhammad or Ahmad; if several people in a family are named Muhammad, they will be forgiven and blessed; and so forth. These two names are undoubtedly excellent names. It is good to give children these names out of love for the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him). However, the hadiths specifying special virtues for these names are fabricated. 6. Aql, meaning intellect or the faculty of understanding All hadiths narrated in praise of, or concerning the virtue of, the intellect or faculty of understanding are baseless. The Qur’an and hadiths command the acquisition and pursuit of knowledge and praise knowledgeable people. However, no sahih hadith has been narrated from the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) praising the faculty of understanding. Fabricators invented many hadiths praising the intellect or faculty of understanding. They said that people would be rewarded according to their intellect rather than their deeds; that the reward for the prayer of an intelligent person would be greater than that for the prayer of an unintelligent or foolish person; and similar things. All of these are fabricated. No innate or hereditary matter determines salvation or status in the Hereafter. A person’s deliberate deeds are fundamentally the means of his salvation. Whoever possesses greater intelligence and uses it for righteous deeds will be praised and rewarded for those deeds. But innate or natural intelligence is not itself a means of salvation or a matter of reward. 7. The long lives of al-Khidr (peace be upon him) and Ilyas (peace be upon him) In Surah al-Kahf, Allah Most High mentions certain events involving a servant of Allah and Musa (peace be upon him). The Qur’an does not mention the name of this servant. However, it is mentioned in an authentic hadith that his name was al-Khadir (known in Bengali as Khidr). Apart from this one event, no authentic narration is known concerning al-Khidr (peace be upon him). No account of his birth, childhood, prophethood, deeds, field of activity, life after this event, or death is known from any sahih hadith. Statements that he drank the water of the Fountain of Life and similar claims are ideas current among Jews and Christians that entered Muslim society. Allama al-Mawsili says that all hadiths narrated to the effect that al-Khidr (peace be upon him) and Ilyas (peace be upon him) lived long lives, saw or spoke with the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him), and remained alive after him are false and baseless. He says that Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal was asked about the long lives and continued existence of al-Khidr (peace be upon him) and Ilyas (peace be upon him). He replied: “Satan himself spread this matter among the people.” Imam al-Bukhari was asked whether al-Khidr (peace be upon him) and Ilyas (peace be upon him) were still alive. Imam al-Bukhari replied that this was impossible, because the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) said: “All those who are alive in the world today will die within one hundred years.” Ibn al-Jawzi said concerning the long lives of al-Khidr (peace be upon him) and Ilyas (peace be upon him) that this claim contradicts a Qur’anic verse. Allah Most High says in the Noble Qur’an: “We did not grant everlasting life to any human being before you; so if you die, will they live forever?” (Surah 21, al-Anbiya, verse 34). It should be noted that some scholars have stated that al-Khidr (peace be upon him) might still be alive. They relied on statements of various pious elders. However, no acceptable hadith has been narrated from the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) on this subject. 8. The virtues of various surahs of the Qur’an Allama al-Mawsili says that some hadiths concerning the virtues of the Qur’an are authentic, but many fabricated hadiths on this subject have been circulated in society. Sahih or hasan hadiths have been narrated indicating special status or virtue for the following surahs or verses: Surah al-Fatihah, Surah al-Baqarah, the last two verses of Surah al-Baqarah, Ayat al-Kursi, Surah Al ‘Imran, Surah al-Kahf, the first or last ten verses of Surah al-Kahf, Surah al-Mulk, Surah al-Zalzalah, Surah al-Kafirun, Surah al-Ikhlas, Surah al-Falaq, and Surah al-Nas. The hadiths narrated concerning the virtues of other surahs are fabricated or extremely weak. In addition, many fabricated statements have been circulated as hadiths concerning even the virtues of the surahs listed above. 9. Praise or condemnation of Abu Hanifa (may Allah have mercy on him) and al-Shafi‘i (may Allah have mercy on him) All hadiths narrated on this subject are false or fabricated. 10. Heating water in the sun All hadiths narrated from the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) to the effect that using water heated in the sun may cause illness or misfortune are false and baseless. 11. Using a towel after ablution No sahih hadith has been narrated that the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) wiped his wet fingers after ablution or used a towel to wipe them. 12. Reciting the basmalah aloud during prayer Allama al-Mawsili says that Imam al-Daraqutni stated that no hadith is authentic which says that the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) recited “Bismillah…” aloud during prayer. 13. The prayer of one who owes an overdue prayer will not be accepted Imam al-Mawsili says that all hadiths narrated with this meaning are baseless. 14. Prohibition of performing the funeral prayer inside a mosque Imam al-Mawsili says that no sahih hadith has been narrated from the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) on this subject. 15. Raising the hands during the takbirs of the funeral prayer No sahih hadith has been narrated that the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) raised his hands during any takbir of the funeral prayer other than the first takbir. 16. Salat al-Ragha’ib All hadiths concerning the virtue of a special supererogatory prayer called Salat al-Ragha’ib, or the special supererogatory prayer on the first Friday of Rajab, are fabricated and baseless. 17. Salat on the night of the Mi‘raj All hadiths concerning the virtue of performing a special supererogatory prayer on the night of the Mi‘raj are fabricated and baseless. 18. Salat on the night of mid-Sha‘ban All hadiths concerning the special virtue of performing a specific number of supererogatory prayer units in a special manner on the night of Bara’ah are fabricated and baseless. 19. Special supererogatory prayers for every day and night of the week Allama al-Mawsili says that all hadiths on this subject are fabricated and baseless. He further says that authentic hadiths concerning supererogatory prayers have been narrated only regarding the following prayers: sunnah prayers before and after the obligatory prayers, Tarawih, Duha or Chasht prayer, the night prayer or Tahajjud, Tahiyyat al-Masjid, Tahiyyat al-Wudu, Salat al-Istikhara, the eclipse prayer, and the prayer for seeking rain. (Salat al-Tasbih is also mentioned in authentic hadiths.) 20. The number of takbirs in the Eid prayer Allama al-Mawsili says that Imam Ahmad stated that no sahih hadith has been narrated from the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) concerning the number of takbirs in the Eid prayer. All hadiths narrated from the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) on this matter are weak. (Many authentic hadiths have been narrated from the Companions concerning their practice in this matter. For a detailed discussion, see the author’s other book, The Method of Examining Hadith Chains and the Additional Takbirs of the Eid Prayer in Light of Authentic Hadiths.) 21. Praising people with beautiful faces All hadiths narrated with this meaning are baseless and fabricated. 22. The virtue of Ashura The virtue of fasting on the day of Ashura is established by authentic hadiths. However, all hadiths concerning giving charity, applying henna, using oil, applying kohl, special foods and drinks, and similar practices on this day are fabricated and baseless. 23. The virtue of fasting in Rajab All hadiths concerning the virtue of supererogatory fasting in Rajab or on any particular date in that month are fabricated and baseless. 24. Any benefit derived from a loan is usury Allama al-Mawsili says that a statement is widely circulated: “Any benefit derived from a loan is usury.” The chain of the hadith narrated with this meaning is not authentic. The hadiths contain a clearly defined description and definition of usury. 25. All statements praising unmarried people are baseless. 26. Prohibition of cutting and eating meat with a knife It is narrated in a hadith that using a knife while eating, or cutting meat with a knife, is the practice of non-Arabs and that Muslims must avoid it. This hadith is at the level of fabrication. An authentic hadith states that the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) cut and ate goat meat with a knife. 27. All hadiths concerning the benefits or virtues of walnuts, eggplant, pomegranates, raisins, meat, watermelon, roses, and similar things are fabricated or baseless. 28. All statements praising roosters or white roosters are fabricated. 29. All hadiths concerning the use of agate stones or the properties of any other stone are fabricated and baseless. 30. All hadiths stating that dreams must not be told to women are baseless. 31. All hadiths stating that the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) spoke Persian or condemned the Persian language are fabricated and baseless. 32. All statements that an illegitimate child will not enter Paradise are fabricated and baseless. 33. The permissibility of backbiting a sinful person Among the fabricated statements in circulation is: “There is no backbiting concerning a sinful person.” That is, mentioning a true and actual fault of a sinful person in his absence would not constitute backbiting or sin. All statements narrated with this meaning are fabricated, baseless, and false. Such fabricated statements cause countless believers to fall into the terrible sin of backbiting. 34. Prophecies based on a particular year, date, or place, claiming that something will happen in a certain month, year, or place, are fabricated. 35. The prohibition of chess The noble hadiths encourage physical sports and prohibit games based on chance. Scholars have differed since the time of the Companions regarding the permissibility of chess, which depends on intellect but involves no physical exercise. Many Companions strictly prohibited the game. However, nothing has been narrated from the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) on this subject. Allama al-Mawsili says that no sahih hadith has been narrated from the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) with this meaning. The hadiths on this subject are weak or at the level of fabrication. 2.1.3. Mulla Ali Qari and Darwish Hut Among the valuable books written by Mulla Ali ibn Sultan Muhammad Nur al-Din al-Harawi al-Qari (d. 1014 AH), one of the greatest scholars and Hanafi jurists of the tenth and eleventh Islamic centuries, are two books on forged hadiths. One is entitled Al-Asrar al-Marfu‘ah, or Al-Mawdu‘at al-Kubra, and the other is Al-Masnu‘ fi al-Hadith al-Mawdu‘, or Al-Mawdu‘at al-Sughra. At the end of both books, he mentioned certain principles concerning forged hadiths. Muhammad ibn al-Sayyid Darwish Hut (1209–1276 AH) was a highly renowned Syrian scholar and Sufi of the thirteenth Islamic century. One of his valuable works is Asna al-Matalib. In this book, he discussed various sahih, weak, and mawdu‘ hadiths circulating in society. At the end of the book, he mentioned certain principles concerning forged hadiths. In light of the principles mentioned by these two scholars, I will briefly discuss several matters here. (For details, see Al-Asrar, pp. 277–259; Al-Masnu‘, pp. 178–220; Asna al-Matalib, pp. 269–300.) 2.1.4. Some principles concerning forged hadiths 1. Almost all narrations concerning future wars and battles are unreliable accounts of storytellers. Very few sahih hadiths have been narrated concerning prophecies and future events; these have been compiled in Sahih al-Bukhari, Sahih Muslim, and other famous hadith collections. Apart from these, most of the hadiths narrated and circulated concerning future wars, battles, trials, disorder, and similar matters are unreliable or baseless. 2. No chain of transmission or acceptable source can be found for most hadiths concerning detailed histories of the battles or various events in the life of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him), or concerning maghazi. A few sahih hadiths exist on these matters. The rest are additions by storytellers. The history of Muhammad ibn Ishaq is famous in this field. He too collected information from Jews and Christians. 3. In the field of tafsir, tafsirs and reports on the occasions of revelation with authentic chains are very few. Most hadiths on this subject have no reliable chain or source. In particular, all tafsirs narrated by Muhammad ibn Sa’ib al-Kalbi (d. 146 AH) are false and baseless. The tafsir narrated by Muqatil ibn Sulayman (d. 150 AH) is similar. They mixed countless falsehoods with popular tales, Israelite reports from Jews and Christians, and other material. 4. Everything circulated concerning the graves of the prophets is baseless and fabricated. Nothing is known about the grave of any prophet other than the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him). 5. Many Companions were buried in Makkah, but nothing is known about the locations of their graves. The site known as the grave of Khadijah al-Kubra (may Allah be pleased with her) in the Mu‘alla cemetery has not been reported through any reliable source. A person allegedly saw in a dream that this site was the grave of Khadijah (may Allah be pleased with her), and it gradually became famous among the people of Makkah. 6. The exact place in Makkah where the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) was born is not known with certainty. There is disagreement concerning it. 7. The additional hadiths in al-Quda‘i’s Al-Shihab After the fourth Islamic century, some hadith scholars wrote hadith compilations. In some of these books, nearly all the compiled hadiths are fabricated and baseless. One of these is Al-Shihab, written by the Egyptian scholar Qadi Abu Abdullah Muhammad ibn Salamah al-Quda‘i (d. 454 AH), a scholar of the fifth Islamic century. He compiled approximately 1,500 hadiths in this book. Some of them had already been compiled in the Sihah Sittah and other famous works of earlier centuries. He compiled the remaining hadiths with his own chains. Nearly all hadiths of this type were compiled with fabricated, baseless, or extremely weak chains. 8. All the hadiths in Ibn Wad‘an’s Forty Hadith Another scholar of the fifth Islamic century was Qadi Abu Nasr Muhammad ibn Ali ibn Wad‘an (d. 494 AH) of Mosul in Iraq. He compiled a collection of hadiths entitled Al-Arba‘in, or Forty Hadith. All the hadiths in this collection are forged or fabricated statements. Imam al-Suyuti says that the meanings of the forged statements called hadiths in this book are very attractive. They contain sermons that melt the heart. But a statement does not become a statement of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) merely because it is beautiful; it must be narrated from him through an authentic chain. All the hadiths in this book are forged. However, the fabricators inserted some phrases from authentic hadiths into some of the forged hadiths. 9. All the hadiths in Sharaf al-Balkhi’s book entitled Fada’il al-‘Ulama. 10. A popular book called Kitab al-‘Arus Many forged statements concerning newlyweds and married people were compiled in this book. The fabricators circulated the book in the name of Imam Ja‘far al-Sadiq. 11. Hakim al-Tirmidhi The famous scholar Muhammad ibn Ali, known as Hakim al-Tirmidhi, of the third and fourth Islamic centuries (d. approximately 320 AH), wrote Nawadir al-Usul and many other famous books. His works contain many forged hadiths. Indeed, the hadith scholars said that he filled his books with forged hadiths. Therefore, no hadith from his works may be accepted without examination. 12. No hadith mentioned in Imam al-Ghazali’s Ihya’ ‘Ulum al-Din may be accepted without examination. The great status of Imam al-Ghazali is undeniable. However, he did not verify hadiths before citing them. Relying on certain popular books and reports, he mentioned many forged and baseless hadiths in his work. 13. The same applies to Tanbih al-Ghafilin, written by Allama Imam Abu al-Layth al-Samarqandi, Nasr ibn Muhammad (d. 373 AH). This book contains many mawdu‘, forged, and fabricated hadiths. 14. Shu‘ayb ibn Abd al-Aziz al-Khurayfish (d. 597 AH), a famous scholar of the sixth century, wrote a book on preaching, admonition, and virtues called Al-Rawd al-Fa’iq, which became well known. Many forged hadiths also found their way into this book. 15. Many forged hadiths entered books of Sufism because of the simplicity of the Sufi elders. 16. Imam al-Hakim (d. 405 AH) called many weak, false, and mawdu‘ hadiths sahih in his book Al-Mustadrak. He showed considerable weakness in determining the authenticity of hadiths. Therefore, his opinions cannot be relied upon. 17. A sixth-century hadith scholar, Muhammad ibn Abdullah ibn Ahmad ibn Habib al-Amiri (d. 530 AH), wrote a commentary on al-Quda‘i’s Al-Shihab. He too displayed considerable leniency and weakness in determining hadith authenticity. He called many weak, forged, and baseless hadiths sahih or hasan. Abd al-Ra’uf al-Munawi and other hadith scholars mentioned these errors of his. Therefore, his opinions are unacceptable without examination. 18. The purported testament of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) to Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) Several forged testaments attributed to Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) are in circulation. At the beginning of the well-known forged testament is a sentence taken from an authentic hadith. All the subsequent sentences are forged and false. It begins: “O Ali, your position with me is like the position of Harun (peace be upon him) with Musa (peace be upon him), except that there is no prophet after me.” The fabricator took this sentence from an authentic hadith and then added various baseless statements, such as: “O Ali, the signs of a believer are three … the signs of a hypocrite … the signs of an envious person …” The entire testament is filled with false, baseless statements. Occasionally, one or two sentences from authentic hadiths were inserted into it. [This forged testament has been printed in Bengali in its entirety. See Allama al-Suyuti, The Testament of the Noble Prophet, translated by Maulana Muhammad Rizaul Karim Islamabadi (Dhaka: Islamic Foundation Bangladesh, 2nd edition, 2003), pp. 11–24.] The fabricators also produced several other testaments in the name of Ali (may Allah be pleased with him). The hadith scholars unanimously agree that everything circulated under the title “The Testament of the Messenger of Allah to Ali” is forged. However, the fabricators inserted one or two sentences from authentic hadiths into some of them; those sentences are narrated through other chains. 19. The purported testament of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) to Abu Hurayrah (may Allah be pleased with him) Another forged and fabricated hadith is in circulation under the title “The Testament of the Messenger of Allah to Abu Hurayrah.” This testament is forged and false from beginning to end. However, as was their practice, the fabricators patched into it a few sentences from authentic hadiths narrated through other chains. (This forged testament was also printed in Bengali with the previous testament. See Allama al-Suyuti, The Testament of the Noble Prophet, pp. 27–38.) 20. The story of Bilal leaving Madinah and returning after seeing a dream After the death of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him), Bilal (may Allah be pleased with him) left Madinah for the region of Syria for the purpose of jihad and lived in Syria. It is said that one day he saw in a dream that the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) encouraged him to visit him. He then came to Madinah, and so on. Allama Qari says that al-Suyuti mentioned that this story is fabricated. Perhaps Ibn Hajar al-Makki did not see Imam al-Suyuti’s discussion; for this reason, he mentioned this fabricated story in his book on visitation. 21. Everything narrated about special prayers for particular days or nights of the week is fabricated and baseless. Similarly, all statements concerning prayers on the day or night of Ashura, the first night of Rajab, other days or nights of Rajab, the night of the twenty-seventh of Rajab, and so forth are fabricated and baseless. Allama Ali Qari says: Do not be deceived when you see these hadiths in books such as Qut al-Qulub, Ihya’ ‘Ulum al-Din, and al-Tha‘labi’s Tafsir. They are all fabricated. 22. Everything circulated claiming that Hasan al-Basri received the khirqa or leadership of a Sufi order from Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) is baseless and false. 23. Everything stated to the effect that the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) gave his garment or khirqa to Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) and Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) to deliver to Uways al-Qarani, and that they delivered it to him, is false and baseless. 24. All hadiths concerning the qutb and aqtab, ghawth, naqib and nuqaba, najib and nujaba, awtad, and similar matters are false and baseless. 25. All hadiths narrated concerning special virtues or praise of henna are baseless and fabricated. Only the hadiths encouraging the use of henna for dyeing the hair are reliable. 26. Extraordinary rewards or punishments In addition to examining chains of transmission, the hadith scholars mentioned various contextual meanings and factual matters as signs of forged hadiths. One of the most prominent is the description of extraordinary rewards and punishments. There are descriptions of countless extraordinary rewards for various minor supererogatory acts of worship or extremely ordinary acts of worship, dhikr, supplications, words, deeds, or thoughts. Sometimes the fabricators attributed such extraordinary rewards to dhikr, prayer, supplication, or worship established by authentic hadiths. At other times they invented dhikr, prayers, supplications, fasting, and acts of worship, then described fabricated extraordinary rewards for them. The wording of such forged hadiths is as follows: “Whoever recites such-and-such dhikr or performs such-and-such deed will receive one hundred thousand good deeds and have one hundred thousand sins forgiven …” Or: “One hundred thousand trees will be planted for him in Paradise; the roots of every tree will be made of gold, its branches … its leaves …” and other imaginary descriptions. Or: “He will receive the reward of one hundred thousand martyrs, the reward of the truthful …” Or: “An angel or bird will be created for him, possessing so many thousands or hundreds of thousands of faces …” Or: “If such-and-such supplication is recited, iron will melt, flowing water will stop, and so many hundreds of thousands of angels will be created for every letter,” and so forth. 27. Statements contrary to normal knowledge and experience Among such fabricated statements are: 1. “Eggplant is a cure for every illness,” or, “The intention with which eggplant is eaten will be fulfilled.” 2. “If someone says something and another person sneezes at that moment, it proves the truth of what was said.” 3. “Eat lentils, for lentils are blessed. Lentils soften the heart and increase tears. Seventy prophets described the virtue of lentils.” 4. “Goldsmiths, blacksmiths, and weavers are the greatest liars.” 28. Discussions of irrelevant, unnecessary, and frivolous matters The Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him), the leader of all knowledgeable people and Sayyid al-Bashar, could not speak about matters that ordinary intelligent people would not wish to discuss. Such statements include: 1. “If rice were a person, it would be patient, and any hungry person who ate it would become full.” 2. “Walnuts are medicine and cheese is illness; if the two enter the stomach together, there will be recovery.” 3. “Eat salt. Salt is a cure for seventy kinds of illness.” 4. “The constellations are the sweat of a snake beneath the Throne …” 5. “When Allah becomes angry, He sends revelation in Persian.” 6. “Looking at a beautiful face increases eyesight. Allah will not punish a beautiful face in Hell.” 7. “Blue eyes are auspicious.” 8. “Allah purified certain people through baldness; the first among them was Ali (may Allah be pleased with him).” 9. “The growth of hair inside the nose protects against leprosy.” 10. “The hadiths concerning ringing or buzzing in the ears are fabricated.” Among such fabricated statements are hadiths circulated describing the benefits of various trees, vegetables, medicines, and similar things. Likewise, fabricated hadiths concerning the virtues of roosters, white roosters, and similar matters belong to this category. 29. Most statements concerning medicine, remedies, or food are fabricated Among such frivolous statements are: 1. “Such-and-such activity reduces or destroys memory. Such-and-such activity causes such-and-such illness. Such-and-such activity cures such-and-such illness,” and so forth. 2. “Such-and-such food strengthens the waist; such-and-such food increases offspring. A believer is sweet and likes sweetness. Eating dates with a mouth contaminated by spittle kills worms.” 30. Uj the giant, Mount Qaf, and other unreal statements Among such baseless and false statements are: 1. The imaginary height of Uj ibn Unuq, or Uj the giant. Everything said concerning “Uj the giant” is false and fabricated. 2. The hadiths circulated and narrated concerning Mount Qaf. Everything on this subject is baseless, forged, and false. 3. “The earth is upon a stone, which is upon the horn of a bull, which is upon a fish … When the bull moves, its horn moves and an earthquake occurs …” All such statements are false and fabricated, circulated in the name of hadith by malicious and shameless fabricators. 31. Statements clearly contradicting authentic hadiths The teaching of many Qur’anic verses and countless authentic hadiths is that salvation in the Hereafter depends on deeds, not on a name or lineage. Similarly, among deeds, the most important are the obligatory acts, which must be performed, and the unlawful acts, which must be avoided. After these come wajib, sunnah, mustahabb, and other deeds. Many statements are common in society that clearly contradict this Islamic teaching. Examination of their chains proves them weak or forged. Yet their fabrication can also be detected simply by examining their meaning, without examining their chains. For example, many hadiths state that the reward for a minor mustahabb deed is that whoever performs it will not be touched by the fire of Hell or will be freed from Hell, and so forth. Similarly, some say that a person will be freed from Hell merely because his name is Muhammad or Ahmad. All hadiths of this type are fabricated and baseless.

2.2. Fabricated Hadiths Concerning the Great Creator

1. Seeing Allah in Any Form The Holy Qur’an states that the eyes cannot see Allah: لَّا تُدْرِكُهُ الْأَبْصَارُ وَهُوَ يُدْرِكُ الْأَبْصَارَ ۖ —He cannot be perceived by vision, but He perceives all vision. (Surah 6, al-An‘am, verse 103.) Elsewhere it is stated: “It is not possible for any human being that Allah should speak to him except through revelation, or from behind a veil.” (Surah 42, al-Shura, verse 51.) Elsewhere it is stated: “When Musa came at the appointed time and his Lord spoke to him, he said, ‘My Lord, show Yourself to me so that I may look at You.’ He said, ‘You will never see Me. Rather, look at the mountain; if it remains firm in its place, then you will see Me.’ When his Lord manifested His radiance upon the mountain, He reduced it to dust, and Musa fell unconscious…..” (Surah 7, al-A‘raf, verse 143.) In light of these clear directives of the Noble Qur’an, the Muslim community is unanimous that no one can see Allah in this world. Not a single sahih Hadith has been narrated from the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) stating, “I saw Allah with my physical eyes or with the eyes of my heart while awake, whether on earth or during the Mi‘raj.” There is no disagreement regarding dreams. However, the Companions differed over whether the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) saw Allah with the sight of his heart while awake. A’ishah (may Allah be pleased with her) said, “Whoever says that Muhammad (peace be upon him) saw his Lord has uttered a heinous lie in the name of Allah.” (Bukhari, al-Sahih 3/1181; Muslim, al-Sahih 1/159.) Ibn Mas‘ud and other Companions also held this view. On the other hand, it has been narrated from Ibn ‘Abbas (may Allah be pleased with him) that “on the night of the Mi‘raj, the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) saw Allah with the sight of his heart. Just as Allah granted Musa the miracle of speaking with Him, He likewise granted Muhammad (peace be upon him) the miracle of seeing Him with the sight of his heart.” (Ibn Khuzaymah, Kitab al-Tawhid 2/477–563.) Those who affirm that the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) saw Allah agree that this vision was a special miracle granted only to the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him), not to anyone else, and that it was a perception of the heart, with no form being mentioned. Everything narrated to the effect that the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) saw Allah in a particular form, or that any Companion other than him saw Allah, is fabricated and false. All Hadiths claiming that on the night of the Mi‘raj, on the Day of ‘Arafah, on the day of Mina, or at any other time or in any other state, the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) saw his glorious and exalted Lord Allah in a particular form are fabricated. Likewise, all claims that he saw Him as a young man, as one wearing a crown, on the back of a camel or mule, or in any similar manner, are false and fabricated. (Ibn ‘Iraq, Tanzih al-Shari‘ah 1/137–139.) One such baseless statement is: “I saw my Lord in the form of a young man who had not yet grown a beard or moustache.” The Hadith scholars declared this vile statement fabricated. (Ibn al-Jawzi, al-Mawdu‘at 1/80–81; Suyuti, al-La’ali 1/28–31; Mulla ‘Ali al-Qari, al-Asrar, p. 126.) Similarly, fabricators attributed to ‘Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) the statement: “My heart saw my Lord through the light of my Lord.” They fabricated an even more abhorrent statement in the name of ‘Ali (may Allah be pleased with him): “I do not worship a Lord whom I do not see.” (Sirr al-Asrar, pp. 57–58.) 2. Seven, Seventy, or Seventy Thousand Veils It is mentioned in a sahih Hadith: “The veil of the light of Almighty Allah exists.” (Muslim, al-Sahih 1/161.) However, detailed information about the number and nature of the veils is not found in sahih Hadith. Some Hadiths mention the number of veils of the Great Creator, Allah, the Lord of the worlds. In sermons in our country, statements are often made about seventy thousand veils of light, seventy veils, seven veils, and so on. Through detailed discussion and examination, the Hadith scholars have shown that some Hadiths conveying this meaning are unquestionably false and fabricated, while others are weak and unreliable. 3. The Enormous Rooster Beneath the Throne In sermons in our society, people sometimes speak about an enormous rooster beneath the Throne, its form, its crowing, and so forth. The Hadiths concerning this are baseless, fabricated, or extremely weak. (Suyuti, La’ali 1/60; Ibn ‘Iraq, Tanzih 1/155, 189.) 4. Whoever Knows Himself Knows Allah A statement very common among religious people in our society is: “Whoever knows himself knows his Lord.” Many scholars have cited this statement in their books, attributing it to the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) without a chain of transmission. However, the Hadith scholars have unanimously stated that this is not a statement of the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him), and that it has not been transmitted from him through any chain. Some Hadith scholars have mentioned that the statement was originally said by Yahya ibn Mu‘adh al-Razi (258 AH), a Sufi preacher of the third Islamic century. He used to say it while giving sermons and exhortations, as his own statement, not as a Hadith. Later, through carelessness, some scholars cited it as a Hadith. 5. The Believer’s Heart Is Allah’s Throne A statement widely circulated among religious people in our society is: “The believer’s heart is Allah’s Throne.” Various statements are current on this subject: “The heart is the house of the Lord.” “The believer’s heart is Allah’s Throne.” “My earth and My heaven could not contain Me, but the heart of My believing servant contained Me.” All of these are fabricated or forged Hadiths. Some authors have cited these statements in their books as Hadiths without chains of transmission. Even after extensive research, the leading Hadith scholars and memorizers found no chain for them, nor did they find them mentioned in any Hadith collection. None of these statements has been narrated from the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) through any chain. Therefore, they classified them among false and fabricated Hadiths. (Mulla ‘Ali al-Qari, al-Asrar, pp. 170 and 206; al-Masnu‘, pp. 100 and 130.) 6. I Was a Hidden Treasure A fabricated statement commonly known as a Hadith is: “I was an unknown hidden treasure. I desired to be known. So I created the universe, so that I might be known.” I have mentioned earlier that the fabricated Hadiths circulating in society are of two types. One type consists of fabricated Hadiths that have chains of transmission and have been compiled with their chains in some book. Through examining their chains, the Hadith scholars detected their fabrication. The second type consists of fabricated Hadiths that have not been narrated with a chain in any book. Nevertheless, they became commonly repeated, and on that basis some scholars mentioned them in their books without a chain. This statement is a completely nonexistent and chainless fabrication of that kind. (Ibn Taymiyyah, Ahadith al-Qussas, p. 55; Mulla ‘Ali al-Qari, al-Asrar, p. 179.) 7. Allah Will Call People by Their Mothers’ Names on the Day of Resurrection Another fabricated and false statement is that on the Day of Resurrection Allah will call people by their mothers’ names. On the one hand, this is a fabricated and invalid statement; on the other, it contradicts sahih Hadith. Various sahih Hadiths compiled by Imam Bukhari and other Hadith scholars state that on the Day of Resurrection people will be identified by their fathers’ names. It will be said, “So-and-so, the father of so-and-so,” or “So-and-so, the son of so-and-so.” (Sakhawi, al-Maghadith, p. 139; Suyuti, al-La’ali 2/449.) 8. The Inhabitants of Paradise Will Have No Beards It is said that the inhabitants of Paradise will have no beards and that everyone will remain beardless youth. Some say that only Adam (peace be upon him) will have a beard. Others say that only Musa (peace be upon him) or Harun (peace be upon him) will have a beard, or that Ibrahim (peace be upon him) and Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him) will have beards. All of these are false and fabricated statements. (Dhahabi, Mizan al-I‘tidal 3/393; Mulla Qari, al-Asrar, p. 75.) 9. Reflecting on Allah, Paradise, and Hell A commonly circulated false Hadith is: “Reflecting for one moment on the greatness of Almighty Allah, Paradise, and Hell is better than staying awake all night performing Tahajjud.” (Ibn ‘Iraq, Tanzih 1/148.)

2.3. Concerning Earlier Creations, Prophets, and Tafsir

The Qur’an discusses previous creations, previous prophets, and historical narratives only briefly. It discusses only those matters in which there is worldly and otherworldly instruction for people. Accounts of these creations and prophets were circulated in great detail among the Jews. Since the Qur’an does not provide detailed descriptions of these matters, many exegetes, from the age of the Companions and the Tabi‘un onward, listened with curiosity to Jewish reports about them. In addition, after many Jewish scholars accepted Islam during the generation of the Tabi‘un, they related to Muslims many stories and narratives current in their society concerning these matters. Islam did not prohibit hearing or relating these stories as stories. However, it prohibited believing them to be true. Some exegetes and historians, in explaining various verses concerning earlier prophets and relating histories centered on their lives, relied on the distorted Bible of the Jews and Christians and on other stories, some true and some false. During the early periods, Muslims listened to these merely as stories. In later periods, however, people began to regard these narratives as true. Some even propagated them as hadiths. The Qur’an repeatedly declares that the Jews and Christians distorted the Word of Allah revealed to them—the Torah, the Psalms, and the Gospel. They composed many statements themselves and passed them off as the Word of Allah. For this reason, the hadith literature instructs that their statements may be related, but on the condition that nothing may be accepted as true unless confirmed by the Qur’an. The Companions condemned reliance on information from the Jews and Christians. ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Abbas (may Allah be pleased with him) said: “How can you ask the Jews and Christians about anything, when your Book, which was revealed to Allah’s Messenger, is newer and you have read it in its pure form, with no distortion having entered it? This Qur’an has informed you that the followers of the earlier Scriptures changed and distorted Allah’s Book. They wrote books with their own hands and claimed that they were from Allah. They did this to gain a small worldly benefit. Can the knowledge that has come to you—the knowledge of the Qur’an and Sunnah—not restrain you from asking them anything?” (Al-Bukhari, al-Sahih, 6/2679). Despite all this, Israelite reports gradually continued to enter Muslim society. In later periods, Muslims continued to believe these reports precisely as statements from the Qur’an or hadith. It is not possible to discuss this matter in detail within the scope of this book. Therefore, I shall briefly point to a few matters. 1. The date of the creation of the world or the age of the world Everything said concerning the date and time of the world’s creation, the age of the world, the calculation of the period from Adam (peace be upon him) to Jesus (‘Isa, peace be upon him), and how long the world will remain, is false, untrue, and baseless. Fabricators invented many statements concerning this matter. The Bible of the Jews and Christians mentions the age of the world and states the time of the creation of humankind. According to the Bible’s calculation, the age of the present world is only 7,000 (seven thousand) years. This has been proven historically and scientifically to be false. Relying on these false and erroneous pieces of information, Muslim historians also wrote many things. Fabricators likewise forged many hadiths to this effect. 2. Accounts of other creations before humankind The Qur’an and hadith do not clearly state whether any intelligent creature other than the jinn existed in this world before humankind. However, the Qur’an states in various places that, before humankind, Almighty Allah created the jinn with intelligence, free will, and responsibility for worship, just as He created humankind. The Qur’an contains no detailed account of the creation of the jinn. No such account is found in any authentic hadith either. Whatever is said about the mystery of the creation of the jinn, their primordial father, their activities, their prophets and messengers, their punishment and wrath, their various kings and rulers, and the names of their prophets and messengers consists entirely of superstitions, folk tales, and unreliable imaginary narratives current among the Jews and Christians. The Qur’an states that Iblis belonged to the jinn. He became accursed after disobeying the command to prostrate before Adam. There is no authentic report about any history of his life before this event. Everything said about the account of Iblis’s birth, his lineage and deeds, his knowledge and grandeur, and his worship and devotion consists of statements made by various people, Israelite reports, and unreliable accounts. Books such as Qisas al-Anbiya are filled with these false stories. 3. The number of creations: eighteen thousand creatures A widely circulated statement is: “There are eighteen thousand creatures.” That is, the number of species and kinds of living creatures created in this universe is only 18,000. This is purely a popular tradition and the opinion of some scholars. No information about whether the number of Allah’s innumerable creations is hundreds of thousands or millions has been reported in any authentic—or even weak—hadith. 4. The number of prophets and messengers From the Qur’an it is known that Almighty Allah sent prophets and messengers to every nation and community in every age. It is stated: “A warner was sent to every nation.” (Surah 35, Fatir, verse 24. See also Surah 10, Yunus, verse 47.) The total number of these prophets and messengers is not mentioned in the Qur’an. Rather, the Qur’an states that Allah informed His Messenger about some of these prophets and messengers, but did not inform him about others. It is stated: وَرُسُلًا قَدْ قَصَصْنَاهُمْ عَلَيْكَ مِن قَبْلُ وَرُسُلًا لَّمْ نَقْصُصْهُمْ عَلَيْكَ ۚ “Many messengers We have related to you previously, and many messengers We have not related to you.” (Surah 4, al-Nisa, verse 164. See also Surah 40, Ghafir/ al-Mu’min, verse 78.) It is extremely well known among us that the number of prophets and messengers was 124,000 or 224,000. It should be noted here that not a single authentic hadith has been reported concerning the number of prophets and messengers. Some statements on this subject have been reported in several weak or fabricated hadiths. I have nowhere found a hadith with a chain explicitly stating 224,000. However, 124,000 and some other numbers have been reported in this regard. They are as follows: a. 124,000 It has been reported through several chains that the number of prophets and messengers was 124,000. Yet all these chains are extremely weak. Some hadith scholars considered hadiths conveying this meaning fabricated. Ibn Hibban and other hadith scholars narrated a hadith through their chains from a narrator of the third Hijri century named Ibrahim ibn Hisham ibn Yahya al-Ghassani (238 AH). Ibrahim said that his father told him, from his grandfather, from Abu Idris al-Khawlani, from Abu Dharr al-Ghifari: “I said, ‘O Messenger of Allah, how many prophets were there?’ He said, ‘124,000.’ I said, ‘O Messenger of Allah, how many of them were messengers?’ He said, ‘Three hundred and thirteen—a very large number.’” (Ibn Hibban, al-Sahih, 1/76–79). There is some disagreement among hadith scholars concerning the narrator Ibrahim ibn Hisham, the sole narrator of this hadith. Al-Tabarani and Ibn Hibban considered him generally acceptable. Other hadith scholars identified him as a liar. Abu Zur‘ah said: “The man is a great liar.” Abu Hatim al-Razi went to obtain hadith from him. He took his manuscript and compared it with his oral narration, finding countless contradictions and inconsistencies. He consequently said: “It appears that this man never spent time studying hadith. He seems to be a liar.” Al-Dhahabi described him as matruk, abandoned. (Al-Dhahabi, Mizan al-I‘tidal, 1/201; Ibn Hajar, Lisan al-Mizan, 1/122.) Since no one besides Ibrahim ibn Hisham narrated this hadith, Ibn al-Jawzi and some other hadith scholars described it as forged and fabricated. (Ibn Kathir, al-Tafsir, 1/586–587.) Imam Ahmad compiled another hadith with this meaning. In this hadith, a narrator named Mu‘an ibn Rifa‘ah says that ‘Ali ibn Yazid told him, from al-Qasim Abu ‘Abd al-Rahman, from Abu Umamah (may Allah be pleased with him): “How many prophets were there?” He said: “124,000.” (Ahmad, al-Musnad, 5/265.) The narrator of this hadith, Mu‘an ibn Rifa‘ah al-Sulami, was somewhat weak. (Ibn al-Jawzi, al-Du‘afa, 3/126; al-Dhahabi, Mizan al-I‘tidal, 6/455.) His teacher ‘Ali ibn Yazid was even weaker. Imam al-Bukhari called him munkar, objectionable. Imam al-Nasa’i, al-Daraqutni, and other hadith scholars described him as abandoned. (Al-Nasa’i, al-Du‘afa, p. 77.) His teacher al-Qasim Abu ‘Abd al-Rahman (112 AH) was also weak. Indeed, Imam Ahmad, Ibn Hibban, and other hadith scholars said that al-Qasim narrated many statements in the names of the Companions in such a way that it seemed he was making these mistakes deliberately. He claimed to have seen forty Companions who had participated in Badr, even though he was born in the middle of the first century. (Ibn al-Jawzi, al-Du‘afa, 3/14.) From this we see that this hadith too is extremely weak. This number has also been reported through two or three other extremely weak chains. Overall, even if this number is not considered fabricated, it is deemed extremely weak. Allah knows best. (Ibn Kathir, Tafsir, 1/587–588.) b. Eight thousand prophets Abu Ya‘la al-Mawsili narrated from Musa ibn ‘Ubaydah al-RabadhI, from Yazid ibn Aban al-Raqashi, that Anas ibn Malik (may Allah be pleased with him) said that the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said: “Almighty Allah sent 8,000 prophets: 4,000 among the Children of Israel and the remaining 4,000 among the rest of humankind.” (Ibn Kathir, Tafsir, 1/588.) This hadith is also weak. Imam Ibn Kathir said: “This chain too is weak. Al-RabadhI is weak, and his teacher al-Raqashi is even weaker.” Ibn Kathir stated that this number was also reported through another chain, which outwardly appears fairly acceptable. (Ibn Kathir, Tafsir, 1/588.) c. One thousand or more prophets In a hadith compiled by Imam Ahmad and other hadith scholars, the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said: “I am the last of one thousand or more prophets.” Ibn Kathir, al-Haythami, and other hadith scholars mentioned that, regarding the number, this hadith is somewhat more acceptable than the other hadiths, although its chain also contains weakness. (Ibn Kathir, Tafsir, 1/588.) 5. The names of the prophets and messengers The Qur’an mentions the names of twenty-five prophets: Adam (his name is mentioned 25 times; see Surah al-Baqarah, verse 31, and so on), Idris (2 times; see Surah Maryam, verse 56, and so on), Nuh (43 times; see Surah Al ‘Imran, verse 33, and so on), Hud (8 times; see Surah al-Baqarah, verse 124, and so on), Salih (9 times; see Surah al-A‘raf, verse 73, and so on), Ibrahim (69 times; see Surah al-Baqarah, verse 124, and so on), Lut (17 times; see Surah Hud, verse 70, and so on), Isma‘il (12 times; see Surah al-Baqarah, verse 125, and so on), Ishaq (17 times; see Surah al-Baqarah, verse 133, and so on), Ya‘qub (16 times; Surah al-Baqarah, verse 132, and so on), Yusuf (27 times; Surah al-An‘am, verse 84, and so on), Ayyub (4 times; Surah al-Nisa, verse 163, and so on), Shu‘ayb (11 times; see Surah al-A‘raf, verse 85, and so on), Musa (136 times; see Surah al-Baqarah, verse 51, and so on), Harun (20 times; see Surah al-Baqarah, verse 248, and so on), Yunus (4 times; see Surah al-Nisa, verse 163, and so on), Dawud (16 times; see Surah al-Baqarah, verse 251, and so on), Sulayman (17 times; Surah al-Baqarah, verse 102, and so on), Ilyas (3 times; Surah al-An‘am, verse 85, and so on), al-Yasa‘ (2 times; Surah al-An‘am, verse 86, and Surah Sad, verse 48), Dhu al-Kifl (2 times; Surah al-Anbiya, verse 85, and Surah Sad, verse 48), Zakariyya (7 times; see Surah Al ‘Imran, verse 37, and so on), Yahya (5 times; see Surah Al ‘Imran, verse 39, and so on), ‘Isa (25 times; see Surah al-Baqarah, verse 87, and so on), and Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him) [his name is mentioned four times: Surah Al ‘Imran 3:144, Surah al-Ahzab 33:40, Surah Muhammad 47:2, and Surah al-Fath 48:29. In the Qur’an, Allah addresses all the prophets and messengers by name and mentions their names when relating their stories. But this was not done in the case of Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him). In addressing him, the Qur’an mostly says, “O Prophet” or “O Messenger.” When speaking of him, it uses his honored titles, Prophet, Messenger, or Servant. Therefore, apart from four places, his name is not mentioned anywhere in the Qur’an.] (Ibn Kathir, Tafsir, 1/586; al-Qurtubi, Tafsir, 3/31.) The Qur’an states that the Jews claimed that ‘Uzayr was the son of Allah. (Surah 9, al-Tawbah, verse 30.) But it says nothing about whether he was a prophet. Abu Hurayrah (may Allah be pleased with him) said that the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said: “I do not know whether ‘Uzayr was a prophet or not.” (Abu Dawud, al-Sunan, 4/218; al-‘Azimabadi, ‘Awn al-Ma‘bud, 12/280.) The name Yusha‘ ibn Nun is mentioned in hadith as the servant of Musa. No authentic hadith narrated from the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) mentions the name of any other prophet. The name of Shith (peace be upon him), the son of Adam, is mentioned in some extremely weak or fabricated hadiths. Whatever is said about the names and biographies of prophets such as Qalut, Hizqil, Hazala, Samuel, Jirjis, Sham‘un, Irmiya, and Daniel consists fundamentally of Israelite reports and the opinions of exegetes and historians based on them. 6. The number of heavenly scriptures and scrolls Almighty Allah repeatedly states in the Qur’an that He gave scriptures to the prophets and messengers. However, neither the Qur’an nor any authentic hadith mentions the number of these Books and scrolls. The statement that there were “104” Books and scrolls is extremely famous in our country. It is not found in any reliable hadith. The hadith narrated from Abu Dharr (may Allah be pleased with him) concerning 124,000 prophets, mentioned above, contains the statement about these 104 scrolls and Books. We have seen that this hadith is fabricated or extremely weak. 7. Reports concerning the ages of the prophets and messengers The Qur’an says concerning Nuh (peace be upon him) that he lived for 950 years. Apart from this, the lifespan of no other prophet is given in the Qur’an. A hadith mentions that Adam (peace be upon him) lived for one thousand years. No further information on this subject is available. Everything written in popular books concerning the lifespans of the prophets has been taken from the distorted scriptures of the Jews and Christians. 8. The biographies of the prophets and messengers The biographies of the prophets and messengers mentioned above have not been discussed in detail in the Qur’an or hadith. Concerning Ilyas, al-Yasa‘, and Dhu al-Kifl (peace be upon them), nothing is said beyond mentioning their names. The matter of Idris (peace be upon him) is nearly the same. In the case of the other prophets and messengers, only certain instructive aspects of their lives are discussed. Most of what is said about their detailed biographies consists of Israelite reports and popular traditions. Most of what has been written in the commonly circulated Qisas al-Anbiya and books about the lives of various prophets in our country is a collection of such fabricated, baseless, and Israelite reports. It is not possible to discuss all these aspects in detail within the limited scope of this book. Nor do I possess the ability to discuss every matter in detail. Here I shall briefly mention a few matters. 9. Adam (peace be upon him) and Hawwa (Eve, peace be upon her) 9.1. The wheat fruit It is widely said in our country that Adam (peace be upon him) ate the fruit of a wheat tree. This statement is entirely baseless; it is found nowhere in the Qur’an or hadith. Allah Most High prohibited Adam and Hawwa (peace be upon them) from approaching a particular tree. Later, they ate from that tree at Satan’s prompting. This matter is mentioned in various places in the Qur’an and hadith. But the name of the tree or fruit is not mentioned anywhere. In later periods, exegetes named various trees. It was current among the Jews that Adam (peace be upon him) ate wheat—that is, the fruit of a wheat plant. Some said grapes, others dates, and so on. All of this is speculation. Nothing is said about it in hadith. The believer’s duty is to learn from this event, not to know the name of the tree or fruit. Under no circumstances should these human opinions be regarded as statements of Allah or His Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him). (Ibn Kathir, Qisas al-Anbiya, 1/19.) Many more fabricated statements concerning this wheat fruit are found in the commonly circulated Qisas al-Anbiya and similar books in our country: that a malicious argument arose in Adam’s mind, that Jibril (peace be upon him) removed it and buried it, and that a wheat plant grew from it, and so forth. All of these are fabricated and baseless statements. 9.2. The marriage and dowry of Adam and Hawwa (peace be upon them) The apparent wording of the Qur’an indicates that Hawwa was created before Adam (peace be upon him) entered Paradise and that both were commanded to remain in Paradise together. However, since the time of the Companions, some exegetes have said that Hawwa was created several days after Adam had been living in Paradise. The Qur’an states in various places that Hawwa was created from Adam. But the complete details of this process of creation are not given in the Qur’an or hadith. Exegetes have expressed various views. It is commonly said that the dowry for the marriage of Adam and Hawwa was reciting blessings upon the Prophet, and so on. No chain of transmission or basis for these statements is known. 9.3. Iblis’s taking help from the peacock and the snake Many stories circulate that Iblis tried to incite Adam and Hawwa (peace be upon them) with the help of a snake and a peacock. Researchers have stated that these were taken from the Jews and Christians. (Muhammad Abu Shahbah, al-Isra’iliyyat wa al-Mawdu‘at, pp. 178–180.) 9.4. After their descent to earth After Adam and Hawwa (peace be upon them) descended to earth, the Qur’an says nothing about them. Nothing specific on this subject is found in authentic hadith either. No information is available about where they descended, where they lived, what work they did, what language they spoke, how they worshipped, or how they conducted their family and social lives. Almost everything circulated about these matters consists of the opinions of exegetes and historians or stories told by storytellers. One or two hadiths with weak chains have also been reported on these matters. Allah knows best. 9.5. Adam’s building of the Ka‘bah It is commonly said that Adam (peace be upon him) built the sacred Ka‘bah. These are essentially statements of various historians, exegetes, and scholars. The hadiths concerning this matter have weak chains. Some hadith scholars considered all the reports on this subject extremely weak and invalid. Allamah Ibn Kathir, citing the verses concerning the House of Allah, said that these verses clearly state that Ibrahim (peace be upon him) built the first blessed House, the House of Allah, established for all humankind for the worship of Allah alone. This place had been greatly honored from the beginning of creation. Allah showed that place to His intimate friend through revelation. He further said: “Not a single authentic hadith has been narrated from the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) that the Ka‘bah was built before Ibrahim (peace be upon him). All reports on this subject are Israelite reports. We have previously stated that they may neither be believed nor declared false.” (Tafsir Ibn Kathir, 1/173–174.) 10. Defecating in and cleaning Noah’s ark Many sensational stories circulate about this matter. I have not found that any of them has a basis in an authentic or weak hadith. Apparently, these are fabricated stories invented by storytellers. Countless fabricated and baseless narratives also circulate concerning Noah’s ark: what kind of wood it was made from, which animals were where, how Satan entered it, and so on. No information on these matters has been provided in authentic hadith. 11. Idris’s bodily ascension to heaven Idris (peace be upon him) is mentioned in two places in the Qur’an. In one place it is stated: “And Ishmael, Idris, and Dhu al-Kifl—all were among the patient.” (Surah 21, al-Anbiya, verse 85.) Elsewhere it is stated: “And mention Idris in the Book: he was indeed a man of truth and a prophet, and We raised him to a high station.” (Surah 19, Maryam, verses 56–57.) The hadith literature also contains little concerning Idris (peace be upon him). Everything said about his birth, lineage, place of work, and so forth consists of Israelite reports or fabricated stories of storytellers. In particular, it is famous in our society that four prophets are eternally alive: Khidr and Ilyas (peace be upon them) on earth, and Idris and ‘Isa (peace be upon them) in heaven. It is commonly said that Idris (peace be upon him) was taken bodily to the fourth or sixth heaven while alive, that he remains alive there, or that he died there and was then brought back to life. All these statements are baseless Israelite reports. Apart from ‘Isa (peace be upon him), nothing has been narrated from the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) in either an authentic or weak hadith about any prophet remaining alive or ascending to heaven while alive. The meaning of Allah’s raising him to a high station is that He granted him a high rank. One aspect of this rank is that, after his death, Allah granted him a spiritual place in heaven together with several other great prophets and messengers. An authentic hadith mentions that, on the night of the Mi‘raj, the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) met eight prophets in the heavens: Adam in the first heaven, Yahya in the second, Yusuf in the third, Idris in the fourth, Harun in the fifth, Musa in the sixth, and Ibrahim (peace be upon him) in the seventh. (Al-Bukhari, al-Sahih, 1/136; 3/1173, 1216–1217, 1410–1411; Muslim, al-Sahih, 1/148–150.) Apart from ‘Isa (peace be upon him), all the other prophets were granted this honor after a natural death. (Ibn Kathir, Qisas al-Anbiya, 1/61–62; Darwish Hutt, Asna al-Matalib, p. 25.) 12. Hud and Shaddad’s paradise Everything related about Shaddad’s birth, his life, the extravagant descriptions of Shaddad’s paradise, and his death before entering it consists of fabricated and baseless statements—some Jewish reports and some imaginary stories invented by fabricators. Nothing concerning this subject has been narrated from the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) in any authentic or weak hadith. Some people have even attributed this falsehood to Allah. One writer wrote: “Allah Himself also mentioned that paradise in the Holy Qur’an, saying, ‘O Muhammad! Shaddad built such a paradise on earth that no human being in the world has ever been able to build such palaces…’” (Maw. Md. Ashrafuzzaman, Sahih Qisas al-Anbiya, p. 235; M.N.M. Imdadullah, Adi o Asal Qisas al-Anbiya, 1/98.) What a vile lie! What a vile distortion of Allah’s Word! Here the meaning of verses 6–7 of Surah al-Fajr has been distorted and presented falsely. In fact, many exegetes quoted these fabricated and false stories without chains while explaining these verses. They were again mentioned without chains in the book Qisas al-Anbiya. All of it is false. Regarding this, Imam Ibn Kathir said: “Many exegetes said such things about the city of Iram in explaining this verse. Let the reader not be deceived by their statements. All these statements are the superstitions of the Israelites and fabricated fantasies of some of their heretics. Through them they test the understanding of ignorant common people, who believe whatever they hear.” (Ibn Kathir, Tafsir, 4/509.) 13. Ibrahim (peace be upon him) 13.1. Ibrahim’s father Although Allah has declared the Qur’an to be the standard by which the authenticity of the Torah, Psalms, and Gospel is judged, some commentators and scholars treat the biblical account as a criterion of authenticity and interpret the Qur’anic account on its basis. A vile example of this concerns the name of Ibrahim’s father. Almighty Allah says: “And when Ibrahim said to his father, Azar…” (Surah al-An‘am, verse 74.) Here the name of Ibrahim’s father is explicitly given as Azar. But the Bible says that Ibrahim’s father’s name was Terah. (Bible, Genesis 11:24–32.) The Qur’an generally does not discuss additional information about the fathers and mothers of the prophets, their birthplaces, lifespans, and so forth, apart from matters related to prophethood, calling people to Allah, and miracles. Sometimes information is given to refute Jewish falsehoods. For example, the Jews distorted their Bible and wrote that Allah created the earth in six days and rested on the seventh. The Qur’an states that Allah experienced no labor in creating the universe and had no need for rest. The reason for specifically mentioning Ibrahim’s father’s name here was probably to expose the Jews’ error concerning his father’s name. In all circumstances, a believer needs no account after the account of the Qur’an and hadith. Therefore, most knowledgeable exegetes have said that Ibrahim’s father’s name was Azar. This Qur’anic information is decisive. The Muslim ummah has no need whatsoever to turn to Jewish and Christian information. Influenced by the biblical account, some exegetes sought to reconcile the two. Some said that both Azar and Terah were names of Ibrahim’s father, just as Ya‘qub (peace be upon him) had another name, Israel. Others said that one was his title and the other his name. There are several similar opinions. These interpretations do not distort the Qur’anic account. All agree that “his father” here means Ibrahim’s biological father, and that Azar was either his name or his title. (Ibn Kathir, Tafsir, 2/150–151; al-Tabari, Tafsir, 7/242–249.) However, the most vile and false view commonly circulated is that the biblical account is correct: Ibrahim’s father was named Terah and was never named Azar. Without directly calling the Qur’anic account false, they offered the absurd interpretation that one of Ibrahim’s uncles was named Azar, and that the Qur’an called the uncle “father.” In this way, they accepted the biblical account as the standard of authenticity and distorted the clear meaning of the Qur’an. Calling an uncle “father” in this context is essentially a distortion of the Qur’an’s meaning and a rejection of its clear meaning without any necessity. Although, in some exceptional contexts, there may be a remote possibility of calling an uncle “father,” we must remember two matters. First, the hadith literature strictly prohibits calling anyone other than one’s biological father one’s father or claiming to be his child. Second, interpreting the clear meaning of the Qur’an metaphorically or evasively without an explicit indication from another verse or hadith is tantamount to distortion. From the hadith compiled in Sahih al-Bukhari we also learn that Azar was Ibrahim’s biological father, and that Ibrahim will rebuke this same Azar on the Day of Resurrection, after which he will be cast into Hell in the form of an animal. (Al-Bukhari, al-Sahih, 3/1223; Ibn Hajar, Fath al-Bari, 8/500.) To support this distortion and misinterpretation, some claim that Ibrahim’s biological father was not an unbeliever, because none of his ancestors from Adam (peace be upon him) to the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) was an unbelieving polytheist. This statement is baseless and clearly contrary to the Qur’an, authentic hadith, and historical information. The Qur’an and authentic hadith repeatedly describe Ibrahim’s father as an unbeliever. It is mentioned in the hadiths of al-Bukhari and Muslim that the Messenger of Allah’s grandfather, ‘Abd al-Muttalib, followed the religion of unbelief. When the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) invited his uncle Abu Talib to accept Islam at the time of his death, he refused and said, “I shall remain upon the religion of ‘Abd al-Muttalib.” (Al-Bukhari, al-Sahih, 1/457; Muslim, al-Sahih, 1/54.) Naturally, his ancestors from the time of ‘Amr ibn Luhayy until the time of ‘Abd al-Muttalib were also involved in polytheism, although they were renowned for honesty, morality, and public service. (Ibn Hisham, al-Sirah al-Nabawiyyah, 1/93–94.) All the ancestors of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) were free from immorality, adultery, and indecency. (Al-Tabari, al-Tafsir, 11/76; Ibn Kathir, Tafsir, 2/404.) 13.2. Ibrahim’s tawakkul A fabricated story is commonly circulated among us in the name of Ibrahim (peace be upon him). It says that when he was thrown into the fire, Jibril (peace be upon him) came and said: “If you have any need, tell me.” He replied: “I have no need from you.” Jibril said: “Then pray to your Lord.” He replied: “He knows my condition, and that is sufficient for me. Therefore, I have no need to pray any further.” This story is a baseless fabrication. It was a story current among the Jews that entered Muslim society without a chain of transmission. Hadith scholars considered it fabricated. The Qur’an mentions many supplications of Ibrahim (peace be upon him). No incident is narrated in the Qur’an or hadith in which he never supplicated for any need. (Ibn ‘Iraq, Tanzih al-Shari‘ah, 1/250; al-‘Ajluni, Kashf al-Khafa, 1/136.) Abandoning supplication in the name of tawakkul contradicts the teachings of the Qur’an and hadith. The hadith literature instructs us to ask Allah for every matter, however small. To learn more about these matters, read the book Rahe Belayat. 13.3. Slitting the son’s throat In Surah al-Saffat, the Glorious Allah mentions that Ibrahim (peace be upon him) proceeded to sacrifice his son. It is stated: “Ibrahim said, ‘My Lord, grant me a righteous son.’ So We gave him the good news of a forbearing son. When he reached the age at which he could work with his father, Ibrahim said, ‘My son, I see in a dream that I am sacrificing you, so consider what you think.’ He said, ‘O my father, do what you have been commanded. If Allah wills, you will find me among the patient.’ When they had both submitted and he laid him down on his side, We called to him, ‘O Ibrahim, you have fulfilled the vision.’ Thus do We reward those who do good. (Surah 37, al-Saffat, verses 100–105.) The matter is stated here with complete clarity. Nevertheless, many false statements contrary to the Qur’an and hadith circulate in our society as hadith and tafsir. I draw readers’ attention to several matters. First, the Qur’an clearly states that Ibrahim saw in a dream that he was slaughtering his son. It is commonly said in our country that Ibrahim dreamed, “Sacrifice the thing you love most.” This is a baseless fabrication. No such account exists in any authentic or weak hadith. Second, the Qur’an clearly states that Ibrahim informed his son that he had seen in a dream that he was slaughtering him. Yet it is commonly said among us that Ibrahim took his wife and son out of the house by telling them the false story that they were going to attend a feast, and so on, and finally told his son the truth. None of this has been narrated from the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) through any reliable source. Moreover, these statements are contrary to the dignity of the prophets. Why would Allah’s intimate friend lie to his wife and son? Third, it is commonly said that Ibrahim (peace be upon him) tied his son Isma‘il tightly with a rope, laid him down, and repeatedly ran a knife across his throat. All of this is fabricated and baseless. The Qur’an clearly says that, as soon as they prepared for the slaughter, a call came from Allah. No incident of running a knife across his throat took place. Hadith also states that an alternative animal was provided by Allah at the time the slaughter was being prepared. (Ibn Kathir, Tafsir, 4/16.) Regarding this, the famous thirteenth-century Syrian hadith scholar Muhammad ibn al-Sayyid Darwish Hutt (1276 AH) said: “The story commonly told concerning Ibrahim (peace be upon him)—that he ran a knife across his son’s throat but it did not cut him—is fabricated, false, and invented by heretics.” (Darwish Hutt, Asna al-Matalib, pp. 283–284.) 14. Ayyub’s (peace be upon him) affliction The Qur’an says that Ayyub (peace be upon him), afflicted by hardship, remained patient and supplicated to Allah. Allah accepted his supplication, rescued him from his affliction, and restored his wealth and children to him. (Surah al-Anbiya, verses 83–84; Surah Sad, verses 41–44.) No account is found in the Qur’an or authentic hadith concerning the type, nature, details, or duration of Ayyub’s affliction, or the names of his wife and relatives. Everything said about this matter consists essentially of Israelite reports. Most accounts contain unrestricted imaginary descriptions. Various exegetes expressed various views. In particular, Tabi‘i scholars such as Wahb ibn Munabbih and Ka‘b al-Ahbar, who accepted Islam from Judaism and were familiar with the Jewish scriptures and the stories current among the Jews, related these stories as “stories.” (Ibn Kathir, Qisas al-Anbiya, 1/230–236; Abu Shuhbah, al-Isra’iliyyat, pp. 275–282.) They may be related as stories, but they must never be believed to be true. In particular, these stories give such imaginary descriptions of Ayyub’s illness that they are incompatible with the dignity of a prophet. Had they been narrated in an authentic hadith, we would have accepted and explained them. But since nothing on this subject has been narrated in authentic hadith, and these are stories of Israelite narrators and reports, they must be rejected. Darwish Hutt (1276 AH) said concerning this: “It is said in the story of Ayyub (peace be upon him) that Allah gave Iblis power over him. Iblis then blew into his body, causing it to be afflicted with leprosy. His flesh even rotted and became infested with worms, and so on. Storytellers say these things, and some exegetes have mentioned them. All these statements are pure fabrication, falsehood, and invention. Whoever says or quotes them, regardless of how great his rank may be, that does not alter the matter. These statements are not found in Allah’s Book, nor are they narrated in any hadith of His Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him). They are not even narrated in a hadith with a weak or invalid chain. They are all chainless reports.” (Darwish Hutt, Asna al-Matalib, p. 284.) 15. The alleged love of Dawud (peace be upon him) A very indecent story about the prophet Dawud (peace be upon him) is found in various tafsir books and in one or two hadith collections from later periods. The story entered Muslim society primarily from the Jewish Bible and from the mouths of Jewish scholars living during the time of the Tabi‘un. Regrettably, however, some books have also propagated this incident in the name of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him). One of the particularly indecent features of the Jews is that they wrote in their scriptures, the Torah and Psalms, obscene stories about their own prophets and messengers that cannot be expressed in decent language. These stories surpass even the accounts of the immoral deeds of the gods and goddesses in the Ramayana and Mahabharata. One of them is the story of love, adultery, and murder attributed to Dawud (peace be upon him). This very story has been circulated in Muslim society in a somewhat modified form. Its summary is as follows: One day Dawud (peace be upon him) happened to catch a glimpse of a woman bathing. He became intensely infatuated with her. The woman’s husband was named Uriah, and he was a soldier. Dawud conspired with the chief commander to have Uriah killed on the battlefield. When Uriah was eventually killed, Dawud married the woman. (Allah forbid!) (Al-Tabari, al-Tafsir, 23/14; al-Qurtubi, Tafsir, 15/166–185.) The Bible records this incident in an even more indecent manner. (Bible, 2 Samuel 11:1–27.) This incident is not only false and contrary to the character of the prophets; it is also contrary to human reason. It is inconceivable that a sensible, mature man with countless wives, who is also a popular ruler, would become so infatuated merely because he happened to look once at a woman and then resort to murder and conspiracy. (Muhammad Abu Shahbah, al-Isra’iliyyat, pp. 264–270.) 16. Harut and Marut Magic was widespread among the Jews. They also claimed that Sulayman (peace be upon him) attained power through magic. They further claimed that Sulayman himself and two angels named Harut and Marut taught them magic. In refutation of these false claims, it is stated in verse 102 of Surah al-Baqarah: وَاتَّبَعُوا مَا تَتْلُو الشَّيَاطِينُ عَلَىٰ مُلْكِ سُلَيْمَانَ ۖ وَمَا كَفَرَ سُلَيْمَانُ وَلَٰكِنَّ الشَّيَاطِينَ كَفَرُوا يُعَلِّمُونَ النَّاسَ السِّحْرَ وَمَا أُنزِلَ عَلَى الْمَلَكَيْنِ بِبَابِلَ هَارُوتَ وَمَارُوتَ ۚ وَمَا يُعَلِّمَانِ مِنْ أَحَدٍ حَتَّىٰ يَقُولَا إِنَّمَا نَحْنُ فِتْنَةٌ فَلَا تَكْفُرْ ۖ “They followed what the devils recited during the reign of Sulayman. Sulayman did not disbelieve; rather, the devils disbelieved, teaching people magic, and what was sent down upon the two angels in Babylon, Harut and Marut. They taught no one without saying, ‘We are only a trial, so do not disbelieve.’…” There has been disagreement among exegetes concerning the meaning and interpretation of this verse since the time of the Companions and the Tabi‘un. ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Abbas (may Allah be pleased with him) and some other exegetes said that the Arabic particle used with Harut and Marut means “not.” That is, magic was not sent down upon the two angels, Harut and Marut. Just as the Jews’ claim concerning Sulayman (peace be upon him) is false, so their claim concerning Harut and Marut is also false. Generally, however, exegetes have said that when the Jews began to claim that everything was magic, without distinguishing between miracles, extraordinary acts, and magic, Allah appointed two angels to teach people the nature of magic and the difference between magic and miracles. They taught people this distinction and said: “Do not use this knowledge for magic and thereby disbelieve.” Nevertheless, many remained immersed in the unbelief of using magic. Some exegetes have said that the two were human beings; because of their special knowledge, scholarship, or righteousness, people called them angels. In this way, they taught people about the harmful effects of magic. Nothing else is said about Harut and Marut in the Qur’an. Nothing is found on this subject in authentic hadith either. Nevertheless, many stories concerning them circulate in tafsir books and society as hadith or tafsir. The summary of the story is that, because of the sins of humankind, the angels said to Allah: “Why do You forgive people for so many sins, or why do You not punish them?” Allah said to them: “If you possessed human nature, you too would commit such sins.” They replied: “Never.” The angels then selected two angels named Harut and Marut for a test. They were given human nature and sent to earth. They fell in love with a supremely beautiful woman named Zahrah and became involved in the sins of drinking wine, adultery, and murder. Zahrah, for her part, learned incantations from them and flew into the sky. She was then transformed into a star. These stories are essentially a collection of narratives current among the Jews. However, they have also been narrated as hadiths in some tafsir books. All hadiths concerning this matter were narrated through extremely weak or fabricated chains. Some hadith scholars considered several reports acceptable because of their various chains. Many hadith scholars judged all of them fabricated and invented. Allamah al-Qurtubi and other hadith scholars and exegetes have stated that these stories contradict the Islamic belief concerning angels. In Judaism, Christianity, and many other religions, angels are imagined to possess human nature. It is also believed that they have their own will and power of decision. In Islamic belief, angels are pure of every human desire, personal thought, and inclination to oppose Allah’s decree. They may ask Almighty Allah questions in order to learn something. But they have no disposition whatsoever to challenge any act or statement of Allah. Therefore, these stories contradict Islamic creed. Regarding this matter, Allamah Ibn Kathir and several other hadith scholars gathered all the reports and, on the basis of comparative examination, stated that nothing concerning it had been narrated from the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) through any authentic hadith or reliable chain. The hadiths attributed to him on this subject are fabricated. However, some reports from the Companions, presented as their own statements, have chains that are generally acceptable. It is very well known that some Companions listened to and related various stories current among the Jews concerning such matters. It is possible that they made these statements on the basis of those reports. Allah knows best. (Al-Tabari, 1/451–464; Ibn Kathir, 1/135–144.) Many other fabricated stories and Israelite reports concerning earlier prophets and messengers circulate in our society. Books such as Qisas al-Anbiya are filled with these false narratives. A much larger scope would be needed to discuss them in detail. For the present, I conclude the discussion of this subject here.

2.4. Regarding the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him)

The Qur’an and many authentic hadiths describe the boundless and incomparable honor, virtue, greatness, and importance of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him). Yet many believers are not attracted by their profound language, intellectual appeal, and spiritual inspiration. Consequently, instead of discussing, writing, and mentioning these verses and authentic hadiths, people often discuss and circulate entirely baseless, fabricated, and highly unreliable hadiths. Three major areas in which forged hadiths are widespread are: (1) works on virtues and the rewards of good deeds; (2) works about earlier prophets and Qisas al-Anbiya; and (3) works on the birth, life, miracles, and Sirah of the Messenger of Allah. Such fabrications increased over time. Numerous baseless reports entered Sirah, Dalail, and miracle works compiled in the tenth, eleventh, and twelfth Islamic centuries, reports found neither in earlier hadith collections nor even in earlier Sirah or miracle books. Allama Abul Kalam Azad discussed some such fabricated stories in Rasule Rahmat, including the alleged visits of Asiya and Maryam before the Prophet’s birth, their giving Aminah glad tidings of his birth, and her experiencing no hardship during pregnancy or childbirth. Some claim that lies told in the Prophet’s name increase his honor. What a vile idea! Allah and His Messenger are greatly displeased by lies, and the worst lie is one told against Allah and His Messenger. Allah gave earlier prophets many tangible miracles and gave the final Prophet many as well, but most of his fundamental miracles are intangible and intellectual; knowledge of language, literature, philosophy, and science enables people to appreciate them. Storytellers, preachers, and fabricators sometimes invented tales and circulated them as hadiths to attract, entertain, or excite ignorant people. Identifying such false reports is not disrespect; lying in his name is the greatest disrespect and enmity toward him. Resisting, identifying, and avoiding lies is his instruction, and obeying it is true loyalty, following, devotion, and love. 1. “I am the final prophet; there is no prophet after me, unless Allah wills.” This is a vile fabrication. The Qur’an declares him the final prophet, and innumerable rigorously authenticated reports in all major hadith collections state that there will be no prophet after him. He is the final brick in the prophets’ edifice and through him prophethood ended. The additional phrase “unless Allah wills” was attributed only by the heretic Muhammad ibn Sa‘id, and appears neither in hadith collections nor in any authentic chain. Yet Qadianis and other misguided groups use it as evidence. The rightly guided Muslim submits personal desires and opinions to Allah and His Messenger. When hearing a hadith, the only concern is whether its chain is authentic—not whether its meaning agrees with one’s opinion. Misguided people accept statements according to their preferences and distort or reject anything contrary to them. 2. “If you had not existed, I would not have created the heavens and the earth.” Scholars including al-Saghani, Mulla Ali al-Qari, and Abd al-Hayy al-Lucknawi unanimously called this fabricated and baseless, since it is not transmitted in any hadith collection with any chain. Other weak or fabricated reports convey a similar meaning. One such report says that Adam sought forgiveness through Muhammad’s right, saw the declaration of faith written on the Throne, and was forgiven; al-Hakim recorded it and called it authentic, but the hadith experts agreed it is weak, and some called it fabricated. Its transmitters include the extremely unreliable Abd al-Harith and Abd al-Rahman ibn Zayd ibn Aslam, whom even al-Hakim accused of transmitting fabricated reports. Another report attributed the idea to Ibn Abbas, claiming that Allah revealed to Jesus that Muhammad should be believed in and that Adam, Paradise, and Hell would not have been created without him. Al-Hakim called its chain authentic, but al-Dhahabi judged it apparently fabricated because its sole transmitter was unknown. Other hadith scholars likewise classified it as forged.اللَّهُ نُورُ السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالْأَرْضِ ۚ مَثَلُ نُورِهِ كَمِشْكَاةٍ فِيهَا مِصْبَاحٌ ۖAllah is the Light of the heavens and the earth. The likeness of His light is as a niche containing a lamp. Al-Tabari explained that Allah is the guide of all within the heavens and earth, and that by His light they are guided to truth. Ibn Abbas explained it as His guidance of the inhabitants of the heavens and earth, while Anas reported: “My guidance is My light.” The Qur’an also describes the Qur’an itself as light, and regarding the Messenger of Allah it says that those who believe in him, honor him, support him, and follow the light sent down with him are successful.الَّذِينَ يَتَّبِعُونَ الرَّسُولَ النَّبِيَّ الْأُمِّيَّ الَّذِي يَجِدُونَهُ مَكْتُوبًا عِندَهُمْ فِي التَّوْرَاةِ وَالْإِنجِيلِ يَأْمُرُهُم بِالْمَعْرُوفِ وَيَنْهَاهُمْ عَنِ الْمُنكَرِ وَيُحِلُّ لَهُمُ الطَّيِّبَاتِ وَيُحَرِّمُ عَلَيْهِمُ الْخَبَائِثَ وَيَضَعُ عَنْهُمْ إِصْرَهُمْ وَالْأَغْلَالَ الَّتِي كَانَتْ عَلَيْهِمْ ۚ فَالَّذِينَ آمَنُوا بِهِ وَعَزَّرُوهُ وَنَصَرُوهُ وَاتَّبَعُوا النُّورَ الَّذِي أُنزِلَ مَعَهُ ۙ أُولَٰئِكَ هُمُ الْمُفْلِحُونَ [٧:١٥٧Those who follow the unlettered Prophet, believe in him, honor him, support him, and follow the light sent down with him—they are the successful. Here the “light” sent down upon the Messenger of Allah means the Qur’an. Elsewhere the Qur’an is called spirit and light.وَكَذَٰلِكَ أَوْحَيْنَا إِلَيْكَ رُوحًا مِّنْ أَمْرِنَا ۚ مَا كُنتَ تَدْرِي مَا الْكِتَابُ وَلَا الْإِيمَانُ وَلَٰكِن جَعَلْنَاهُ نُورًا نَّهْدِي بِهِ مَن نَّشَاءُ مِنْ عِبَادِنَا ۚ وَإِنَّكَ لَتَهْدِي إِلَىٰ صِرَاطٍ مُّسْتَقِيمٍ [٤٢:٥٢Thus We revealed to you a spirit from Our command. You did not know what the Book or faith was, but We made it a light by which We guide whom We will among Our servants. The Torah revealed to Moses is also called light, and the Torah and Gospel are described as containing guidance and light. Commentators have differed concerning the meaning of “Allah’s light” in other verses.يُرِيدُونَ أَن يُطْفِئُوا نُورَ اللَّهِ بِأَفْوَاهِهِمْ وَيَأْبَى اللَّهُ إِلَّا أَن يُتِمَّ نُورَهُ وَلَوْ كَرِهَ الْكَافِرُونَ [٩:٣٢They wish to extinguish Allah’s light with their mouths, but Allah will perfect His light, even though the disbelievers dislike it. Commentators gave five explanations: Allah’s light means the Qur’an, Islam, Muhammad, Allah’s proofs, or the sun. These interpretations were attributed respectively to Ibn Abbas and Ibn Zayd, al-Suddi, al-Dahhak, Ibn Bahr, and Ibn Isa.الر ۚ كِتَابٌ أَنزَلْنَاهُ إِلَيْكَ لِتُخْرِجَ النَّاسَ مِنَ الظُّلُمَاتِ إِلَى النُّورِ بِإِذْنِ رَبِّهِمْ إِلَىٰ صِرَاطِ الْعَزِيزِ الْحَمِيدِ [١٤:١This is a Book We sent down to you so that you may bring humanity out of darkness into light. Here darkness and light obviously do not mean physical objects: darkness means disbelief, while light means the Qur’an or Islam. In other verses commentators similarly interpret “light” as the Qur’an, Islam, or Muhammad.يَا أَهْلَ الْكِتَابِ قَدْ جَاءَكُمْ رَسُولُنَا يُبَيِّنُ لَكُمْ كَثِيرًا مِّمَّا كُنتُمْ تُخْفُونَ مِنَ الْكِتَابِ وَيَعْفُو عَن كَثِيرٍ ۚ قَدْ جَاءَكُم مِّنَ اللَّهِ نُورٌ وَكِتَابٌ مُّبِينٌ [٥:١٥People of the Book, Our Messenger has come to you, clarifying much of what you concealed of the Book and overlooking much. There has come to you from Allah a light and a clear Book. Commentators differed: some said the light is the Qur’an, some Islam, and some Muhammad. These interpretations are not contradictory. Some explained it as Islam because the verse first mentions the Messenger and then the Book; others explained it as the Qur’an. Al-Tabari said that “light” here means Muhammad, through whom Allah illuminated truth, made Islam victorious, and eradicated polytheism. The distinction between diya and nur was also discussed: the former includes heat, while the latter is gentle and pleasant; therefore Islamic law is called light.يَا أَيُّهَا النَّبِيُّ إِنَّا أَرْسَلْنَاكَ شَاهِدًا وَمُبَشِّرًا وَنَذِيرًا [٣٣:٤٥] وَدَاعِيًا إِلَى اللَّهِ بِإِذْنِهِ وَسِرَاجًا مُّنِيرًا [٣٣:٤٦O Prophet, We sent you as a witness, a bearer of good news, and a warner; as one who calls to Allah by His permission, and as an illuminating lamp. The Qur’an is called light as guidance to truth and the right path. Some commentators interpret “light” in certain verses as the Messenger or Islam. This does not mean that Muhammad, the Qur’an, or Islam was physically made of light. It refers to an intangible spiritual and ideological light that illuminates hearts from disbelief and confusion to faith, truth, and guidance. Second: the hadiths concerning the Muhammadan light. The Qur’an and hadith repeatedly state that human beings were created from earth. Adam was created from earthly material, while later generations are born through ordinary physical processes. The Messenger is repeatedly described as a human being. Some reports claim that he was created from light, and their meaning may seem attractive; nevertheless, Muslims must verify every report before accepting it. A creature’s honor lies in its deeds, not its material or lineage. Here are several fabricated reports on this subject.ﷺWhen we hear that even the material of creation gave our beloved Prophet Muhammad a special distinction, we may like it. But the essential quality of the Muslim community is to verify every statement before accepting it. Reports are judged first by the reliability of their evidence and then by their meaning. Here are several fabricated hadiths on this subject. 4. The Messenger and Ali were created from light.ﷺ“I and Ali were created from light. Two thousand years before Adam was created, we were on the right side of the Throne; when Allah created Adam, we began moving through human loins.” The hadith scholars unanimously classified this as false and fabricated. The liar Ja‘far ibn Ahmad ibn Ali al-Ghafiqi invented both the report and its chain. 5. The Messenger was created from Allah’s light and Abu Bakr from his light.ﷺ“Allah created me from His light, Abu Bakr from my light, Umar from Abu Bakr’s light, and my community from Umar’s light.” The hadith scholars unanimously declared it false and fabricated. Ahmad ibn Yusuf al-Manbaji promoted it and invented an attractive chain. Other versions claim that all believers, apart from prophets and messengers, were created from Umar’s light, or that Umar and Aisha were created from Abu Bakr’s light and believing men and women from the lights of Umar and Aisha. These too are baseless.ﷺ6. The Messenger was created from the light of Allah’s Face. Fabricators inserted many vile statements into the forged book Sirr al-Asrar, attributed to Abd al-Qadir al-Jilani. One says that Allah declared: “I created Muhammad from the light of My Face.” This vile lie is not transmitted even with a fabricated chain.ﷺ7. Rice was created from the Messenger’s light. Another fabricated statement says: “Rice is from me and I am from rice; rice was created from my remaining light.” 8. The believer was created from Allah’s light. Al-Daylami attributed to the Messenger: “The believer sees by Allah’s light, from which he was created.” This hadith is fabricated. Its sole transmitter, Maysarah ibn Abd Rabbihi, was a notorious fabricator and liar. The hadith critics unanimously agreed about him and cited many forged reports he invented.ﷺ9. The Muhammadan light was the first creation. The reports above are not widely circulated in our society, although scholars recorded them and exposed their chains as forged. By contrast, the statement “Allah first created my light,” which is found in no hadith collection and has no trace anywhere, has become extremely widespread. It has even been accepted as part of Islamic belief and printed as a hadith in recognized madrasa texts. It is circulated as part of a lengthy report allegedly narrated by Jabir, in which the Prophet says that Allah first created the light of his Prophet from His own light.ﷺJabir allegedly asked what Allah created first, and the answer was: “Allah first created the light of your Prophet from His light.” The report then claims that this light was divided and used to create the Throne, Footstool, Tablet, Pen, angels, jinn, humans, and the entire universe. These words sound pleasing, but the report is not acceptable merely because its meaning appeals to us.ﷺIf lying in the name of the Messenger or repeating everything one hears were permitted, we might accept and repeat these claims without hesitation. But since it is forbidden, we must object.ﷺEverything circulated claiming that the Messenger was first created from light or that the universe and other creatures were created from his light is baseless, fabricated, and false. Some claim that al-Bayhaqi or Abd al-Razzaq al-San‘ani recorded this hadith, but neither their works nor any hadith collection contains it—not with an authentic, weak, or fabricated chain. Hadith collections contain reports of every grade, often in many books and chains, but this statement cannot be found in even one. It was unknown for centuries after the Prophet and appears neither in early books nor in chainless Sirah, historical, or preaching works.ﷺAs far as is known, the seventh-century scholar Muhyi al-Din Ibn Arabi was the first to cite these words as a hadith. His books contain numerous fabricated reports and statements apparently conflicting with Islamic belief. Later admirers offered various excuses and interpretations, while others strongly criticized him. Ahmad ibn Abd al-Ahad al-Sarhindi repeatedly opposed Ibn Arabi’s baseless fabrications, sometimes gently and sometimes severely. He wrote that Muslims deal with the clear, decisive Qur’anic and hadith texts, not with Ibn Arabi’s Kashf-based Fusus al-Hikam, and that the hadiths of the Madani Prophet make them independent of Ibn Arabi’s works. Ibn Arabi gave this unsupported statement a central place in his cosmology and promoted the doctrine of the Muhammadan light in imitation of the Christian Logos theory. Christians claimed that God first created the Word or Son from His essence and created all other things through him. Ibn Arabi said Allah first created the Muhammadan light and created everything from it. The claim gradually spread, especially from the ninth and tenth Islamic centuries, as authors increasingly copied one another without verification. Al-Qastallani later mistakenly claimed that the report was recorded in the Musannaf of Abd al-Razzaq. It is not there. Al-Suyuti and other investigators confirmed that the report is baseless and nonexistent. Over the centuries this false report became widespread and was treated as part of faith. Some inferred from it that Allah’s essence is light and that He created the Prophet from a part of His essence—an abhorrent form of shirk. Similar Christian errors arose when Jesus was made part of God’s essence. The correct approach is to rely on Qur’anic verses and authentic hadiths and not attribute baseless claims to the Messenger. 10. The Muhammadan light appearing as a peacock. Stories claim that Allah created a tree called the Tree of Certainty, placed the Prophet’s light in the form of a peacock behind a pearl curtain, and created everything from it. No chain or basis for any of these stories exists. 11. The Messenger existed as a star.ﷺSome books claim that the Prophet existed as a star before Adam was created and include various tales involving Gabriel and Fatimah. All such claims are baseless and false. The alleged story that Gabriel said he had seen a star rise seventy thousand times and that the Prophet declared, “By Allah’s honor, I am that star,” is also fabricated. It has falsely been attributed to Sahih al-Bukhari. Neither Bukhari nor Muslim, nor any hadith collection, contains it. Scholars criticized those who circulated it without checking their sources. The fact that respected scholars relied on earlier quotations does not excuse failure to verify. The humanity of the Messenger versus the Muhammadan light. Many forged and chainless statements on this subject appear in Ibn Arabi’s works, al-Sirah al-Halabiyyah, Sharh al-Mawahib, and later Sirah books. All reports claiming that the Messenger was physically made of light are fabricated. Although extensive hadith collections were compiled in the second through fourth Islamic centuries and included even forged reports, not one hadith says that he was created from light. Early hadith, tafsir, history, and Sirah works contain no chapter establishing this doctrine. For five or six centuries after the Prophet, Muslims knew nothing of it. Some commentators interpreted the “light” in a verse of Surah al-Ma’idah as the Messenger. Muslims must follow the clear, unequivocal Qur’anic and hadith statements above personal preference. The Qur’an and authentic hadith repeatedly call the Messenger a human being; nowhere do they say, “I am light” or “Muhammad is light.” The interpretation that “light” means Muhammad is a later exegetical opinion and is not proven from the Messenger or any Companion. We may therefore refrain from calling him light, or use the word metaphorically for his guidance. But to claim that he was literally light and only metaphorically human is to reject every clear text in favor of an unsupported opinion. Authentic hadiths state that the Prophet’s prophethood was decreed while Adam was still between clay and spirit, and that its beginning was connected with Abraham’s supplication, Jesus’ glad tidings, and the vision of his mother. Other authentic or hasan reports say he was appointed a prophet while Adam was between body and spirit. A weak report says: “I was the first of the prophets in creation and the last in being sent.” Its chain contains weaknesses. These reports suffice; fabricated claims should not be attributed to the Prophet.ﷺ11. The Messenger existed as a star.ﷺA widespread idea says that the Messenger existed as a star before Adam was created.ﷺVarious versions circulate, including a claim that the Prophet told Fatimah that Gabriel was her younger uncle. All such statements are baseless and false. A sermon book published by a prominent Islamic center quotes an alleged report from Abu Hurayrah claiming that Gabriel saw a star rise seventy thousand times and that the Prophet said he was that star.ﷺThe alleged report says that Gabriel was asked his age and replied that he did not know, except that in the fourth heaven there was a star which rose every seventy thousand years; he had seen it rise seventy thousand times. The Prophet allegedly said: “By Allah’s honor, I am that star.”ﷺThis entire report is fabricated and falsely attributed to Bukhari. It is not in Sahih al-Bukhari, Sahih Muslim, or any hadith collection. Some scholars even attributed it to both Bukhari and Muslim. The author argues that scholars may have repeated other people’s citations without knowingly lying, but this is not an acceptable excuse for scholars. Readers should verify claims directly in the books rather than assuming that every famous scholar checked his sources.ﷺThe Messenger’s light versus his humanity. Many forged and chainless statements about the Muhammadan light occur in later works, and they were copied into Sirah books such as Sayyid al-Mursalin. The detailed discussion cannot be repeated here; in brief, all hadiths claiming that the Messenger was made from light are fabricated.ﷺHadith collections from the second, third, and fourth Islamic centuries contain many reports on ordinary subjects, including authentic, hasan, weak, and forged reports. Yet no book contains even one report claiming that the Messenger was created from light.ﷺHadith scholars wrote chapters on very minor topics, but no hadith scholar devoted even a section to the Muhammadan light. Early tafsir works discuss authentic, weak, and forged reports, yet early commentators did not cite a report that the Prophet was created from light when explaining the relevant verse of Surah al-Ma’idah. History and Sirah books contain countless weak reports, but no work written during the first five centuries discusses the Muhammadan-light doctrine. It was unknown to the Muslim community for centuries.ﷺThe remaining issue is the verse of Surah al-Ma’idah in which some commentators interpreted “light” as the Messenger. What should we do? First, Islam means accepting the Qur’an and hadith above personal likes and dislikes. The rightly guided Muslim accepts revelation completely and submits personal views to it. Second, the Qur’an and hadith clearly call the Messenger a human being—“I am only a human messenger” and “I am only a human being like you.” No verse or hadith says, “I am light” or “Muhammad is light.” The interpretation of one verse as referring to the Messenger is a later commentary, not a statement proven from him or a Companion.ﷺThis interpretation is not established from the Messenger or any Companion; rather, it was stated by some later commentators.ﷺThird, if we submit to the Qur’an and hadith, we should accept their clear, unambiguous instructions and keep the commentators’ opinions in their proper place. We may say that the Qur’an and hadith nowhere explicitly call the Messenger light, so it is preferable to refrain from saying so.ﷺAlternatively, following the Qur’an and hadith, we may say with certainty that the Messenger is human, while “light” may be used in the verse metaphorically for the guiding light he brings to humanity.ﷺFourth, if someone claims that he was literally light and not human, and that he was called human only metaphorically, then that person has rejected the clear, unequivocal guidance of the Qur’an and hadith according to personal desire, adopting a view for which there is not one unambiguous text. Authentic hadiths concerning the antiquity of the Messenger’s honor establish that his prophethood was decreed while Adam was still in the process of creation. Other authentic and hasan reports state that he was appointed a prophet while Adam was between body and spirit. One weak report says he was the first prophet in creation and the last in being sent, but its chain is weak. These authentic reports prove that before Adam’s creation was complete, the prophethood, finality, and rank of Muhammad had already been declared. We should rely on these reports rather than baseless claims. Reports close in wording to the authentic hadiths were also fabricated: “I was a prophet when Adam was between water and clay,” and the expanded version, “I was a prophet when there was neither water nor clay.” Scholars including al-Sakhawi, al-Suyuti, Ibn Iraq, Mulla Ali al-Qari, and al-Ajluni declared these statements baseless. 14. The Messenger, Abu Bakr, and Umar were created from one clay. A report says Allah created all three from the same clay and would bury them in it. Its individual chains are weak, though some scholars judged the combined report hasan because its transmitters were weak but not accused of lying. 15. The Messenger, Ali, Aaron, Yahya, and others were created from one clay. A report in Tarikh Baghdad claims this. Its chain contains Muhammad ibn Khalaf and Musa ibn Ibrahim, both accused of fabrication; the hadith scholars unanimously classified it as forged. 16. The Messenger, Fatimah, Hasan, and Husayn were created from one clay. A report in Fada’il al-Sahabah says, “I and you were created from one clay.” Scholars called it fabricated. 17. The Prophet’s abnormal birth. Some people claim that the Messenger emerged from his mother’s womb in an abnormal or miraculous manner. These claims are baseless. Miracles are not a measure of rank; Allah grants them according to the needs of guidance, not according to status. Christian missionaries exploit the mistaken idea that more miracles mean greater rank, contrasting Jesus’ miraculous birth and miracles with Muhammad’s ordinary birth and death. Yet the greatest miracle of Muhammad was guiding vast numbers from the darkness of confusion to faith and bringing spiritually dead hearts to life. False and unreliable miracle stories must not be treated as proof of his rank or prophethood; the Qur’an and authentic hadiths are sufficient. 18. Abu Bakr being bitten by a snake in the Cave of Thawr. Muhammad ibn al-Sayyid Darwish Hut said that stories of a tree growing at the cave entrance, a door appearing behind it, a river being seen there, and Abu Bakr being bitten by a snake are all invalid and baseless. 19. Ascending the Throne wearing shoes on the night of the Mi‘raj. This widespread story is entirely false. The Qur’an and numerous hadiths describe the journey to Sidrat al-Muntaha, but no authentic, weak, or recognized report says that the Prophet went beyond it to the Throne or rode al-Rafraf. Later books introduced such stories. The popular tale that Allah told him not to remove his sandals because the Throne would be blessed by his arrival is fabricated from beginning to end. Scholars repeatedly exposed it, but many preachers still circulate it without checking their sources.يَا أَهْلَ الْكِتَابِ لَا تَغْلُوا فِي دِينِكُمْ وَلَا تَقُولُوا عَلَى اللَّهِ إِلَّا الْحَقَّ ۚ إِنَّمَا الْمَسِيحُ عِيسَى ابْنُ مَرْيَمَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ وَكَلِمَتُهُ أَلْقَاهَا إِلَىٰ مَرْيَمَ وَرُوحٌ مِّنْهُ ۖ فَآمِنُوا بِاللَّهِ وَرُسُلِهِ ۖ وَلَا تَقُولُوا ثَلَاثَةٌ ۚ انتَهُوا خَيْرًا لَّكُمْ ۚ إِنَّمَا اللَّهُ إِلَٰهٌ وَاحِدٌ ۖ سُبْحَانَهُ أَن يَكُونَ لَهُ وَلَدٌ ۘ لَّهُ مَا فِي السَّمَاوَاتِ وَمَا فِي الْأَرْضِ ۗ وَكَفَىٰ بِاللَّهِ وَكِيلًا [٤:١٧١People of the Book, do not exaggerate in your religion or say about Allah anything but the truth. The Messiah, Jesus son of Mary, was only Allah’s Messenger, His word conveyed to Mary, and a spirit from Him. So believe in Allah and His messengers and do not say, “Three.” Allah forbids exaggeration: say only what He said. Call Jesus Allah’s word and spirit, but do not go beyond that and call him God or part of God’s essence. The same error caused earlier sects to go astray: they accepted one group of texts and distorted or rejected others. The Qur’an speaks both of human choice and of all things occurring by Allah’s will; the Companions accepted both without contradiction, while later sects made one principle fundamental and reinterpreted the rest. Likewise, the Qur’an and authentic hadiths clearly state that only Allah possesses comprehensive knowledge of the unseen. The Messenger was not given unrestricted knowledge of the unseen, thoughts, secrets, or the future. Allah informed him of particular unseen matters through revelation, but the sole owner of all unseen knowledge is Allah. Some people claim that the Messenger was ‘Alim al-Ghayb or Hazir-Nazir, present everywhere and observing everything. No clear verse or hadith says this. Various hadiths instead state that the community’s salutations are conveyed to him, contradicting the claim that he is physically present everywhere. Ambiguous texts must be interpreted in light of clear ones; a solitary ambiguous report cannot overturn the Qur’an or widely transmitted hadiths. Some argue from the Qur’anic description of the Messenger as shahid or witness. The word can mean witness, proof, or present, but early commentators explained it as his witnessing that he conveyed the religion and his testimony concerning people and earlier prophets. Believers and Allah are also called shahid. It does not mean that the Messenger is omnipresent or omniscient. If “witness” required physical presence everywhere, every believer would have to be omniscient and omnipresent, since believers too are called witnesses over humanity. The verse saying that the Prophet is closer to believers than their own selves means greater love, responsibility, relationship, and authority—not bodily presence everywhere. The Prophet himself explained that he is closer to believers in this world and the next, taking responsibility for debts left by deceased believers. Interpreting this as physical omnipresence contradicts his own explanation and would imply that all relatives are omnipresent because relatives are described as closer to one another. Another hadith states that during prayer the Prophet could see those behind him as he saw those before him. This describes a special visual ability during prayer, not universal observation of hidden rooms, thoughts, distant places, or all times. Even if understood generally, it cannot establish omnipresence. The Qur’an says that Satan and his hosts see people while people do not see them; this does not mean that every devil continually sees everyone everywhere. Those who use ambiguous texts to promote the Prophet’s rank may have good intentions, but they are still attributing to revelation and to the Prophet what he never said. Belief must rest on the Qur’an and mutawatir hadith, especially concerning unseen matters and creed. Reason may support revelation but cannot add to or subtract from it. Where the Qur’an and authentic hadiths provide no clear statement and the Companions said nothing, one should not speculate or argue.النَّبِيُّ أَوْلَىٰ بِالْمُؤْمِنِينَ مِنْ أَنفُسِهِمْ ۖ وَأَزْوَاجُهُ أُمَّهَاتُهُمْ ۗ وَأُولُو الْأَرْحَامِ بَعْضُهُمْ أَوْلَىٰ بِبَعْضٍ فِي كِتَابِ اللَّهِThe Prophet is closer to the believers than their own selves, and his wives are their mothers; blood relatives are closer to one another according to Allah’s Book. The term awla derives from wilayah, meaning friendship, closeness, guardianship, greater entitlement, or responsibility. Here closeness means love, devotion, responsibility, relationship, and kinship—not physical presence. Believers regard the Messenger as dearer and more entitled to their obedience than themselves, and his wives have the status of their mothers. He was more compassionate toward the community than their own relatives. Jabir, Abu Hurayrah, and others reported that he said he was closer to every believer in this world and the next; whoever died leaving property, his heirs would receive it, and whoever left debt or dependents, he would assume responsibility. Those who claim Hazir-Nazir interpret this as bodily nearness and say that the Messenger is present with every believer. This fabricated interpretation rejects clear Qur’anic and hadith guidance and even the Prophet’s own explanation. The verse also says that relatives are closer to one another; according to their logic, every person would be omnipresent because everyone is someone’s relative. Another verse would imply that all believers are present with Abraham. A hadith about the Prophet’s saying that Muslims were closer to Moses than the Jews would likewise imply that every Muslim is present with Moses. Anas reported that during prayer the Messenger told people not to bow, prostrate, stand, or finish before him because he could see them in front of and behind him while they bowed and prostrated. This refers to a special ability during prayer. Ibn Hajar said the apparent meaning restricts it to prayer, though another possibility was mentioned. Even if he could see front and back generally, the hadith does not establish that he saw hidden things, thoughts, distant places, or everything everywhere. Numerous clear verses and authentic hadiths state the contrary. The claim that “I see you” means that he constantly sees everyone everywhere is a distortion of the hadith and contradicts the Qur’an and authentic Sunnah. Seeing people unseen by them does not make Satan omnipresent, so the same grammatical argument cannot establish the Prophet’s omnipresence. Those who use such interpretations to increase his honor may have sincere love, but they still speak falsely in the name of revelation and attribute to him what he never claimed. The only safe path is to rely literally on the Qur’an and Sunnah, especially in creed. Religious beliefs must be the same for all believers and must rest on Qur’anic texts or mutawatir hadith. Unlike practical matters, creed cannot be expanded through analogy or personal reasoning. Allah’s attributes, the number and rank of prophets and angels, creation, duties, and unseen realities must be believed exactly as revelation states them. We may use reason to support revelation, but not to add or remove beliefs. Accept all Qur’anic statements together, do not establish one by cancelling another, follow the Companions when explanation is needed, and avoid discussion where neither authentic hadith nor the Companions provide clear guidance. May Allah make our souls obedient to the Qur’an and Sunnah. Amen.

2.5. The Ahl al-Bayt, the Companions, and the Ummah

The natural implication of the sublime status of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) is that the status and honor of his family members and companions would be above that of all people in every age of the world after the Prophets. Even if there had been no mention of them in the Qur’an and Hadith, any knowledgeable and sensible person could easily have understood their exceptionally noble status. Many verses of the Noble Qur’an and countless statements of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) have confirmed this natural honor and described their glory, status, and dignity. A separate book would be needed for a detailed discussion of these verses and Hadiths. Their essence is that loving and honoring the family and Companions of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) means loving and honoring him and is an inseparable part of faith. These sublime statements of the Qur’an and Hadith, and their simple, heartfelt descriptions, could not satisfy the hearts of many ignorant devotees. Nor could they satisfy the countless people involved in the hypocrisy of excessive devotion. They fabricated exaggerated, fantastic, and unrealistic statements in the name of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him). In this way, along with committing the gravest sin of lying in his name, they corrupted Islam’s rational appeal. They polluted the faith of believers and the perception of knowledgeable people. Below I mention some such false, fabricated, and unreliable statements. 1. The Pure Five Many fabricated and false statements are current under the name “the Pure Five,” claiming the special status of five people by gathering Ali, Fatimah, Hasan, and Husayn (may Allah be pleased with them) with the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) from among the Ahl al-Bayt. All statements concerning “the Pure Five” are fabricated and wicked lies. Ignorant people have spread many fabricated, fantastic, and false statements concerning Ali and Fatimah (may Allah be pleased with them). For example: One day Fatimah (may Allah be pleased with her) wanted to eat the meat of a bird. Despite making great efforts, Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) could not catch the bird. … These are vile lies. 2. Bishad Sindhu and Other Popular Ballads and Books Ninety-five percent of the contents of the book Bishad Sindhu are false. Bishad Sindhu is a novel, not a historical or religious book. It should be evaluated as a novel. Unfortunately, however, ordinary people in society believe the statements in such books to be true. Special care must be taken regarding all the false statements made concerning the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him). The supposed prophecies concerning Mu’awiyah (may Allah be pleased with him), the prophecies concerning Muhammad Hanufa, Husayn’s allegedly remaining uninjured despite repeated knife blows to his throat, the claim that his killer was taken to Paradise, and all similar statements are fabricated. Everything said about Muhammad Hanufa (Muhammad ibn Ali, Ibn al-Hanafiyyah), his war against Yazid, and his being confined within a mountain is false. It should also be noted that books like Bishad Sindhu, ballad literature, and books such as Khairul Hashr are among the main causes of the spread of false and forged Hadiths in our society. Alongside them are books such as Bar Chand-er Fazilat, Nek Amal, Maqsudul Mu’minin, Niamul Qur’an, and Naf’ul Khala’iq. The contribution of these ballad-books to spreading various necessary Islamic teachings among the general Muslim population cannot be denied. Their honored authors fulfilled their responsibilities as best they could within the limitations of their age and circumstances. Nevertheless, it cannot be denied that, alongside their beneficial service, these works also contributed to spreading forged Hadiths, baseless statements, various superstitions, and mistaken ideas about Islam. At one time, qualified scholars of Bengal considered writing books in the Bengali language blameworthy. This destructive misconception gave less qualified scholars the opportunity to write books full of errors. 3. Asking for a Maidservant to Massage Fatimah’s Body Here I mention an example of distortion and falsehood in translation. A popular book contains the following written statement: “It is mentioned in the Noble Hadith: One day Lady Fatimah (may Allah be pleased with her) came to the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) and said, ‘O father! I have to spend the whole day grinding flour and engaged in household work. Consequently, my body becomes painful and sore. Therefore, buy me a maidservant so that she may massage my body and assist me with household work.’ In reply, the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said, ‘O mother! For a woman, there is no deed more meritorious than grinding flour and performing household work for her husband and for maintaining the family. But if you take the help of a maidservant or servant, you will not receive as much reward. Therefore, follow my advice and continually recite the following supplication; surely the pain in your body will disappear, your body will always remain strong and healthy, and you will also receive extra reward.’ From then on Lady Fatimah used to do this. The supplication: … Subhan Allah, wa al-hamdu lillah, wa la ilaha illallah, wallahu akbar.” (Md. Ghulam Rahman, Qazi Mawlana, Maqsudul Mu’minin, pp. 55–56.) Here, a fabricated translation of an authentic Hadith has been used to attribute many false and invented statements to the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him). Moreover, insulting statements have been made about Fatimah (may Allah be pleased with her). The original Hadith was recorded by al-Bukhari, Muslim, and all other Hadith scholars in nearly identical wording. The Hadith is as follows: “Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) said: Fatimah (may Allah be pleased with her) went to the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) to tell him of the pain in her hand caused by operating the millstone. Fatimah had heard that some captive slaves had been brought to the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him). She went to his house but did not find him there. She informed A’ishah (may Allah be pleased with her) of the matter. When the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) returned home, A’ishah informed him of it. Ali said: After we had gone to bed at night, he came to us. We were about to rise, but he said, ‘Remain in your places.’ He came and sat between me and Fatimah, until I felt the coolness of his feet on my stomach. He said to us, ‘Shall I not teach you something better than what you have asked for? When you go to bed, say Subhan Allah thirty-three times, al-Hamdulillah thirty-three times, and Allahu Akbar thirty-four times. This practice is better for you than a servant.’ Ali said: After that I never abandoned this practice.” This is the original incident, recorded by all Hadith scholars, including al-Bukhari and Muslim, through various authentic chains. Yet everything in the translation above has been distorted, and many false statements have been attributed to the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him). (Sahih al-Bukhari 3/1133, 3/1358, 5/2051; Sahih Muslim 4/2091; Fath al-Bari 11/120.) 4. Abu Bakr Wearing a Garment of Date-Palm Leaves I mention a baseless story from a popular book: “Before accepting Islam, Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him) was a wealthy merchant. From the very day he came into the service of Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him) and accepted Islam, he began spending all his wealth in the path of Allah. … One day he was slightly late in going to the mosque for prayer because he lacked clothing to wear. Seeing this, Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him) said, ‘Abu Bakr, such disregard for Islam is occurring while I am alive; who knows what may happen after I am gone.’ … He said, ‘Master, it is not due to any disregard on my part. In reality, I had no clothes to wear. Therefore, I tore up the cloth of a pillow, sewed it with date leaves and thorns to a small piece of cloth, washed and dried it, and wore it to come here, which caused me to be late.’ … Shortly afterward Gabriel appeared before the Prophet wearing a complete garment made of date leaves. … Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him) asked him, ‘Why am I seeing you wearing a garment of date leaves today?’ Gabriel (peace be upon him) replied, ‘Abu Bakr came to pray wearing a garment sewn from date leaves. Then Allah called all the angels and said, “O angels, look at how much hardship Abu Bakr is enduring to attain My pleasure. Therefore, if you seek My pleasure today, all of you must immediately wear garments of date leaves in honor of Abu Bakr. Otherwise I shall remove the names of all the angels from My register today.” Upon hearing these stern words, we were all compelled to wear garments of date leaves in his honor.’” (Md. Ghulam Rahman, Maqsudul Mu’minin, pp. 149–151.) 5. Umar Could Not Understand the Conversation between the Messenger of Allah and Abu Bakr This is something fabricated by fraudsters. Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) is reported to have said: “When the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) spoke with Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him), I would become like a non-Arab Abyssinian between them, who could understand nothing.” The fraudulent impostors intend to suggest that the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) spoke with Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him) in such mystical language that even Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) could not understand their conversation. The Hadith scholars unanimously state that this is a baseless, chainless falsehood. (Ibn al-Qayyim, al-Manar, p. 115; al-Suyuti, Dhayl al-La’ali, p. 203; Ibn Iraq, Tanzih, 1/407; Mulla Ali al-Qari, al-Asrar, p. 342.) 6. Umar Flogging His Son Abu Shahmah It is commonly claimed that Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) flogged his son Abu Shahmah one hundred times for adultery, causing the son’s death. A long and elaborate story is told about the discovery of the adultery, the confession, the punishment, and the conversation between father and son; it brings tears to ordinary listeners’ eyes. The Hadith scholars unanimously state that these are baseless false stories. Ibn al-Jawzi said: “The ignorant preachers invented these stories to make ordinary listeners cry.” (Ibn al-Jawzi, al-Mawdu’at, 2/442.) It is found in history that Umar’s son, Abd al-Rahman Abu Shahmah, was serving in the Egyptian army. One day he drank nabidh, a beverage made by soaking dates. The date beverage had become intoxicating, and Abu Shahmah became drunk. He went to Amr ibn al-As (may Allah be pleased with him), the governor of Egypt, and said, “I have consumed an intoxicant, so impose upon me the legal punishment for drinking intoxicants.” Amr flogged him inside the house. When Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) learned of this, he rebuked Amr (may Allah be pleased with him) and said that his son should have been punished publicly, just as an ordinary Muslim citizen would be. When Abu Shahmah returned to Madinah, Umar personally punished him again. A short time later Abu Shahmah died. (Ibn al-Jawzi, al-Mawdu’at, 2/438–443; Ibn Iraq, Tanzih, 2/220.) 7. The Adhan Beginning at the Ka’bah on the Day Umar Accepted Islam It is commonly claimed that the first adhan at the Ka’bah began on the very day Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) accepted Islam. This is incorrect. Umar accepted Islam five years before the Hijrah, whereas the adhan was instituted in Madinah after the Hijrah. At the time of Umar’s acceptance of Islam and for approximately six years afterward, there was no practice of the adhan. The actual matter is that before Umar accepted Islam, Muslims in Makkah could not pray beside the Ka’bah because the polytheists of Makkah prevented them. After Umar accepted Islam, he resisted the polytheists’ obstruction, stood beside the Ka’bah, and prayed there; other Muslims prayed there with him. (Ibn Hisham, al-Sirah al-Nabawiyyah.) Consider an example of how this information was gradually distorted. In the book Rahatil Qulub, attributed to Khwaja Nizamuddin Awliya, it is stated that his spiritual guide, Fariduddin Masud Ganj-e-Shakkar, said: “As long as Amir al-Mu’minin Umar ibn al-Khattab (may Allah be pleased with him) had not accepted faith in Islam, the adhan for prayer was given in caves and caverns. But on the day Amir al-Mu’minin Umar Faruq (may Allah be pleased with him) accepted faith, he stood with his sword unsheathed and said to Bilal (may Allah be pleased with him), ‘Climb onto the pulpit of the Ka’bah and give the adhan.’ Bilal acted according to his command.” (Rahatul Qulub, p. 71, 12th assembly.) We know that none of this is correct. Neither before nor after Umar’s acceptance of Islam was the adhan ever given in a cave, cavern, or anywhere at the Ka’bah in Makkah. Moreover, the Ka’bah had no pulpit and does not have one. We may say that this book was probably forged in the name of Khwaja Nizamuddin. Alternatively, its authors may have simply believed what they heard out of naivety. 8. The Messenger of Allah Is the City of Knowledge and Ali Is Its Gate A Hadith widely circulated in our society says: “I am the city of knowledge and Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) is its gate.” Experienced Hadith scholars have identified this Hadith as fabricated. Some have called it weak rather than false. Imam al-Tirmidhi narrated a Hadith with this meaning and himself declared it weak. (Al-Tirmidhi, al-Sunan, 5/596.) Imam al-Bukhari, Abu Hatim, Yahya ibn Sa’id, al-Dhahabi, and other Hadith scholars declared this Hadith a baseless falsehood. (Ibn al-Jawzi, al-Mawdu’at, 1/261–265; al-Suyuti, al-La’ali, 1/328–336; Mulla Ali al-Qari, al-Asrar, pp. 71–72.) 9. Giving Ali the Dervish Cloak A popular story says: “After returning from the Mi’raj, the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) called his Companions (may Allah be pleased with them) and said that he would give his dervish cloak to whoever could answer his question correctly. He asked Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him), ‘If I gave this dervish cloak to you, how would you fulfill its due?’ … He asked Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) in the same way … and asked Uthman (may Allah be pleased with him) … Then he asked Ali (may Allah be pleased with him). Ali replied, ‘I will protect the secrets of Allah’s servants.’ He therefore gave the cloak to Ali …” and so on. The entire story is baseless and fabricated. (Khwaja Nizamuddin Awliya, Rahatil Qulub, pp. 8–9.) 10. Call Ali; He Will Help You in Distress Mulla Ali al-Qari says that this is a vile fabricated statement invented by the Shi’ah: “Call upon Ali; he manifests wondrous deeds, and you will find him your helper in distress and hardship. O Muhammad, by your prophethood; O Ali, by your sainthood.” (Mulla Ali al-Qari, al-Asrar, pp. 265–266; al-Ajluni, Kashf al-Khafa, 2/489.) In reality, the source of all the superstitions, shirk, and innovations current in our society is the Shi’ite doctrine and Shi’ite community. Abandoning the Noble Qur’an and the clear Sunnah, they go to excess in devotion to the twelve or seven Imams from the lineage of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him). Consequently, it becomes easy for the enemies of Islam to spread and establish among them various false and faith-destroying statements in the names of these pious people. Their hearts have been freed from the bond of the Noble Qur’an and the Sunnah of Muhammad, the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him). Ali and the Imams of his lineage have taken their place in the innermost chambers of their hearts. They have accepted with devotion everything the fabricators said in their names and, on the basis of these lies, have distorted the clear guidance of the Noble Qur’an. Among the gravest crimes of this sect is that they have made Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) and the Imams of his lineage into gods. They have imagined divinity or divine power in them. This is a form of shirk prevalent among them. While the Qur’an and Sunnah repeatedly teach that help in every hardship should be sought from Allah alone, they have invented the idea of seeking help from Ali. Seeking supernatural help in hardship from anyone other than Allah is the root of all shirk. I have discussed this matter in detail in my book Rahe Belayat. On the basis of this vile falsehood, the Shi’ah invented a supplication that, unfortunately, is also current among many Sunni Muslims in our society. I quote this supplication, filled with shirk, from a popular book: “The Supplication of Call upon Ali. If, after the Tahajjud prayer, one recites salawat before and after it and recites this supplication as much as possible, one’s desires will be fulfilled and difficult troubles will be removed. In the name of Allah, the Most Gracious, the Most Merciful. Call upon Ali, the manifestation of wonders; you will find him your helper in calamities, and every anxiety and grief will disappear through your might. O Allah, by Your prophethood; O Muhammad, by Your sainthood; O Ali, O Ali, O Ali. There is no brave one except Ali, no sword except Dhu al-Fiqar. Help from Allah and a near victory, and give glad tidings to the believers. Allah is the best Guardian, and He is the Most Merciful of the merciful.” (Md. Bashiruddin Ahmad, Nek Amal, p. 186.) 11. Leaving Ali on a Camel Instead of Burying Him On the twenty-third of Ramadan in 40 AH, Ali ibn Abi Talib (may Allah be pleased with him) was martyred in Kufah, the capital of his caliphate, at the hands of a Kharijite assassin. His eldest son, Hasan ibn Ali (may Allah be pleased with him), led the funeral prayer. After the funeral prayer, he was buried in Kufah inside his own house. This was because Imam Hasan and the others feared that, if he were buried in the public cemetery, the Kharijites would steal and dishonor his body. This was well known among the early Muslims. Later, the Shi’ah spread a fabricated and false story about this matter. Its summary is that Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) was not buried but left on the back of a camel. The camel disappeared, and later his grave was discovered in Najaf. These statements are not merely false; they are also deeply insulting to Ali, Hasan, Husayn (may Allah be pleased with them), and all the members of Ali’s family. After death, burying the body is an obligation upon the living. No one except a completely foolish and senseless person would believe that they neglected this obligatory duty and left the body of Amir al-Mu’minin on a camel. Quite apart from Hasan and Husayn, even an ordinary person would not agree to leave his father’s body in this way. He would want his father’s grave to be known so that he and his descendants could visit it. … The problem, however, is that after abandoning the Qur’an and Sunnah and immersing their hearts in the darkness of excessive devotion, the Shi’ah have accepted, through various interpretations, everything said in the names of the Imams that is false, contrary to the Shari’ah, and contrary to reason and conscience. On the basis of this falsehood, the Shi’ah believe and proclaim that a grave in the city of Najaf is Ali’s grave. For three hundred years after Ali’s martyrdom, no one said that Ali’s grave was in Najaf. Nearly three hundred years later, based on various popular tales and superstitions, this grave began to be known as Ali’s grave. The condition of this grave is exactly like the story of a Ram temple at the site of the Babri Mosque. All Hindu researchers and historians agree that there was never a Ram temple at the site of the Babri Mosque in Ayodhya. But through the propaganda of extremist Hindus, this falsehood has now become almost an established truth. Perhaps one day a Ram temple will be built there, and millions of people in India will believe that Ram was born there—just as millions of Shi’ah believe that this grave in Najaf is Ali’s grave. For this reason they call the city Najaf al-Ashraf: Makkah Sharif, Madinah Sharif, and Najaf Ashraf—that is, Holy Makkah, Holy Madinah, and the Most Holy Najaf! (Ibn Taymiyyah, Majmu’ al-Fatawa, 27/446; Ibn Kathir, al-Bidayah, 7/330; Mulla Ali al-Qari, al-Asrar, p. 280.) 12. My Companions Are Like Stars A Hadith current in Muslim society says: “My Companions are like stars; whichever of them you follow, you will be rightly guided.” This Hadith is so famous among us that an ordinary Muslim naturally thinks it was recorded in al-Bukhari, Muslim, the Six Canonical Books, and every Hadith collection. In reality, however, it is not found even in any other famous Hadith book, let alone the Six Canonical Books. This statement and several statements with the same meaning have been narrated through multiple chains in biographical works on weak and fraudulent narrators, in a few books of jurisprudence, and in one or two obscure Hadith books. In every chain, several narrators were famous as fabricators or were extremely weak and accused of lying. Therefore, Abu Bakr al-Bazzar Ahmad ibn Amr (d. 292 AH), Ibn Hazm al-Zahiri Ali ibn Ahmad (d. 456 AH), al-Dhahabi Muhammad ibn Ahmad (d. 748 AH), and other Hadith scholars regarded this Hadith as fabricated and baseless. (Abd ibn Humayd, al-Musnad, p. 250; Ibn Hazm, al-Ihkam, 6/244; al-Dhahabi, Mizan al-I’tidal, 2/141–142; al-Sakhawi, al-Maqasid, pp. 49–50.) It is astonishing that we rely on such unreliable Hadiths to establish the status of the Companions, even though the Qur’an clearly describes their status in many places. Many authentic Hadiths concerning their status have also been recorded in the famous Hadith collections. 13. My Ahl al-Bayt Are Like Stars Another Hadith is expressed in the wording of the preceding one: “My Ahl al-Bayt—that is, the people of my household or my descendants—are like stars; whichever of them you follow, you will be rightly guided.” Nubayt ibn Sharit (may Allah be pleased with him) was a Companion. Several Tabi’un learned and narrated Hadith from him. One of his later descendants, Ahmad ibn Ishaq ibn Ibrahim ibn Nubayt, claimed in the third or fourth Islamic century that he possessed a written manuscript of Nubayt. He claimed that he had received the manuscript from his father and grandfather. One of the Hadiths written in it was this Hadith. The Hadith scholars unanimously state that this man was a vile liar. He fabricated the manuscript himself and attributed it to his ancestor. This Hadith and all the Hadiths in the manuscript are forged. (Al-Dhahabi, Mizan al-I’tidal, 1/216; Ibn Hajar, Lisan al-Mizan, 1/136.) 14. The Difference of Opinion of My Companions or My Ummah Is Mercy A very widespread and famous Hadith says: “The disagreement of my ummah is mercy.” It is sometimes said: “The disagreement of scholars is mercy.” Others say: “The disagreement of my Companions is mercy.” The Hadith scholars declare that although this statement is widely circulated in society as a mercy, it is not found with a chain in any Hadith collection. It has not been narrated through any authentic, weak, or even fabricated chain. Many people have mentioned it in various books as a Hadith without a chain. Allamah al-Subki said: “It is not known as a Hadith to the Hadith scholars. I have found no chain for this Hadith; it has no chain of any kind, authentic, weak, or fabricated.” (Mulla Ali al-Qari, al-Asrar, p. 51; al-Suyuti, al-Jami’ al-Saghir, 1/13; al-Albani, al-Da’ifah, 1/141.) Disagreement is fundamentally blameworthy. In some cases it may be permitted or even praiseworthy. We may say many things in praise or condemnation of disagreement. But under no circumstances may we attribute this statement to the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), because it is a baseless statement without a chain. 15. Yazid on Mu’awiyah’s Shoulder: A Man of Hell on the Shoulder of a Man of Paradise In the book Rahatil Qulub, attributed to Khwaja Nizamuddin Awliya, it is stated that Fariduddin Ganj-e-Shakkar said: “The Noble Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him) was sitting one day with the Companions when Mu’awiyah passed by carrying his son Yazid on his shoulder. Seeing him, the Pure Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) smiled and said, ‘Look, look! A man of Hell is going on the shoulder of a man of Paradise.’” … (Rahatil Qulub, p. 130.) It requires no great knowledge to understand that this statement is baseless and fabricated. Anyone with a general knowledge of Islamic history knows that Yazid was born approximately fourteen years after the death of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him). 16. Prostrating and Kissing the Ground in the Era of the Companions The Rahatil Qulub attributed to Khwaja Nizamuddin Awliya contains the following: “One day the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) was sitting surrounded by his Companions … At that time an Arab came, kissed the ground respectfully, and said …” (Rahatil Qulub, p. 130.) This is a completely baseless and fabricated statement. We have already said that this entire book appears to have been written by fabricators. Not only was kissing the ground, but even the practice of kissing feet, not current in the time of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him). During his twenty-three-year prophetic life, some of his hundreds of thousands of Companions came to his court once or twice, while some came more than a thousand times. On such occasions their Sunnah was to offer greetings. Sometimes, after greeting, they shook hands or practiced musafahah. In one or two cases they kissed one another on the forehead or embraced. A few weak reports indicate that some people kissed the feet of the Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him). Among the countless visits of hundreds of thousands of people during the twenty-three years of his prophethood, only four or five incidents of kissing his feet have been narrated through weak chains. In none of these incidents did a well-known Companion kiss his feet; rather, those who did so were Bedouins or Jews who had newly accepted Islam, who did not remain in the Prophet’s court or know its etiquette. (Abu Bakr Muhammad ibn Ibrahim, al-Rukhsah fi Taqbil al-Yad, pp. 55–80.) Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman, Ali, Fatimah, Bilal (may Allah be pleased with them), and hundreds of other leading Companions each entered his presence at least ten thousand times during twenty-three years. Yet none of them ever kissed his blessed feet even once, nor placed a hand there and kissed that hand—not to mention kissing the ground before him. The Hindus of India were accustomed to prostrating before people, bowing, or offering pranam. After the advent of Islam, the practice also became current among Indian Muslims of prostrating before spiritual leaders, elders, or kings, kissing their feet, or kissing the ground before them. This practice is unquestionably contrary to Islam. Most sadly, it has been passed off as a Hadith. 17. Concern for the Ummah of the Latter Days Among the countless baseless forged Hadiths inserted into the book Sirr al-Asrar, attributed to Abd al-Qadir al-Jilani, is the following: “I am deeply concerned for my ummah in the latter days.” (Sirr al-Asrar, p. 15.) This statement is not found in any book through any authentic, weak, or fabricated chain. We have already said that this entire book appears to be forged.

2.6. Concerning the Tabi’un

Numerous fabricated statements are in circulation concerning the Tabi‘un and the pious figures of later generations. I will mention some of the well-known ones. 1. Uways al-Qarani (may Allah have mercy on him) During the lifetime of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), he told the Companions about a man named Uways ibn Amir from the Qaran tribe of Yemen, and authentic hadiths mention Umar’s meeting with him after the Prophet’s death. But in later times, many bizarre and false stories were fabricated around Hazrat Uways. Many speakers invented strange stories to fascinate their audiences. Many simple-hearted dervishes merely narrated whatever they heard. Some of these stories revolve around Uways, while others were fabricated in the name of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him). These are undoubtedly the cause of extremely grave and heinous sins. The gist of what has been narrated about Hazrat Uways ibn Amir al-Qarani (may Allah be pleased with him) in authentic hadiths compiled in Sahih Muslim and other books is as follows: When Hazrat Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) was caliph (13–23 AH), whenever the army from Yemen came to him, he would ask, “Is there anyone among you named Uways ibn Amir?” Thus, on one occasion he found Uways. He said, “Are you Uways?” Uways replied, “Yes.” Umar said, “Are you a member of the Murad branch of the Qaran tribe?” He replied, “Yes.” Umar said, “You had leprosy on your body, and Allah healed everything except an area the size of a dirham near your navel?” He replied, “Yes.” Umar said, “Is your mother alive?” He replied, “Yes.” Then Umar said, “I heard the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) say: ‘Uways ibn Amir will come to you with the army from Yemen. He is from the Murad branch of the Qaran tribe. He had leprosy on his body, and Allah healed everything except an area the size of a dirham. His mother is alive, and he serves his mother. If he swears by Allah concerning something, Allah fulfills his oath. If you are able to ask him to seek forgiveness for your sins, then do so.’” In another narration: “The best of the Tabi‘un is a man named Uways.… Tell him to seek forgiveness for you.” After saying this, Hazrat Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) said, “Ask Allah to forgive me.” Uways then supplicated to Allah for the forgiveness of Umar’s sins. Umar asked him, “Where are you going?” He replied, “I will go to Kufa.” Umar said, “Then shall I write a letter to the governor of Kufa on your behalf?” Uways replied, “I prefer to remain among the ordinary people.” The following year, a prominent man from Kufa went on pilgrimage. When he met Caliph Umar, Umar asked him about Uways. The distinguished man said, “I left him living in extreme poverty in a very dilapidated house.” Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) then told him the above hadith of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him). When that distinguished man returned to Kufa, he went to Uways and requested him to seek Allah’s forgiveness for him. Uways said, “You have just returned from a blessed pilgrimage; you should ask Allah to forgive me. Did you meet Umar (may Allah be pleased with him)?” He replied, “Yes.” Uways then asked Allah to forgive that man’s sins. After this incident, people came to know about Uways, and consequently they began visiting him. He then went somewhere out of public view. For nearly the next two decades, Hazrat Uways al-Qarani lived out of public view as a very ordinary member of society. Wherever he lived, he regularly attended the mosque there as an ordinary worshipper, joining the prayers and religious talks. Sometimes he would also say something himself. It is also reported that he would sit in the mosque while several people recited the Qur’an. It is said that in this way he participated in various jihads. In 37 AH, the Battle of Siffin took place between Hazrat Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) and Hazrat Mu‘awiya (may Allah be pleased with him). Hazrat Uways al-Qarani was in Hazrat Ali’s army in this battle. While fighting on Hazrat Ali’s side, he was eventually martyred. (Muslim, al-Sahih, 4/1968–1969; Ahmad, al-Musnad, 3/480; al-Hakim, al-Mustadrak, 3/455–461). This is the authentic account concerning him. Many fabricated and baseless statements about him are common in our country. It is said that he carried his mother. It is said that, upon hearing that the blessed teeth of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) had been injured in the Battle of Uhud, he broke all his own teeth, and so on. No basis can be found for any of these claims. It is also said that Hazrat Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) and Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) went to meet him or asked him to supplicate for them. All of these are false claims. In the authentic hadith mentioned above, we have seen that, in accordance with the prophecy of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), Uways came to Umar’s court. More serious still are the fabricated statements made in the name of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) concerning him. For example, it is said that before his death, the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) left his blessed shirt or garment for Uways al-Qarani (may Allah have mercy on him), and that Hazrat Umar (may Allah be pleased with him) and Hazrat Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) delivered that garment to him. All these statements are fabricated and baseless. Ibn Dahiya, Ibn al-Salah, Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, al-Sakhawi, Mulla Ali al-Qari and other hadith scholars unanimously held that all of these are false and fabricated statements. (Ibn al-Jawzi, al-Mawdu‘at, 1/350; al-Suyuti, al-La’ali, 1/449; Ibn Iraq, Tanzih, 2/32–36; Mulla Ali al-Qari, al-Asrar, p. 181). 2. Hazrat Hasan al-Basri (may Allah have mercy on him) Hazrat Hasan al-Basri (may Allah have mercy on him) (22–109 AH) was a famous Tabi‘i. Many false and fabricated statements concerning him are common in society. For example, conversations and discussions between Hasan al-Basri and Rabi‘a al-Basri are very commonly narrated in our society. Yet the two were neither of the same age nor contemporaries. Rabi‘a al-Basri was born in or around 100 AH. She died in 180/181 AH. When Hasan al-Basri died, Rabi‘a al-Basri was only ten or eleven years old. From this we can easily understand that all the stories commonly told about these two are fabricated. The most serious matter, however, is the attribution of false statements to the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) through him. For example, it is commonly said that Hasan al-Basri received the tariqa from the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) through Ali (may Allah be pleased with him), or that he received the khirqa, staff and other things of the Chishtiyya tariqa. This statement is baseless. Hazrat Hasan al-Basri (may Allah be pleased with him) was one of the foremost hadith scholars, jurists, mujahids, preachers and ascetic saints among the Tabi‘un. Alongside teaching hadith and fiqh, he preached against worldly greed and desires and urged people to abandon the comforts of life and orient their lives toward the Hereafter. Remembering the Hereafter, he would weep out of love and fear of Allah. His gatherings had a profound influence on the people of that era. Most Sufi dervishes of later generations were inspired by him and learned from him. During the time of Hazrat Hasan al-Basri (may Allah have mercy on him), terms such as tasawwuf and Sufi were unknown. Tariqa, in the commonly understood sense, was also unknown. They primarily discussed the love of Allah and the Hereafter in the light of the Qur’an and hadith, and devoted themselves extensively to worshipping Allah. At that time, there was also no practice of going to a particular person for a tariqa. Through the collective company of various Companions and Tabi‘un, people attained spiritual refinement. Nearly five hundred years later, when the entire Muslim world was submerged in the darkness of division and ignorance and torn apart by the devastating attacks of the Tatars, the tariqas were established and spread during the sixth and seventh Islamic centuries. The Qadiriyya tariqa is associated with Hazrat Abd al-Qadir al-Jilani (may Allah have mercy on him) (died 561 AH/1166 CE). However, he did not establish or promulgate the Qadiriyya tariqa in the form commonly known today. It became established long after him. The founder of the Rifa‘iyya tariqa was Ahmad ibn Ali al-Rifa‘i (may Allah have mercy on him) (died 578 AH). The founder of the Suhrawardiyya tariqa was Shihab al-Din al-Suhrawardi (may Allah have mercy on him) (died 632 AH). Hazrat Mu‘in al-Din Chishti (may Allah have mercy on him) was the principal propagator of the Chishtiyya tariqa. He died in 633 AH (1236 CE). Ali ibn Abd Allah al-Shadhili (may Allah have mercy on him) (656 AH/1258 CE) founded the Shadhiliyya tariqa. Muhammad ibn Muhammad al-Bukhari Baha al-Din Naqshband (may Allah have mercy on him) (d. 791 AH) founded the Naqshbandiyya tariqa. They selected the prescribed acts of worship in the light of the Qur’an and hadith and sought the spiritual improvement of Muslims on that basis. In reality, during those dark and difficult days, they were the ones who undertook the responsibility of spreading and establishing Islam among ordinary Muslims. A commonly circulated statement of later times is that Hasan al-Basri (may Allah have mercy on him) received the Chishtiyya tariqa and certain other tariqas from the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) through Hazrat Ali (may Allah be pleased with him). It is said that he received the khirqa and the caliphate from Hazrat Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) and became the sajjada-nashin of the tariqa. This statement is false and baseless. Hasan al-Basri (may Allah have mercy on him) was born in Medina in 22 AH. When he was thirteen years old, Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) was appointed caliph in 35 AH and transferred the seat or capital of the caliphate from Medina to Kufa. After that, Hasan al-Basri (may Allah be pleased with him) did not see Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) again. He did not even have the opportunity to sit in Ali’s court and study under him. Hazrat Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) was martyred in 40 AH. We can easily understand that Hazrat Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) did not leave the khirqa and caliphate to, or appoint as sajjada-nashin, a thirteen-year-old boy while bypassing his most capable children and his countless prominent devotees, students and companions. Hadith scholars such as Ibn Dahiya, Ibn al-Salah, al-Dhahabi, Ibn Hajar, al-Sakhawi and Mulla Ali al-Qari have stated that all of these are baseless and false claims. (al-Sakhawi, al-Maqasid, p. 335; Mulla al-Qari, al-Asrar, p. 181).

2.7. Concerning the Venerable Awliya and Wilayah

There are many instructions in the Noble Qur’an and authentic hadith concerning the identity, conduct, and status of Allah’s awliya. These matters have been discussed in detail in the two books Ihya’us-Sunan and Rahe Wilayat. Forgers have spread many false statements about this subject in Muslim society. Many simple-hearted, pious elders have believed them innocently. Here I mention some statements on this subject. 1. The miracles of the awliya are true A published book states: “Several statements from the Noble Qur’an and noble hadith concerning the friends of Allah: … Karamat al-Awliya haqqun—al-hadith. Meaning: The miraculous powers of the awliya are true.” [Khwaja Nizamuddin Awliya (may Allah have mercy on him), Rahatul Muhibbin, back cover]. Here the statement has been called a hadith, or attributed to the Messenger of Allah, thereby fabricating it in his name. We shall discuss two matters here: (1) the source of this statement and (2) its meaning. First, its source. “The miracles of the awliya are true” is a statement of Muslim scholars. It is not a hadith. The Messenger of Allah never said these words, nor were they transmitted from him through any authentic or weak chain. Moreover, the word karamat itself is not a Qur’anic or hadith term. The miraculous deeds of prophets and awliya are called ayat, or signs, in the Qur’an and hadith. From the second and third centuries onward, Muslim scholars used the term mu’jizah for the signs of prophets and messengers, and karamat for the signs of the awliya. From the second Hijri century, the Mu’tazilah and certain other groups denied the possibility of miraculous deeds occurring through the awliya. Their view conflicts with the Qur’an and Sunnah. Various verses of the Noble Qur’an and various hadiths prove that Allah sometimes grants miraculous signs, or ayat, to pious people besides the prophets. Therefore, scholars following the Sunnah say: “Karamat al-Awliya haqq.” Second, the meaning of the statement. We have seen that it is not a saying of the Messenger of Allah, but a statement of the scholars. Thus, attributing it to the Prophet as a hadith is a fabrication. Furthermore, the statement was mistranslated in the quotation above, resulting in additional fabrication through the translation. A. Karamat versus miraculous power There are three words in this statement: karamat, awliya, and haqq. In the quotation above, karamat was translated as miraculous power. This is not merely incorrect; it conflicts with Islamic belief. Karamat means a miraculous sign, not miraculous power. To believe that anyone besides the Glorious Allah possesses miraculous power is shirk. The basic meaning of karamat is an honor or distinction. In Islamic terminology, karamat means “a miraculous deed occurring through a pious person other than a prophet or messenger.” Considering a miraculous sign to be miraculous power is one of the causes of shirk. Christians claim: “No one besides God has the power to bring the dead to life. Jesus brought the dead to life. This proves that Jesus was God, or that he possessed divinity or divine power.” The Noble Qur’an repeatedly states that no prophet, messenger, or other person can produce or display a miracle or sign by his own will; it can occur only by Allah’s will. If a miracle occurs through a wali or pious person, this does not mean that the act was under that person’s control or that it resulted from his own power. It means that, on a particular occasion, Allah honored him by granting him a miraculous sign. He may not grant it at another time. I shall mention one example. It is reported through a reliable chain that, on a Friday early in 23 AH, while Umar ibn al-Khattab was delivering the sermon in the Prophet’s Mosque, he called out loudly: “O Sariyah, go to the mountain.” At that time, a Muslim commander named Sariyah ibn Zuraym was fighting in a battlefield in Persia. He was on the verge of defeat. He heard Umar’s words, took shelter by the mountain, and won the battle. (Tabari, Tarikh 2/553–554; Ibn Hajar, al-Isabah 3/5–6; al-Maqdisi, p. 468.) In this event we see a special karamat of Umar. He perceived the condition of a battlefield thousands of miles away, gave an instruction aloud, and Sariyah heard it. The meaning of this karamat is that, at that particular moment on that particular day, Allah honored this great wali. He perceived the distant scene in his heart, gave the instruction, and Allah conveyed it to Sariyah. It does not mean that Umar possessed the power to observe everything thousands of miles away, or that he could see distant things whenever he wished or send his words there by his own power. At the end of that same year, on 27 Dhu al-Hijjah 23 AH, when Umar said the opening takbir for the dawn prayer, the enemy of Allah, Abu Lu’lu’, who was standing behind him among the worshippers wearing a cloak, repeatedly stabbed him with a concealed knife. Umar fell unconscious. When he regained consciousness, he asked, “Who struck me?” He was told, “Abu Lu’lu’.” He said, “Praise be to Allah; I was not martyred at the hands of a Muslim.” He died a few days later. (Ibn Kathir, al-Bidayah 7/130–138.) Here we see that in the first event Allah showed Umar the condition of a place thousands of miles away, but in the second He did not let him know about the enemy standing beside him. This is because karamat is never power; it is only an honor granted by Allah. B. Wali and awliya The word wilayat means nearness, friendship, guardianship, and similar meanings. One who attains wilayat is called a wali—that is, a friend, close servant, or guardian under Allah’s care. The Qur’an identifies the awliya as follows: “Know that surely the friends of Allah shall have no fear, nor shall they grieve—those who believe and remain conscious of Allah, protecting themselves from His displeasure.” (Surah Yunus 10:62–63.) Iman means a pure belief in tawhid and risalah, free of shirk and disbelief. Taqwa means self-protection. Abandoning every deed or thought that displeases the Glorious Allah is taqwa. In essence, abstaining from all unlawful, prohibited, and sinful things is called taqwa. This verse teaches us that the identity of a wali is confined to two qualities: iman and taqwa. The more abundant and complete these qualities are in a person, the further he advances on the path of wilayat and the more beloved he is to Allah, and thus the greater his status as a wali. The Messenger of Allah divided the deeds of the path of wilayat into two categories: obligatory and voluntary. After performing all obligations, a servant advances ever farther toward Allah through abundant voluntary worship. From this we understand that every Muslim is a wali of Allah. Whoever possesses more iman and taqwa is a greater wali. Imam Abu Ja’far al-Tahawi, one of the leading Imams of the Hanafi school, describing the creed of Abu Hanifah, Muhammad, Abu Yusuf—may Allah have mercy on them—and Ahl al-Sunnah wa al-Jama’ah, said: “All believers are the awliya of the Most Merciful. Among them, whoever is more obedient to Allah and more committed to the Qur’an is more honored by Allah, and is therefore a greater wali.” (Imam Tahawi, al-Aqidah, pp. 357–362.) Thus, the standard of wilayat is iman and taqwa: fulfilling all obligatory duties and performing abundant voluntary worship. If a Muslim preserves correct faith in accordance with the complete Sunnah, attains taqwa by abandoning every kind of unlawful act and prohibition, fulfills all obligations, and performs as much voluntary worship as possible, he is a wali of Allah, a beloved servant. The farther a person advances in these matters, the more nearness to Allah, or wilayat, he attains. We therefore understand that wilayat is not an office or title, and Islam has no special office or rank called “wali.” Every believer is a wali. The more iman and taqwa a person acquires, the greater his wilayat. C. Haqq “Karamat al-Awliya haqq,” or “the miraculous deeds of the awliya are true,” means that miraculous deeds can occur through the awliya. If a miraculous act appears through a person who outwardly seems to be a pious, believing, God-fearing person, it must be understood as an honor granted by Allah. Likewise, if it is reliably established that a miraculous act appeared through a pious elder, it must be believed to be true. To deny it or dismiss it as impossible is the creed of the Mu’tazilah. The statement “the miracles of the awliya are true” is misunderstood in two ways. First, some think that everything said about miracles or supernatural events attributed to awliya must be accepted as true. This is a grave error. No report is acceptable without a sound chain. Just as fabricated hadiths have spread, countless fabricated miracle stories have also been circulated in the names of the awliya. Second, some think it means that an wali must possess miracles, or that miracles are the sign or mark of a wali. This too is a serious error. Apart from outward religious practice, there is no sign, badge, or certificate identifying a wali. No karamat or supernatural event is ever the criterion of wilayat. Allah’s most beloved wali may possess no miracle at all. We know that no karamat has been reported for most of the noble Companions, although they were Allah’s most beloved awliya. Conversely, a supernatural event may occur through a sinful person, an unbeliever, or a polytheist. Above all, a person possessing a karamat is not thereby someone of a special rank, nor is he protected from error. If he errs in his actions, he will be punished. The Qur’an tells us that even a wali possessing a karamat may become misguided and astray. (Surah al-A’raf 7:175–177; Ibn Kathir, Tafsir 2/265–268.) 2. The awliya do not die A published book states: “Indeed, the friends of Allah do not die; rather, they move from the perishing worldly life to the everlasting Hereafter”—al-hadith. (Khwaja Nizamuddin Awliya, Rahatul Muhibbin, back cover.) It should be noted that in the book Sirr al-Asrar, circulated in the name of Abd al-Qadir al-Jilani, this hadith is quoted differently: “The believers do not die; rather, they move from the perishing worldly life to the everlasting Hereafter.” Both statements are false, vile fabrications attributed to the Messenger of Allah. They have not been transmitted through any authentic, weak, or even fabricated chain. We know that every human being, through death, “moves from the perishing worldly life to the everlasting Hereafter.” No one has any special distinction in this respect. The special life of martyrs in the Hereafter is established by various Qur’anic verses and authentic hadiths. The special life of the prophets in the Hereafter is established by authentic hadiths. No special post-death life of any other pious person has been established. Whatever is said about the post-death life of scholars, awliya, callers to prayer, and other kinds of pious people is all unsupported, baseless nonsense. (Darwish Hut, Asan al-Matalib, pp. 295–296; Daylami, al-Firdaws 3/35.) 3. The awliya pray in their graves Another fabricated statement concerning the afterlife of the awliya says: “The prophets and awliya pray in their graves just as they prayed in their homes.” (Sirr al-Asrar, p. 55.) We have already seen that the statement is authentic with regard to the prophets. But the addition of the word awliya here is fabricated. 4. The awliya are Allah’s fragrance A published book states: “Al-awliya rayhanullah—al-hadith. Meaning: The awliya are the fragrance of Allah.” [Khwaja Nizamuddin Awliya, Rahatul Muhibbin, back cover.] This too is a fabrication attributed to the Messenger of Allah. It is not known to have been transmitted from him through any authentic, weak, or fabricated chain. There is no objection to calling the awliya Allah’s fragrance. Allah’s provision has been called Allah’s fragrance, and children have also been called Allah’s fragrance. (Tabari, Tafsir 27/123; Ibn Hajar, Fath al-Bari 8/621.) But if this statement is attributed to the Messenger of Allah, it must be transmitted through an authentic chain. 5. The awliya are concealed beneath Allah’s cloak A published book states: “Indeed, My friends are beneath My cloak; no one knows them except Me and My friends”—a hadith qudsi. Meaning: “Indeed, My friends remain beneath My cloak; no one besides Me and My awliya knows them.” [Khwaja Nizamuddin Awliya, Rahatul Muhibbin, back cover.] This too is a baseless, fabricated statement. It is not known to have been transmitted through any authentic, weak, or fabricated chain. Like many other unsupported sayings, it spread among people in later times. Some scholars of the ninth and tenth Hijri centuries, relying on baseless popular reports, mentioned it without a chain in their books. (Jurjani, Ali ibn Muhammad, d. 816 AH, Ta’rifat, p. 295.) 6. The special Paradise of the awliya: only the vision of Allah It is commonly said in our society that Allah’s special awliya do not worship for the blessings of Paradise, but only for love or the vision of Allah. This state is considered the highest state. A fabricated hadith is cited for this claim: “Allah has a Paradise in which there are no maidens, palaces, honey, or milk—rather, there is the vision of the Lord.” This is a completely baseless, chainless fabrication. (Sirr al-Asrar, pp. 19–20.) 7. Both this world and the Hereafter are forbidden to the awliya of Allah Another fabricated statement with the same meaning says: “The world is forbidden to the people of the Hereafter, and the Hereafter is forbidden to the people of the world. Both the world and the Hereafter are forbidden to the people of Allah.” That is, no one can attain nearness to Allah until he abandons all hope for and enjoyment of the happiness and peace of this world and the next. The sixth-century scholar Shirawayh ibn Shahrdar al-Daylami mentioned this hadith in al-Firdaws. His son, Shahrdar ibn Shirawayh Abu Mansur al-Daylami, cited a chain for it in Musnad al-Firdaws. Most of the narrators in the chain are completely unknown, while the others are weak. For this reason the hadith has been judged fabricated. (Daylami, al-Firdaws 2/230; al-Albani, al-Da’ifah 1/105–106.) This hadith claims that (1) the world is forbidden to the people of the Hereafter and (2) both the world and the Hereafter are forbidden to the people of Allah. These claims conflict with the Noble Qur’an and countless authentic hadiths. Allah has said precisely the opposite. He declared that He has not forbidden the beauty and good pleasures of this world and the Hereafter to His beloved Messenger, His greatest God-conscious Companions, or any of the people of Allah and the Hereafter: “Say: Who has forbidden the adornment of Allah which He has produced for His servants, and the good things of provision? Say: They are for the believers in the worldly life, and exclusively for them on the Day of Resurrection.” (Surah al-A’raf 7:31–32.) The Qur’an instructs the people of Allah and the people of the Hereafter to ask for the blessings of this world and the Hereafter. The Messenger of Allah himself always made this supplication. The blessings of the Hereafter are, of course, the principal aspiration of the people of Allah and the Hereafter. The idea that a person must abandon hope for the blessings of Paradise in order to become one of Allah’s people is clearly opposed to the Qur’an and hadith. Such an idea may occur to some pious people. But the Messenger of Allah and the Companions always asked for the blessings of Paradise, and he gave the Companions glad tidings of various blessings. Above all, Allah described in the Noble Qur’an the blessings of Paradise for the prophets and awliya of the highest rank as well as for ordinary awliya. 8. Shariah, tariqah, ma’rifah, and haqiqah These are four very familiar terms among us. The word Shariah itself is used in the Qur’an and hadith. But the terms tariqah, ma’rifah, and haqiqah, in the sense of four stages, levels, or divisions of Islam, are not used anywhere in the Qur’an or hadith. Later scholars divided these concepts and terms in light of the Qur’an and hadith. Forgers also fabricated hadiths about them. Liars claimed that the Messenger of Allah said: “Shariah is a tree, tariqah is its branches, ma’rifah is its leaves, and haqiqah is its fruit.” (Sirr al-Asrar, p. 33.) May Allah disgrace the liars. Another saying fabricated by them is: “Shariah is my words, tariqah is my deeds, haqiqah is my state, and ma’rifah is my capital.” (Ajluni, Kashf al-Khafa 2/6.) 9. The lesser jihad and the greater jihad It is claimed that, returning from a battle, the Messenger of Allah said: “We have returned from the lesser jihad to the greater jihad. The greater jihad is jihad against the mind, or struggle against one’s desires.” Ibn Taymiyyah judged this hadith baseless and invalid. The hadith scholars Iraqi, Suyuti, and others stated that it was transmitted from the Messenger of Allah through a weak chain. On the other hand, the statement is authentically transmitted as the saying of the famous Successor Ibrahim ibn Abi Ablah (d. 152 AH). For this reason Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani said that it was originally the statement of this Successor. Weak narrators often transmitted the words of a Companion or Successor as words of the Messenger of Allah. (Mulla Ali al-Qari, al-Asrar, p. 127; Darwish Hut, Asan al-Matalib, p. 153; al-Albani, al-Da’ifah 5/478–481.) 10. Striving against one’s desires is the hardest jihad Another hadith with this meaning is widespread in our society: “The hardest jihad is jihad against one’s desires.” This is not a statement of the Messenger of Allah. It was not transmitted as his statement through any chain. It is reported as the personal statement of the famous Successor of the Successors, Ibrahim ibn Adham (d. 161 AH). (Bayhaqi, Kitab al-Zuhd 2/152.) It should be noted that there is an authentic hadith with a similar meaning. Fudalah ibn Ubayd said that during the sermon of the Farewell Pilgrimage the Messenger of Allah said: “The mujahid is the one who strives against his own desires in obedience to Allah.” (Tirmidhi, al-Sunan 4/165; Ibn Hibban, al-Sahih 11/204.) Sadly, instead of the authentic statements collected in famous hadith books, we attribute baseless fabrications to the Messenger of Allah. 11. The alim versus the arif In the terminology of the Qur’an and hadith, a person possessing Islamic knowledge is called an alim. Ma’rifah means theoretical knowledge, hidden knowledge, or special knowledge. The Qur’an and hadith say nothing about calling theoretical knowledge arifah or about distinguishing between an alim and an arif. Everything said on this subject is fabricated. One such fabricated hadith says: “The alim draws the design, and the arif—the knower of divine realities—clears it.” (Sirr al-Asrar, p. 49.) 12. Adopt Allah’s nature Among the Sufis there is a baseless, chainless fabricated hadith: “Adopt Allah’s nature, or become adorned with Allah’s attributes.” (Sirr al-Asrar, p. 50.) 13. Become alone and reach me “Become alone and you will reach me.” (Sirr al-Asrar, p. 78.) All the statements above are chainless, baseless fabrications. They have not been transmitted through any authentic, weak, or fabricated chain. 14. Listening to sama, or love music, is permissible for some Sama means listening. In the time of the Companions and Successors, sama meant listening to the Qur’an and listening to the life, conduct, and sayings of the Messenger. These were what produced in their hearts a flood of love for Allah and love for the Prophet. No Muslim listened to music in order to attain nearness to Allah or create love of Allah in the heart. Among luxurious and irreligious people, music was sometimes used for entertainment, but the scholars considered it unlawful. One or two people tried to permit it as entertainment, but such actions were never regarded as a means of attaining nearness to Allah. Gradually, sama came to mean music and singing. Becoming emotionally overwhelmed by music and dancing was called wajd, meaning emotion, excitement, or frenzy. From the fifth Hijri century, sama, music, and wajd—dancing or becoming ecstatic under the influence of music—became a major activity of Sufi practitioners. No Sufi lodge or court could be imagined without sama. Because of their devotion to Sufis, Hujjat al-Islam Imam al-Ghazali and some other scholars claimed that such music, singing, and dancing were permissible, lawful under the Shariah, and a good innovation. (Abu Hamid al-Ghazali, Ihya’ Ulum al-Din 2/292–332.) When sama music became widespread among pious people, the forgers found a major field in which to exercise their ingenuity. They fabricated and circulated various hadiths concerning sama and wajd. The book Sirr al-Asrar states that the Prophet said: “Sama is obligatory for some, Sunnah for some, and innovation for some. It is obligatory for the elite, Sunnah for the lovers, and innovation for the heedless.” (Sirr al-Asrar, pp. 88–89.) This is a baseless fabrication made in the name of the Messenger of Allah; it has not been transmitted anywhere, even through a weak or fabricated chain. 15. Whoever has no wajd or ecstasy has neither religion nor life Becoming overwhelmed by emotion, losing consciousness, or dancing in a music gathering was considered a major sign of love. The forgers fabricated several hadiths about this. The book Sirr al-Asrar cites one such “hadith”: “Whoever has no wajd, or emotional excitement and ecstasy, has no life and no religion.” (Sirr al-Asrar, pp. 86, 89.) This too is a completely baseless, chainless fabrication. 16. Whoever is not moved by music is not noble Another fabricated hadith is famous on this subject. It even has a chain, but its principal narrator is a lying forger. It says that a love poem was recited before the Messenger of Allah. The song said: “The serpent of love has bitten my heart. There is no physician or medicine for it, except my beloved. He is my illness and he is my medicine.” On hearing this poem, the Messenger became excited and began dancing or swaying, until his cloak fell from his body. The Companions also began dancing or swaying with him. Then he said: “Whoever is not moved while listening is not noble.” The hadith scholars agree that this is an atrocious lie and fabrication. (Ibn Taymiyyah, Ahadith al-Qussas, pp. 60–61; Dhahabi, Mizan al-I’tidal 5/198.) 17. Ghawth, qutb, awtad, aqtab, abdal, and nujaba The terms ghawth, qutb, awtad, aqtab, and others are widespread among religious people in our society. We generally use them to refer to the noble awliya. Special meanings and special offices are also associated with these terms. It is further claimed that a certain number of awtad, abdal, ghawths, and qutbs always exist in the world. All these are baseless statements fabricated in the name of Allah and His great Messenger. Apart from abdal, none of these terms is mentioned in any hadith. The terms ghawth, qutb, awtad, and so forth, along with all the offices, titles, and numbers associated with them, are entirely baseless. Nothing concerning them has been transmitted from the Messenger of Allah through an authentic or acceptable chain. Only the word abdal has been mentioned in several hadiths. Abdal is the plural of badal, meaning substitutes or replacements. Several hadiths state that there are some pious people, and whenever one of them dies, Allah appoints another in his place. They are therefore called abdal, or substitutes. Every hadith reported on this subject has a weak chain. Some chains contain a lying narrator, some are disconnected, and some contain weak narrators. For this reason, certain hadith scholars have categorically called all hadiths about the abdal objectionable, invalid, or fabricated. Many other scholars, because of their multiple chains, have considered them acceptable as a whole. After reviewing the detailed discussions of various hadith scholars and the reports transmitted through different chains, the second view seems correct to me. Two matters establish the basis of the term abdal: first, the various hadiths on the subject; and second, the use of this term by many Successors, Successors of the Successors, hadith scholars, Imams, and jurists of the second and third Hijri centuries. This shows that the term has a basis and origin. As with all other subjects, many false statements have been circulated as hadiths concerning the abdal. Alongside these, some hadith scholars have considered the following three hadiths broadly acceptable. The first hadith: A Successor named Shurayh ibn Ubayd (d. 101 AH) said that when the war between Ali and Muawiyah was taking place, the Iraqis who followed Ali said, “Commander of the Believers, curse the Syrians who follow Muawiyah.” He replied, “No, for I heard the Messenger of Allah say: ‘The abdal will be in Syria. They are forty people. Whenever one of them dies, Allah replaces him with another. Through them Allah sends rain, grants victory over enemies, and removes punishment from the people of Syria.’” All the narrators in the chain are reliable and accepted by Bukhari and Muslim, except Shurayh ibn Ubayd. His hadith is not in Bukhari and Muslim, but he too is recognized as a trustworthy narrator. Thus the chain is authentic. Some scholars consider it disconnected because Shurayh did not say that he heard it from Ali; he merely related the event. It therefore seems possible that he heard it through someone whose name he did not mention, although this is not certain. Shurayh was about thirty years old at the time of the Battle of Siffin, so it was not impossible for him to have heard a hadith from Ali or to have been present at the event. Outwardly, therefore, the chain appears connected. Diya al-Din al-Maqdisi stated that this hadith is transmitted through a stronger chain as Ali’s own statement. Thus it is authentic as a statement of Ali, or as a mawquf hadith. (Ahmad, al-Musnad 1/112; Sakhawi, al-Maqasid, pp. 32–34; Suyuti, al-La’ali 2/330–332; Ibn Iraq, Tanzih 2/306–307.) The second hadith: The Successor Abd al-Wahid ibn Qays said that Ubadah ibn al-Samit said that the Messenger of Allah said: “There are thirty abdal in this community. They are like Ibrahim, the intimate friend of the Glorious and Merciful Allah. Whenever one of them dies, the Glorious and Blessed Allah replaces him with another.” There is disagreement among hadith scholars concerning the narrator Abd al-Wahid ibn Qays. Ijli and Abu Zur’ah considered him acceptable, while other scholars considered him weak. Imam Ahmad called the hadith munkar, meaning objectionable or weak. Some scholars considered it hasan. The third hadith: Anas reported that the Messenger of Allah said: “The earth will never be without forty people who are like Ibrahim, the intimate friend of the Merciful Allah. Through them you receive rain and through them you gain victory. Whenever one of them dies, Allah replaces him with another.” Tabarani collected this hadith. There are objections concerning the reliability of several narrators in its chain, so some scholars considered it weak. However, Allamah Haythami considered it hasan. (Tabarani, al-Mu’jam al-Awsat 4/247; al-Albani, al-Da’ifah 9/325–327; Da’if al-Jami, p. 689.) In addition to these three hadiths, several others have been reported about the abdal. Although each is weak or extremely weak on its own, taken together they establish the existence of the abdal. Naturally, many fabricated statements have been circulated around this established matter. Numerous fabricated reports concern the duties and ranks of the abdal. Below and above the abdal, many invented titles are mentioned: 300 naqibs, 70 najibs, 40 badals or abdals, 4 amids, and 1 qutb or ghawth. Apart from abdal, all these titles and numbers are baseless fabrications. Nothing about qutb, ghawth, najib, or naqib has been transmitted from the Messenger of Allah through any authentic or weak chain. Everything said about their countries, ranks, duties, and activities is likewise baseless and fabricated. Nothing on these matters has been transmitted from the Messenger through an authentic or weak chain, although some scholars in recent centuries have written much about them. (Hakim al-Tirmidhi, Nawadir al-Usul 1/261–263; Sakhawi, al-Maqasid, pp. 32–34; Darwish Hut, Asan al-Matalib, p. 63; al-Albani, Da’if al-Jami, pp. 203, 334, 367.) Here I draw the reader’s attention to two related matters: the identity of the abdal and their duties. A. The identity of the abdal No authentic hadith has been transmitted concerning the identity of the abdal. No hadith states in any way that the abdal themselves know or recognize that they are abdal. Nevertheless, from the second century onward, pious people were thought to be among the abdal because of their outward good deeds. Some weak hadiths mention certain outward practices in this regard. One weak chain reports: “They did not attain this rank through abundant voluntary prayer, fasting, or charity; rather, they attained it through generosity, breadth of heart, mercy, love, and sincere counsel toward all Muslims.” The chain of this hadith is weak. (Haythami, Majma al-Zawa’id 10/63; Ajluni, Kashf al-Khafa 1/24–25.) In light of various weak hadiths and statements of the Successors and their successors, scholars such as Sakhawi, Suyuti, and Ajluni have mentioned some signs of the badals: breadth of heart; contentment with destiny; abstention from unlawful things; anger for the sake of Allah’s religion; not harming anyone; benefiting someone who harms him; forgiving someone who causes him pain; praying daily for the community of Muhammad; being childless or having no children born to him; and not cursing anyone, among other things. (Ibn al-Jawzi, al-Mawdu’at 2/335–337; Sakhawi, al-Maqasid, pp. 32–34; Suyuti, al-La’ali 2/330–332; Ibn Iraq, Tanzih, pp. 306–307; Tahir al-Fatani, Tadhkirah, pp. 193–195.) B. The duties of the abdal It is also commonly said among us that the ghawth has such-and-such a duty, the qutb has such-and-such a duty, and so on. These are baseless fabrications. Countless elders and pious people have innocently accepted and repeated these hearsay claims. We have already seen that all offices and terms apart from abdal are baseless. Regarding the abdal, some hadiths say that Allah sends rain “because of them” or “for their sake.” This has two meanings. First: receiving the blessing of good deeds. Allah grants worldly blessings because of the good deeds of pious people. In an authentic hadith, Anas said that during the time of the Messenger of Allah there were two brothers. One would visit the Messenger, while the other worked to earn money. The working brother complained that the other did not help him. The Prophet said: “Perhaps you receive provision because of him.” (Tirmidhi, al-Sunan 4/574; Hakim, al-Mustadrak 1/172.) Second: receiving the blessing of their supplications. The other meaning is that Allah grants mercy and blessing because of their prayers. Various hadiths state that Allah accepts the supplications of His beloved servants. Several weak hadiths about the abdal say that people benefit from the blessing of their prayers. The nature of pious people is that they continually pray to Allah for the welfare of all Muslims and the Muslim community. The Muslim community benefits from the blessing of these prayers. Three erroneous and distorted meanings have become common in society. First: the supposed obligation to accept a supplication. Some people believe that if an abdal or some such pious person prays, Allah must accept it. Thus, whether the Glorious Allah is pleased or displeased, they think their objective will be achieved if they somehow obtain a prayer from a particular person. This idea is not merely mistaken; it conflicts with Islamic belief and contains shirk. First, none of us knows who is a badal or abdal. Everything concerning this is speculation and imagination. Second, whether Allah accepts someone’s prayer is entirely His will. The Qur’an teaches us that Allah fulfilled even the unspoken wish in the heart of His beloved and intimate friend, Muhammad, the Messenger of Allah. Yet He did not accept a prayer he uttered. He prayed for forgiveness for a hypocrite, but Allah did not accept it. He further said that even if he prayed in this way seventy times, it would not be accepted. A wali who possessed a karamat was severely punished because he prayed outside Allah’s will. (Surah al-Tawbah 9:80; Surah al-A’raf 7:175–177; Tafsir Ibn Kathir 2/265–269.) Second: supplication through an intermediary. A distorted interpretation, opposed to Islamic creed, of statements such as “you receive provision because of him” and “you receive rain because of them” is that Allah would supposedly not grant these things without the prayers or intercession of these people. They are treated like ministers of kings, without whose intercession nothing can be accomplished. Just as an application to an earthly king, ruler, or minister may receive a quicker result when presented through a close associate, it is thought that asking Allah through these people has a greater chance of acceptance than asking Him directly. These ideas are clear shirk. An earthly king does not know me or know my honesty and sincerity, but perhaps one of his favorites knows me. Through that person’s intercession, the king may become convinced that I deserve his mercy. Is Allah’s matter like that? Does He not know me? Does any wali or beloved servant of Allah know me better than Allah does? Does anyone love me more than Allah, or wish to show me more mercy? Furthermore, because of the human weakness of earthly kings and judges, there is a fear of bias or mistaken judgment, which intercession may remove. Is there any such fear in Allah’s case? No one can say who is accepted and beloved by Allah. We have already seen that it is the nature of pious people to pray continually to Allah for the welfare of all Muslims and the Muslim community; Muslims benefit from the blessing of these prayers. But these hadiths never instruct an individual Muslim, or the Muslim community collectively, to go to a particular pious person and request a prayer. During the blessed generations of Islam, the Companions, Successors, their successors, and the people of that time never did this. Third: duty or power. Some believe that Allah has given the abdal or noble awliya responsibility and power over rain, victory, and similar matters, and that they grant these things as they choose. This belief is shirk like the Hindu and polytheist belief in gods and deities. In governing the universe, Allah has given no responsibility or authority to any living or dead prophet, wali, or human being. Everything said or believed on this subject is a vile falsehood and contradicts the countless clear statements of the Qur’an and hadith. Allah has assigned the angels various responsibilities in governing the universe, but He has given them no independent power. He has not assigned any such responsibility to any living or dead human being. Many people in Muslim society, without any basis, imagine that a certain person is a beloved servant of Allah. Then they imagine that Allah may have given him some power. They subsequently begin asking such people for things according to their own fancies. To support these vile acts of shirk, certain ignorant people distort the hadiths mentioned above concerning the abdal. 18. Centered on Abd al-Qadir al-Jilani Hazrat Abd al-Qadir al-Jilani was one of the prominent scholars, jurists, and Sufis of the sixth Hijri century, a period of decline, disunity, and external attacks in the history of the Muslim community. He was born in 471 AH and died at the age of ninety in 561 AH (1166 CE). He was a major jurist of the Hanbali school and also a great Sufi practitioner and preacher. Through his sermons, countless people returned to the path of religion during that dark period. Many of his miracles became famous during his lifetime. His students and close associates, such as Dhahabi, Sam’ani, and others, wrote reliable biographies of him. He himself also authored many books, teaching Muslims about their religious and spiritual lives according to the Hanbali school. Although, under the influence of the sectarian disputes of his time, he mentioned Imam Abu Hanifah and his followers as a hellbound sect (Abd al-Qadir al-Jilani, Ghunyat al-Talibin, pp. 6, 7, 149, 151, 152, 155, 211, 227), people of all schools, including Hanafis, nevertheless revere him. In later times, countless bizarre and false statements were fabricated in his name as supposed miracles. These statements are not only baseless and false; they also oppose Islamic ideas. Our subject here, however, is a false statement connected with the Messenger of Allah. One fabrication centered on Abd al-Qadir al-Jilani claims that, on the night of the Mi’raj, the Messenger of Allah placed his foot on Abd al-Qadir al-Jilani’s shoulder and ascended to the Throne. This is a vile fabrication falsely attributed to the Messenger of Allah. It has no existence in any hadith collection. It is astonishing to consider how a believer could attribute to the Messenger of Allah such bizarre fabrications—words he never said, which appear in no hadith collection and have no chain. The Companions did not dare to repeat even words they had memorized and known for fear of the slightest addition or omission. How, then, can we indiscriminately repeat whatever we hear in his name? How will we face him on the Day of Resurrection?

2.8. Concerning the Virtues of Knowledge and Scholars

There are many Qur’anic verses and authentic hadiths concerning the command to acquire knowledge and the status of scholars and students of knowledge. On the other hand, many fabricated hadiths have been invented in praise of knowledge. Many ignorant “pious” people have invented numerous false hadiths while describing the virtue of acquiring knowledge. What a terrible crime! They thought that the verses of the Noble Qur’an and authentic hadiths were not sufficient; therefore, unless they quoted additional fabricated hadiths about the virtue of knowledge, perhaps people would not come to learn. Since scholars are the ones who circulate hadiths, many scholars have sometimes narrated these forged hadiths, which had attractive meanings, without examining them. As a result, many fabricated hadiths concerning the virtue of knowledge and scholars have spread through society. It is our duty to know these false hadiths and refrain from narrating them. The Qur’anic verses and authentic hadiths are sufficient for us. 1. A little reflection is better than a thousand years of worship Among these fabricated hadiths is the statement: “Reflecting and engaging in contemplation for a moment or some time is better than worshipping for one year.” Some people exaggerate it further, saying that it is better than worshipping for seventy thousand years. Hadith scholars have identified this statement as fabricated. It is false when attributed to the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him). It is merely a saying of an earlier scholar. (Mulla Qari, al-Asrar, p. 97; al-Albani, Da‘if al-Jami‘, p. 581.) 2. The ink of a scholar is better than the blood of a martyr Another fabricated hadith invented in praise of knowledge is: “The ink of a scholar is better than the blood of a martyr.” Hadith scholars such as al-Sakhawi, al-Zurqani and Mulla Ali al-Qari have stated that, although the statement sounds beautiful, it is not a saying of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him). al-Zarkashi said that it was actually a statement of Hasan al-Basri (may Allah have mercy on him). 3. The scholars of my ummah are like the prophets of the Children of Israel This is a widely circulated statement among scholars and religious people: “The scholars of my ummah are like the prophets of the Children of Israel.” Hadith scholars unanimously agree that this statement is not from the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him). Rather, it is a baseless, chainless, false, fabricated statement circulated in his name. (al-Sakhawi, al-Maqasid, p. 293; Mulla Qari, al-Asrar, p. 159.) Many preachers tell fabricated stories based on this false hadith, claiming that the Messenger Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him) supposedly debated this matter with Moses (peace be upon him). We seek Allah’s protection! What an atrocious fabrication! It should be noted here that there are many other hadiths concerning the virtue of scholars, in which scholars are described as possessing a status close to that of the prophets. A reliable (hasan) hadith states: “The scholars are the heirs of the prophets.” al-Tirmidhi, Abu Dawud, Ibn Majah and other hadith scholars have transmitted this hadith. Instead of sinning by attributing fabricated statements to the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), we should discuss these acceptable hadiths. 4. Look at the faces of scholars Another fabricated hadith invented concerning the virtue of scholars states: “Looking at the face of a scholar is more beloved to Allah than worship consisting of sixty years of fasting and night prayer (tahajjud).” In another wording it is said: “Looking at the face of a scholar is worship.” Neither of these two statements is a hadith. Hadith scholars have described both statements as false or fabricated hadiths. (al-Sakhawi, al-Maqasid, p. 442; Mulla Qari, al-Asrar, p. 253.) 5. A scholar’s sleep is worship Another fabricated hadith of this kind is: “A scholar’s sleep is worship.” Mulla Ali al-Qari says: “As a statement of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him)—that is, as a marfu‘ hadith—this statement has no existence.” 6. A scholar’s sleep is better than an ignorant person’s worship Another similarly baseless fabricated statement is: “A scholar’s sleep is better than an ignorant person’s worship.” Both statements are fabricated. They do not exist through any chain, whether authentic, weak or mawdu‘. However, there is a weak hadith with a similar meaning: “Sleeping with knowledge is better than performing prayer with ignorance.” (Abu Nu‘aym al-Isfahani, Hilyat al-Awliya’, 4/385; Mulla Ali al-Qari, al-Asrar, p. 255; al-Albani, Da‘if al-Jami‘, p. 861.) 7. The company of a scholar is better than a thousand rak‘ahs of prayer Another fabricated hadith on this subject states: “Being present in a scholar’s gathering is better than praying one thousand rak‘ahs.” Hadith scholars have regarded this statement as a false hadith. (Mulla Qari, al-Asrar, p. 113.) Based on this fabricated hadith, another statement was later circulated: “Spending a moment in the company of the saints is better than praying for one hundred years without ostentation.” Keeping the company of righteous and pious people is an important act of worship. The Qur’an and hadith give special instructions concerning it. However, this particular virtue of companionship is fabricated. 8. Do not study after ‘Asr In our country, it is common among many scholars and madrasa students to say that studying after ‘Asr harms the eyes. This claim originated from a fabricated hadith. That fabricated hadith says: “Whoever loves his two eyes should not write after ‘Asr.” This is not a hadith and has no basis. Studying in dim light, darkness, or half-light may harm the eyes. Doctors can say much about this matter. But there is no hadith concerning it. (al-Sakhawi, al-Maqasid, p. 397; Mulla Qari, al-Asrar, p. 216.) 9. Seek knowledge, even in China A statement widely circulated in our country is: “Seek knowledge, even in China.” Most hadith scholars have identified it as fabricated. Some have called it an extremely weak hadith. Only two extremely weak narrators, who used to narrate false hadiths, transmitted it as a statement of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him). (Ibn ‘Adi, al-Kamil, 1/292; Ibn al-Jawzi, al-Mawdu‘at, 1/154; al-Suyuti, al-La’ali, 1/193.) 10. Studying knowledge for part of the night is better than worshipping throughout the night A famous book in our country states: “There is another hadith in Sahih al-Bukhari: The Prophet (peace be upon him) said that learning religious knowledge for the length of one hour at night is better than staying awake and worshipping throughout the entire night.” (Muhammad Golam Rahman, Maqsud al-Mu’minin, p. 25.) This statement was not compiled as a saying of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) even in any hadith collection, let alone Sahih al-Bukhari. Imam al-Darimi included it in his Sunan as a statement of the Companion Ibn ‘Abbas (may Allah be pleased with him), through an extremely weak and disconnected chain. Everything narrated in this meaning as a statement of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) is fabricated. [al-Darimi, ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Abd al-Rahman (d. 255 AH), al-Sunan, 1/94, 157.] 11. The virtue of knowledge, practice and sincerity The Qur’an and hadith contain many instructions concerning the importance of knowledge, practice and sincerity. Alongside these, some fabricated hadiths circulate in society, such as: “All people are dead or ruined except the scholars. All scholars are ruined except those who act. All those who act are ruined or drowning except the sincere. The sincere are in severe fear.” Hadith scholars unanimously agree that these statements are fabricated. They have not been transmitted from the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) through any authentic, weak or mawdu‘ chain. Darwish Hutt says: “Samarqandi mentioned this ‘hadith’ in his book Tanbih al-Ghafilin, and preachers make a great fuss over it. This book contains many false and mawdu‘ hadiths. Therefore, it cannot be relied upon.” (Darwish Hutt, Asan al-Matalib, p. 246; al-Albani, al-Da‘ifah, 1/174.) 12. Seeking knowledge expiates previous sins Imam al-Tirmidhi included the following hadith in his Sunan: “If a person acquires knowledge, it will be an expiation for his previous sins.” (al-Tirmidhi, al-Sunan, 5/29.) Besides Imam al-Tirmidhi, al-Darimi, al-Tabarani and other hadith scholars also recorded this hadith. All of them transmitted it through “the blind Abu Dawud,” Nufay‘ ibn al-Harith. He died around 150 AH. Famous hadith scholars of his own and later generations demonstrated through comparative examination that this man used to lie in the name of hadith. The famous contemporary Successor Qatadah ibn Di‘amah (d. 117 AH) described him as a liar. Imam Muslim wrote in the introduction to his Sahih that the famous Successor-of-the-Successors Hammam ibn Yahya (d. 165 AH) said: “The blind Abu Dawud came to us and began narrating hadith. He claimed to have heard hadith from the Companion al-Bara’ ibn ‘Azib (d. 73 AH), the Companion Zayd ibn Arqam (d. 68 AH), and other Companions. He claimed that he had learned hadith from eighteen Companions who had participated in the Battle of Badr. We then asked the famous Successor and hadith scholar Qatadah about him. He said, ‘The man is lying. He never saw these Companions and heard nothing from them, because only a few years earlier, even during the epidemic, we saw him begging from door to door.’” (Muslim, al-Sahih, 1/21–22.) Imam al-Bukhari, Ahmad ibn Hanbal, Abu Hatim al-Razi and other hadith scholars described him as an extremely weak and abandoned narrator. Yahya ibn Ma‘in, al-Nasa’i, Ibn Hibban and other hadith scholars described him as a liar and fabricator. No one other than this man transmitted the hadith through any chain. He claimed that a man named ‘Abdullah ibn Sakhbarah had told him, and that Sakhbarah, his father, had told ‘Abdullah that the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) had said this statement. The man named ‘Abdullah ibn Sakhbarah is also unknown. Apart from the blind Abu Dawud, no one mentioned his name or claimed to know him. Similarly, no one except this blind ‘Abdullah mentioned the Companion named Sakhbarah. No other source indicates that there was a Companion by this name. (Ibn Hajar, Tahdhib, 10/419; Taqrib, p. 465; al-Isabah, 3/35.) After citing the hadith and referring to these matters, Imam al-Tirmidhi said: “The chain of this hadith is weak. Abu Dawud is weak. No substantial information is available about ‘Abdullah ibn Sakhbarah or his father. Qatadah and other scholars have spoken about this blind Abu Dawud.” (al-Tirmidhi, al-Sunan, 5/29.) Imam al-Tirmidhi stopped at describing the chain of this hadith as weak; he did not state the degree of weakness. We know that one type of weak, or da‘if, hadith is a fabricated hadith. A weak hadith whose narrator is accused of narrating false hadiths is called fabricated. For this reason, some later hadith scholars described this hadith as fabricated. ‘Allamah Nur al-Din al-Haythami, citing this hadith, said: “Its chain contains the blind Abu Dawud, who was a famous liar.” (al-Haythami, Majma‘ al-Zawa’id, 1/123; al-Albani, Da‘if al-Jami‘, p. 819.) 13. Going barefoot for a good deed or to learn knowledge Some statements circulate claiming that walking barefoot while travelling to acquire knowledge or perform a good deed brings a great reward. All of these are false statements and fabricated hadiths. (Ibn al-Jawzi, al-Mawdu‘at, 1/155–157; al-Suyuti, al-La’ali, 1/194–196; Ibn ‘Iraq, Tanzih, 1/251–252.) 14. Exoteric knowledge and esoteric knowledge Hadith scholars such as ‘Allamah Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani, al-Suyuti and Mulla Ali al-Qari have stated that all hadiths circulating about ‘ilm al-batin, or esoteric knowledge, as something separate from or hidden from exoteric knowledge, are fabricated and false. (al-Suyuti, Dhayl al-Mawdu‘at, p. 44; Mulla Ali al-Qari, al-Masnu‘, p. 93.) In our society, truth and falsehood have often become mixed in this matter, and many hasan and authentic hadiths have also been used with distorted meanings. We know that human knowledge has two levels. The first is knowing something. The second is for that knowledge to become a conviction deep in the mind or subconscious. For example, a person knows that smoking is harmful to health, or that smoking is like drinking poison. Yet he continues to smoke. But he never drinks poison, because this knowledge has not become a deeply rooted conviction. When it becomes a conviction, he will no longer be able to smoke, just as he cannot drink poison. The same two levels exist in religious rules and regulations. A person knows that if he jumps into blazing fire he will be burned. Therefore, he would never jump into fire; even if someone tried to push him into it, he would resist with all his strength. Yet this same person knows and believes that if he misses a prayer he will burn in the blazing fire of Hell, but still misses prayers. This is because his “knowledge” and “belief” have not truly become deeply rooted convictions in his mind or subconscious. When this knowledge becomes a deep conviction, he will not be able to miss a prayer under any circumstances, just as he cannot enter fire. He will be able to see and feel the fire of Hell with his heart. Thus we know that an ordinary religious Muslim who generally performs the dawn prayer in congregation may fail to wake for the dawn congregation if he goes to sleep late at night. But if this same person has a train or vehicle at four o’clock in the morning, he will wake several times during the night. The knowledge that missing the vehicle will cause him inconvenience or loss has become knowledge of his subconscious mind, or “knowledge of the heart.” But the knowledge that missing the congregational prayer will cause loss has not become that kind of deep knowledge. When it becomes such deep knowledge, or knowledge of the heart, he will also wake repeatedly for the dawn congregation. Practising and acting upon knowledge at the first level takes knowledge to the second level. This applies in every matter. If the knowledge that “smoking is drinking poison” is repeatedly presented to someone, if he acts upon it, studies the harmful aspects of smoking in detail, and attends seminars, discussions and similar events concerning it, then eventually this knowledge will become deep knowledge and he will abandon smoking. Similarly, if someone repeatedly discusses the knowledge that “backbiting is the path to Hell,” repeatedly reads the relevant verses and hadiths, and deeply feels its punishment through conviction in the Hereafter, then eventually he will abandon backbiting. His own heart will restrain him from backbiting. We know that knowledge at both levels is knowledge. Allah will hold His servants accountable according to knowledge at the first level. A person who knows that missing a prayer is unlawful but nevertheless misses it will deserve punishment for his action. When knowledge rises to the second level, however, it makes following Allah’s path very easy and pleasurable for a person. In the noble hadith, knowledge has been divided into two levels from this perspective. ‘Abdullah ibn Mas‘ud (may Allah be pleased with him) said: “Many people recite the Qur’an, but it does not descend below their throats—it does not become deep knowledge in their hearts. But when it reaches the heart and becomes firmly established, it benefits them.” (Ibn Rajab, Jami‘ al-‘Ulum wa’l-Hikam, p. 343.) The famous Successor Hasan al-Basri (d. 110 AH) said: “Knowledge is of two kinds: 1. knowledge of the tongue, which is also Allah’s proof against the children of Adam; and 2. knowledge of the heart. This is beneficial knowledge.” (al-Darimi, al-Sunan, 1/114.) The chain of this statement from Hasan al-Basri is reliable. However, through another chain the statement has been narrated from Hasan al-Basri as a saying of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him). In one chain, a later narrator claimed that Hasan al-Basri said that the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) had said the above statement. In another chain, a later narrator claimed that Hasan al-Basri said that the Companion Jabir (may Allah be pleased with him) had said that the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) had said it. Some scholars have described these two chains as weak. However, ‘Allamah al-Mundhiri described the chain of the hadith as hasan. (al-Darimi, al-Sunan, 1/114; Ibn al-Mubarak, al-Zuhd, 1/407; al-Mundhiri, al-Targhib, 1/58.) It should be mentioned here that in a hadith recorded by Imam al-Bukhari, Abu Hurayrah (may Allah be pleased with him) said: “I preserved two vessels of knowledge from the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him). I have disseminated one vessel. If I were to disseminate the other, my throat would be cut.” (al-Bukhari, al-Sahih, 1/56.) Some have tried to explain this hadith as an indication of esoteric knowledge. In reality, Abu Hurayrah (may Allah be pleased with him) was referring to the oppressive rulers of the Umayyad period. The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) had foretold the arrival of oppressive rulers after the Rightly Guided Caliphate, neglect of religious matters and other matters, and had also mentioned the names of Yazid and other oppressive rulers. During the Umayyad period, Abu Hurayrah and many other Companions used to speak in this manner when narrating hadiths on these subjects. (Ibn Hajar, Fath al-Bari, 1/216–217.) Thus hadith scholars have agreed that the expression “knowledge of the unseen inner realm” is not mentioned in any authentic hadith. However, many have called the second level of knowledge mentioned above ‘ilm al-qalb (knowledge of the heart) or ‘ilm al-batin (subconscious knowledge). This knowledge is not something different from knowledge of the Qur’an, hadith or the Shari‘ah. Rather, it is the genuine and desired level of knowledge of the Qur’an and Sunnah. When knowledge of the Qur’an, Sunnah and Islamic law enters deeply into the heart through continuous study, practice and observance, and controls a person’s actions from the subconscious mind, it is called ‘ilm al-qalb or ‘ilm al-batin. Later, however, many kinds of anti-Islamic superstitions were spread in Muslim society under the names of exoteric and esoteric knowledge. It was claimed that esoteric knowledge consisted of hidden matters or matters to be acquired outside the knowledge of the Qur’an and Sunnah. Fabricators invented some hadiths concerning this subject. Every statement circulating with the meaning that esoteric knowledge is separate from or hidden from exoteric knowledge is fabricated. I shall mention several such fabricated hadiths. 15. Esoteric knowledge is a hidden secret unknown even to prophets and angels! Fabricators forged a hadith reaching back to Hasan al-Basri, claiming that Hasan al-Basri (22–109 AH) said: “I asked the Companion Hudhayfah ibn al-Yaman (d. 36 AH), ‘What is esoteric knowledge?’ He said, ‘I asked the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), “What is esoteric knowledge?” He said, “I asked Jibril, ‘What is esoteric knowledge?’ He said, ‘I asked Allah, “What is esoteric knowledge?” Allah said, “O Jibril, it is a secret between Me and My beloved saints. I place it in their hearts. No angel brought near, nor any prophet or messenger, can know it.”’” The fifth- or sixth-century scholar Shirawayh ibn Shahrdar al-Daylami (d. 509 AH) recorded this statement as a hadith in his famous book al-Firdaws. But erudite hadith scholars such as ‘Allamah Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani, Jalal al-Din al-Suyuti, Ibn ‘Iraq al-Kinani and Mulla Ali al-Qari exposed the fabrication of this hadith. Its narrators are proven liars and fabricators of hadith. Moreover, the fabricators made a mistake here: they claimed that Hasan al-Basri (may Allah have mercy on him) questioned Hudhayfah (may Allah be pleased with him), whereas Hasan al-Basri did not even see Hudhayfah in his lifetime, let alone ask him anything. (al-Daylami, al-Firdaws, 2/312; Ibn ‘Iraq, Tanzih, 1/280; Mulla Qari, al-Masnu‘, pp. 92–93.) 16. Esoteric knowledge is a hidden secret that Allah casts wherever He wills Another fabricated and false statement of this kind is: “Esoteric knowledge is one of the hidden secrets of Almighty Allah and one of Allah’s laws. He casts it into the heart of whichever of His servants He wishes.” This hadith has a chain, but the chain consists of obscure and unidentified narrators. ‘Allamah al-Dhahabi, al-Suyuti, Ibn ‘Iraq and others have described it as fabricated. The amusing matter is that al-Suyuti himself identified the hadith as fabricated and included it in his book on fabricated hadiths, Dhayl al-La’ali. Yet in another book, al-Jami‘ al-Saghir, he cited the hadith as weak, even though he claimed that he would not mention any fabricated hadith in al-Jami‘ al-Saghir. This shows that even eminent scholars may make mistakes and that no one’s statement may be accepted blindly.” Some have expressed this false statement differently: “Esoteric knowledge is one of my hidden secrets. I place it in the hearts of My servants, and no one knows it except Me.” (Sirr al-Asrar, p. 23.) 17. Man is Allah’s hidden secret A fabricated “hadith qudsi” states: “Man is My hidden secret, and I am man’s hidden secret.” (Sirr al-Asrar, pp. 23, 31.) 18. Esoteric knowledge is a hidden secret known only to the people of Allah Another extremely weak, unreliable or fabricated statement with this meaning is: “Among knowledge there is a kind of knowledge that is like a hidden object. No one knows it except the scholars who are people of Allah. When they utter it, no one denies it except one who is deluded concerning Allah.” al-Daylami and other scholars recorded this hadith. In their chain, they narrated it through an unknown person named Nasr ibn Muhammad ibn al-Harith, who said that ‘Abd al-Salam ibn Salih Abu al-Salt al-Harawi had told him, from Sufyan ibn ‘Uyaynah, from Ibn Jurayj, from ‘Ata’, from Abu Hurayrah, that the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said … The narrator Nasr ibn Muhammad ibn al-Harith is unknown. His teacher, ‘Abd al-Salam ibn Salih, was an extremely weak narrator. Some hadith scholars described him as an intentional liar, while others described him as an unintentional liar. We discussed him in the section on the types of lying. This hadith was not transmitted through anyone other than this liar. (al-Daylami, al-Firdaws, 1/210; al-Albani, al-Da‘ifah, 2/262.) 19. Receiving thirty thousand kinds of esoteric knowledge on the night of the Mi‘raj A terrible false statement about esoteric knowledge is written in the book Sirr al-Asrar, which is circulated under the name of ‘Abd al-Qadir al-Jilani (may Allah have mercy on him): “Allah Most High entrusted this thirty thousand-fold secret knowledge to the blessed heart of the Master (peace be upon him) on the night of the Mi‘raj. The Master (peace be upon him) did not disclose that sacred trust to any ordinary person except his most beloved Companions and the Companions of the Suffah …” (Sirr al-Asrar, p. 45.) What an atrocious, blatant lie in the name of Allah and His Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him)! No such statement has been transmitted from even one beloved Companion of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), or from one of the people of the Suffah, through an authentic or weak chain. 20. The Messenger of Allah’s special esoteric knowledge A statement invented by fabricators and circulated as a hadith is: “I have a special moment with Allah in which there is no room for any angel brought near or any sent prophet.” Hadith scholars unanimously agree that this is a baseless, chainless fabricated statement, although it became widespread among the Sufis. Sufis and dervishes believed whatever they heard with simple hearts. Consequently, fabricators were especially successful in spreading forged statements among them. (al-Sakhawi, al-Maqasid, p. 358; Mulla Qari, al-Asrar, p. 197.) 21. When a scholar or student of knowledge enters a village, the punishment of the grave is lifted for forty days A commonly circulated false statement says: “When a scholar or student of knowledge passes through a village, Almighty Allah lifts the punishment from the cemetery of that village for forty days.” This statement is fabricated and false. (Mulla Ali al-Qari, al-Asrar, p. 74, no. 261.) 22. Meeting or shaking hands with a scholar is like meeting or shaking hands with the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) A commonly circulated fabricated hadith states: “Whoever meets a scholar or a group of scholars is as though he has met me. Whoever shakes hands with a scholar or a group of scholars is as though he has shaken hands with me. Whoever sits in the gathering of a great scholar or scholars is as though he has sat in my gathering. And whoever sat in my gathering in this world, Almighty Allah will seat him with me in Paradise tomorrow, on the Day of Resurrection.” Hadith scholars unanimously agree that this statement is fabricated and false. (al-Suyuti, Dhayl al-La’ali, p. 35; Ibn ‘Iraq, Tanzih, 1/272–273; Mulla Qari, al-Asrar, p. 232.) It should be noted here that the Qur’an and hadith instruct us regarding three important acts of worship: 1. acquiring knowledge; 2. keeping the company of righteous people; and 3. loving righteous people for the sake of Allah and meeting them. These three acts of worship are among the fundamental means of a believer’s salvation. These three acts can be practised through the company of scholars. A scholar has no virtue merely by virtue of being a scholar. His virtue depends on the amount of knowledge and practice he obtains from the Qur’an and hadith. In other words, the virtues of action are two: knowledge and practice. The importance of keeping the company of a righteous scholar is threefold: the general virtue of the company of righteous people, the general virtue of loving righteous people, and the opportunity to acquire knowledge. Apart from this, everything said about special virtues in praying behind a scholar, sitting in his gathering, meeting him, shaking his hand and similar matters is baseless and fabricated. 23. The day on which I learn nothing new is a day without blessing A false statement commonly circulated as a hadith is: “If a day of my life comes on which I do not increase in faith that brings me closer to Allah, may there be no blessing for me in the sunrise of that day.” Abu Nu‘aym al-Isfahani and other hadith scholars transmit this hadith through a second-century person named Hakam ibn ‘Abdullah. Hakam says that Ibn Shihab al-Zuhri told him this hadith, from Sa‘id ibn al-Musayyib, from ‘A’ishah, from the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him). Abu Nu‘aym says: “No one narrated this hadith except Hakam.” (Abu Nu‘aym, Hilyat al-Awliya’, 8/188.) Hadith scholars unanimously agree concerning this person named Hakam that he was a fabricator and a terrible liar. Imam Abu Hatim al-Razi said that he was a terrible liar. Imam al-Daraqutni, Ibn ‘Adi and other hadith scholars said that he was a terrible fabricator. He made a forged manuscript, wrote more than fifty fabricated hadiths in it, and circulated them in the name of Imam al-Zuhri through Sa‘id ibn al-Musayyib. All of these are fabricated and baseless. He also circulated many other fabricated hadiths. All hadith scholars agree that he was abandoned, a liar and a fabricator. (al-Kamil, 2/79, 202–214; Ibn al-Jawzi, al-Du‘afa’, 1/227; al-Dhahabi, Mizan al-I‘tidal, 2/337.) This statement has also been narrated in another form: “If a day of my life comes on which I cannot increase a good deed, may there be no blessing in that day.” This statement too is transmitted through the chain of the above-mentioned fabricator Hakam ibn ‘Abdullah. In its chain there are further fabricators and narrators after Hakam. Perhaps a later weak narrator slightly altered the wording. 24. Judging hadith by the Qur’an The two fundamental sources of Islamic knowledge are the Qur’an and hadith. We have seen that, in addition to knowledge transmitted through hadith, hadith may explain the Qur’an or add details to it. In the discussions of the first part, we saw that on the basis of this fundamental principle, the scholars of the Muslim ummah in every age, beginning with the era of the Companions, examined hadith for authenticity, chain, source, meaning and other matters. Fabricators also committed various kinds of forgery in this area. Their purpose was to “accept” hadith by judging its desired meaning without documentary examination. Some invented fabricated hadiths to judge hadith by the Qur’an. Some invented fabricated hadiths to judge hadith by whether its meaning was “good” or “bad.” Some invented fabricated hadiths so that people would accept hadiths blindly and devoutly. One such hadith states: “When a hadith is narrated to you from me, present it to the Book of Allah—that is, compare it with the Qur’an. If it agrees with the Book of Allah, accept it; and if it contradicts it, reject it.” This hadith, and the various statements narrated with this meaning, are all fabricated and baseless. Most statements with this meaning are chainless falsehoods. One or two statements have been narrated with chains, but in their chains there are abandoned, munkar or accused-of-lying narrators. Hadith scholars have stated that the secret enemies of Islam, the zanadiqah, fabricated and circulated these hadiths. Naturally, we understand that no hadith actually contradicts the Qur’an. However, if hadith is judged against the “Qur’an” without documentary proof, everyone will judge hadith according to his own “intellect” or “preference.” One person could easily say that the Qur’an does not mention five daily prayers, or that it mentions three prayers; therefore, the hadiths about five daily prayers contradict the Qur’an and must be rejected. Another might say that the rule requiring zakat after a year has passed contradicts the Qur’an. Someone else could easily say that the story of Ukashah taking retaliation accords with the Qur’anic instruction to establish justice and is therefore authentic. Or he might say: the Qur’an calls the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) a mercy to the worlds; therefore, the hadith “If it were not for you, I would not have created the universe” is authentic. Or: the Qur’an praises the Companions; therefore, the hadith “My Companions are like stars” is authentic. In this way everyone would continue making claims according to his own preference, and the Muslim ummah would fall into an endless whirlpool of confusion. It was for this purpose that the zanadiqah fabricated these hadiths. However, the hadith scholars’ examination of the chains exposed their forgery. 25. Judging hadith by its “good” meaning Among the hadiths of the second type is: “If something beneficial or good reaches you from me, whether I say it or do not say it, accept it, because I say it. And if something bad or harmful reaches you, do not accept it, because I do not say anything bad.” Another hadith with this meaning is: “When a hadith is narrated to you from me and it agrees with truth or reality, accept it, whether I say it or do not say it.” Several “hadiths” have been narrated concerning accepting hadith on the basis of judging its meaning as good or bad. Some of the statements narrated with this meaning are unquestionably proven to be fabricated and false. Their chains contain well-known liars. Other hadiths have been narrated through extremely weak chains; some scholars have called them weak, while others have called them mawdu‘. We have seen that the meaning of a hadith has been examined in hadith verification since the era of the Companions. But the first matter to be examined in the case of any hadith is whether it has been established that the Messenger of Allah actually said it. To accept something indiscriminately as a “hadith” merely because it agrees with truth, reality or goodness—whether he said it or not—is to open the way to attributing to him what he did not say. Countless hadiths prohibit this. Therefore, hadith scholars have regarded even the weak hadiths on this subject as invalid in meaning. Many weak narrators mistakenly attach the chain of one hadith to another or alter the text. Thus, sometimes even a hadith of a weak or unknown narrator is judged, on the basis of its meaning, to be mawdu‘ or invalid. 26. Salvation lies in devotion So that ordinary people would accept fabricated hadiths blindly, the fabricators invented many hadiths conveying the idea that salvation lies in devotion. For example: “If a statement about virtue or reward reaches someone and he believes it, Allah will grant him that reward, even if it is not actually correct, or even if the person who told it to him was a liar.” Another similar false and fabricated hadith states: “If a statement about a virtue or reward reaches someone from Almighty Allah’s side, but he does not accept it as true, he will not receive that virtue.” Another fabricated statement invented by a deceiver says: “If any one of you has a good opinion even concerning a stone, that stone will benefit him.” These statements, and all statements narrated with this meaning, are atrocious lies invented by lying deceivers, who even fabricated chains for them. However, because the Companions established the practice that chains were indispensable for narrating hadith, the Muslim ummah found a means of protecting itself from their fabrications. Hadith scholars found liars and fabricators in the chain of every one of these hadiths. Therefore, they identified them as fabricated. Because of the existence of multiple chains, however, some hadith scholars called them “extremely weak” and attempted to interpret them in a manner consistent with authentic hadiths.

2.9 Matters Relating to Faith

Love of one’s homeland is part of faith: This is a very common statement: “Patriotism is part of faith.” As a hadith, this statement is entirely baseless and fabricated. Moreover, its meaning is not entirely compatible with the Islamic perspective. Therefore, there is no justification for presenting it as a statement of the scholars or of the Islamic viewpoint. Faith and Islam consist of those actions that a person can voluntarily perform or acquire through the power of his free will. Matters acquired naturally or by birth are not called part of faith or Islam, because they are not voluntary or discretionary actions. Love for one’s birthplace, place of residence, friends, wife, children, relatives, and parents is a natural matter. By nature, people feel love for them. None of these is part of faith. For this reason, obedience to and service of one’s parents have been called an inseparable part of Islam, but their love has not. Similarly, a Muslim has many duties toward his country, place of residence, neighbors, and community, which he will fulfill through voluntary actions. But calling natural love part of faith does not fully accord with the Islamic conception. If someone violates the natural order and does not love his own children, wife, parents, place of residence, or country, we will call him abnormal, a maniac, crazy, and so on. If this condition prevents him from fulfilling the aforementioned duties, we will call him sinful and disobedient to Allah. 2. The Common ‘Five’ Kalimahs In our country, the expression ‘the five Kalimahs’ is commonly used in describing Islamic faith and creed. In addition, there are two statements known as Iman Mujmal and Iman Mufassal. These Kalimahs are found in Qa’idah, Ampara, religious instruction books, and various other commonly used books. They are considered extremely important and are specially memorized. The meanings of these statements are beautiful. However, not all of them have been narrated in this form in the Hadith literature. It would be incorrect to regard all of them as statements of the Qur’an or Hadith. (1) Kalimah Shahadah The Qur’an and Hadith command the giving of two testimonies as the foundation of Islamic faith or belief; in our country these are known as the Kalimah Shahadah. In this Kalimah, testimony is given to Allah’s oneness and Muhammad’s messengership. In reality, only the Kalimah Shahadah has been mentioned as a foundational statement in the Hadith literature. In the tashahhud of the salat (prayer), the two statements are recited together as follows: “I testify that there is no deity except Allah.” “I also testify that Muhammad is the servant and Messenger of Allah.” The first statement: “I testify that there is no deity except Allah.” Regarding this first statement, some hadiths say: “I testify that there is no deity except Allah; He is One, and He has no partner.” The second statement: “I also testify that Muhammad is the servant and Messenger of Allah.” These two statements are mentioned separately in the adhan. (2) Kalimah Tayyibah In our country, the Kalimah Tayyibah, or “the Pure Statement,” refers to the combined declaration of tawhid and messengership. The Noble Qur’an states: “Have you not seen how Allah sets forth an example: a ‘Kalimah Tayyibah,’ or ‘Pure Statement,’ like a pure tree whose branches extend into the sky?” In the commentary on this verse, it has been narrated from Abdullah ibn Abbas and other exegetes that the Kalimah Tayyibah here means the statement, “There is no deity except Allah.” However, the two statements, “There is no deity except Allah; Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah,” have not been mentioned together as the Kalimah Tayyibah in any hadith. The basis of the two parts of the Kalimah Shahadah mentioned above is the Kalimah Tayyibah, in which the foundational statements of tawhid and messengership are recited together. We have seen that the Kalimah Shahadah is often recited with the word “shahadah” omitted. There is no known instance of it being referred to in this form as the “Kalimah.” It is narrated in one hadith that these two statements were written together on the Throne in this form. We have mentioned elsewhere in this book that this hadith is extremely weak and fabricated. It should be noted here that the two parts of the Kalimah Tayyibah are mentioned separately in the Noble Qur’an and the Hadith literature. Both statements are part of the Qur’an and express the foundational testimony of faith. There is no difficulty in reciting both statements together. Since the era of the Tabi‘in, this statement has been used as the foundational declaration of the Kalimah Shahadah. In the Qur’an, it is called Kalimat al-Taqwa, “the statement of piety.” In explaining it, the Tabi‘i ‘Ata al-Khurasani (d. 135 AH) said: The Kalimat al-Taqwa is, “There is no deity except Allah; Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah.” (3) Kalimah Tawhid In our country, the following statement is commonly known as the Kalimah Tawhid: This statement has a beautiful meaning. However, its significance, or even any mention or existence of it, cannot be found in the Qur’an or Hadith. 4. Kalimah Tamjid The following statement is commonly known as the Kalimah Tamjid: This statement also has a beautiful meaning. However, no instruction to recite it in this form, nor any special significance or existence of it, can be found in the Qur’an or Hadith. 5. Kalimah Radd al-Kufr Several statements known as the Kalimah Radd al-Kufr are found in various books in our country. The meanings of these statements are good. However, the statements are not found in any hadith in this form, and no special significance of them has been established by hadith. 6. Iman Mujmal The commonly used statement known as Iman Mujmal has a beautiful meaning. However, this statement is an ordinary formulation made by later scholars. No such statement has been mentioned in any hadith in any form. 7. Iman Mufassal In one hadith, Gabriel asked the Messenger of Allah what faith is. He replied: “You will believe in Allah, His angels, His Books, His Messengers, and the Last Day, and you will believe in destiny, its good and its evil.” The six pillars of faith are mentioned in various places in the Noble Qur’an. There are also many other hadiths on this subject. It is noteworthy here that in Iman Mufassal, belief in the Hereafter is expressed in two separate statements: Yawm al-Akhir and Ba‘th ba‘d al-Mawt—the Last Day (the Hereafter) and resurrection after death. Both refer to the same matter.

2.10 Matters Relating to Salat

2.10.1 Matters Concerning Purification 1. ‘The punishment of the grave for not using a clod’ A popular book states: “It is found in a hadith that no one will receive a punishment as severe as those who do not use a clod after urinating.” (Md. Gholam Rahman, Maqsudul Mu’minin, p. 84.) This statement is not correct in this form. If it is called a hadith in this manner, it will constitute a lie against the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him). Perhaps the translation of an authentic hadith has been distorted here. From various authentic hadiths we learn that failing to purify oneself properly from urine is one of the causes of punishment in the grave. Abu Hurayrah (may Allah be pleased with him) said that the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said: Arabic (******) “Most of the punishment of the grave is because of urine.” (Ibn Majah, al-Sunan 1/125; al-Hakim, al-Mustadrak 1/293.) The above statement is probably a distorted translation of this hadith. This hadith and all other hadiths with this meaning teach proper purification from urine. No hadith says that failure to use a ‘clod’ itself causes wrongdoing or punishment. The actual matter is that completely purifying oneself after relieving oneself is one of the rulings of Islam. From the hadiths we see that, when performing istinja, the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) sometimes used stones or clods. In most cases he used water, and sometimes he used both stones and water. The Companions likewise performed istinja in this way. Using both water and stones (clods) is preferable. If that is not done, using only water is better. If that is not possible, purification must be achieved using only stones or clods. Even then the essential obligation will be fulfilled; there is no offense or sin. These matters are known from various hadiths. Another matter should be noted here. There are two stages of purification after relieving oneself. The first is cleaning the soiled place, while still seated, by using water or stones, or both. In Arabic this is called istinja or istijmar. The second stage is precaution, or becoming free of doubt. This means that after urinating and performing istinja, a person may fear that one or two drops could emerge when he stands or walks. He may then clear the doubt by clearing his throat or walking a few steps. In Arabic this is called istibra. The noble hadiths mention the use of water and stones for the first stage, istinja. One weak hadith mentions pulling the penis three times while seated to urinate. Nothing else of this kind has been narrated in any hadith. Neither the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) nor his Companions ever stood up, walked about, jumped, cleared their throats, or did anything similar during istinja. In both urination and defecation, they naturally remained seated and purified themselves with stones or water, or first stones and then water. Later scholars prescribed walking and similar measures as a precaution in cases of doubt. They said that people’s constitutions differ. If someone has a particular need, he may stand, walk a few steps, clear his throat, or do something similar in order to become certain that his urination has completely ended. But whoever feels that he has become completely pure while seated need not go beyond the Sunnah. Therefore, to claim that one should “walk around with a clod,” or that the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) walked in this way or instructed people to do so, would be a false claim in his name. 2. Mention of clods in the virtue of Bilal A popular book states: “The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) once asked Bilal (may Allah be pleased with him), ‘O Bilal, I saw the sound of your footsteps in Paradise on the night of the Mi‘raj. Tell me, what virtuous deed do you perform?’ Bilal replied, ‘After urinating, I use a clod, I remain attentive to purity, and I always remain in a state of ablution.’ The Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said, ‘This is the foundation of all good deeds.’” In various hadiths, three matters are mentioned concerning Bilal’s virtue: whenever he performed ablution, he prayed two rak‘ahs; whenever he gave the call to prayer, he prayed two rak‘ahs; and whenever his ablution was invalidated, he performed ablution. The first matter is reported in hadiths collected by al-Bukhari and Muslim. The second and third are found in a hadith collected by Ibn Khuzaymah, al-Hakim, and other hadith scholars. There is no known mention of clods anywhere. It should be noted that all the Companions used clods after relieving themselves. For this reason, various hadiths encourage the use of both water and clods. 3. Relieving oneself in an open place A popular book states: “It is found in a hadith that angels continue to curse those who sit in an open place and urinate or defecate.” This statement is not correct in this form. Despite making every effort, I have not found any hadith stating that such a curse applies when “open” means a place open above or open on all sides. During defecation and urination, the private parts must be concealed from the sight of others. The hadiths prohibit exposing one’s private parts to people while relieving oneself and prohibit speaking while doing so. They also describe relieving oneself on people’s roads or in places where people seek shade as a matter deserving curse. 4. Delaying the obligatory bath All statements that delaying an obligatory bath is sinful, or that the earth will curse someone who walks on it while in that state, are fabricated and baseless. When a bath becomes obligatory, performing it as soon as possible is preferable. However, the primary need for the bath is to perform prayer or recite the Qur’an. Apart from that, a believer may engage in all acts, remembrance, and supplication while a bath is obligatory upon him. Therefore, if prayer is not compromised, delaying the bath is not sinful. Authentic hadiths state that the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) would sometimes go to bed without bathing even though a bath had become obligatory at the beginning of the night, and would bathe at the end of the night. 5. Bathing for the Night of Bara’ah or the Night of Qadr Everything said about bathing for Laylat al-Bara’ah and Laylat al-Qadr is fabricated. No virtue of bathing for these two nights has been established in an authentic hadith. I hope to mention the fabricated hadiths on this subject later. 6. The intention for ablution, bathing, and other acts Everything commonly recited under the name of intention, such as “Nawaytu an…,” was invented by later scholars. If someone regards these formulas as hadiths, or believes or claims that the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) recited such an intention or instructed people to make intention in this way, that is a baseless and false claim. The word niyyah means purpose or intention. The reward of worship depends on its purpose. Niyyah is the inward resolve or intention that motivates a person to perform an act. Intention is required, but it does not have to be spoken or recited. The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) never once in his life verbally stated any kind of intention for ablution, bathing, prayer, fasting, or any other act of worship. His Companions, the Tabi‘un, the four Imams—including Imam Abu Hanifah (may Allah have mercy on him)—and the jurists never verbally stated an intention for worship, nor did they instruct anyone to do so. Some later scholars invented these formulas. They said that verbal pronunciation has no value and that the intention in the heart is what matters, but that pronouncing it strengthens the inward intention somewhat, and therefore it is good to say it. Many did not accept this alleged goodness. Hazrat Alf Sani condemned verbal intention for ablution, prayer, fasting, and every other act of worship as an evil innovation and strongly opposed it. I have discussed this matter in detail in my book Ihya al-Sunan. 7. The supplication before ablution Various books popular in our country teach the following supplication for recitation before ablution: Arabic (*******). This supplication is fabricated. Various hadiths instruct one to say “Bismillah” before ablution. One hadith encourages saying “Bismillah wa al-hamdulillah” (“In the name of Allah, and praise belongs to Allah”). But there is no known hadith containing the above supplication. 8. Supplications during ablution Various books mention special supplications to be recited while washing each limb during ablution: a supplication for washing the hands, a supplication for rinsing the mouth, a supplication for cleaning the nose, and so on. The hadith used as the basis for these supplications is fabricated. Imam al-Daraqutni, Imam al-Nawawi, Imam al-Suyuti, Mulla ‘Ali al-Qari, and other hadith scholars all described it as fabricated and baseless. 606 9. Not speaking during ablution No hadith with a reliable or acceptable chain states that one may not speak during ablution, or that speaking causes any wrongdoing. Whatever is said on this subject is merely the statement of certain scholars. 10. Reciting Surah al-Qadr after ablution Several supplications to be recited after ablution are mentioned in authentic hadiths. I have discussed these supplications, with their chains, in the book Rahe Belayat. In many books in our country, fabricated statements have been written instead of these authentic supplications. Some books state: “If one recites Surah al-Qadr after ablution, the door of the truthful will be opened.” Similar statements occur in the fabricated hadith entitled “The Prophet’s Testament to ‘Ali.” That testament has been discussed earlier. 2.10.2 Matters Concerning Mosques and the Call to Prayer 1. The purpose of building mosques The purpose of mosques is to perform prayer, remember Allah, discuss religion, and similar activities. Regarding mosques, the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said: Arabic (*****). “For the remembrance of Allah, prayer, and Qur’an recitation alone.” (Muslim, al-Sahih 1/236.) The hadiths prohibit buying and selling in mosques, searching there for lost or runaway things, speaking loudly, and shouting. However, no clear prohibition of ordinary worldly conversation is reported in any authentic hadith. The Companions recited poetry in the mosque. Jabir (may Allah be pleased with him) said that the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) would remain seated at the place where he had performed the dawn prayer until sunrise, then rise. While he was seated, the Companions would converse, discuss matters from the Age of Ignorance, recite poetry, and smile, while he would only smile. (Sahih Muslim 1/463.) Several fabricated hadiths popular in our country are as follows: “Whoever speaks worldly words in a mosque, Allah will invalidate forty years of his deeds.” Allamah al-Saghani, Tahir al-Fattani, Mulla ‘Ali al-Qari, al-‘Ajluni, and other hadith scholars unanimously declared this hadith fabricated. Mulla al-Qari said: “Just as this statement is invalid in terms of its chain, its meaning is also contrary to Islam.” Another similar fabricated statement is: “Conversation in the mosque consumes good deeds just as fire consumes wood.” Some famous scholars, relying on popular reports, cited this sentence as a hadith. But Allamah al-‘Iraqi, al-Fayruzabadi, Tahir al-Fattani, Mulla ‘Ali al-Qari, and all other hadith scholars agree that it is a fabricated, baseless, and chainless statement falsely attributed to the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him). 2. Lighting and sweeping the mosque Cleaning and sweeping the mosque, lighting it, and similar acts are generally virtuous. But, as with many other matters, fabricated hadiths have been invented here in the name of special rewards. Claims that lighting a mosque brings such-and-such reward, that thousands of angels will supplicate for the person, or that he will receive the reward of so many pilgrimages or minor pilgrimages are all fabricated. 3. Wiping the eyes with the thumbs during the call to prayer Many religious Muslims in our country, upon hearing the words “Ashhadu anna Muhammadar Rasulullah” during the call to prayer, kiss the fingers of both hands and wipe their eyes with them. They do this believing a fabricated and false hadith to be authentic. This fabricated hadith is circulated in various forms. One version says that whoever hears these words of the call to prayer and says: Arabic (*******), “I testify that Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him) is His servant and Messenger. I am pleased with Allah as Lord, Islam as religion, and Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him) as Prophet,” and then wipes both eyes with the inner sides of the index fingers will be entitled to intercession. Some say that upon hearing these words one should say: “Welcome! To my beloved, the comfort of my eyes, Muhammad ibn ‘Abdullah,” then kiss both thumbs and place them upon the eyes. If someone does this, his eyes will never become diseased and his eyesight will never be lost. All statements of this kind are fabricated. Some have attributed these statements to Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him). Mulla ‘Ali al-Qari said, “If it were established from Abu Bakr, acting upon it would be sufficient.” But the hadith is not established from Abu Bakr. Imam al-Sakhawi and other hadith scholars have discussed it in detail. The contemporary Hanafi jurist, hadith scholar, and Sufi ‘Abd al-Fattah Abu Ghuddah wrote that research by his teacher, the renowned Hanafi jurist and hadith scholar Muhammad Zahid al-Kawthari, established that Mulla ‘Ali al-Qari had not learned of Imam al-Sakhawi’s detailed discussion on this subject; consequently, he remained uncertain. The actual matter is that no reliable narration of any kind is found from Abu Bakr or any other source. The hadith scholars have concluded that all narrations on this subject are fabricated. (Imam al-Sakhawi, al-Maqasid, pp. 383–384, no. 1021; Mulla ‘Ali al-Qari, al-Asrar, p. 210, no. 829; al-Masnu‘, p. 134, no. 300; al-Zurqani, Mukhtasar al-Maqasid, p. 174, no. 940; al-‘Ajluni, Kashf al-Khafa 2/206; al-Shawkani, al-Fawa’id 1/39.) Three matters should be noted here. First, various practices are sometimes used through experience for recovery from illness and health. Obtaining a result from such a practice does not mean that it is established by hadith. A person may perform a practice permitted by the Shari‘ah with the intention of recovery, but without an authentic chain such a practice cannot be called a hadith. Second, honoring and loving the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) is part of faith and an extremely virtuous deed. If someone acts upon this practice without knowing that the hadith is fabricated, and kisses his fingers out of love and affection upon hearing the Messenger’s name, he will not receive the reward mentioned in the fabricated hadith, but, God willing, he will receive the reward for his genuine love. However, knowingly acting upon a fabricated hadith is not permissible. Third, instead of this fabricated hadith, a believer may act upon an authentic hadith. Although wiping the eyes with the fingers is fabricated, an extremely authentic hadith has been narrated concerning saying the words mentioned above. The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said: Whoever hears the caller to prayer and says, “I testify that there is no deity but Allah, alone, without partner, and that Muhammad is His servant and Messenger. I am pleased with Allah as Lord, Islam as religion, and Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him) as Prophet,” all his sins will be forgiven. (Muslim 1/290, no. 386; Ibn Khuzaymah 1/220; Ibn Hibban 4/591.) 4. Saying ‘You have spoken the truth’ in response to the call to prayer In our country it is customary, upon hearing “al-salatu khayrun min al-nawm” in the dawn call to prayer, to respond, “Sadaqta wa bararta (bararta).” This statement is baseless and fabricated. In the hadiths narrated by al-Bukhari and Muslim, the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said: “When you hear the caller to prayer, say what he says.” (Bukhari 1/221; Muslim 1/288.) Abu Hurayrah said in another hadith: We were with the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) when Bilal stood and gave the call to prayer. When Bilal finished, the Messenger of Allah said: “If anyone says with firm conviction what this caller said, he will enter Paradise.” (The hadith is hasan. Sahih Ibn Hibban 4/553; Mustadrak al-Hakim 1/321; Musnad Ahmad 2/352; al-Nasa’i, al-Sunan al-Kubra 1/510, 6/146; Sahih al-Targhib 1/177.) These two hadiths show that the listener should repeat exactly what the caller says. No exception was stated. However, another hadith collected by Muslim teaches one exception: when the caller says “Hayya ‘ala al-salah” and “Hayya ‘ala al-falah,” the listener should say, “There is no power and no strength except through Allah.” In this hadith he said: “Whoever says the words of the call to prayer from his heart along with the caller will enter Paradise.” (Sahih Muslim 1/289, no. 385.) Thus, apart from these two phrases, the respondent should say all the remaining phrases exactly as the caller says them. “Al-salatu khayrun min al-nawm” is not an exception. The same phrase must be said in response; no hadith instructs a different response. For this reason, Mulla ‘Ali al-Qari listed “Sadaqta wa bararta” among fabricated hadiths and said: “The Shafi‘is consider saying this phrase recommended, but it has no basis in hadith.” (See Mulla ‘Ali al-Qari, al-Asrar al-Marfu‘ah, p. 146.) 5. ‘And the exalted rank’ in the supplication after the call to prayer The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said: “When you hear the caller to prayer, repeat what he says. Then send blessings upon me; whoever sends blessings upon me, Allah will send ten blessings upon him. Then ask Allah to grant me al-Wasilah, for it is a rank in Paradise which will be granted to only one servant of Allah, and I hope that I will be that servant. Whoever asks Allah to grant me al-Wasilah will be entitled to my intercession.” (Sahih Muslim 1/288, no. 384.) In other hadiths he taught the following supplication for asking for al-Wasilah: Arabic (*****): “O Allah, Lord of this perfect call and of the prayer about to be established, grant Muhammad al-Wasilah and excellence, and raise him to the praised station that You have promised him.” He said: “Whoever says these words after hearing the caller’s call to prayer will be entitled to my intercession on the Day of Resurrection.” (Sahih al-Bukhari 1/222, no. 589; 4/1749, no. 4442.) All hadith scholars, including Imam al-Bukhari, compiled the supplication in this form. Two additional phrases are found in the supplication common in our country but absent from the above supplication. The first is “and the exalted rank,” after “and excellence.” The second is “Indeed, You do not break Your promise,” at the end. The second phrase is narrated in a weak hadith. (al-Bayhaqi, al-Sunan al-Kubra 1/410, nos. 603–604.) The first phrase, “and the exalted rank,” is based entirely on a baseless and false hadith. Ibn Hajar, al-Sakhawi, al-Zurqani, Mulla ‘Ali al-Qari, and other hadith scholars said that this phrase is fabricated. (Ibn Hajar, Talkhis al-Habir 1/211; al-Sakhawi, al-Maqasid, pp. 222–223; al-Zurqani, Mukhtasar al-Maqasid, pp. 70–71; al-Asrar, p. 122; Mubarakpuri, Tuhfat al-Ahwadhi 1/532.) 6. The consequence of speaking during the call to prayer The following “hadith” is cited to prohibit speaking during the call to prayer: “Whoever speaks during the call to prayer should fear that his faith may be destroyed.” Allamah al-Saghani, al-‘Ajluni, and other hadith scholars stated that this sentence is a baseless fabricated statement invented in the name of hadith. No hadith contains an instruction that one may not speak during the call to prayer. (al-Saghani, al-Mawdu‘at, p. 80; al-‘Ajluni, Kashf al-Khafa 2/295, 315.) 2.10.3 Matters Concerning the Five Daily Prayers Five types of reward and fifteen types of punishment connected with prayer From the Qur’an and hadith we learn that performing the five obligatory prayers at their proper times is the believer’s first and greatest responsibility. Prayer is the believer’s identity and the distinction between faith and disbelief. One who abandons prayer will be counted among the unbelievers. On the Day of Resurrection, prayer will be the first matter about which a person is questioned. Numerous authentic hadiths thus show us the importance of obligatory prayer and the terrible consequence of neglecting it. But, in order to astonish ordinary people, fabricators invented and circulated many additional statements. Sadly, many books popular in society contain these fabricated and baseless statements instead of Qur’anic verses and authentic hadiths. They are also printed on various calendars, posters, and similar materials. A fabricated hadith on this subject is widely circulated in our society. Its summary is as follows: Whoever performs prayer properly and seriously will be honored by Allah in five ways: he will be freed from poverty in livelihood and from hardship in life; he will cross the Sirat like lightning; and he will enter Paradise without reckoning. Whoever is negligent regarding prayer will receive fifteen punishments: five in this world, three at the time of death, three in the grave, and three after emerging from the grave. This is found in books such as Namaz Shiksha and Amaliyat. I will not increase the volume by writing out these false and baseless statements. This lengthy hadith is entirely baseless and fabricated. It is not found in any hadith collection. In later times, some scholars mentioned these statements as hadiths in books of preaching and admonition, along with other popular sayings. The hadith Imams clearly stated that these are false and fabricated statements, and they also identified the person responsible for the fabrication. Imam al-Dhahabi, Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani, al-Suyuti, Ibn ‘Iraq, and other hadith scholars discussed the matter. (al-Dhahabi, Mizan al-I‘tidal 6/264; Ibn Hajar, Mizan al-I‘tidal 5/295; al-Suyuti, Dhayl al-La’ali, p. 99; Ibn ‘Iraq, Tanzih 2/113–114.) Shaykh al-Hadith Allamah Muhammad Zakariyya Kandhlawi (may Allah have mercy on him) quoted this fabricated hadith in full, with its Arabic text, in his book Fada’il al-Salah. Before mentioning it, he said that some people claim that this statement occurs in hadith. After quoting it, he briefly stated that Imam al-Dhahabi, Imam al-Suyuti, and other hadith scholars identified it as fabricated and false, and had exposed the fabricators in its chain. (Maulana Zakariyya Kandhlawi, Fada’il-e A‘mal, pp. 104–108.) In this way, Allamah Zakariyya fulfilled his responsibility by identifying the fabrication. But this responsibility was not preserved in the translation. His discussion was omitted. The translation began: “It has been narrated in a hadith…” At the end, it merely mentioned “Zawajir of Ibn Hajar al-Makki (may Allah have mercy on him).” Ordinary readers therefore believed it to be a reliable hadith or a statement of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him). Yet the hadith scholars unanimously agree that narrating a fabricated hadith as a hadith without identifying it as fabricated is a grave prohibition. May Allah protect us. 2. Prayer is the Mi‘raj of the believers A very widespread baseless fabricated hadith says: “Prayer is the Mi‘raj of the believers.” (Mufti Habib Samdani, Bar Chand-er Fazilat, p. 123.) It should be noted that many hadiths with a similar meaning do exist. Authentic hadiths state that a believer is closest to Allah while in prayer, and that when he stands in prayer Allah looks toward him, and so on. But instead of these authentic reports, many people attribute this baseless statement to the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), thereby becoming guilty of lying against him. 3. Punishment of eighty huqbah or one huqbah The book Majalis al-Abrar states: “The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said that whoever does not perform prayer on time and performs it as qada after its time has ended will suffer eighty huqbah of punishment in Hell. One huqbah is eighty years, and one year is 360 days. Thus 360 × 80 = 28,800 days. Therefore, for failing to perform one prayer, he will burn in the Fire for 28,800 days. The day of the Hereafter equals one thousand years of this world. Thus, one who abandons one prayer will suffer punishment in Hell for 28,800,000 years.” (Mufti Habib Samdani, Bar Chand-er Fazilat, p. 131.) Shaykh al-Hadith Allamah Zakariyya Kandhlawi (may Allah have mercy on him) quoted it in his Fada’il-e Namaz as follows: “Whoever does not perform prayer until its time ends and then performs it as qada will be given one huqbah of punishment in Hell. One huqbah is eighty years, one year is 360 days, and each day is equal to one thousand years.” After quoting it, he said: “It is written in the book Majalis al-Abrar. My statement is that I have not found this hadith in any of the hadith books available to me.” (Maulana Zakariyya Kandhlawi, Fada’il-e A‘mal, pp. 57–58.) The condition of a hadith that a scholar of his standing could not find in any hadith collection is easy to understand. In reality, it is merely a baseless, chainless fabricated statement. It has not been compiled anywhere with an authentic, weak, or even fabricated chain. Relying on popular reports, some late scholars included it in their books without a chain. It is worth noting that, despite knowing that it is absent from every hadith collection and that the author of Majalis al-Abrar cited it without a chain, some otherwise good scholars still mention this “hadith” and many similar fabricated and weak hadiths in sermons, discussions, and writings, out of a desire to guide people. It seems they think that the thousands of verses of the Qur’an and thousands of authentic hadiths in the famous collections are no longer sufficient to guide people, and that they therefore have no choice but to add some weak (!) hadiths. 4. Performing congregational prayer equals pilgrimage with the prophets Performing prayer in congregation is one of the believer’s responsibilities. The Qur’an commands believers to pray together. Countless authentic hadiths command congregational prayer. A person who abandons the congregation and prays alone has been identified as a hypocrite. Authentic hadiths state that if someone hears the call to prayer and, without a valid excuse of illness or fear, does not come to the congregation but prays alone, his prayer will not be accepted. There is a terminological juristic difference concerning the ruling of congregational prayer. Some call it Sunnah mu’akkadah, some wajib, and some fard. This is purely a terminological difference, because all agree that it is a serious sin for a man to perform an obligatory prayer alone without an excuse. There is some disagreement as to whether the prayer itself is valid. Alongside these authentic hadiths, fabricators have invented many fabricated reports. In books and sermons, the fabricated reports are often presented while the authentic reports are omitted. Authentic hadiths state that whoever performs the night and dawn prayers in congregation receives the reward of spending the entire night in tahajjud, and that whoever performs the dawn prayer in congregation remains under Allah’s protection, and so on. But, disregarding these “small” rewards, the fabricators invented: “Whoever performs the dawn prayer in congregation is as though he performed Hajj seventy times with Adam (peace be upon him).” (al-Suyuti, Dhayl al-La’ali, p. 83; al-Saghani, al-Mawdu‘at, p. 42; al-Fattani, Tadhkirah, pp. 39, 106; al-Shawkani, al-Fawa’id 1/55.) In this way a prophet was attached to each prayer. Among similar fabricated statements is: “Whoever performs the dawn and night prayers in congregation is as though he prayed behind Adam (peace be upon him).” Thus one prophet’s name is mentioned for each prayer. (Professor Kamrun Nesa Dulal, Nek Kanun, pp. 102–103.) 5. Prayer behind a scholar equals prayer behind a prophet Authentic hadiths establish that congregational prayer increases reward. Various hadiths instruct that those most proficient in Qur’an recitation and knowledge, most knowledgeable in hadith, and foremost in migration and other good deeds should lead the prayer. But no authentic hadith says that the followers receive greater reward or blessing because of the imam’s piety or knowledge. Everything narrated with this meaning is extremely weak or fabricated. One such baseless statement is: “Whoever prays behind a pious scholar is as though he prayed behind a prophet.” The author of the famous Hanafi fiqh book al-Hidayah, Allamah ‘Ali ibn Abi Bakr al-Marghinani (d. 592 AH), cited this as a hadith, relying on popular reports. But hadith scholars investigated and confirmed that it is not a hadith. It has not been recorded in any book with an authentic or weak chain. Therefore, Allamah al-Zayla‘i, al-‘Iraqi, Ibn Hajar, al-Suyuti, al-Sakhawi, Tahir al-Fattani, Mulla ‘Ali al-Qari, al-‘Ajluni, and other hadith scholars listed it as fabricated. (al-Marghinani, al-Hidayah 1/57; al-Zayla‘i, Nasb al-Rayah 2/26; Ibn Hajar, al-Dirayah 1/168; al-Sakhawi, al-Maqasid, pp. 147, 235; al-‘Ajluni, Kashf al-Khafa 2/37, 122, 337; Tahir al-Fattani, Tadhkirat al-Mawdu‘at, p. 40; al-Shawkani, al-Fawa’id 1/55.) 6. Forty-four hundred and forty times the reward behind a scholar Another fabricated statement of this kind is: “Prayer behind a scholar brings 4,440 times the reward.” (Mulla ‘Ali al-Qari, al-Masun, p. 152; al-Asrar, p. 147.) 7. The reason for the number of rak‘ahs in the five daily prayers All popular statements explaining why the five daily prayers contain seventeen rak‘ahs—Fajr two, Zuhr four, ‘Asr four, Maghrib three, and ‘Isha four—and why witr contains three rak‘ahs are baseless and false. Likewise, all stories claiming that the prayers at different times were performed or established by different prophets are baseless. One such story appears in famous books: “The reason witr prayer became obligatory is written in the book Irshad al-Talibin. When the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) travelled during the Mi‘raj and reached Bayt al-Maqdis, the souls of all the prophets came to meet and bless him. At Jibril’s command, the Prophet led them in one rak‘ah. Then Mika’il came with seventy thousand angels seeking to meet him and receive his supplication, so, at Jibril’s command, the Messenger prayed another rak‘ah. Then Israfil came with seventy thousand angels seeking his supplication, and at Jibril’s command the Prophet led them in one rak‘ah. Then ‘Azra’il came with many angels and expressed the same wish. Jibril said, ‘O beloved Prophet, lead them in reciting the supplication of qunut.’ The Prophet did so. Thus those three rak‘ahs became obligatory for us, and reciting the supplication of qunut in witr also became obligatory.” (Maulana Gholam Rahman, Maqsudul Mu’minin, pp. 192–193.) Some fabricators present a variation, claiming that on the night of the Mi‘raj he performed one rak‘ah for Musa, another for himself, and a third at Allah’s command. (Professor Kamrun Nesa Dulal, Nek Kanun, p. 115.) 8. ‘Umari qada prayers Prayer is an obligatory act of worship in the believer’s life; it has no substitute or expiation. As long as consciousness remains, prayer must be performed—standing, sitting, lying down, walking, running, by gesture, or in whatever manner possible. If consciousness is lost, prayer is waived. If, for an unavoidable special reason, one or two prayers are missed, they must be made up. But no ruling for making up many deliberately abandoned prayers is given in the noble hadiths, because neither the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) nor his Companions conceived that a Muslim could abandon prayer. The Companions said that a Muslim might commit many sins, but a Muslim could never abandon prayer. Muslims and jurists of later times differed on this matter. Some said that whoever deliberately abandons one prayer becomes an unbeliever. Others said that if a person fully accepts the importance of prayer but abandons it out of laziness, he is a severe sinner “like an unbeliever,” but is not himself an unbeliever. If someone believes that he can remain a Muslim like other praying Muslims while not regularly performing the five prayers, then, because he rejects the importance of prayer, he is a genuine unbeliever. In all cases, everyone agrees that no hadith ruling exists concerning making up prayers abandoned or missed deliberately over a long period. Fabricators nevertheless invented fabricated hadiths on this matter, and baseless popular statements also circulated. Two issues arose: first, ‘umari qada, and second, kaffarah or isqat. One fabricated hadith says: “A man said, ‘O Messenger, I have abandoned prayer.’ He said, ‘Make up what you abandoned.’ The man asked, ‘O Messenger of Allah, how shall I make it up?’ He said, ‘Perform one like it with each current prayer.’ He asked, ‘Before or after?’ He said, ‘No, rather before.’” The hadith scholars unanimously agree that this hadith is fabricated, baseless, and invalid. (al-Jawzaqani, al-Abatil 2/419; Ibn al-Jawzi, al-Mawdu‘at 2/26; al-Suyuti, al-La’ali 2/24; Ibn ‘Iraq, Tanzih 2/80; al-Shawkani, al-Fawa’id 1/35.) If a Muslim, after neglecting prayer for a long time, repents and begins praying regularly, his chief responsibility is to repent and weep abundantly for the prayers abandoned in previous days. In addition, many jurists have said that he should identify and make up those abandoned prayers. There is no prescribed rule for ‘umari qada in the Qur’an or hadith; it is a precautionary practice. It is hoped that through repentance and making up the prayers Allah will forgive his offense. 9. Kaffarah and isqat Islam prescribes kaffarah for fasting. If a Muslim is unable to fast and is also unable to make up the fasts, he must feed a poor person in place of each obligatory fast. In light of various hadiths, jurists have specified the amount of food to be given for each fast. No such kaffarah for prayer is prescribed in hadith. The possibility of incapacity exists in fasting, but not in prayer. As long as consciousness remains, a believer must pray according to his ability, even by gestures. There is therefore no fear of incapacity. If consciousness is permanently lost, prayer is also waived. Nevertheless, some later jurists prescribed a precautionary kaffarah for prayer as well. If a believer who regularly prayed was unable to perform some prayers because of illness and then died, they prescribed giving one fitrah in place of each prayer, as with fasting. Some extended this ruling to a person who had abandoned prayer throughout his life or treated it with contempt and mockery. They then introduced the bizarre rule of giving a Qur’an instead of food. A popular book states: “The method of isqat is first to calculate the deceased’s age. From this, subtract twelve years for a man and nine years for a woman, the age of minority. For every remaining year, calculate the price of ten maunds and ten seers of flour at the weight of eighty tolas per seer. In place of this price, one should present a single-volume Qur’an to a poor person in front of everyone and say: ‘In place of so many thousands, hundreds, and maunds of flour owed to Allah because of the above ruling concerning so-and-so, I present this Word of Allah to you.’ If the poor person accepts it before two witnesses, the Qur’an becomes his and the flour becomes obligatory upon him.” (Maulana Gholam Rahman, Maqsudul Mu’minin, p. 181.) This bizarre rule is not merely fabricated; it is an extreme mockery of Allah’s religion. What greater mockery could there be? After abandoning and mocking prayer throughout one’s life, one volume of the Qur’an is given to a beggar after death and the person is forgiven! 2.10.4 Matters Concerning Sunnah and Supererogatory Prayer Just as obligatory prayer is the greatest worship in a believer’s life, supererogatory prayer is the greatest voluntary worship and one of the means of gaining Allah’s pleasure and nearness. Acts beyond the obligatory are called nafl. The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) encouraged certain amounts of nafl prayer at certain times, and performed some himself. These are also called Sunnah. Those voluntary prayers to which he gave greater importance are called Sunnah mu’akkadah. Because some Sunnah prayers were strongly emphasized in hadith, some imams and jurists called them wajib. Authentic hadiths generally encourage performing as much nafl prayer as possible. A Companion asked, “Which deed is most beloved to Allah?” The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) replied: Arabic (*****): “Perform abundant prostration for Allah—that is, perform abundant voluntary prayer—for whenever you prostrate to Allah, He raises your rank and removes one of your sins.” (Muslim, al-Sahih 1/353.) Another Companion requested companionship in Paradise. He said: “Then help me concerning yourself by performing abundant prostration,” that is, abundant voluntary prayer. (Muslim, al-Sahih 1/353.) Abu Hurayrah (may Allah be pleased with him) narrated that the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said: Arabic (******): “Prayer is the best matter, so whoever is able should perform as much prayer as he can.” The hadith is hasan. (al-Tabarani, al-Mu‘jam al-Awsat 1/84; al-Haythami, Majma‘ al-Zawa’id 2/249; al-Albani, Sahih al-Targhib 1/256.) Authentic hadiths also mention the special virtue of particular prayers at particular times or places. From the discussion of Allamah al-Mawsili mentioned earlier, we know that authentic hadiths establish the following special Sunnah and voluntary prayers: Sunnah prayers before and after obligatory prayers, tarawih, duha or chasht, the night prayer or tahajjud, tahiyyat al-masjid, tahiyyat al-wudu, istikhara prayer, the eclipse prayer, and salat al-tasbih. Hadiths also mention repenting by performing two rak‘ahs after committing a sin. Salat al-hajah is reported in a few weak hadiths. Despite the existence of authentic hadiths concerning Sunnah and voluntary prayers, fabricators circulated many fabricated hadiths on the subject. As with other fabricated hadiths, these contain attractive but irrelevant claims of reward. The fabricators acted in two ways. First, they invented fabricated virtues, surahs, or procedures for voluntary prayers established by authentic hadith. Second, they invented prayers for various times, places, or reasons and created imaginary stories of their rewards and virtues. I will mention here some baseless statements and fabricated hadiths popular in our country. I do not intend to discuss in detail the fabricated hadiths concerning voluntary prayers established by authentic hadith; I will discuss only the invented procedures for these prayers. I will then mention the prayers and virtue-stories fabricated by the fabricators. 1. Assigning particular surahs or verses to particular prayers No particular surah or verse has been assigned in authentic hadith for any of these established prayers. Everything narrated about reciting a designated surah in these prayers, or reciting a particular surah or verse in a particular manner in the first rak‘ah, is fabricated or baseless. Thus the claims that a particular surah or verse must be recited in the first and second rak‘ahs of istikhara, in the first and second rak‘ahs of chasht, or in the prayer of the Night of Qadr are all baseless and fabricated. Any surah or verse may be recited in these prayers. No particular surah or verse is required, and the reward or blessing of these prayers does not change because of the surah or verse. Reward may vary because of the length of the recitation, concentration, emotion, and similar factors. 2. The supplication and munajat of tarawih The night prayer of Ramadan is called salat al-tarawih, or “the prayer of rest.” During the time of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), he and the Companions would stand for four or five hours from the middle of the night until its end, performing qiyam al-layl, tahajjud, and tarawih, both in Ramadan and in other months. From the time of Caliph ‘Umar (may Allah be pleased with him), Muslims performed tarawih in congregation. Generally, from after ‘Isha until the end of the night or before dawn, they stood continuously for five or six hours performing tarawih. Because standing continuously for several hours was very difficult, a practice later developed of resting after every four rak‘ahs for approximately the length of four rak‘ahs. This is why the prayer later became known as salat al-tarawih. This rest is not part of the prayer or worship. There is no basis for saying that the reward decreases without rest, or varies according to the length of rest. Rest is simply a means of performing the prayer properly. During the rest, worshippers may do anything permissible, sit or lie down, or engage in supplication or remembrance. Nothing specific is prescribed. For several centuries, in some countries a particular supplication has been recited after every four rak‘ahs, followed by a prescribed munajat. Sometimes the supplication is recited at the end of every four rak‘ahs. It is as follows: Arabic (*****). The munajat is as follows: Arabic (*******). Both this supplication and this munajat are fabricated. Authentic hadiths contain many kinds of supplications and munajat. These two supplications cannot be found anywhere—not even in connection with rest. However, a fabricated hadith contains a supplication resembling the first one. It says that some angels of Allah recite it in an ocean of light, and that whoever recites it on a certain day, month, or year will receive such-and-such rewards. (al-Suyuti, Dhayl al-La’ali, p. 147; Ibn ‘Iraq, Tanzih 2/326; al-‘Ajluni, Kashf al-Khafa 1/53, 538.) Instead of reciting these fabricated supplications, we should send blessings upon the Prophet at this time, recite the Qur’an, or remain occupied with prescribed remembrance. Some popular books instruct people to recite the following after every two rak‘ahs of tarawih: Arabic (****). (Maulana Gholam Rahman, Maqsudul Mu’minin, p. 228.) This supplication is baseless and fabricated. 3. Salat al-Awwabin Authentic hadiths state that the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) and his Companions performed abundant voluntary prayer between Maghrib and ‘Isha. Hudhayfah (may Allah be pleased with him) said: “I came to the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) and prayed Maghrib with him. He remained engaged in voluntary prayer after Maghrib until the ‘Isha prayer.” The hadith is authentic. (Ibn Abi Shaybah, al-Musannaf 2/15; al-Nasa’i, al-Sunan al-Kubra 1/51, 5/80.) In another hadith, Anas (may Allah be pleased with him) said: “The Companions would remain awake and wait between Maghrib and ‘Isha and would perform voluntary prayer.” This hadith is authentic. Hasan al-Basri said that the prayer performed between Maghrib and ‘Isha is also considered night prayer or tahajjud. (al-Bayhaqi, al-Sunan al-Kubra 3/19; Sunan Abi Dawud 2/35; Majma‘ al-Zawa’id 2/230; Ibn Abi Shaybah, al-Musannaf 2/15; Sahih al-Targhib 1/313.) Various hadiths show that some Companions encouraged the Tabi‘un to pray at this time. (Musannaf Ibn Abi Shaybah 2/14–16.) These hadiths establish that a believer should perform some voluntary prayer between Maghrib and ‘Isha, and the more he performs, the greater his reward. No authentic hadith specifies a number of rak‘ahs or a special virtue for this prayer. Some fabricated or extremely weak chains mention special virtues for four, six, ten, or twenty rak‘ahs at this time. For example, it is claimed that whoever performs four rak‘ahs will receive the reward of striving in jihad after one battle and then another; whoever performs six rak‘ahs after Maghrib before speaking will have fifty years of sins forgiven, or all his sins forgiven, or will receive the reward of twelve years of worship; whoever performs ten rak‘ahs will have a house built for him in Paradise; and whoever performs twenty rak‘ahs will have a house built for him in Paradise. All these reports are fabricated or transmitted through extremely weak chains. Imam al-Tirmidhi mentioned the report promising the reward of twelve years for six rak‘ahs and said that it is extremely weak. Some hadith scholars called it fabricated. (al-Tirmidhi 2/298, no. 435; Ibn Majah 1/369, no. 1167; al-Bayhaqi, al-Sunan al-Kubra 3/19; Ibn Abi Shaybah, al-Musannaf 2/14–15; al-Bayhaqi, Shu‘ab al-Iman 3/133; Ibn al-Mubarak, al-Zuhd, pp. 445–446; al-Shawkani, Nayl al-Awtar 3/65–67; Majma‘ al-Zawa’id 2/230.) Books in our country even specify which surahs must be recited after al-Fatihah in these six rak‘ahs. These are all baseless and fabricated statements. It has been narrated through weak chains that some Companions and Tabi‘un called the voluntary prayer between Maghrib and ‘Isha salat al-awwabin, the prayer of those who frequently repent. In various authentic hadiths, however, the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) called the chasht prayer salat al-awwabin. 4. Salat al-Hajah Imam al-Tirmidhi quoted a hadith in his Sunan concerning salat al-hajah, the prayer of need. It states that if someone has a need from Allah or from a person, he should perform ablution, pray two rak‘ahs, and then recite a supplication asking Allah to fulfill his need. Imam al-Tirmidhi said that the sole narrator of the hadith, Fa’id ibn ‘Abd al-Rahman, is a weak narrator. For this reason, Imam al-Bukhari and other hadith scholars regarded Fa’id as a munkar, matruk, abandoned, and false hadith narrator. (al-Tirmidhi, al-Sunan 2/344; Ibn Hajar, Tahdhib 6/229; Taqrib, p. 444; Ibn al-Jawzi, al-Mawdu‘at 2/61; al-Suyuti, al-La’ali 2/48; Ibn ‘Iraq, Tanzih 2/110.) Many other fabricated procedures called salat al-hajah are popular in our country. Some books state: “The prayer of al-Khidr (peace be upon him) for a need is two rak‘ahs. To fulfill a wish, al-Khidr taught it to a certain pious man. In the first rak‘ah, after al-Fatihah, recite Surah al-Kafirun ten times,” and so on. All this is fabricated and baseless. (Md. Basiruddin Ahmad, Nek A‘mal, p. 168.) 5. Salat al-Istikhara Authentic hadiths state that for istikhara one should perform ablution, pray two rak‘ahs, and recite the supplication “Allahumma inni astakhiruka bi ‘ilmika…” (Bukhari, al-Sahih 1/391, 5/2345, 6/2690; Ibn Hajar, Fath al-Bari 11/183.) But various books popular in our country mention fabricated procedures and supplications. One book says that if one wants to know whether something is good or bad, one should pray two voluntary rak‘ahs after ‘Isha with the intention of istikhara, recite blessings several times, then recite “Subhanaka la lana illa ma ‘allamtana…” one hundred times, recite blessings another twenty-one times, and then lie down on a clean prayer mat. (Md. Basiruddin Ahmad, Nek A‘mal, p. 168.) Another book says that ‘Ali (may Allah ennoble his face) stated that to learn in a dream whether something is good or bad, one should pray six rak‘ahs in two-rak‘ah units before sleeping, reciting Surah al-Wash-Shams seven times after al-Fatihah in the first rak‘ah. (Md. Shamsul Huda, Ni‘amul Qur’an, pp. 202–203.) All these statements and procedures are baseless and fabricated. It is inexplicable why we mention such fabricated procedures while leaving aside authentic hadiths. 6. The light voluntary prayer The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) would perform witr after tahajjud at the end of the night, then perform two rak‘ahs of voluntary prayer. A hadith mentions that performing two voluntary rak‘ahs after witr brings the reward of tahajjud or night prayer. (al-Darimi, al-Sunan 1/452.) This is all that is established by hadith. Among the popular fabricated and baseless statements on this subject is that performing two voluntary rak‘ahs after witr brings the reward of one hundred prayers, and that Surah al-Ikhlas must be recited three times after al-Fatihah in each rak‘ah. These appear to be entirely baseless. (Md. Basiruddin Ahmad, Nek A‘mal, p. 168.) 7. Some other fabricated ‘prayers’ Several other ‘prayers’ are popular in society, with various names and invented, baseless virtues. They include the Hifz al-Iman prayer, kaffarah prayer, piety prayer, prayer for acquiring wealth, thanksgiving prayer, prayer concerning the rights of parents, and others. (Lakhnawi, al-Athar, pp. 103–117; al-Shawkani, al-Fawa’id 1/57–85; Md. Basiruddin Ahmad, Nek A‘mal, pp. 168–175.) 8. Prayers for the seven days of the week All hadiths concerning designated voluntary prayers on the days or nights of the seven-day week and their virtues are fabricated and baseless. A believer should regularly perform tahajjud, chasht, and similar prayers, and should perform as much voluntary prayer as possible, hoping for the rewards established in authentic hadiths. But the fabricators invented many hadiths containing imaginary rewards and virtues, describing special prayers for every day and night of the week. The voluntary prayer of Friday night, the voluntary prayer of Friday daytime, the voluntary prayer of Saturday night, the voluntary prayer of Saturday daytime, and all similar named practices are fabricated. For example, reports are attributed to Anas (may Allah be pleased with him) and other Companions saying that one should perform so many rak‘ahs on the night leading into Friday and receive an immeasurable reward, including a palace in Paradise; that one should perform so many rak‘ahs on Friday at a particular time and in a particular manner and receive such-and-such reward; that whoever performs so many rak‘ahs on Saturday night at a specified time and in a specified manner will receive specified rewards; and that performing so many rak‘ahs in a certain manner on Saturday daytime will produce certain results. Thus every form of prayer described for the seven days and nights, with various quantities and procedures and particular surahs or supplications, is fabricated. These false statements have been presented as hadiths in books popular in our country, such as Bar Chand-er Fazilat, Nek A‘mal, and Wazifah. Yet all hadith scholars agree that they are fabricated. Sometimes even a major scholar writes statements relying on popular reports. It is not possible for everyone to investigate every statement. Some major scholars have also mentioned prayers for the seven days or nights. Nevertheless, all earlier and later hadith scholars agree that every hadith narrated with this meaning is baseless and fabricated. They include Imam al-Dhahabi, Ibn Hajar, al-Jawzaqani, Ibn al-Jawzi, al-Suyuti, Muhammad Tahir al-Fattani, Mulla ‘Ali al-Qari, ‘Abd al-Hayy al-Lakhnawi, Isma‘il ibn Muhammad al-‘Ajluni, al-Shawkani, and other renowned hadith scholars. (Ibn al-Jawzi, al-Mawdu‘at 2/113–119; al-Dhahabi, Tartib al-Mawdu‘at, pp. 158–160; Ibn al-Qayyim, al-Manar, p. 49; al-Suyuti, al-La’ali 2/49–52; al-‘Iraqi, Tanzih 2/58–87; Tahir al-Fattani, Tadhkirat al-Mawdu‘at, p. 42; Mulla al-Qari, al-Asrar, pp. 288, 295–297, 328; al-‘Ajluni, Kashf al-Khafa 2/556; ‘Abd al-Hayy al-Lakhnawi, al-Asrar, pp. 47–58; al-Shawkani, al-Fawa’id 1/69–72.) Prayer is the greatest act of worship, and believers should strive to perform as much voluntary prayer as possible. But it is not permissible to add invented procedures to it or describe invented virtues for it.

2.11. Prayers and Virtues of the Twelve Lunar Months

The fabricators invented hadiths describing prayers of various forms and types, performed on different days of the year and in different months, together with all kinds of bizarre and extraordinary virtues attributed to them. Books such as the commonly circulated Baro Chander Fazilat are filled with these false statements. For the convenience of readers, I have mentioned the Arabic months and cited the authentic and fabricated reports related to them. Although we are discussing the chapter on prayer, I shall also mention reports concerning fasting and other virtues associated with these months, so that readers may learn all the related matters in one place. 2.11.1. Muharram A. Muharram in the light of authentic and weak hadiths Muharram is the first month of the Islamic calendar. From authentic hadiths we learn the following about its virtue and status. First, it is one of the four sacred months of the year. These months are specially honored in Islamic law, and ordinary quarrels and warfare are prohibited in them. Allah the Exalted says: “Indeed, the number of months with Allah is twelve months, in the decree of Allah, from the day He created the heavens and the earth; four of them are sacred. That is the established religion, so do not wrong yourselves during them….” (Qur’an 9:36.) The four months are Muharram, Rajab, Dhu al-Qi‘dah and Dhu al-Hijjah. Second, an authentic hadith calls this month “Allah’s month” and identifies its voluntary fasting as the best voluntary fasting. In Sahih Muslim, the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said: (*****) “The best fasting after Ramadan is fasting in Allah’s month, Muharram.” Third, fasting on the tenth day of this month, the day of Ashura, has a special virtue. Regarding the fast of Ashura, the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said: “Fasting on this day expiates the sins of the preceding year.” (Muslim, al-Sahih 2/821.) He himself fasted on this day, encouraged the ummah to fast, and also encouraged fasting on the ninth or eleventh along with the tenth. (Ibn Rajab, Lata’if 1/68–76; ‘Abd al-Hayy Lakhnawi, pp. 91–94.) Fourth, authentic hadiths establish that on this day Allah rescued His Messenger Moses and the Children of Israel from Pharaoh, while Pharaoh and his companions were drowned. (Bukhari, al-Sahih 2/704, 3/1244; Muslim, al-Sahih 2/796.) From authentic hadiths, this is all that is known about Muharram and Ashura. Later, many fabricated and false stories became widespread concerning them. Two points should be noted. First, the Jews honored this day, and imaginative stories about it circulated among them. In later times these entered Muslim society as Israelite reports. In the earliest period, Muslims narrated them as Israelite stories without affirming them as true or false; later they were transformed into hadiths. Second, half a century after the death of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him), on 10 Muharram 61 AH, his beloved grandson Husayn (may Allah be pleased with him) was martyred at Karbala. This event had a lasting influence on the Muslim ummah. Thoughtless people on both sides fabricated many hadiths concerning Ashura. Some invented reports in order to observe it as a day of mourning, while others invented reports in order to observe it as a day of victory. Yet the methods of hadith criticism made these fabrications easy to identify. The other reports commonly circulated about Muharram and Ashura may be divided into two categories. First are reports which some hadith scholars classified as fabricated, while others accepted them as weak, together with reports transmitted from certain Companions or Successors through extremely weak chains as their own statements, apparently based on Israelite narratives. Second are those reports concerning which all hadith scholars agreed that they were fabricated and baseless. Fabricated or weak hadiths and the opinions of Companions and Successors 1. It has been transmitted through extremely weak chains from some Companions or Successors that on this day Allah accepted Adam’s repentance. 2. It has similarly been transmitted through unreliable chains that on this day Noah’s ark came to rest on Mount Judi. 3. It has likewise been transmitted through unreliable chains that Jesus was born on this day. 4. Concerning charity on Muharram and Ashura, one scholar reasoned that since fasting on Ashura earns the reward of one year, charity on that day might also earn the reward of one year’s charity. Apart from this reasoning, everything reported about special charity on this day is false and baseless. (Ibn Rajab, Lata’if 1/78; ‘Abd al-Hayy Lakhnawi, al-Athar, pp. 95–96.) 5. A hadith states: “Whoever spends generously on his family on the day of Ashura, Allah will expand his provision throughout the year.” It was transmitted through several chains, but every chain is extremely weak. Because of the multiple chains, al-Bayhaqi, al-‘Iraqi, al-Suyuti and other hadith scholars called it weak rather than fabricated. Ibn Hajar called it extremely objectionable and very weak. On the other hand, Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal, Ibn Taymiyyah and other scholars classified it as fabricated, explaining that multiple extremely weak chains do not strengthen one another. They also noted that it conflicts with authentic hadiths, which state that Muslims should oppose the Jews’ celebration of Ashura: they should fast on that day rather than celebrate it. (References cited in the source.) 6. Another hadith states: “Whoever applies ithmid antimony to his eyes on the day of Ashura will never suffer from an eye ailment.” Like the previous report, it was transmitted through several chains, but every chain contains an extremely weak or mendacious narrator. Some scholars considered it weak because of the multiple chains, while most classified it as fabricated. They explained that the practice of applying antimony on Ashura was introduced by the killers of Imam Husayn and that this report was invented by them, or was carelessly transmitted by a weak narrator. (References cited in the source.) B. False and baseless reports concerning Muharram Although some scholars classified the preceding reports as fabricated and others as weak, all hadith scholars unanimously regard the following reports as fabricated. They can be divided into three groups: fabricated reports about the virtue of fasting Muharram or Ashura; fabricated reports about special prayers on the day or night of Ashura or during Muharram; and fabricated reports claiming that major events occurred or will occur on Ashura. 1. Fasting Muharram or Ashura Authentic hadiths establish that fasting on Ashura expiates the sins of the preceding year. The fabricators invented many additional statements. One commonly circulated book says: “It is stated in hadith that whoever fasts in Muharram will receive, for each fast, the reward of fasting for thirty days. It is also stated that whoever fasts one day of Ashura will receive the reward of ten thousand angels, ten thousand martyrs and ten thousand pilgrims.” It further claims that whoever compassionately strokes an orphan’s head on Ashura will receive a gate of Paradise for every hair, and that whoever feeds a fasting person that evening will receive the reward of feeding and giving iftar to the entire ummah of Muhammad. It also claims that fasting on Ashura equals the reward of sixty years of fasting and prayer, that visiting the sick on that date equals visiting all the descendants of Adam, and that one’s family will receive abundance and forty years of sins will be expiated. These are all fabricated statements. Another false report claims that whoever fasts the first ten days of Muharram is like someone who fasted and worshipped at night for ten thousand years; that worship in Muharram equals worship on the Night of Power; that Muharram is Allah’s most beloved month; that fasting on 10 Muharram was obligatory for Adam and the other prophets; and that two thousand prophets were born and two thousand prayers accepted on that day. Hadith scholars unanimously state that all these are fabricated reports. (References cited in the source.) 2. Prayer in Muharram No hadith contains any instruction or encouragement to perform a special prayer on any day or night of Muharram or on the day or night of Ashura. All reports on this subject are fabricated. Some books circulated in our country describe special virtues for performing two rak‘ahs on the first day of Muharram. These claims are entirely fabricated and baseless. 3. Special prayer on the day or night of Ashura Although fasting on Ashura is encouraged, no special prayer for its day or night is prescribed in hadith. Fabricators invented claims that whoever performs a certain number of rak‘ahs between noon and afternoon, or performs a specified number of rak‘ahs on the night of Ashura while reciting particular surahs a specified number of times, will receive extraordinary rewards. Such statements were invented to win the hearts of simple Muslims and sometimes deceived sincere scholars and ascetics. (References cited in the source.) 4. A fabricated list of past and future events on Ashura Liars attributed to the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) the claim that Allah created the heavens and earth on Ashura; created the mountains, rivers, the Pen, the Preserved Tablet, the Throne, the Footstool, Paradise, Gabriel, the angels and Adam; admitted Adam into Paradise; raised Idris to heaven; brought Noah out of the ark; accepted David’s repentance; granted Solomon kingship; removed Job’s affliction; revealed the Torah; caused Abraham to be born and honored him with the title of His close friend; saved him from Nimrod’s fire; sacrificed Ishmael; rescued Jonah from the fish; brought Joseph out of prison; restored Jacob’s sight; reunited Jacob with Joseph; and caused Muhammad to be born. Others claimed that Noah was saved from the Flood on 2 Muharram, Idris was raised to heaven on the third, and Abraham was thrown into the fire on the fourth. The fabricators included countless such imaginary events in their stories. The summary is that, apart from the rescue of Moses and his companions on Ashura, no event is established by authentic hadith. The acceptance of Adam’s repentance, the resting of Noah’s ark on Mount Judi, and the birth of Jesus are reported only from some Companions or Successors through unreliable chains. Everything else said about Ashura or Muharram is false and invalid. Unfortunately, these baseless statements are still mentioned in books, speeches and sermons in our country. (References cited in the source.) 2.11.2. Safar The preceding discussion shows that although a special fast is established for Muharram, there is no special prayer for that month. By contrast, Safar has neither a special prayer nor a special fast. No hadith establishes special reward or virtue for prayer on any day or night of Safar, or for fasting on any day of it. Everything said on this subject is fabricated and baseless. Many false beliefs have become widespread in Muslim society concerning Safar. They fall into three categories: the alleged misfortune and calamities of Safar; special prayers on its first day or at other times; and the last Wednesday, known as Akheri Chahar Shombah. First: the alleged misfortune of Safar Considering any place, time, object or action unlucky or ominous is a superstition fundamentally opposed to Islamic belief. The Arabs of the pre-Islamic period believed Safar to be a month of misfortune and calamities. The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) rejected this superstition and said: (*****) “There is no evil omen.” (Bukhari, al-Sahih 5/2158, 2161, 2171, 2177; Muslim, al-Sahih 4/1742–1785.) Despite this, fabricators claimed in the name of the Messenger of Allah that Safar is a month of calamities, that hundreds of thousands of misfortunes descend during it, that Adam ate the forbidden fruit in it, Abel was killed in it, Noah’s people were destroyed in it, Abraham was thrown into the fire in it, and that the Messenger of Allah became distressed when it arrived and happy when it ended. They even invented the statement: “Whoever gives me the good news that Safar has ended, I will give him the good news of entry into Paradise.” Many simple-minded ascetics believed these fabrications. Hadith scholars agree that all such statements about Safar are baseless and false. Second: the prayer of the first night of Safar Based on these false claims, a baseless prayer was invented. It is said that whoever performs four rak‘ahs after Maghrib or ‘Isha on the first night of Safar, reciting particular surahs or verses, will be protected from calamity and receive extraordinary rewards. All these claims are fabricated, although some scholars accepted them or mentioned them in their books. Third: the last Wednesday of Safar Various fabricated hadiths claim that Wednesday is unlucky and that the last Wednesday of every month is the most unlucky day. Since Safar is supposedly unlucky, its last Wednesday is said to be the most dangerous day of the year, when the greatest number of calamities descend. Many simple-minded ascetics believed these baseless statements. One writer claims that 120,000 calamities descend during Safar and that the greatest number descend on its last Wednesday; whoever performs four rak‘ahs according to a prescribed method on that day will be protected from them until the following year. This is entirely baseless. In our country the last Wednesday of Safar is famous for another reason. It is claimed that the Messenger of Allah became ill toward the end of Safar, recovered somewhat on its last Wednesday, bathed and ate, then became ill again and died in the following month. Muslims therefore celebrate the memory of his final recovery and bath on that day. A commonly circulated book claims that he recovered, bathed, ate, led the prayer in the Prophet’s Mosque, and that the Companions rejoiced and distributed large amounts of charity. It further alleges that Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman, Ali and ‘Abd al-Rahman ibn ‘Awf donated large sums of money, camels and horses on that occasion, and that Muslims have followed this practice ever since. The book further claims that this was the Prophet’s final bath and that Muslims should bathe, worship and send blessings upon him on that day. I have searched to the best of my ability but have found no mention of this incident in any authentic or weak hadith. To my knowledge, the practice and story of observing the last Wednesday of Safar is not found in any Muslim society outside the Indian subcontinent. A. The Messenger’s final illness Hadith does not specify the date in Safar or Rabi‘ al-Awwal when the Messenger became ill or died. Numerous hadiths describe his illness, condition, actions, advice and death in detail, but no day, date or time is specified. From the second Islamic century, Successor and later historians tried to arrange events from his life according to historical dates, leading to many differing views. Some said his illness began at the end of Safar, others that it began in Rabi‘ al-Awwal. Ibn Ishaq stated that the illness from which he died began during the final nights of Safar or at the beginning of Rabi‘ al-Awwal. There is disagreement over the day of the week: Saturday, Wednesday or Monday. There is also disagreement over whether he was ill for ten, twelve, thirteen or fourteen days. Authentic hadiths do establish that, while ill and a few days before his death, he bathed. ‘A’ishah reported that when his illness worsened, he instructed that seven water-skins be poured over him so that he might feel relief and be able to advise the people. He then went out, led them in prayer and addressed them. This clearly describes a bath taken during his illness to lessen the fever and discomfort, not a recovery on the last Wednesday of Safar. The date and weekday of this bath are not specified in hadith. Ibn Hajar reconciled the reports and suggested that it occurred on the Thursday five days before his death. The preceding discussion shows that the story of the Messenger recovering, bathing, and being celebrated by the Companions on the last Wednesday of Safar has no basis. Since the event itself is unestablished, there can be no question of commemorating it. We must also distinguish between being happy or sad when an event occurs and annually celebrating that date as a day of joy or mourning. These are entirely different matters. Many joyful events occurred in the Messenger’s life, and he sometimes prostrated in gratitude, while his family and Companions expressed thanks. Yet they never turned those dates into annual celebrations. Without an instruction from the Messenger or an action of the Companions, there is no basis for observing a particular day or believing that special worship on it earns special reward. B. Prayer of the last Wednesday of Safar No special status for the last Wednesday of Safar is established by hadith. The belief that worship, prayer, remembrance, supplication, charity or almsgiving on that day earns more or special reward or blessing than on other days is fabricated and baseless. ‘Abd al-Hayy Lakhnawi wrote that the special voluntary prayer performed on that day with particular surahs, verses and supplications is fabricated and baseless. 2.11.3. Rabi‘ al-Awwal Because it is regarded as the month of the birth and death of the Prophet Muhammad (peace and blessings be upon him), Rabi‘ al-Awwal occupies a special position among Muslims. Before discussing reports concerning its virtues and practices, we shall examine the birth and death of the Messenger in the light of hadith and history. First: the date of the Messenger’s birth Authentic hadith clearly establishes that the Messenger was born on a Monday. No information about the month or date of his birth is found in Prophetic hadith, and there was no established view among the Companions. For this reason later historians differed, with more than twelve opinions being reported. Among the views mentioned are that his date is unknown; that he was born in Muharram; in Safar; on 12 Rabi‘ al-Awwal; on 8 Rabi‘ al-Awwal; on 10 Rabi‘ al-Awwal; on 17 Rabi‘ al-Awwal; on 22 Rabi‘ al-Awwal; in Rabi‘ al-Thani; in Rajab; or in Ramadan. The view that he was born on 8 Rabi‘ al-Awwal was accepted by many hadith scholars and historians and was attributed to Ibn ‘Abbas and Jubayr ibn Mut‘im. The view of 12 Rabi‘ al-Awwal became famous in later times, but Ibn Ishaq gave no chain for it and did not identify its source. Many researchers therefore considered it weak. Some later writers nevertheless claimed that it was transmitted from Jabir and Ibn ‘Abbas. The view that he was born in Ramadan was attributed to al-Zubayr ibn Bakkar. Its proponents argued that he received prophethood in Ramadan at the age of forty and therefore must have been born in Ramadan. This argument and the reports used to support it are not decisive. Second: the date of the Messenger’s death Several hadiths establish that the Messenger died on a Monday, but no hadith specifies the month and date of that Monday. Historians and hadith scholars agree that he died in Rabi‘ al-Awwal, but they differ over the date. The reported opinions include the first, second, twelfth and thirteenth of Rabi‘ al-Awwal. The twelfth became the most famous opinion in later times, but it creates a calendrical difficulty. The months of Dhu al-Hijjah, Muharram and Safar consist of twenty-nine or thirty days, and the available reports concerning the day of ‘Arafah do not fit easily with the claim that the twelfth of Rabi‘ al-Awwal was a Monday. Some scholars therefore preferred the first or second. Al-Suhayli, Ibn Hajar and others favored the second, citing its early chain, its compatibility with the report that the Prophet lived eighty or eighty-one days after the Farewell Pilgrimage, and the possibility that a numeral was misread in transmission. Third: the virtue of Rabi‘ al-Awwal according to hadith The preceding discussion shows that no hadith mentions Rabi‘ al-Awwal as the month of the Prophet’s birth or death, nor does any hadith establish a special virtue or special practice for the month. Among the false stories circulated is the claim that pious Successors performed twenty voluntary rak‘ahs on the twelfth of the month for forgiveness for the Prophet’s soul, reciting Surah al-Ikhlas eleven times in each rak‘ah, and that they saw the Prophet in dreams as a result. Another claim says that reciting a particular blessing 1,125 times after ‘Isha on any night of the month guarantees seeing the Prophet in a dream. These are fabricated claims. For the first three generations after the Prophet’s death, the month had no such recognized identity. Around 400 AH, the Fatimid Shi‘ite rulers of Egypt first celebrated a mawlid in this month. Around 600 AH, celebrations of the mawlid began in Irbil on the eighth and twelfth of Rabi‘ al-Awwal. In India and elsewhere, observance of Fatihah or Fatihah-e-Dawazdahum began on the twelfth to commemorate the Prophet’s death. Detailed discussion of these matters appears in the author’s work Ihya’ al-Sunan. 2.11.4. Rabi‘ al-Thani No distinctive virtue, special prayer, fast, supplication, remembrance or other special practice for Rabi‘ al-Thani is mentioned in hadith. About 561 AH, ‘Abd al-Qadir al-Jilani died on the tenth of this month. In our country some people observe Gyarhvi Sharif or Fatihah-e-Yazdahum on the eleventh. This has no connection with hadith. No hadith instructs or encourages people to celebrate births or deaths, or to arrange Fatihah, supplication or transfer of reward on birth or death anniversaries. During the Prophet’s lifetime many relatives, Companions and eminent saints died, but he never arranged an annual ceremony for any of them. After his death, Fatimah, Ali, Hasan, Husayn, the Mothers of the Believers, the Rightly Guided Caliphs, the Companions, the Successors or their followers never arranged such a ceremony on his death date or any other date. Everything circulated under the name of the virtues and practices of Rabi‘ al-Thani is baseless and fabricated. One example claims that four voluntary rak‘ahs should be performed on its first night, with Surah al-Ikhlas after al-Fatihah in each rak‘ah, earning ninety thousand years of reward and expiating ninety thousand years of sins. Such bizarre statements are found in various books. 2.11.5. Jumada al-Awwal No special virtue, prayer, fast, supplication, remembrance or practice for Jumada al-Awwal is established by hadith. Claims that the Companions performed twenty rak‘ahs on its first day, recited al-Ikhlas, then recited a special blessing one hundred times, or that eight rak‘ahs on its first day bring extraordinary rewards, are fabricated. Many similar bizarre and baseless reports appear in books such as Baro Chander Fazilat. 2.11.6. Jumada al-Thani No special virtue or practice for Jumada al-Thani, also called Jumada al-Akhirah, is established. Claims that Abu Bakr and other Companions performed twelve rak‘ahs on its first day, reciting al-Ikhlas eleven times and Ayat al-Kursi three times, are entirely baseless and fabricated. 2.11.7. Rajab More fabricated hadiths have been produced concerning Rajab than concerning any other month. False reports about Safar, Rabi‘ al-Awwal, Rabi‘ al-Thani, Jumada al-Awwal and Jumada al-Thani became widespread mainly in the Indian subcontinent during the last several centuries. Even books of fabricated hadith and virtue written up to the fifth or sixth Islamic century contain little or no mention of special virtues for these months. Earlier pious writers generally began their discussions with Rajab and ended with Muharram. Rajab is one of the four sacred months. The Arabs honored these months according to the law of Abraham, although superstitions and customs later entered their practices. During the pre-Islamic period they performed a sacrifice called ‘Atirah and held celebrations in Rajab; hadith prohibited this practice. Apart from its general status as a sacred month, no authentic hadith establishes any special virtue for Rajab or any special prayer, fast, remembrance, recitation or worship on any day or night of it. First: the general virtue of Rajab Many fabricated hadiths describe extraordinary events supposedly occurring in Rajab and extraordinary rewards for prayer, fasting, charity, supplication and remembrance performed throughout the month. They claim, for example, that Rajab’s status over other months is like the Qur’an’s status over ordinary speech; that Noah and his companions boarded the ark in Rajab; that Adam’s repentance was accepted in it; that Abraham and Jesus were born in it; that the sea was split for Moses in it; that the Prophet was born on its first day; that he received prophethood and ascended during the Night Journey on its twenty-seventh; and that good deeds in it receive multiplied reward. All these statements are baseless and fabricated. Second: prayer in Rajab Many fabricated hadiths describe special methods and extraordinary rewards for prayers performed on the first day, first Friday, third, fourth, fifth, fifteenth or twenty-seventh of Rajab, on its last day, or on other particular days and nights. Hadith scholars such as Ibn Rajab, Ibn Hajar, al-Suyuti and Mulla ‘Ali al-Qari unanimously stated that no acceptable chain establishes any special prayer in Rajab or at any particular time in it. Everything said on this subject is invalid and fabricated. Third: charity and remembrance in Rajab The same applies to claims that charity, remembrance, supplication or blessings performed in Rajab earn special reward or multiplied ordinary reward. No reliable report establishes this. Fourth: fasting in Rajab The greatest number of fabricated reports concern fasting in Rajab. Some describe extraordinary rewards for fasting the month generally; others assign different fabricated rewards to fasting one, two, three or up to thirty days. Hadith scholars state that every report encouraging a special reward for fasting Rajab or a particular day of it is baseless and fabricated. Nothing reliable is transmitted from the Messenger on this matter. Fifth: Laylat al-Ragha’ib Among the fabricated reports concerning Rajab are those about Laylat al-Ragha’ib and its special prayer. Hadith scholars agree that its name, virtue, prayer, number of rak‘ahs, recitations and method are all fabricated and baseless. The practice became widespread in many Muslim countries after the fourth Islamic century. It is celebrated in some societies with enthusiasm similar to that attached to Laylat al-Bara’ah in our country. The fabricated claim says that the first Friday night of Rajab is the night when hopes are fulfilled. A person is said to fast on the preceding Thursday and perform twelve rak‘ahs between Maghrib and ‘Isha on the night leading into Friday, with specified surahs, verses, prayers and blessings, receiving enormous rewards. Hadith scholars investigated its sources and unanimously concluded that all reports about Laylat al-Ragha’ib and Salat al-Ragha’ib are false, fabricated and invented. Sixth: the twenty-seventh of Rajab In our society, the twenty-seventh of Rajab is widely known as the night of the Mi‘raj. Yet no hadith establishes the date of the Mi‘raj. Historians have differed over whether it occurred once or several times, and over its year, month and date. Around twenty opinions have been reported. Some said 27 Rabi‘ al-Awwal; others Rabi‘ al-Thani, Rajab, Ramadan, Shawwal, Dhu al-Qi‘dah or Dhu al-Hijjah. The date is likewise disputed. Later historians discussed the event historically but did not determine a definite date. The disagreement itself shows that even a few centuries ago there was no universally recognized night called the Night of the Mi‘raj. The claim that the Mi‘raj occurred on 27 Rajab is only one historical opinion, not something established by hadith. Nothing authentic or weak is transmitted from the Messenger specifying that date. Reports that he was born or received prophethood on 27 Rajab are also fabricated and false. B. Worship on 27 Rajab No authentic or weak hadith establishes special reward for worship on the night of the Mi‘raj. Since the date of the Mi‘raj itself is unknown from hadith, there can be no basis for observing that night. Some fabricated reports nevertheless describe 27 Rajab as the day of the Prophet’s reception of prophethood and assign special virtues to fasting and prayer on it. They claim that fasting and worshipping at night on that date earns the reward of one hundred years, that the Prophet received prophethood on that day, or that special prayers performed with specified recitations expiate sixty years of sins. These are all abhorrent falsehoods. Hadith scholars unanimously regard everything circulated in the name of hadith concerning the virtue of 27 Rajab, worship at its night or fasting during its day as baseless, invalid and fabricated. Ibn Hajar, Mulla ‘Ali al-Qari, al-‘Ajluni, ‘Abd al-Hayy Lakhnawi and others explicitly stated this.إِنَّا أَنزَلْنَاهُ فِي لَيْلَةٍ مُّبَارَكَةٍ ۚ إِنَّا كُنَّا مُنذِرِينَ [٤٤:٣] فِيهَا يُفْرَقُ كُلُّ أَمْرٍ حَكِيمٍ [٤٤:٤I have revealed it in a blessed night, and I am truly a warner. In that night every wise matter is determined. (Surah 44, al-Dukhan, verses 3–4.) In explaining this statement, the Successor ‘Ikrimah said that the “blessed night” refers to the middle night of Sha‘ban and that the affairs of the entire year are decided on that night. The exegetes did not accept this view. Imam al-Tabari cited ‘Ikrimah’s explanation through several chains and refuted it, stating that it is baseless. He explained that the correct view is that the blessed night refers to Laylat al-Qadr. Allah calls the night in which He revealed the Qur’an Laylat al-Qadr, the Night of Decree, in one place, and Laylat al-Mubarakah, the blessed night, in another. That night is certainly in Ramadan, because Allah states elsewhere that He revealed the Qur’an in Ramadan. Therefore, the blessed night is in Ramadan, not Sha‘ban. (References cited in the source.) 3. Supplication on the middle night of Sha‘ban Some reports concerning the virtue of this night encourage general supplication, asking Allah to fulfill one’s needs and seeking forgiveness for the living and the dead. No authentic or acceptable hadith establishes this meaning. Some such reports are weak and others fabricated. 4. Unspecified prayer and supplication Some reports mention prayer and supplication on this night without specifying a number of rak‘ahs, particular surahs or a particular method. At most, they indicate general night prayer and supplication. Most of these reports are of fabricated quality; one or two may be considered weak rather than fabricated. 5. Prayer with a fixed number of rak‘ahs, surahs and method Other reports concerning Shab-e-Barat prescribe special surahs, a fixed number of rak‘ahs and a special method, promising special rewards. According to the unanimous judgment of the hadith scholars, all such reports are fabricated. They were invented in the name of the Messenger after the fourth Islamic century. One claim promises intercession for ten people destined for Hell to whoever performs three hundred rak‘ahs on the middle night of Sha‘ban, reciting Surah al-Ikhlas thirty times in every rak‘ah. Ibn al-Qayyim listed it among the invalid and baseless reports. Another practice prescribes two hundred rak‘ahs, reciting al-Ikhlas ten times in every rak‘ah. Historians state that this practice first became known in Bayt al-Maqdis in 448 AH. Four reports were fabricated to support it, all baseless. One claims that whoever performs one hundred rak‘ahs, reciting al-Fatihah once and al-Ikhlas ten times in each, will have all his needs fulfilled, his destiny changed from misery to happiness, and seventy thousand angels sent to erase his sins and build cities and palaces for him in Paradise. This report is unanimously fabricated; its narrators are unknown or known liars. Another fabricated report claims that whoever performs one hundred rak‘ahs and recites al-Ikhlas one thousand times will receive one hundred angels before death, some bringing news of Paradise, some protection from Hell, some protection from error and some protection from enemies. A third report gives the same promise through the Successor Imam Muhammad al-Baqir. All these reports are fabricated. In India, preachers later added the recitation known as Tasbih al-Tarawih after every two rak‘ahs, followed by prostrations and invented supplications. ‘Abd al-Hayy Lakhnawi summarized the practice as one hundred rak‘ahs in fifty salutations, with ten recitations of al-Ikhlas in every rak‘ah, followed by prescribed prostrations, blessings and fabricated supplications. The hadith supporting this practice is baseless. A further fabricated report prescribes fifty rak‘ahs and promises that every need will be fulfilled, that misfortune recorded in the Preserved Tablet will be changed into fortune, that hundreds of thousands of angels will record good deeds and build palaces, and that intercession will be accepted for tens of thousands of monotheists. Al-Dhahabi condemned the person who fabricated it. Another report prescribes fourteen rak‘ahs, followed by fourteen recitations each of al-Fatihah, al-Ikhlas, al-Falaq and al-Nas, Ayat al-Kursi and the final two verses of al-Tawbah. It promises the reward of twenty accepted pilgrimages and ten years of accepted fasting. Al-Bayhaqi reported it and stated that Imam Ahmad considered it objectionable, abandoned, fabricated and baseless. Other scholars agreed. Another fabricated report prescribes twelve rak‘ahs, with thirty recitations of al-Ikhlas in every rak‘ah, claiming that the worshipper will see his place in Paradise before completing the prayer and will intercede for ten family members destined for Hell. Most of its narrators are unknown, and the rest are weak or rejected. The discussion makes clear that all hadiths concerning fixed prayers with fixed numbers, surahs and methods on the middle night of Sha‘ban are fabricated and baseless. Some sincere and simple jurists and exegetes included them in their books without explaining their fabrication, and some issued rulings based on them. This helped the practice spread. Mulla ‘Ali al-Qari expressed astonishment that people who had learned the knowledge of the Sunnah could be deceived by these reports. He stated that this prayer entered Islam after the fourth Islamic century and originated in Bayt al-Maqdis, and that not one of the numerous reports supporting it is sound or reliable. He warned readers not to be deceived merely because such reports appear in Qut al-Qulub, Ihya’ ‘Ulum al-Din or the tafsir of al-Tha‘labi. Al-Shawkani likewise stated that some jurists and exegetes were deceived by these reports. The meaning of declaring them fabricated is that the practice of performing a fixed number of rak‘ahs with fixed surahs and a fixed method on that night is invalid and baseless. A few weak reports may encourage general worship and supplication without fixing a number of rak‘ahs, surahs or a method. Third: further fabricated or unreliable hadiths 1. Standing in prayer during the night and fasting during the day Ibn Majah records a report attributed to Ali stating that when the middle night of Sha‘ban arrives, people should stand in prayer at night and fast during the day, because after sunset Allah descends to the lowest heaven and calls for those seeking forgiveness, provision or relief until dawn. Because Ibn Majah recorded it, the report became widespread in our society. However, hadith scholars classified it as extremely weak or fabricated. It is transmitted only by Ibn Abi Sabrah. No other student of Ali transmitted it from him, nor did students of ‘Abdullah ibn Ja‘far, Mu‘awiyah or Ibrahim transmit it. Ibn Abi Sabrah alone claimed to have heard it from Ibrahim. Abu Bakr ibn ‘Abdullah ibn Muhammad ibn Abi Sabrah was a learned jurist of Madinah, but the hadith critics concluded that he used lies in transmitting hadith. Ahmad, Yahya ibn Ma‘in, ‘Ali ibn al-Madini, al-Bukhari, Ibn ‘Adi, Ibn Hibban and al-Hakim accused him of fabricating hadith. Al-Busiri therefore judged the chain weak, while al-Albani called it extremely weak or fabricated. 2. Worship throughout the night of the two Eids and the middle night of Sha‘ban A fabricated hadith states: “Whoever remains awake in worship on the middle night of Sha‘ban and the nights of the two Eids will not suffer spiritual death on the day when all hearts die.” Its sole narrator is known for transmitting invalid hadiths. The chain contains abandoned, weak and accused narrators, so the report is fabricated. Weak reports from Abu Umamah and others mention staying awake on the two Eid nights, but they do not add the middle night of Sha‘ban. 3. Staying awake in worship on five nights A report attributed to Mu‘adh ibn Jabal states that Paradise is guaranteed for one who remains awake on five nights: the night of 8 Dhu al-Hijjah, the night of ‘Arafah, the night of Eid al-Adha, the night of Eid al-Fitr and the middle night of Sha‘ban. It was transmitted through ‘Abd al-Rahim ibn Zayd al-‘Ammi, who was famous for lying and fabricating hadith. The major hadith scholars declared him a liar, so the report is fabricated. 4. The gates of mercy are opened on this night Ibn ‘Iraq cited a report attributed to Ubayy ibn Ka‘b claiming that Gabriel came to the Prophet on the middle night of Sha‘ban and told him to pray, raise his head and hands, and that three hundred gates of mercy had been opened. The report describes the Prophet visiting the cemetery of al-Baqi‘ and angels announcing glad tidings to those who prostrate. Ibn ‘Iraq explained that its sole chain consists of unknown narrators and that the report is fabricated and baseless. 5. Supplications on five nights are not rejected A report attributed to Abu Umamah states that supplications are not rejected on five nights: the first night of Rajab, the middle night of Sha‘ban, the night of Friday, and the nights of Eid al-Fitr and Eid al-Adha. Al-Suyuti called it weak, while al-Albani classified it as fabricated. Its central narrator, Ibrahim ibn Muhammad ibn Abi Yahya, was accused by Malik, Ahmad, al-Bukhari, Yahya ibn Ma‘in, al-Nasa’i, al-Daraqutni and others of falsehood and deviant beliefs. Another narrator in the chain was also known as a liar. A similar statement is transmitted from Ibn ‘Umar as his own saying, but the chain contains an unknown narrator and Muhammad ibn ‘Abd al-Rahman ibn Baylamani, who was known as a fabricator, as well as his weak and unreliable father. 6. Bathing on Shab-e-Barat One of the widespread false claims about Shab-e-Barat is that bathing on this night has a special virtue. A commonly circulated book claims that every drop of water from a bath taken for worship on this night earns the reward of seven hundred voluntary rak‘ahs, followed by two rak‘ahs of the prayer of greeting for ablution. This statement is entirely false and fabricated. Influenced by it, some people bathe even in severe winter and do not dry themselves properly in the hope that every drop will bring reward. This causes illness, especially among women. Such suffering is merely useless hardship from the standpoint of the Shariah. There is no difference, according to the Sunnah, between worshipping after bathing on this night and worshipping after ablution, nor between bathing on this night and bathing on any other night. 7. Glad tidings for good deeds on this night A popular statement says: “Great glad tidings for the one who performs good deeds on the middle night of Sha‘ban.” This was taken from the fabricated report attributed to Ubayy ibn Ka‘b. 8. Distributing halwa, bread or sweets Making, eating or distributing halwa, bread and sweets on this night has no basis. No hadith states that these acts bring special or additional reward. 9. Fasting on 15 Sha‘ban The Messenger frequently fasted in Sha‘ban, sometimes almost the entire month, and the virtue of the middle night is established through authentic reports. Some weak reports encourage general prayer, supplication and seeking forgiveness on that night, but no acceptable hadith establishes fasting the following day. The report attributed to Ali in Ibn Majah is unreliable, and the report about fourteen rak‘ahs is fabricated. Another widespread fabricated hadith claims that whoever fasts on 15 Sha‘ban will never be touched by the Fire. 10. Examples of common baseless statements In books circulated in our country, authors often mix authentic and inauthentic material. Sometimes they insert ideas into translations of authentic hadiths until the result becomes a lie attributed to the Prophet. They also use the names of Bukhari, Muslim and other collections without verification. We must be cautious. May Allah accept the efforts of writers, forgive their mistakes and guide us all to what pleases Him. One book claims that whoever worships on this night will be protected from Hell; that worship on the fifteenth night equals worship on Laylat al-Qadr; that Allah forgives all worshippers except magicians, fortune-tellers, misers, drinkers, adulterers, addicts and those who harm their parents; and that three hundred special gates of mercy are opened. It also relates a long story about Jesus and an old man who worshipped for four hundred years, concluding that a member of Muhammad’s ummah who worships on this night and fasts the following day may become more honored than that old man. The same book claims that reciting a particular phrase forty times at sunset expiates forty years of minor sins; that performing four rak‘ahs with ten recitations of al-Ikhlas in each fulfills four needs and forgives all sins; that another four rak‘ahs with al-Qadr once and al-Ikhlas twenty-five times make a person sinless like a newborn; that reciting blessings one hundred to three hundred times makes Hell forbidden; and that reciting al-Dukhan seven times and Ya-Sin three times fulfills three wishes: extended life, increased provision and forgiveness of all sins. These claims are all fabricated and baseless. The author cites Mishkat, Tirmidhi and Bukhari, although these reports are not found in those books or in any hadith collection. Such books are a major cause of the spread of fabricated hadiths among Bengali readers. 2.11.9. Ramadan The virtues, importance and worship of Ramadan, and the importance and worship of Laylat al-Qadr, are established by the Qur’an and authentic hadith. Even here, however, fabricators invented many reports and inserted false statements into famous authentic hadiths. Since the basic virtues are established, only some common false claims need to be noted. 1. Allah’s merciful gaze and freedom from punishment Many authentic hadiths describe the virtues of Ramadan, fasting, suhur and iftar. Nevertheless, bizarre fabricated reports circulate instead. One says that when the first night of Ramadan arrives, Allah gazes mercifully upon His fasting creation, and whoever receives this gaze will never suffer punishment. Hadith scholars state that this report is fabricated. 2. The virtue of suhur and the consequence of abandoning it Several authentic hadiths encourage suhur, even if only with a sip of water, and describe it as blessed nourishment. They also state that suhur distinguishes Muslim fasting from the fasting of Jews and Christians. Alongside these authentic and hasan reports, exaggerated fabricated claims circulate, such as the claim that every bite of suhur earns the reward of a year’s worship, that one who fasts after suhur receives reward according to the number of Jews, and that anyone who abandons suhur will develop the character of the Jews. These statements are fabricated. 3. Laylat al-Qadr and 27 Ramadan The Qur’an and hadith establish the virtue of Laylat al-Qadr, but the Messenger did not specify it as a particular night. He instructed Muslims to seek it during the last ten nights of Ramadan, especially the odd nights. Some Companions and Successors considered 27 Ramadan more likely, but nothing explicit is transmitted from the Messenger. Therefore all special claims concerning 27 Ramadan are fabricated. Among them are claims that worshipping on the night of 27 Ramadan earns the reward of one thousand years of worship and countless houses in Paradise; that the Prophet told Abu Bakr that Laylat al-Qadr is definitely the twenty-seventh; and that reciting a supplication forty times at sunset on 27 Ramadan expiates forty years of minor sins. Another fabricated statement promises the reward of twenty-seven thousand years of worship and countless palaces in Paradise. None of these reports is authentic. 4. Bathing on Laylat al-Qadr As with Shab-e-Barat, fabricated hadiths circulate about bathing on Laylat al-Qadr, including the claim that previous sins are forgiven before the worshipper finishes washing his feet. No hadith establishes a special virtue for bathing on Laylat al-Qadr. A weak report says that the Messenger bathed between Maghrib and ‘Isha during each of the last ten nights of Ramadan, but nothing further is known about a special reward for such bathing. 5. Intention for the prayer of Laylat al-Qadr All verbal formulas beginning with “I intend…” for prayer are fabricated. There is no separate intention for a voluntary prayer on Shab-e-Barat or Laylat al-Qadr. The intention is simply that of Salat al-Layl or Qiyam al-Layl. A believer may pray two rak‘ahs at a time with the intention of seeking Allah’s pleasure. If the night is truly Laylat al-Qadr, the worshipper will receive its reward. Saying aloud, “I am praying the prayer of Laylat al-Qadr,” is meaningless and baseless. 6. The number and method of prayer on Laylat al-Qadr Authentic hadiths encourage Qiyam al-Layl during Laylat al-Qadr, but prescribe no particular number of rak‘ahs, surahs, verses, supplications or method. The Messenger prayed with lengthy recitation, bowing and prostration. Whoever can should lengthen these; whoever cannot may recite shorter passages and increase the number of rak‘ahs. Each believer will be rewarded according to his deeds. Thus all claims specifying a particular number of rak‘ahs, surahs, method or special supplications during or after the prayer of Laylat al-Qadr are fabricated and invented. One popular book prescribes twelve rak‘ahs, then four, then another four, with particular recitations and extraordinary rewards. It claims that worshippers will receive the reward of the entire night, the rewards of several prophets, forgiveness of all sins, accepted supplications and palaces equal to the world. None of this is found even in Mishkat, much less in a hadith collection. 7. Increased honor because of Laylat al-Qadr A popular book records: “Whoever attains Laylat al-Qadr, Allah will increase his honor and status on the Day of Resurrection.” This appears to be fabricated and baseless. 8. Fabricated claims about the last Friday of Ramadan Authentic hadiths describe Friday as the best day and Ramadan as the best and most blessed month. A believer naturally tries to increase good deeds on every Friday, on every day of Ramadan, and especially during the last ten days. But no authentic or weak hadith establishes a special virtue for the last Friday of Ramadan or for a so-called Farewell Friday. Fabricators nevertheless invented special virtues for that day, including claims about making up missed prayers or performing ‘Umari qada’. One report says that whoever performs one missed prayer, or five according to another version, on the last Friday will compensate for all missed prayers of seventy years. Hadith scholars unanimously classify this as fabricated and false. The report became widespread relatively late. Mulla ‘Ali al-Qari and later scholars exposed it. Al-Shawkani said that its invalidity is beyond doubt, that he had not found it even in books of fabricated hadith, and that it had nevertheless become popular among jurists and students in Sana‘a, many of whom acted upon it. He did not know who invented it and prayed that Allah disgrace the liars. Some later jurists copied the claim from popular circulation. It was included in a commentary on al-Hidayah and then repeated by later commentators, causing ordinary people to think it authentic merely because it appeared in books of respected scholars. Mulla ‘Ali al-Qari explained that it contradicts consensus: no single act of worship can replace or compensate for years of abandoned worship. The writers of those commentaries were not hadith specialists and did not cite any hadith collection, so their quotation has no evidentiary value. 9. More examples of common baseless statements As noted earlier, authors often combine authentic, weak and fabricated reports so that the entire passage becomes a lie attributed to the Messenger. They also give invented references to hadith collections. One book claims that worship on Laylat al-Qadr earns the reward of a hundred years, makes Hell forbidden, illuminates the grave, forgives all minor and major sins and guarantees entry into Paradise. It also quotes a story in which Moses asks Allah what He granted Muhammad’s community, and Allah replies that He granted them Ramadan, whose virtue surpasses all other months. The same book claims that whoever fasts all thirty days of Ramadan with his family, breaks the fast with lawful food and does so in Makkah and Madinah receives seventy thousand rewards each of Hajj, ‘Umrah and Ramadan, the reward of all believers, and the rewards of all the angels. These statements are not found in Tirmidhi or any other hadith collection with an authentic or weak chain. Perhaps the author freely translated a report in Ibn Majah concerning one who fasts Ramadan in Makkah. That report itself is transmitted only through ‘Abd al-Rahim ibn Zayd al-‘Ammi, a narrator known as a liar and fabricator. Some scholars therefore classified it as fabricated. 2.11.10. Shawwal First: Shawwal in the light of authentic hadith Shawwal is the first of the months of Hajj, and Hajj activities begin in it. One virtue of the month is established by authentic hadith: “Whoever fasts Ramadan and then follows it with six days of fasting in Shawwal, it is as though he fasted the entire year.” (Muslim, al-Sahih 2/822.) Some weak reports encourage fasting the entire month or fasting Ramadan and Shawwal together with Wednesdays and Thursdays, but no other special virtue is established. A believer should continue ordinary worship in Shawwal, including Tahajjud, Duha, remembrance and regular weekly or monthly voluntary fasting, and should additionally observe the six fasts. Claims about special prayer, fasting, remembrance, supplication, charity or special rewards for other deeds in Shawwal are baseless or fabricated. Second: fabricated hadiths concerning Shawwal Among the fabricated claims are that whoever refrains from sin in Shawwal will receive a palace in Paradise; that four rak‘ahs on the first day or night, with al-Ikhlas recited twenty-one times in every rak‘ah, close seven gates of Hell and open eight gates of Paradise; and that whoever dies in Shawwal receives the rank of a martyr. All are fabricated. Although the virtue of six fasts is established, exaggerated claims have also been invented: that each fast earns the reward of a thousand fasts; that fasting Shawwal makes Hell forbidden; that the reward of all righteous members of Muhammad’s community is recorded for the person; that he will be placed in Paradise with Abu Bakr; and that he will receive houses of red ruby with rivers of milk and honey. Such claims have been recklessly attributed to the Messenger without verification. 2. Special prayer on the day or night of Eid al-Fitr Some weak reports encourage staying awake in worship on the night of Eid al-Fitr, but none specifies a method, number of rak‘ahs or surahs. No authentic hadith instructs a special voluntary prayer on Eid apart from Salat al-Eid. Fabricators nevertheless invented a report prescribing one hundred rak‘ahs on the night of Eid, with al-Fatihah once and al-Ikhlas eleven times in each rak‘ah, followed by specific supplications and one hundred repetitions of seeking forgiveness. It promises forgiveness before rising from prostration and acceptance of Ramadan fasting. This is fabricated. 3. Four rak‘ahs after Eid prayer No special virtue is established for a prayer after Salat al-Eid. Fabricators invented a report promising that whoever performs four rak‘ahs after Eid, reciting certain surahs, is like someone who read all revealed books, fed, oiled and cleaned all orphans, and had fifty years of sins forgiven. This report is fabricated. 2.11.11. Dhu al-Qi‘dah Dhu al-Qi‘dah has two general virtues: it is one of the four sacred months and the second of the months of Hajj. No special virtue is established by hadith. Fabricators nevertheless claimed that the month should be specially honored; that fasting one day earns the reward of a Hajj for every hour; that four rak‘ahs on a Friday earn the reward of Hajj and ‘Umrah; that two rak‘ahs every night, with al-Ikhlas three times, earn the reward of a pilgrim and martyr and a place under Allah’s Throne; and that every breath of its fasting person earns the reward of freeing a slave. All these are the statements of shameless fabricators. 2.11.12. Dhu al-Hijjah Dhu al-Hijjah is one of the four sacred months. Hajj is performed in it and Eid al-Adha is celebrated in it. Authentic hadiths encourage abundant good deeds during its first ten days. The Messenger said: “There are no days in which righteous deeds are more beloved to Allah than these ten days.” (Bukhari, al-Sahih 1/329; Tirmidhi, al-Sunan 3/130–131.) Weak reports say that fasting each of these days equals a year of fasting, each night equals Laylat al-Qadr, or that deeds receive seven hundred times the reward. These reports are weak. On 9 Dhu al-Hijjah, pilgrims stand at ‘Arafah and complete the central rite of Hajj. Those not performing Hajj are specially encouraged to fast that day. The Messenger said that fasting it expiates the sins of the preceding and following years. (Muslim, al-Sahih 2/819.) Second: fabricated reports concerning Dhu al-Hijjah Alongside the authentic and weak reports, many fabricated hadiths circulate about special prayers and fasts in this month and about the first ten days. 1. The first day of Dhu al-Hijjah The day has virtue as part of the first ten days, but fabricators added the claim that Abraham was born on it and that fasting it earns the reward of seventy years of fasting and forgiveness of eighty years of sins. This is fabricated. 2. The eighth of Dhu al-Hijjah, Yawm al-Tarwiyah The eighth is called Yawm al-Tarwiyah, when Hajj activities begin and pilgrims leave Makkah for Mina. Apart from its inclusion among the first ten days, no special practice is prescribed for non-pilgrims. Fabricators invented special prayers and fasts for its day and night, including the claim that fasting it earns the same reward as the reward Ayub received because of his trials. This is fabricated. 3. The ninth of Dhu al-Hijjah, the day of ‘Arafah The virtue of fasting on ‘Arafah is known. For non-pilgrims, however, no hadith prescribes any additional special prayer, supplication, remembrance or method of worship during its day or night. Fabricators have invented many reports on these subjects. 4. Fabricated prayers of Dhu al-Hijjah The first ten days and nights are important, and believers should increase voluntary prayer, fasting, remembrance, supplication, charity and other worship according to their ability. But no special prayer or method is prescribed for any day or night of Dhu al-Hijjah. Fabricators nevertheless list special prayers for the first night, the night and day of Tarwiyah, the day and night of ‘Arafah, the night and day of Eid al-Adha, the prayer after Eid, and the final day of the month, with fixed numbers of rak‘ahs, surahs, repetitions, supplications and fantastic rewards. All are fabricated. 5. Fasting the final day of Dhu al-Hijjah and the first day of Muharram A fabricated hadith says that whoever fasts the last day of Dhu al-Hijjah and the first day of Muharram completes the preceding year with fasting and welcomes the new year with fasting, so Allah forgives fifty years of sins. This report and similar chainless stories are fabricated. The long discussion shows that a major field for the creativity of fabricators has been inventing hadiths about the virtues of weekly, monthly and yearly good deeds. Such claims easily attract simple Muslims and deceive sincere ascetics and writers who love worship and readily accept reports about its virtues. Once one author records a fabricated report, later authors quote it without investigation. One may ask whether all pious elders who acted upon or transmitted these reports are sinners. We must understand that these fabricated reports usually encourage lawful acts such as prayer, fasting, remembrance, supplication and charity. A believer should regularly perform all kinds of daily, weekly and annual good deeds, following the practice of the Messenger and the Companions, Successors and righteous scholars. He should also increase worship on virtuous nights and days established by authentic hadith. Fabricated hadiths, however, often divert believers from authentic Sunnah, impose needless hardship and immerse them in practices opposed to the Sunnah. Accepting everything heard or read as hadith, without checking in which collection it appears, contradicts the Sunnah and reflects negligence in religion. Those who acted upon such reports through ignorance, simplicity or carelessness will not receive the fabricated rewards mentioned in them, although they may hope for the ordinary reward of the underlying lawful deed. But whoever continues to say, write or practice these reports after learning or hearing that they are fabricated, and refuses to investigate or verify them, is certainly guilty of lying in the name of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him).

2.12. Matters Concerning Death, Funeral Prayers, and Related Issues

1. The Status of Martyrdom Through Remembering Death Twenty Times Every Day A statement widely circulated in sermons and various books in our country says: “Whoever remembers death twenty times daily will be among the martyrs or will attain the status of a martyr.” The hadith scholars have stated that this is an invented statement without a chain of transmission. (Taher Patani, Tadhkirah, p. 213; Shawkani, al-Fawa’id 1/336). 2. Detailed Descriptions of the Agony of Death Some statements concerning the pain or agony of death, or sakarat al-mawt, have been narrated in hadith. However, the popular hadiths concerning detailed descriptions of the agony of death, comparisons, examples, conversations between the soul and each limb, and similar matters have been narrated through some fabricated chains and some extremely weak chains. (Taher Patani, Tadhkirah, pp. 213–214). 3. Ibrahim’s (peace be upon him) Agony of Death A fabricated hadith says that when Ibrahim (peace be upon him) met his Lord, He said, “O Ibrahim, how did you find death?” He replied, “I felt as though my skin were being pulled off.” Then Allah said, “The agony of death had been made easy for you, yet even so it was like this….” The hadith scholars agree that this statement is false and fabricated. (Ibn al-Jawzi, al-Mawdu‘at 2/396; Ibn ‘Iraq, Tanzih 2/362). 4. Carrying the Funeral Bier from All Sides or Following the Deceased A very common practice among us is that, while the body is being carried for burial, the same person repeatedly carries it from all four sides. It is narrated in a hadith concerning this: “If someone follows the deceased from all sides, or carries the bier from all sides, Allah will forgive forty of his major sins.” Hadith scholars such as Ibn al-Jawzi and al-Albani considered hadiths with this meaning fabricated, munkar, and extremely weak. On the other hand, hadith scholars such as al-Suyuti and Ibn ‘Iraq considered hadiths with this meaning weak. (Ibn al-Jawzi, al-Mawdu‘at 2/383; al-Suyuti, al-La’ali 2/405). 5. Burying the Dead Beside Righteous People A fabricated hadith commonly circulated says: “Bury your dead among righteous people, for just as living people suffer because of bad neighbors, the dead likewise suffer because of bad neighbors.” Its chain contains a lying narrator. (Ibn al-Jawzi, al-Mawdu‘at 2/411–412; Ibn ‘Iraq, Tanzih 2/373; al-Albani, al-Da‘ifah 2/38–39, 79–82). 6. The Virtue of Visiting Graves Visiting graves is a voluntary act of worship prescribed by the Sunnah. The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) himself would sometimes visit graves. He also permitted and encouraged the ummah to visit graves in order to remember the Hereafter, remember death, and offer greetings and supplication for the deceased. (Bukhari, al-Sahih 1/430; Muslim, al-Sahih 1/218, 3/1563). Apart from this general reward, some fabricated hadiths concerning a special reward for visiting graves are in circulation. For example: “If a person visits the grave of his father, mother, paternal aunt, maternal aunt, or any relative, the reward of an accepted Hajj will be recorded for him….” (Ibn al-Jawzi, al-Mawdu‘at 2/413–414; al-Suyuti, al-La’ali 2/440). 8. A Special Virtue for Visiting Graves on Friday Graves may be visited on any day and at any time. There is no sahih hadith concerning a special virtue for visiting graves on a particular day or at a particular time. A commonly circulated hadith on this subject says: “If a person visits the grave of both his parents, or of one of them, every Friday, his sins will be forgiven and he will be recorded as one who fulfills his duty toward his parents.” Imam al-Tabarani and other hadith scholars recorded this hadith. They compiled it through Muhammad ibn Nu‘man ibn ‘Abd al-Rahman. Muhammad ibn Nu‘man narrated it from Yahya ibn al-‘Ala al-Bajali, from ‘Abd al-Karim ibn Abi al-Makhariq, from Mujahid, from Abu Hurayrah (may Allah be pleased with him). The narrator Muhammad ibn Nu‘man is unknown. His teacher, Yahya ibn al-‘Ala al-Balaji, who is mentioned in the chain, was abandoned and accused of lying. Imam Ahmad, Waki‘, and other hadith scholars explicitly called him a liar and a fabricator. His teacher ‘Abd al-Karim is also known as an extremely weak narrator. Thus we see that the chain of this hadith is extremely weak. In particular, because of this lying narrator named Yahya, the hadith is considered fabricated. (al-Tabarani, al-Awsat 6/175; al-Saghir 2/160; al-Suyuti, al-La’ali 2/440; Ibn ‘Iraq, Tanzih 2/373; al-Shawkani, al-Fawa’id 1/345). 7. Reciting Surah Ya-Sin While Visiting Graves It is narrated in various sahih hadiths that, when visiting graves, the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) would greet the inhabitants of the graves with the words “Peace be upon you, abode of believing people…” or similar words. Along with the greeting, he would make a brief supplication. He taught the Companions to offer greetings and supplication in this manner. It is narrated in one hadith that one night he stood for a long time, raised his hands, and supplicated for the dead. (Ihya al-Sunan, pp. 354–355). Thus, apart from offering greetings and supplication, no sahih hadith has been narrated concerning reciting the Qur’an or any surah while visiting graves. Some jurists have said that Ayat al-Kursi, Surah al-Ikhlas, and so on should be recited before visiting. However, no sahih hadith has been narrated concerning this. Among the fabricated hadiths on this subject is: “If someone visits the grave of both his parents, or of one of them, on Friday and recites Surah Ya-Sin there, he will be forgiven. (He will be forgiven according to the number of verses or letters recited.)” Ibn ‘Adi and other hadith scholars compiled this hadith. They narrated it through a narrator named ‘Amr ibn Ziyad. He says: Yahya ibn Sulaym told us; Hisham ibn ‘Urwah told us, from his father, from ‘A’ishah (may Allah be pleased with her), from Abu Bakr (may Allah be pleased with him), from the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him)…. The hadith scholars have clearly identified the sole narrator of this hadith, ‘Amr ibn Ziyad, as a liar, fabricator, and hadith thief. Therefore, hadith scholars such as Ibn ‘Adi, al-Dhahabi, and Ibn al-Jawzi considered the hadith fabricated. Imam al-Suyuti described this hadith as having the same meaning as the hadith mentioned above concerning visiting graves on Friday. However, ‘Abd al-Ra’uf al-Munawi and other hadith scholars objected to his statement, saying: First, there is a difference in meaning between the two hadiths. Second, both chains contain a fabricating narrator. In the case of fabricated hadiths, the combined meaning of multiple hadiths does not gain acceptability. (Ibn ‘Adi, al-Kamil 5/151; Ibn al-Jawzi, al-Mawdu‘at 2/413). 8. Reciting Surah al-Ikhlas While Visiting Graves Various popular books state: “If one goes to a cemetery and recites Surah al-Ikhlas eleven times, then donates its reward to the souls of the deceased, he will receive reward equal to the number of all the inhabitants of the cemetery.” In reality, this is a commonly circulated translation of a fabricated hadith. That fabricated hadith says: “If someone recites Surah al-Ikhlas twenty-one times while going near a cemetery and donates its reward to the deceased, he will be granted reward equal to the number of the deceased.” The hadith scholars unanimously agree that this hadith is fabricated and invented. (al-Suyuti, Dhayl al-La’ali, p. 144; al-Albani, al-Da‘ifah 3/452–454). 9. Satan Attempts to Mislead a Dying Person by Taking the Form of His Parents It is commonly believed that, when a person is dying, Satan takes the form of his parents and attempts to lead him astray through various whisperings. Hadith scholars such as Imam al-Suyuti and Ibn Hajar al-Makki have stated that nothing concerning this has been narrated in any hadith. (al-Albani, Ahkam al-Jana’iz, p. 243). 10. Performing an Absent Funeral Prayer No hadith has been narrated in support of performing a second “absent funeral prayer” for a deceased person for whom the funeral prayer was already performed at the place of death. Rather, this act conflicts with the Sunnah. I have discussed this matter in detail in the book Ihya al-Sunan. (Ihya al-Sunan, p. 335; al-Albani, Ahkam al-Jana’iz, p. 252). In the book Rahat al-Qulub, written by Khwaja Nizamuddin Awliya, he writes that his spiritual guide, Khwaja Fariduddin Ganj-i-Shakar, said: “There is a rule for performing the absent funeral prayer. When Amir al-Mu’minin Hamzah and the others were martyred, the Pure Master (peace and blessings be upon him) performed the absent funeral prayer for them. Indeed, he performed it separately for each one.” (Khwaja Nizamuddin Awliya, Rahat al-Qulub, p. 126, twentieth gathering.) We do not know whether these words were truly written by Khwaja Nizamuddin (may Allah have mercy on him), or whether they were fabricated in his name. In any case, these statements are entirely baseless. Any ordinary Muslim knows that Hamzah (may Allah be pleased with him) was martyred in the Battle of Uhud and that the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) was himself present there. 11. Questioning Those Present While the Body Lies Before Them In our country, people sometimes place the body before the worshippers before or after performing the funeral prayer and ask them, “What kind of person was he?” Everyone says, “He was good,” and so on. This practice is baseless and fabricated. No such practice is mentioned in hadith. It is mentioned in hadith that if people spontaneously praise a deceased person, this is considered beneficial for him. (Bukhari, al-Sahih 1/460; Muslim, al-Sahih 2/655). 12. Giving the Adhan When Placing the Deceased in the Grave or Afterwards Another baseless and fabricated practice is giving the adhan when placing the deceased in the grave or afterward. No sahih, weak, or fabricated hadith contains anything of this kind from the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) or any Companion. Moreover, no hadith mentions any virtue in giving the adhan for a reason other than the time of prayer. 13. The Belief in Ghosts and Spirits A baseless, fabricated, and anti-Islamic belief common in our society is the belief in ghosts and spirits. All statements that the souls of dead people become ghosts or spirits, wander around the earth or remain there in some other form, and can do good or evil, and so on, are vile lies contrary to Islamic belief. Among such false claims is that the soul of the deceased wanders around the area where he died, and so on. 14. Reciting the Qur’an Beside the Body After Death A hadith has been narrated concerning reciting Surah Ya-Sin to a dying person during his final moments. (Abu Dawud, al-Sunan 3/191). However, no sahih or weak hadith has been narrated concerning reciting the Qur’an beside the body after death. 15. Reciting the Kalimah, Supplications, or the Qur’an Aloud While Carrying the Body This is a fabricated, baseless practice contrary to the Sunnah. Complete silence while carrying the body is the Sunnah. One should walk with grief and thoughts of death deep in one’s heart. Speaking among one another is also contrary to the Sunnah. Imam al-Nawawi says that remaining completely silent while carrying the body is the correct practice according to the Sunnah, and that this was the practice of the Companions and later generations. The renowned Hanafi jurist ‘Allamah al-Kasani says: “The person accompanying the body prolongs his silence. Reciting dhikr aloud at this time is makruh. Qays ibn ‘Ubadah said: The Companions of the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) disliked making noise on three occasions: during battle, at a funeral, and while performing dhikr. In addition, reciting dhikr aloud while carrying the body imitates the Jews and Christians; therefore it is makruh.” (al-Kasani, Bada’i al-Sana’i 1/310). 16. Giving Charity Near a Grave The hadiths instruct children to give charity on behalf of their parents. However, no hadith states in any way that giving this charity near a grave brings any additional reward or benefit. Giving charity anywhere in the world has the same status. 17. Charity Given by Those Other Than the Children It is also noteworthy that no hadith states in any way that a deceased person will receive reward when someone other than his children or family gives charity on his behalf. Everything said or done concerning this is either based on the opinions of scholars, or is invented or fabricated. In light of the Qur’an and hadith, the duty of believers is to supplicate and seek forgiveness for deceased believers. The duty of children, in addition to supplicating and seeking forgiveness for their deceased parents, is to give charity. We know with certainty from the Qur’an and hadith that deceased people benefit when other people, apart from their children, supplicate for them. But no sahih hadith states that a deceased person receives reward when someone other than his children gives charity on his behalf. However, most scholars believe that since the hadiths state that the deceased receives the reward of a child’s charity, we may hope that the deceased may also receive the reward of other people’s charity. Some scholars say that, in this matter, there is no basis or reason for holding hopes beyond the Qur’an and hadith. The Qur’an and hadith clearly state that every Muslim should supplicate for any deceased Muslim. Children should also give charity for their parents in addition to supplicating for them. There is no need for us to go beyond this. (For a detailed discussion of the relevant verses, hadiths, and scholarly opinions, see Ibn al-Qayyim, al-Ruh, pp. 353–409; al-Suyuti, Sharh al-Sudur, pp. 301–314). Even if we accept the “hope” of most scholars, a question remains here. Since we learn from the Qur’an and hadith that the deceased benefits merely from supplication and seeking forgiveness, and that reward and merit are granted to him through supplication, what need is there to go beyond the instructions of the Qur’an and hadith? Since we know with certainty that the person will benefit if we simply supplicate, saying, “O Allah, forgive such-and-such a person and grant him honor…,” what need do we have to say, “O Allah, grant such-and-such person the reward of this charity of ours, and in exchange forgive him and grant him honor and reward”? Perhaps we think that the deceased will receive more reward if supplication is accompanied by charity. It is better to rely on revelation regarding matters of the unseen than on what we ourselves “think.” The Qur’an and hadith instruct us to supplicate and seek forgiveness. The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) himself supplicated and sought forgiveness throughout his life for countless believing men and women, but he never taught that, before, after, or at another time in connection with supplicating and seeking forgiveness for the deceased during a grave visit or otherwise, one should give charity or distribute food. He himself never did so, nor did he teach anyone to do so. The Companions also supplicated and sought forgiveness for the dead and visited graves, but no sahih hadith narrates that they ever gave charity near a grave or elsewhere for the “conveyance of reward” to the dead. We should remain within the teachings of the Sunnah. Every believer should always strive to give abundant charity for his own reward, relief from hardship, and blessings. At the same time, children should supplicate, seek forgiveness, and give charity for their forefathers. All other Muslims should supplicate and seek forgiveness for all deceased believing men and women. 18. Gifts from the Living for the Deceased In common sermon discussions, a hadith is cited saying that the deceased is like a drowning person and benefits when the reward of Qur’an recitation, the Kalimah, charity, and so on is sent as a gift from the living. In reality, the hadith speaks only of supplication and seeking forgiveness; the remaining statements are baseless and fabricated. The original hadith itself is also extremely weak. Imam al-Bayhaqi compiled it through Muhammad ibn Jabir ibn Abi ‘Ayyash al-Masisisi, an unidentified narrator from the third century. This person says that ‘Abdullah ibn al-Mubarak told him, from Ya‘qub ibn Qa‘qa‘, from Mujahid, from Ibn ‘Abbas, that the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) said: “The condition of the deceased in the grave is exactly like the condition of a drowning person seeking rescue. He awaits a supplication that will reach him from a parent, brother, or friend. When such a supplication reaches him, it is more beloved to him than the world and all that it contains. Allah, the Majestic and Almighty, grants the inhabitants of the graves mountains of reward because of the supplications of the people of the earth. The gift of the living to the dead is to seek forgiveness for them.” Imam al-Bayhaqi, after citing the hadith, said that it had not been narrated in any way through anyone other than this Muhammad ibn Jabir ibn Abi ‘Ayyash. (al-Bayhaqi, Shu‘ab al-Iman 6/203, 7/16). Imam al-Dhahabi mentioned this person and said: “I have not been able to learn anything at all about this person. The hadith narrated by him is extremely objectionable or very weakمنكر جد \ .” (al-Dhahabi, Mizan al-I‘tidal 6/86; Ibn Hajar, Lisan al-Mizan 5/99; al-Albani, al-Da‘ifah 2/211). 19. Holding Food, Charity, or Supplication Gatherings for the Deceased In our country it is a widespread custom to hold gatherings for food, charity, and supplications for a deceased person on the third, fifth, seventh, or fortieth day after death, or on any other day, including the day of death or the birthday. However, this custom is entirely fabricated. No hadith of any kind has been narrated concerning holding such a gathering for the deceased. No hadith gives any instruction to hold any kind of ceremony after a person’s death. One should always, or whenever possible, supplicate for the dead. Children should give charity. All of this should be informal. I have discussed this matter in detail in Ihya al-Sunan. (pp. 347–359). 20. Various Khatms for the Sick and the Deceased All types of khatm, such as Khatm al-Tahlil, Khatm al-Tasmiyah, Khatm al-Jalali, Khatm al-Khawajagan, and Khatm Yunus, were all invented later. Among the fabricated statements circulated as hadith on this subject is: “It is stated in the noble hadith that the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) said: When someone recites the following formula—‘There is no god but Allah’—125,000 times and bestows it upon the soul of a deceased person, Allah Most High will certainly forgive him through its intercession and grant him a place in Paradise.” (Ghulam Rahman, Maqsud al-Mu’minin, p. 407). All of these are fabricated statements. 21. Completing a Qur’an for the Deceased A very common practice in our country is to complete a recitation of the Qur’an for someone after he dies. This practice is not based on any hadith. The Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) and the Companions never completed a Qur’an for any deceased person. Nor has any statement been narrated in any sahih or acceptable hadith that someone will receive reward if a Qur’an is completed for him. As we mentioned earlier, the Qur’an and hadith instruct us to supplicate for the deceased. They also instruct children to give charity for their deceased parents. In addition, the hadiths mention repaying a deceased person’s debts, fasting on his behalf, and performing Hajj and ‘Umrah on his behalf. No instruction has been narrated in hadith concerning reciting the Qur’an, completing a Qur’an, reciting tasbih and tahlil, or similar acts of worship for the deceased. However, most scholars have said that, since the hadiths state that the deceased benefits from charity, fasting, Hajj, ‘Umrah, and supplication, it may be hoped that they also benefit from acts of worship such as Qur’an recitation and reciting tasbih and tahlil. Nevertheless, all formalities and khatms undertaken for this purpose are baseless and fabricated. 22. The Bodies of Ten Types of People Will Not Decay A popular book states: “It is narrated in the noble hadith that the bodies of the following ten types of people will not decay: 1. prophets; 2. martyrs; 3. scholars; 4. warriors; 5. those who have memorized the Qur’an; 6. muezzins; 7. just kings or leaders; 8. women who die from childbirth fever; 9. one who is killed without cause; 10. one who dies on Friday.” (Maulvi Shamsul Huda, Ni‘am al-Qur’an, p. 245). Many of these people have been called martyrs in hadith. However, only that the bodies of the prophets will not decay in the earth has been stated in a sahih hadith. Despite my best efforts, I have not been able to find any hadith concerning the bodies of the other nine categories of dead not decaying. Allah knows best.

2.13. Matters Concerning Zakat, Fasting, and Hajj

2.13.1. Matters Concerning Zakat 1. Kharaj and ushr are not combined on a believer’s land A Muslim must pay zakat amounting to 5% or 10% of the produce of his landholdings. The zakat on fruits and crops is called ‘ushr.’ Non-Muslims do not have to pay ‘zakat.’ Non-Muslims do not have to pay zakat. Therefore, a non-Muslim citizen of a Muslim state must pay ‘kharaj’ on his land. ‘Kharaj’ is generally twice the amount of ushr. If a Muslim purchases land belonging to a non-Muslim, there has been disagreement among the jurists since the era of the Tabi‘un as to whether he must pay both ushr and kharaj, or only kharaj. Most of the Tabi‘un and the Imams said that he must pay both kharaj and ushr. The Tabi‘i Ikrimah, Ibrahim al-Nakha‘i, and Imam Abu Hanifah (ra) said that he must pay only kharaj. (Read the author’s other book: Ushr or Zakat on Crops in Bangladesh: Importance and Application.) A hadith on this matter is widespread among scholars. Some jurists of the fifth Hijri century and later cited it. This hadith is attributed through Ibn Mas‘ud (ra), with the Messenger of Allah (sa) saying: “Ushr and kharaj will not be combined on a Muslim’s land.” (Ibn ‘Adi, al-Kamil 9/127; al-Bayhaqi, al-Sunan al-Kubra 4/222). However, all hadith scholars—including Imam al-Zayla‘i and the prominent hadith scholars of the Hanafi school—have said that this hadith is fabricated. As a statement or saying of the Messenger of Allah (sa) or Ibn Mas‘ud, this sentence is fabricated. In reality, this sentence is the saying and opinion of Ibrahim al-Nakha‘i (rah). This opinion has also been transmitted from other Tabi‘un besides Ibrahim al-Nakha‘i. (For details: Ushr or Zakat on Crops in Bangladesh: Importance and Application, pp. 86–87.) Imam Abu Hanifah (rah) narrated this statement from Ibrahim al-Nakha‘i (rah) as al-Nakha‘i’s own opinion and accepted it. He said: “Hammad ibn Abi Sulayman told me that Ibrahim al-Nakha‘i said: ‘Ushr and kharaj will not be combined on a Muslim’s land.’” Up to this point, the statement is authentic. That is, it is authentic as a ‘maqtu‘’ hadith, or as the statement of a Tabi‘i. But a later narrator, Yahya ibn ‘Anbasah, falsely attributed this statement in the name of Imam Abu Hanifah as a statement of the Messenger of Allah (sa). Yahya ibn ‘Anbasah said: “Abu Hanifah told us: Hammad ibn Abi Sulayman narrated to us from Ibrahim al-Nakha‘i, from ‘Alqamah, from ‘Abdullah ibn Mas‘ud, that the Messenger of Allah (sa) said: ‘Ushr and kharaj will not be combined on a Muslim’s land.’” Thus, Yahya ibn ‘Anbasah narrated a Tabi‘i’s report as a statement of the Messenger of Allah (sa). The hadith scholars easily detected this forgery or error of his. They observed that none of Imam Abu Hanifah’s (rah) countless students had narrated this hadith from him. One of his foremost students, Imam Abu Yusuf and Muhammad (rah), discussed this legal issue extensively in their various works, but nowhere did they mention that Imam Abu Hanifah had narrated this hadith to them from the Messenger of Allah (sa), or that he had relied on any Prophetic hadith concerning this matter. This is where the hadith scholars’ doubt began. If a hadith narrator reports from a famous hadith scholar or jurist a hadith that none of his other students—especially those who remained with him throughout their lives—reported, they become doubtful about the hadith’s authenticity. As a second step, they examine the status of the narrator’s other hadiths and his personal character. Here they found that every hadith Yahya ibn ‘Anbasah had narrated in his life was either erroneous or fabricated. He narrated many hadiths in the names of renowned and reliable scholars and hadith scholars that no one else had narrated. In this way he narrated many false and fabricated hadiths through various fabricated chains. After comparing all his narrations with the hadiths transmitted by the hadith scholars and reviewing his personal life, the hadith scholars became certain that he had also fabricated this hadith in the name of Imam Abu Hanifah. That is why no Hanafi Imam or jurist of the third and fourth Hijri centuries cited this hadith as evidence. (Ibn ‘Adi, Kamil 9/127; al-Bayhaqi, al-Sunan al-Kubra 4/222; Ibn al-Jawzi, al-Mawdu‘at 2/69–70; Ibn ‘Iraq, Tanzih 2/118; al-Suyuti, al-La’ali 2/70). 2. There is no zakat on jewelry There has been disagreement among the jurists since the era of the Companions as to whether zakat must be paid on jewelry in use. Jabir and several other Companions said that zakat did not have to be paid on jewelry. On the other hand, many other Companions said that zakat had to be paid on jewelry. A hadith is narrated and circulated in support of those who hold that zakat on jewelry is not obligatory. A hadith narrated in the name of Jabir states that the Messenger of Allah (sa) said: “There is no zakat on jewelry.” This is not a statement of the Messenger of Allah (sa). Al-Bayhaqi, Ibn Hajar, al-Albani, and other hadith scholars declared it invalid as a Prophetic hadith. This sentence is basically Jabir’s own statement. A very weak narrator mistakenly narrated it as a statement of the Messenger of Allah (sa). (Ibn Hajar, al-Dirayah 1/260; al-Albani, Irwa’ al-Ghalil 3/294–296). 2.13.2. Matters Concerning Fasting Many fabricated hadiths and invented statements concerning fasting were previously mentioned in the discussion of ‘the merits of the twelve months’ in the chapter on Prayer. Here I shall mention one or two more fabricated or baseless statements concerning fasting. 1. The intention for fasting We have already mentioned that every form of intention recited with the words ‘Nawaytu an…’ is fabricated. No hadith states that such an intention should be recited for any act of worship. 2. The reason fasting for thirty days was made obligatory There is a peculiar absurd desire to determine the reasons behind various acts of worship. Consequently, fabricators invented many statements about this. Regarding the obligatory fasting of Ramadan, the fabricators invented: “Fasting for thirty days was made obligatory upon my ummah because when Adam ate the fruit, it remained in his stomach for thirty days. When Allah accepted Adam’s repentance, He commanded him to fast continuously for thirty days and thirty nights. He commanded my ummah to fast only during the day……” (Ibn al-Jawzi, al-Mawdu‘at 2/101; al-Suyuti, al-La’ali 2/97; Ibn ‘Iraq, Tanzih 2/145; al-Shawkani, al-Fawa’id 1/119). 3. That there is no accounting for eating food at iftar, suhur, and so on It is commonly held in society that there is no accounting for eating food at iftar, suhur, and so forth. Among the fabricated hadiths conveying this meaning is: “The blessing of food consumed by three people will not be counted: the person breaking the fast, the person eating the suhur meal, and the person eating with a guest.” (al-Suyuti, Dhayl al-La’ali, p. 121; Ibn ‘Iraq, Tanzih 2/166; al-Shawkani, al-Fawa’id 1/124). Because of all these baseless statements, we have turned Ramadan into a month of eating for ourselves. Yet Ramadan is a month of feeding others and showing compassion. Moreover, instead of considering whether we will be held accountable, we should consider whether we will receive greater reward. 4. The naming of the Ayyam al-Bid The 13th, 14th, and 15th days of the lunar month are called ‘Ayyam al-Bid,’ or ‘the days of the white nights.’ This is because, due to the full moon on these dates, brightness or light remains present for almost the entire night. (Ibn Hajar, Fath al-Bari 4/226; ‘Abd al-Ra’uf al-Munawi, Fayd al-Qadir 4/229.) But the fabricators circulated many fabricated hadiths about the naming of the ‘Ayyam al-Bid.’ For example: “When Adam came to earth after eating the fruit of the forbidden tree, his body had become black. Consequently, the angels began to weep for him. …Then Allah said to Adam: Fast for Me on the 13th. He fasted on the 13th, and one-third of him became white. Then the Almighty Allah said to him: Fast today, on the 14th as well. He then fasted on the 14th, and two-thirds of him became white. Then the Almighty Allah said to him: Fast today, on the 15th as well. He then fasted on the 15th, and his entire body became white. For this reason these days were named ‘Ayyam al-Bid,’ or ‘the days of whiteness.’” (Ibn al-Jawzi, al-Mawdu‘at 1/375; al-Suyuti, al-La’ali 1/483–484; Ibn ‘Iraq, Tanzih 2/54–55). 5. The merit of fasting the Ayyam al-Bid In various authentic hadiths, the Messenger of Allah (sa) encouraged believers to perform all voluntary acts of worship regularly, even if in small measure. Regarding voluntary fasting, he encouraged fasting at least three days in every lunar or Arabic month. Some hadiths specifically encourage voluntary fasting on the 13th, 14th, and 15th of every lunar month. (al-Bukhari, al-Sahih 1/395, 2/697–699, 3/1256–1257; Muslim 1/499, 2/812–814). The distinction of fasting on these days is threefold: first, the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) instructed people in various hadiths to fast these three days. (al-Bukhari, al-Sahih 1/395, 2/697–699, 3/1256–1257; Muslim 1/499, 2/812–814). Second, he himself always fasted these three days. (al-Albani, Sahih al-Jami‘ 2/876). Third, he stated that fasting these three days, or fasting at least three days every month, would earn the reward of fasting the entire year. (al-Bukhari, al-Sahih 1/395, 2/697–699, 3/1256–1257; Muslim 1/499, 2/812–814). This is sufficient for a believer. But the fabricators circulated many fabricated hadiths concerning the merit of the ‘Ayyam al-Bid.’ For example: “If anyone fasts the Ayyam al-Bid, then on the first day (the 13th) he will be given the reward of ten thousand years, on the second day (the 14th) the reward of one hundred thousand years, and on the third day (the 15th) the reward of three hundred thousand years.” Some fabricators stated a reduced version: “On the first day he will receive the reward of three thousand years, on the second day ten thousand years, and on the third day twenty thousand years……” (al-Suyuti, al-La’ali 2/106–107; Ibn ‘Iraq, Tanzih 2/148; al-Shawkani, al-Fawa’id 1/128). They circulated many other fabricated statements of this kind. 2.11.3. Matters Concerning Hajj 1. Dying as a Jew or Christian if one does not perform Hajj despite having the means A hadith very familiar in our society, and cited in every sermon, discussion, or piece of writing concerning Hajj, states: “Whoever possesses provisions and a riding animal sufficient to reach the House, yet does not perform Hajj, may die as a Jew or as a Christian without any problem.” One reason for the hadith’s popularity is that it was compiled in Sunan al-Tirmidhi, one of the six famous hadith collections. Imam al-Tirmidhi said: Muhammad ibn Yahya told me, Muslim ibn Ibrahim told us, Hilal ibn ‘Abdullah told us, Abu Ishaq al-Hamdani told us, from al-Harith, from ‘Ali, that the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said……… After citing the hadith, Imam al-Tirmidhi said: “This is a gharib hadith. I have not found it through any route other than this chain. There is criticism concerning its chain. Hilal ibn ‘Abdullah is unknown, and al-Harith is weak in hadith narration.” (al-Tirmidhi, al-Sunan 3/176). There are also two further serious weaknesses in this hadith’s chain. First, Abu Ishaq was a mudallis. Here he did not say that al-Harith told him the hadith or that he heard it from him. His manner of narration indicates that he did not hear it directly from al-Harith. Second, the next narrator in the hadith, Hilal ibn ‘Abdullah, is an unknown person. There is no way to know whether Abu Ishaq actually said the hadith or whether this man fabricated it. It should be noted that the hadith has been narrated through several other chains with this meaning. But the condition of those chains is even worse. For these reasons, some hadith scholars described the hadith as fabricated and invented, while others judged it da‘if. After examining all the chains, ‘Allamah Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani said that this statement has not been narrated from the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) through any acceptable chain. All the chains are extremely weak or invalid. However, through an authentic chain it has been narrated from ‘Umar ibn al-Khattab (ra) as his own statement. (Ibn al-Jawzi, al-Mawdu‘at 2/121–122; al-Suyuti, al-La’ali 2/118–119). 2. Hadiths concerning visiting the grave of the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) The word ziyarat means meeting, visiting, calling on, and so forth. Visiting or meeting living people, especially relatives and righteous people, is a good deed instructed by hadith. In various hadiths, believers have been encouraged to visit or meet one another for the sake of Allah, ‘tazaawur fillah’ ( لًلهافروازالت) . (al-Mundhiri, al-Targhib 3/247–249). Similarly, visiting the graves of the dead—that is, visiting or calling on them—is a recommended act of worship established by hadith. Visiting the Rawdah Sharif of the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) is undoubtedly one of the greatest forms of ziyarat. Moreover, loving him is part of faith and one of the greatest acts of worship. This love increases through ziyarat in accordance with the Sunnah. The merit of standing beside his blessed grave and offering durood and salam is also mentioned in hadith. Thus we see that visiting the Rawdah Sharif is an important act of worship. However, there is disagreement as to whether there are any specific hadiths for this act of worship. Some have said that all the hadiths concerning it are fabricated and baseless. Others have described them as weak or more or less acceptable. Here I wish to discuss the matter in some detail. The hadiths on this subject can broadly be divided, in terms of meaning, into three categories. First, glad tidings of intercession or mercy for one who visits the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) or visits his blessed grave. Second, glad tidings that one who visits his blessed grave after the Messenger of Allah’s (ﷺ) death will receive the status of one who met him during his lifetime. Third, an expression of displeasure toward one who abandons ziyarat. A. Glad tidings for the visitor First hadith: “Whoever visits my grave, my intercession will be due for him.” This hadith was compiled by Ibn Khuzaymah, al-Bazzar, al-Daraqutni, al-Bayhaqi, and other hadith scholars. It has two chains: First chain: Imam al-Bazzar said: Qutaybah told me, ‘Abdullah ibn Ibrahim told me, ‘Abd al-Rahman ibn Zayd ibn Aslam told me, from his father, from Ibn ‘Umar, that the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said…… (al-Haythami, Majma‘ al-Zawa’id 4/2). We have discussed ‘Abd al-Rahman ibn Zayd ibn Aslam in detail elsewhere. We saw that the hadith scholars described him as extremely weak. Some called him a narrator of fabricated hadiths. His student in this chain, ‘Abdullah ibn Ibrahim, is also extremely weak. He narrated many hadiths in the names of ‘Abd al-Rahman ibn Zayd and many other hadith scholars that none of those scholars’ other students narrated and that cannot be found through any other route. The hadith scholars unanimously agree that he was an extremely weak and abandoned narrator. Ibn Hibban described him as a hadith fabricator. (Ibn ‘Adi, al-Kamil 4/190–191; al-Dhahabi, Mizan al-I‘tidal 4/55–56). We have seen that even the hadith narrated by ‘Abd al-Rahman is considered extremely weak or fabricated. In this chain, the condition of his student is even worse. Second chain: Imam al-Daraqutni said: Qadi al-Muhamili told us, ‘Ubaydullah ibn Muhammad al-Warraq told us, Musa ibn Hilal told us, ‘Abdullah (or ‘Ubaydullah) ibn ‘Umar al-‘Umari told us, from Nafi‘, from ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Umar, that the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said…” (al-Daraqutni, al-Sunan 2/278). Imam al-Bayhaqi also compiled the hadith through the same chain, from Musa ibn Hilal, from ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Umar al-‘Umari, from Nafi‘, from ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Umar. After citing it, al-Bayhaqi said: “It is a munkar, or extremely objectionable, hadith from Nafi‘ from Ibn ‘Umar. No one narrated it except this person (Musa ibn Hilal).” (al-Bayhaqi, Shu‘ab al-Iman 3/490). Imam Ibn Khuzaymah also compiled it through the same chain and said: “I have doubts concerning the acceptability of this chain. …The hadith is munkar, meaning objectionable or extremely weak.” (al-Dhahabi, Mizan al-I‘tidal 6/566–567; al-‘Ajluni, Kashf al-Khafa 2/328–329). There are also two weak narrators in this chain. Musa ibn Hilal is an unknown or little-known narrator. Abu Hatim al-Razi called him unknown. Ibn ‘Adi said, “I hope his hadiths are more or less acceptable.” Al-Dhahabi said that this man’s hadiths are more or less acceptable. …Among his narrations, this is the most objectionable or weak hadith. (al-‘Uqayli, al-Du‘afa 4/170; Ibn ‘Adi, al-Kamil 6/351). The teacher of this narrator Musa, ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Umar ibn Hafs al-‘Umari (171 AH), was a second-century Tabi‘ al-Tabi‘i narrator. Although weak in hadith narration, he was not abandoned. His brother ‘Ubaydullah ibn ‘Umar was very reliable. He, however, was weak. Yahya ibn Ma‘in described him as weak or more or less acceptable. Ahmad ibn Hanbal, Ibn ‘Adi, al-Dhahabi, and other hadith scholars regarded him as more or less acceptable. Al-Nasa’i and some others called him weak. Reconciling all these views, Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani said: “He is a weak narrator. Imam Muslim mentioned his narration as supporting evidence. al-Tirmidhi, al-Nasa’i, Abu Dawud, and Ibn Majah accepted his narration.” (Ibn ‘Adi, al-Kamil 4/141; al-Dhahabi, al-Mughni 1/348–349; Mizan al-I‘tidal 4/151–153). In some narrations, Musa ibn Hilal’s teacher is named as ‘Ubaydullah ibn ‘Umar. However, Ibn Khuzaymah, al-Bayhaqi, al-Dhahabi, and other hadith scholars said that mentioning ‘Ubaydullah here is an error. The hadith is narrated by ‘Abdullah. (al-Daraqutni, al-Sunan 2/278; al-Bayhaqi, Shu‘ab al-Iman 3/490). In any case, although this chain is weak, it contains no liar, narrator accused of false narration, or abandoned narrator. Second hadith: “Whoever visits my grave—or, he said, whoever visits me—I will be his intercessor or witness on the Day of Resurrection.” Abu Dawud al-Tayalisi and al-Bayhaqi compiled this hadith. They narrated it through a man named Siwar ibn Maymun. This Siwar ibn Maymun said that a man from the family of ‘Umar ibn al-Khattab told him, from ‘Umar, who said that the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said…… (al-Bayhaqi, Shu‘ab al-Iman 3/488–489; al-Sunan al-Kubra 5/245). The narrator of this hadith, Siwar ibn Maymun, is unknown. He is not mentioned in any book of narrator criticism. His teacher, ‘a man from the family of ‘Umar,’ is completely unidentified. Therefore, after citing the hadith, Imam al-Bayhaqi said: “This chain is unknown.” (al-Bayhaqi, al-Sunan al-Kubra 5/245). Third hadith: “Whoever intentionally visits me will be my neighbor or be under my protection on the Day of Resurrection.” (al-Bayhaqi, Shu‘ab al-Iman 4/488; al-Dhahabi, Mizan al-I‘tidal 7/63; Ibn Hajar, Lisan al-Mizan 6/180). Al-Bayhaqi, al-Dhahabi, Ibn Hajar, and other hadith scholars cited this hadith. They narrated it through the third-century hadith scholar ‘Abd al-Malik ibn Ibrahim al-Juddi (205 AH). ‘Abd al-Malik said: Shu‘bah ibn al-Hajjaj (162 AH) told us, from Siwar ibn Maymun, who said: Harun ibn Quza‘ah told us, from a man of the family of al-Khattab, from the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ), who said…… The chain of this hadith is even weaker than the preceding chain. In addition to the two weaknesses in the previous chain, this chain has two further weaknesses. First, the exact identity of Siwar’s teacher, Harun Abu Quza‘ah, is unknown. He is called Harun Abu Quza‘ah or Harun ibn Quza‘ah. Imam al-Bukhari said concerning him: “This man’s hadith is baseless; no one else says it.” al-Azdi said that this man was abandoned. (Ibn ‘Adi, al-Kamil 7/128; al-Dhahabi, Mizan al-I‘tidal 7/63, 67; Ibn Hajar, Lisan al-Mizan 6/180, 183). Second, the Companion’s name is not mentioned in this chain, making it mursal, or disconnected. Fourth hadith: “Whoever comes to me as a visitor, driven by no need other than visiting me, it will be my responsibility to intercede for him on the Day of Resurrection.” Al-Daraqutni, al-Tabarani, al-Dhahabi, and other hadith scholars compiled this hadith. In their chains they narrate through ‘Abdullah ibn Muhammad al-‘Abbadi, who said: Muslim (Maslamah) ibn Salim al-Juhani told us, ‘Abdullah (or ‘Ubaydullah) ibn ‘Umar told me, from Nafi‘, from Salim, from ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Umar, who said that the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said…… (al-Tabarani, al-Mu‘jam al-Kabir 12/291). The narrator of this hadith, Muslim ibn Salim al-Juhani, was a weak and unreliable narrator. Some have given his name as Maslamah. Abu Dawud al-Sijistani said that this man was not thiqah, or trustworthy. Imam al-Haythami said that he was weak. (al-Dhahabi, Mizan al-I‘tidal 6/415; Ibn Hajar, Lisan al-Mizan 6/29). Fifth hadith: “Whoever visits me in Madinah with sincere righteousness or seeking reward, I will be his witness and intercessor on the Day of Resurrection.” Ibn Abi al-Dunya, al-Bayhaqi, and other hadith scholars compiled this hadith. Through multiple chains, they narrated it from Muhammad ibn Isma‘il ibn Abi Fudayk. He said: Abu al-Musayyina Sulayman ibn Yazid al-Ka‘bi told us, from Anas ibn Malik (ra), that the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said….. (al-Bayhaqi, Shu‘ab al-Iman 3/489–490; Ibn Hajar, Talkhis al-Habir 2/267). The hadith scholars described the narrator Abu al-Musayyina Sulayman ibn Yazid as weak. Abu Hatim al-Razi said that the man was not a strong narrator and narrated objectionable hadiths. Al-Daraqutni also called him weak. However, Ibn Hibban included him among the trustworthy narrators. Imam al-Tirmidhi also considered him acceptable. Reconciling the opinions of the hadith scholars, Ibn Hajar described him as weak. It is noteworthy here that Abu al-Musayyina was not a Tabi‘i, but a Tabi‘ al-Tabi‘i. Ibn Hibban, Ibn Hajar, and other hadith scholars stated that he did not learn hadith from any Companion; rather, he heard hadith from the Tabi‘un. Therefore, the chain is disconnected, or munqati‘. (Ibn Hibban, al-Thiqat 6/395; al-Dhahabi, Mizan al-I‘tidal 3/321; Ibn Hajar, Lisan al-Mizan 7/481; al-Albani, Da‘if al-Jami‘, p. 808). Sixth hadith: “May Allah have mercy on the person who visited me, holding the reins of his camel in his hand.” Concerning this statement, Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani, al-Sakhawi, al-Suyuti, Ibn ‘Iraq, Mulla ‘Ali al-Qari, al-Shawkani, Darwish al-Hut, and other hadith scholars said that it is a baseless fabrication. (Ibn ‘Iraq, Tanzih 2/176; al-Sakhawi, al-Maqasid, p. 235; Mulla ‘Ali al-Qari, al-Asrar, p. 128; Darwish al-Hut, Asna al-Matalib, p. 114). Of the six hadiths above, the sixth is unanimously a baseless fabricated statement. From the remaining five hadiths, one may learn the merit of visiting the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) or meeting him. The first hadith explicitly mentions visiting the grave. The third, fourth, and fifth hadiths mention visiting the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ). The second mentions either of the two. Visiting his blessed grave after the death of the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) may also be regarded as visiting him. We see that all the chains of the hadiths conveying this meaning are quite weak. Ibn Taymiyyah, Ibn ‘Abd al-Hadi, and other hadith scholars described the hadiths conveying this meaning as entirely baseless. Al-Albani judged them da‘if, or weak. (Ibn ‘Abd al-Hadi, al-Sarim al-Munki, pp. 29–246; al-Albani, Irwa’ al-Ghalil 4/333–335). However, we find that the second chain of the first hadith, and the chains of the fourth and fifth hadiths contain no liar or completely majhul, or unknown, narrator. Therefore, these chains strengthen one another and gain acceptability because of their plurality. B. Granting the status of visiting during his lifetime to one who visits after his death Seventh hadith: “Whoever performs Hajj and then visits my grave after my death is as though he visited me during my lifetime.” Al-Daraqutni, al-Tabarani, al-Bayhaqi, and other hadith scholars compiled this hadith. They all narrated it through a narrator named Hafs ibn Sulayman. Hafs said that Layth ibn Abi Sulaym told him, Mujahid told him, from ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Umar, that the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said…… (al-Daraqutni, al-Sunan 2/278; Shu‘ab al-Iman 3/489; al-Tabarani, al-Mu‘jam al-Awsat 1/94). After citing the hadith, al-Bayhaqi said: “Only Hafs narrated this hadith. He is weak.” (al-Bayhaqi, al-Sunan al-Kubra 5/246; Shu‘ab al-Iman 3/489). The sole narrator of this hadith, Hafs ibn Sulayman (180 AH), was a famous and reliable reciter. However, he was extremely weak in hadith narration. He was so occupied with Qur’anic recitation and related matters that he devoted no time at all to memorizing, reviewing, and accurately narrating hadith. Consequently, so many errors were found in his narrations that all hadith scholars except Imam Ahmad regarded him as extremely weak and abandoned. Imam Ahmad considered him more or less acceptable. Al-Dhahabi, Ibn Hajar, and other hadith scholars said that he himself was truthful, but made extremely many errors when narrating hadith, reversed chains, changed narrators’ names, altered the text, and could not distinguish truth from falsehood. For this reason he is regarded as an abandoned narrator. Imam al-Bukhari described him as abandoned; he only described those accused of lying as abandoned. Abu Hatim al-Razi, Ibn ‘Adi, Ibn Hibban, and other hadith scholars also called him extremely weak. Ibn Khirash described him as a narrator of fabricated hadiths. (al-Dhahabi, Mizan al-I‘tidal 2/319–321; Ibn Hajar, Taqrib, p. 172). The teacher of Hafs in this chain, Layth ibn Abi Sulaym, was also a somewhat weak narrator. He was a great scholar, worshipper, and truthful narrator. However, his memory deteriorated toward the end of his life. Imam Muslim accepted his narration as supporting evidence. The compilers of the four Sunan—al-Tirmidhi, al-Nasa’i, Abu Dawud, and Ibn Majah—accepted his narration. (al-Dhahabi, Mizan al-I‘tidal 5/509; Ibn Hajar, Taqrib, p. 464). Eighth hadith: “Whoever visits my grave after my death is as though he visited me during my lifetime.” (al-Tabarani, al-Mu‘jam al-Kabir 12/406; al-Mu‘jam al-Awsat 1/94). Imam al-Tabarani, citing the hadith, said: Ahmad ibn Rashidin told me, ‘Ali ibn al-Hasan ibn Harun al-Ansari told us, Layth, the grandson of Layth ibn Abi Sulaym’s daughter, told me, ‘A’ishah bint Yunus, the wife of Layth ibn Abi Sulaym, told me, Mujahid told her, from Ibn ‘Umar, that the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said….. Almost all the narrators in this chain are unknown or weak. Al-Tabarani’s teacher, Ahmad ibn Rashidin (292 AH), was weak. Some hadith scholars called him a liar. (Ibn Hajar, Lisan al-Mizan 1/257). Nothing is known about his teacher, ‘Ali ibn al-Hasan. Likewise, his teacher Layth and Layth’s teacher, the woman named ‘A’ishah, are entirely unknown. Therefore, the chain is wholly unacceptable. (al-Haythami, Majma‘ al-Zawa’id 4/2; al-Albani, al-Da‘ifah 1/123–124). Ninth hadith: “Whoever visits me after my death is as though he visited me during my lifetime.” Imam al-Daraqutni, al-Bayhaqi, and other hadith scholars compiled this hadith. The hadith scholars found contradictions and disorder in the narration of its chain. Its chain and text have been presented in two ways. First chain: The second-century hadith scholar Waki‘ ibn al-Jarrah (197 AH) said: Khalid ibn Abi Khalid and Abu ‘Awn both narrated to us from al-Sha‘bi and Aswad ibn Maymun, from Harun Abu Quza‘ah, from a man of the family of Hatib, from Hatib (ra). Hatib said that the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said…… (al-Daraqutni, al-Sunan 2/278; al-Bayhaqi, al-Sunan al-Kubra 5/245; Shu‘ab al-Iman 4/488). We previously saw, while discussing the chain of the third hadith, that Harun Abu Quza‘ah is an unknown, unacceptable, and abandoned narrator. In this chain, Harun’s teacher, ‘a man of the family of Hatib,’ is not merely unknown; he is unidentified as well. 2Y1 Second chain: The third-century hadith scholar Yusuf ibn Musa said: Waki‘ ibn al-Jarrah told us, Maymun ibn Siwar (Siwar ibn Maymun) told us, Harun Abu Quza‘ah told me… (al-Bayhaqi, Shu‘ab al-Iman 4/488; Ibn Hajar, Lisan al-Mizan 6/180). This chain is even weaker than the first because, as we saw in the discussion of the third hadith above, Siwar ibn Maymun is an unknown person. The three hadiths above indicate that a believer who visits the grave of the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) even after his death will attain the status of having met him during his lifetime. We have seen that all three chains are extremely weak. The first and second chains contain narrators accused of lying. The third contains an abandoned narrator. In addition, the chains contain completely unidentified and unknown narrators. For this reason, Ibn Taymiyyah, Ibn ‘Abd al-Hadi, al-Albani, and other hadith scholars judged these hadiths to be mawdu‘, or fabricated. In addition to their unacceptable chains, they claimed that the hadiths also contradict the fundamental spirit of Islam in meaning. Ibn Taymiyyah said that it is clearly false. This statement contradicts the religion of Muslims. For a believer who visits or meets the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) during his lifetime is counted among his Companions. …Even by performing the major obligatory duties abundantly, a believer of a later age can never attain the status of a Companion. How, then, could he attain the same status as a Companion through performing a recommended act of worship?! (al-Albani, al-Da‘ifah 1/120–124; Irwa’ al-Ghalil 4/335–341). C. Expressing displeasure toward one who abandons ziyarat Tenth hadith: “Whoever performed my Hajj but did not visit me treated me discourteously or behaved impudently toward me.” In other words: “Whoever did not visit or meet me treated me discourteously or behaved impudently toward me.” No hadith compiler included this hadith in any hadith collection. Some hadith scholars compiled it in biographical works on weak and lying narrators. They compiled it through only one chain. They mention that a man named Muhammad ibn Muhammad ibn al-Nu‘man said: My grandfather al-Nu‘man ibn Shibl told me, Malik ibn Anas told me, from Nafi‘, from ‘Abdullah ibn ‘Umar (ra), that the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said…….” Two narrators in this chain are extremely weak and accused of narrating fabricated hadiths. First, the man named al-Nu‘man ibn Shibl, who narrated from Imam Malik, was an extremely weak narrator. Some hadith scholars called him a liar. Second, his grandson Muhammad ibn Muhammad also became known as a liar and fabricator. Imam al-Daraqutni, Ibn Hibban, Ibn al-Jawzi, al-Saghani, al-Dhahabi, Ibn Hajar, Darwish al-Hut, al-Shawkani, al-Albani, and other hadith scholars described the hadith as fabricated. Al-Daraqutni and other hadith scholars stated that the person responsible for the fabrication was Muhammad ibn Muhammad ibn al-Nu‘man, not his grandfather Nu‘man ibn Shibl. (Ibn Hibban, al-Majruhin 4/74; Ibn ‘Adi, al-Kamil 7/14; Darwish al-Hut, Asna al-Matalib, p. 229; al-Albani, al-Da‘ifah 1/119). Eleventh hadith: “If any member of my ummah has the means or opportunity, yet does not visit or meet me, then he has no excuse.” Ibn al-Najjar compiled this hadith in his work entitled Tarikh al-Madinah. (al-‘Iraqi, al-Mughni, with Ihya’ ‘Ulum al-Din 1/306; al-Sakhawi, al-Maqasid, p. 424). Its chain is as follows: “From Muhammad ibn Muqatil, from Ja‘far ibn Harun, from Sam‘an ibn Mahdi, from Anas (ra), that the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said……” (Ibn ‘Abd al-Hadi, al-Sarim, p. 234; al-Albani, Irwa’ al-Ghalil 4/340). This chain is famous as a fabricated chain. Muhammad ibn Muqatil al-Razi (248 AH) was somewhat weak, but was not abandoned. The person from whom he heard this hadith in this chain, Ja‘far ibn Harun, was known as a narrator of false hadiths and a promoter of fabricated hadiths. (al-Dhahabi, Mizan al-I‘tidal 2/151; Ibn Hajar, Lisan al-Mizan 2/131). Concerning Sam‘an ibn Mahdi, known as his teacher, Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani and al-Dhahabi said: “Almost nothing is known about this man. A fabricated manuscript attributed to Anas ibn Malik (ra) is circulated in his name. It contains approximately 300 hadiths. Muhammad ibn Muqatil al-Razi narrated those hadiths from this Sam‘an through Ja‘far ibn Harun al-Wasiti. May Allah disgrace the fabricators of these hadiths.” (al-Dhahabi, Mizan al-I‘tidal 3/328; Ibn Hajar, Lisan al-Mizan 3/114). Apparently, this hadith is also part of the aforementioned fabricated manuscript. In any case, its chain contains several lying narrators. Twelfth hadith: “Whoever found means or prosperity but did not come to me treated me discourteously or behaved impudently toward me.” Imam al-Ghazali mentioned this hadith without a chain in his work Ihya’ ‘Ulum al-Din. It cannot be found with a chain in any book anywhere. ‘Allamah al-Subki, al-‘Iraqi, al-Sakhawi, al-‘Ajluni, al-Shawkani, and other hadith scholars confirmed that this statement is baseless and fabricated. (al-‘Ajluni, Kashf al-Khafa 2/366; al-Shawkani, al-Fawa’id 1/153). The three hadiths above suggest the sin of not visiting or meeting the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ)—during his lifetime or after his death. However, we see that the third hadith is entirely baseless and fabricated, while the chains of the first and second contain several liars. From the discussion above, we have seen that all hadiths concerning the merit of visiting the blessed grave of the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) were narrated through weak chains. Perhaps for this reason, the authors of the six famous collections, the compilers of other authentic works, Imam Malik, Imam Ahmad, and other hadith scholars did not compile these hadiths in their works. Because of the weakness of their chains, some hadith scholars broadly judged all these hadiths to be fabricated, extremely weak, or wholly unacceptable. On the other hand, some hadith scholars held that all of them, taken together, should be accepted as authentic or hasan. Ibn Taymiyyah, Ibn al-Jawzi, Ibn ‘Abd al-Hadi, and other hadith scholars described all hadiths concerning visiting the sacred grave of the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) as fabricated or entirely weak and unacceptable. In contrast, the eminent hadith scholars Abu ‘Ali Ibn al-Sakan, ‘Abd al-Haqq al-Ishbili, al-Subki, al-Sakhawi, Ibn Hajar al-Makki, and others considered hadiths conveying this meaning acceptable. (Ibn Taymiyyah, Majmu‘ al-Fatawa 27/29–36, 114–288; al-Sakhawi, al-Maqasid, pp. 410, 424). However, I have not learned of anyone who discussed the chains while making a distinction in meaning like that made in the discussion above. As an insignificant student of knowledge, it appears to me that all hadiths narrated in the third sense—that is, expressing displeasure toward one who abandons ziyarat—are fabricated and baseless. The hadiths conveying the second meaning, namely granting the status of a lifetime visitor to one who visits the grave after the Prophet’s death, are extremely weak or fabricated. The hadiths conveying the first meaning—that is, glad tidings of intercession for the visitor—should be regarded as being of the hasan level, because five hadiths have been narrated with the same meaning. The weakness of three of their chains can be supplemented. The second chain of the first hadith, and the chains of the fourth and fifth hadiths, contain no narrator accused of lying or abandoned. Therefore, because of the plurality of chains, they should be regarded as hasan li-ghayrihi. Allah knows best. 3. The necessity of performing Hajj before marriage In our country, because of certain baseless notions and superstitions—such as ‘whether one will be able to retain Hajj,’ ‘one must marry off one’s sons and daughters before Hajj,’ ‘one must arrange Hajj for one’s parents before Hajj,’ or that parental permission is required…..—Muslims generally do not perform Hajj before old age, although delaying it after Hajj becomes obligatory is not at all appropriate. In Indonesia, the matter is the opposite. If one does not perform Hajj at the beginning of youth, before marriage, it seems that one has not really performed Hajj. A fabricated hadith is the cause of this. This fabricated hadith states: “Whoever marries before performing Hajj begins with sin.” The hadith scholars unanimously agree that it is fabricated. (Ibn ‘Adi, al-Kamil 1/364; al-Dhahabi, Mizan al-I‘tidal 1/458; al-Suyuti, al-La’ali 2/120; Ibn ‘Iraq, Tanzih 2/167; al-Shawkani, al-Fawa’id 1/138). 4. That people’s rights are also forgiven because of Hajj Some widely circulated hadiths concerning Hajj state that, during the Farewell Hajj, the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) prayed to Allah for the forgiveness of all the pilgrims’ sins. At first, the Almighty Allah informed him that all the pilgrim’s sins except those involving the rights of people would be forgiven. After repeated supplication, Allah informed him that all the pilgrim’s sins, even sins involving people’s rights, would be forgiven….. Several hadiths have been narrated with this meaning. The chain of every one of them is extremely weak. Every chain contains either a liar, an extremely weak narrator, or an unidentified or unknown narrator. Some hadith scholars held that, because of their multiple chains, they were weak but not outright fabricated. Others held that all hadiths with this meaning were fabricated and baseless, because every hadith contains liars and abandoned narrators. Moreover, they convey a meaning contrary to that established by various authentic hadiths. Various authentic hadiths establish that Allah does not forgive rights owed to people unless the person concerned forgives them. Such rights are not even forgiven through jihad and martyrdom. (Ibn al-Jawzi, al-Mawdu‘at 2/124–127; al-Dhahabi, Tartib al-Mawdu‘at, p. 185; al-Suyuti, al-La’ali 2/120–124; al-Mundhiri, al-Targhib 2/129–131).

2.14. Matters Concerning Dhikr, Supplication, Salat upon the Prophet, Salutation, etc.

2.14.1. Matters Concerning Qur’an Recitation Many sound hadiths have been narrated concerning the virtues of various surahs and verses of the Noble Qur’an, as mentioned earlier. Yet many false statements have also been circulated as hadiths on these subjects. Various books popular in our country contain many such unreliable and fabricated statements. It should be noted that two kinds of statements concerning Qur’anic surahs and verses are current in our country. One concerns virtues, rank in the Hereafter, reward, Allah’s mercy, and similar matters. The other concerns practices intended to produce various worldly results. From Umar al-Mawsili’s discussion, I have learned that some sound hadiths have been narrated concerning the virtues of various surahs and verses. Most of the remaining hadiths in circulation, however, are weak or fabricated. In particular, the statements concerning the virtue of each surah placed at the end of the Tafsir al-Kashshaf and Tafsir al-Baydawi were essentially taken from the lengthy fabricated hadith on this subject. Most statements current in our society about the virtues of the Panj Surahs are fabricated or weak. There are very many weak and fabricated hadiths on this topic, and a separate book would be needed to discuss them in detail. This book has already become quite large. Therefore, we are not discussing the weak and fabricated hadiths concerning virtues here. Rather, we mention some practices and remedies. 2.14.2. Matters Concerning Practices, Remedies and Khatms Reciting Qur’anic verses as ruqyah and practicing them to seek release from illnesses and calamities is permissible. The hadiths instruct using the Qur’an for ruqyah. It is also permissible to perform ruqyah with supplications from hadith or any statement having a good meaning. Ruqyah and such remedies are of two kinds. Some are reported in various hadiths; this type is limited. Most ruqyah practices current in our society were devised, based on the experiences of later pious people. For example, it is said that reciting a certain surah or verse a certain number of times, for a certain number of days, or at a particular time produces a certain result or cures a certain illness. Such practices and remedies arose from the experiences of various pious people. A person may use something based on personal practice or experience as a remedy or as ruqyah shar‘iyyah. But if he believes that it has a special virtue or is established by hadith, he will be attributing a lie to the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) in his name. Moreover, as practices and remedies, we should restrict ourselves to those mentioned in sound hadiths, along with their supplications and devotional acts. Among the fabricated practices or remedies found in some books current in our country in the name of hadith are the following: 1. La hawla wa la quwwata…a practice for eliminating poverty There are many sound hadiths concerning the virtue of the dhikr “La hawla wa la quwwata illa billah.” Various hadiths command saying this phrase frequently. They state that it is one of the treasures of Paradise and a means of forgiveness and abundant reward. I have cited some sound hadiths on this subject in my book Rahe Belayat. But various books current in our country mention, as a hadith, that “Whoever recites this phrase one hundred times every day will never remain poor.” This appears to be fabricated. 2. A practice for becoming free of debt In a hadith narrated by Ali (ﷺ), the Messenger of Allah said that if the following words are said, Allah will repay even a mountain of debt: “O Allah, protect me from the unlawful through what You have made lawful for me, and make me independent of everyone besides You through Your grace and blessing.” The hadith is sound (Sunan al-Tirmidhi 5/560; Mustadrak al-Hakim 1/721). However, no hadith instructs reciting this supplication on a particular day or a particular number of times. Some popular books state: “It is narrated in hadith that whoever recites this supplication seventy times on Friday will soon be made wealthy and fortunate by Allah. Hazrat Ali said that if, before and after the Friday prayer, one recites salat upon the Prophet one hundred times each and this supplication 570 times, even a mountain of debt will be repaid within a short time…” These reports appear baseless and fabricated. 3. A practice involving Surah al-Fatihah It is said concerning the virtue of Surah al-Fatihah: “Whatever intention it is recited for will be fulfilled.” This is a baseless fabrication. Another statement says: “Surah al-Fatihah is a cure for all illnesses.” This has been reported in one weak hadith (al-Sakhawi, al-Maqasid, p. 305, no. 734; Mulla Ali al-Qari, al-Asrar, p. 165). 4. Various kinds of khatm Various kinds of khatm are widespread. Usually, a khatm is recited for two reasons: (1) to ward off calamities or obtain worldly results, and (2) to send reward to the dead. Both kinds are fabricated and baseless. Most of the words recited in these khatms are very good words—verses of the Noble Qur’an or supplications and dhikrs conforming to the Sunnah. But no sound or weak hadith mentions any prescribed virtue, importance, or instruction for reciting them one hundred thousand or 125,000 times. All these khatms are fabricated, and hadiths have also been invented around them. The Khatm of Bismillah, Khatm of the Supplication of Yunus, Khatm of the Kalimah, and the like belong to this category. It is said that reciting Bismillah 125,000 times produces a certain result, or that reciting the Supplication of Yunus 125,000 times produces another result. All these were devised from the experiences of pious people; none is a hadith. Sound hadiths exist concerning the virtue and reward of the Tasmiyah (Bismillah), Tahlil (La ilaha illallah), and the Supplication of Yunus (see the author’s other book, Rahe Belayat, p. 89). But no sound hadith has been narrated concerning reciting them a prescribed number of times, such as 100,000 or 125,000. Some supplications recited in the Khatm of Khwajagan conform to the Sunnah and some are fabricated, but the method itself is entirely invented. 2.14.3. Matters Concerning Dhikr, Wird, Supplication, etc. 1. Virtues and practices involving the various holy names of Allah The Exalted Allah has stated in the Noble Qur’an: وَلِلَّهِ الْأَسْمَاءُ الْحُسْنَىٰ فَادْعُوهُ بِهَا ۖ وَذَرُوا الَّذِينَ يُلْحِدُونَ فِي أَسْمَائِهِ ۚ سَيُجْزَوْنَ مَا كَانُوا يَعْمَلُونَ [٧:١٨٠] —“And Allah has the Most Beautiful Names, so call upon Him by them. Leave those who distort His Names. They will soon be repaid for what they used to do” (Surah al-A‘raf: verse 180). In hadiths compiled in Sahih al-Bukhari, Sahih Muslim and other books, Abu Hurayrah (ﷺ) reported that the Messenger of Allah said: “Indeed, Allah has ninety-nine names, one hundred minus one. Whoever preserves or enumerates them will enter Paradise” (Sahih al-Bukhari 2/981, no. 2585; Sahih Muslim 4/2063, no. 2677). This hadith does not list the names. A hadith containing ninety-nine names was compiled by Imam al-Tirmidhi, Ibn Majah and several other hadith scholars (Sunan al-Tirmidhi 5/530, no. 3507; Mustadrak al-Hakim 1/62–63). Most hadith scholars, however, considered this enumeration weak. Imam al-Tirmidhi himself discussed its weakness after compiling it. Some scholars say that the list of ninety-nine names was not narrated from the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) or Abu Hurayrah (ﷺ). A later narrator compiled them from various scholars in light of the Qur’an and inserted them into the hadith. Many names mentioned in the Qur’an are absent from the list. In the Qur’an, Allah is most often called Rabb, or Lord; this name too is absent from the list (Ibn Hajar al-Asqalani, Fath al-Bari 11/217). A thoughtful Muslim may ask why the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) gave ninety-nine names without giving their list. The scholars answer that some important matters are partially concealed to increase the believer’s eagerness to act, such as Laylat al-Qadr and the time when supplication is accepted on Friday. Likewise, rather than specifying a list of names, people were instructed to preserve Allah’s names so that a servant would eagerly read and preserve all the names of Allah found in the Noble Qur’an, call upon Allah by them, and supplicate to Him through them (Ibn Hajar, Fath al-Bari 11/217–218, 11/221; al-Nawawi, Sharh Sahih Muslim 17/5). Some hadith scholars regarded the list compiled by Imam al-Tirmidhi as generally acceptable (al-Nawawi, al-Adhkar, p. 151; Jam‘ al-Usul 4/173–175). In any event, an eager worshipper may memorize these names. In addition, Allah’s blessed names mentioned in the Noble Qur’an should be preserved through regular Qur’an recitation. I have discussed in detail, with chains of transmission, the sound hadiths concerning how to supplicate before Allah through the medium of His blessed names, what the majestic Allah’s Ism al-A‘zam is, and how to supplicate to Allah through it, in my book Rahe Belayat. Many books popular in our country mention further virtues of these names: that daily recitation prevents food shortages, removes illness, enables one to see the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) in a dream, fulfills wishes, or produces a certain result if a particular name is recited or written a specified number of times for a specified number of days or in a specified manner. None of such statements is from the Qur’an or hadith. Some pious people practiced or taught certain practices and remedies based on personal experience. But to regard these as the word of Allah or the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ), or to narrate them as hadith, is to lie in the name of the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ). Some of the fabricated hadiths on this subject are as follows: 2. “The dhikr of Allah is the best dhikr.” Various books cite the following as a hadith: “The dhikr of Allah is the best dhikr.” The meaning is correct: the dhikr of Allah must indeed be the best dhikr. Whose dhikr could be better than the dhikr of Allah? But the statement is not a hadith. It is not known to have been narrated through any sound or weak chain. 3. “Whoever mentions Allah’s name at night, light will continue to shine in his heart and, after his death, in his grave” (Mawlawi Shamsul Huda, Ne‘amul Qur’an, p. 17). 4. Whoever mentions Allah’s name one hundred times at dawn and recites each of the following six names once—Jalla Jalaluhu, wa ‘amma nawaluhu, wa jalla thana’uhu, wa taqaddasat asma’uhu, wa a‘zama shanuhu, wa la ilaha ghayruhu—will be freed from sins as though just born from his mother’s womb. His record of deeds will be clean, and he will certainly enter Paradise (Mawlawi Shamsul Huda, Ne‘amul Qur’an, p. 36). All these are baseless statements attributed to the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ). 5. The special dhikr of the kalimah “La ilaha illallah” The greatest phrase for remembering Allah is “La ilaha illallah.” The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said: “The best dhikr is La ilaha illallah” (al-Tirmidhi, al-Sunan 5/462; Ibn Majah, al-Sunan 2/1249; al-Hakim, al-Mustadrak 1/676, 681). He also said: “Say La ilaha illallah abundantly” (al-Hakim, al-Mustadrak 4/285; al-Haythami, Majma‘ al-Zawa’id 1/52, 2/211, 10/82). Elsewhere he said: “The words most beloved to Allah are four: Subhanallah, alhamdulillah, la ilaha illallah, and Allahu akbar. You may say any of these four in whatever order you wish” (Sahih Muslim 3/1685, no. 2137). I have discussed many sound and hasan hadiths concerning the importance, virtues, number and time of these dhikrs in Rahe Belayat. We saw there that the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) did not teach any special method for chanting or pronouncing them. Nowhere is it reported, even in a single sound or weak hadith, that he taught anyone to perform dhikr by stretching the words, loudly, with bodily movements, focusing on a lata’if, or by any other special method. The essential point is to perform dhikr with attention and correct pronunciation; each person will receive reward according to his attention and emotion. Later scholars, pirs and spiritual guides prescribed certain methods to develop the attention and emotion of disciples. These were their own innovations and temporary exercises for concentrating the disciples. Yet fabricators also invented statements on this subject. One such baseless statement and fabricated hadith is as follows: “Once Hazrat Ali (ﷺ) said to the Prophet, ‘O Messenger of Allah, tell me an easy and simple way to attain nearness to Allah.’ The Prophet (ﷺ) said, ‘Continue a dhikr.’ Ali asked, ‘How shall I do it?’ He said, ‘Close your eyes and say La ilaha illallah three times with me.’ Hazrat Ali (ﷺ) then taught it to Hasan al-Basri, and from Hasan al-Basri, through the chain of spiritual guides, it reached us.” Another version of this story is: “Ali (ﷺ) said: ‘The Messenger of Allah waited for revelation to learn the easiest and simplest path to attaining God. Then Jibril came and taught him the kalimah La ilaha illallah three times. The Messenger of Allah repeated it as Jibril pronounced it. He then taught it to Ali, and Ali taught it to the other Companions.’” This hadith is merely a baseless statement circulated orally. It has not been compiled in any book with a sound, weak or fabricated chain. For this reason, Shah Waliullah Dehlawi stated that the statement is heard only from the mouths of the spiritual elders of the tariqahs, and no basis for it can be found (Shah Waliullah, al-Qawl al-Jamil, pp. 38–39). 6. Wird after the five daily prayers Countless sound hadiths mention various forms of dhikr, supplication and wird after the five daily prayers, which the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) himself performed or instructed the Companions and the Ummah to perform. Besides these, however, certain wirds are widely practiced in our country that were invented by people of later times and are not found in any hadith. The following wird is very famous: After Fajr, recite “Huwal-Hayyul-Qayyum” one hundred times; after Zuhr, “Huwal-Aliyyul-Azim” one hundred times; after Asr, “Huwar-Rahmanur-Rahim” one hundred times; after Maghrib, “Huwal-Ghafurur-Rahim” one hundred times; and after Isha, “Huwal-Latiful-Khabir” one hundred times. All these phrases are beautiful, and there is no harm in reciting them. But no virtue for them has been reported in hadith. The Qur’an and hadith contain no instruction to recite them this many times or at these particular times. We should practice the wird taught by the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ). 7. “Allahumma antas-salam…” after the five daily prayers It is reported in various sound hadiths that after ending the obligatory prayer with salam, the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) would say: “O Allah, You are Peace, and from You is peace. O Possessor of majesty and honor, You are blessed” (Sahih Muslim 1/414, no. 591). 8. The Supplication of Kanz al-‘Arsh This is one of the false, fabricated and baseless supplications in circulation. The phrases it contains have good meanings, but they were not reported together in this form in any hadith. Everything said about the virtue and reward of these phrases is false. 9. The Supplication of ‘Ahd-namah Another fabricated and baseless supplication is the Supplication of ‘Ahd-namah. Various popular books mention it in different forms. The basic phrases of this supplication are found in hadiths transmitted through several weak chains. These hadiths encourage reciting it morning and evening and state as a virtue that whoever recites it morning and evening will be saved on the Day of Resurrection (Ahmad, al-Musnad 1/412; al-Hakim, al-Mustadrak 2/409; al-Tabari, al-Tafsir 11/154). ﷺAll the popular statements about practicing this supplication and its virtues are fabricated. Consider this example of such baseless talk: “Many virtues of the Supplication of ‘Ahd-namah have been narrated in Tirmidhi, Shami and Naf‘aul Khala’iq. The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said: ‘Whoever lives an Islamic life and recites ‘Ahd-namah one hundred times in his life will depart this world with faith, and I will guarantee his entry into Paradise.’ … Jabir (ﷺ) reported: ‘I heard from the Messenger of Allah that Allah has placed three thousand illnesses in the human body. Physicians know and treat one thousand of them. No one but Allah knows about two thousand illnesses. If someone writes ‘Ahd-namah and carries it, or recites it twice, Allah will protect him from two thousand diseases’… (Maw. Muhammad Amjad Husain, Wazifa-e-Salihin, p. 144).” All this is baseless talk and fabrication in the name of hadith. These statements are not narrated with any sound or weak chain in any hadith collection—not even in Sunan al-Tirmidhi. 10. The Supplication of Qadah Another fabricated and baseless supplication in circulation is the Supplication of Qadah. Everything said about its virtues is fabricated. 11. The Supplication of Jamilah Everything said about the Supplication of Jamilah and its virtues is fabricated. 12. Haft Haykal This supplication called Haft Haykal mainly contains various verses of the Noble Qur’an. The division, arrangement and use of these verses in this manner were devised from the experiences of certain pious people. Everything said about their use and virtues is the statement of various people, not the statement or hadith of the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ). 13. The Supplication of Aman Another fabricated and baseless supplication in circulation is the Supplication of Aman. Its phrases have good meanings, but no hadith was transmitted in this form, and everything said about its virtues is fabricated. 14. The Supplication of Hizb al-Bahr A popular supplication and practice is the Supplication of Hizb al-Bahr. Many phrases used in it were collected from the Qur’an and hadith, but the supplication was not transmitted in this form in any hadith. No importance, virtue or benefit for it has been reported in hadith. Many pious people practiced it, and some obtained results. Some may think that it would not be wrong to regard these supplications as supplications composed by pious people rather than as the words of the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ). But what harm is there in practicing them as supplications composed by the pious? It is true that a believer may supplicate with any good words. But he may not announce invented rewards or results for these supplications. In addition, many brief and beautiful supplications are mentioned in sound hadiths. The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) himself said that practicing them would produce such results or better ones. Because these fabricated, attractive supplications have become widespread, those Prophetic supplications have been abandoned and neglected. These supplications may bear the touch of piety, but they do not possess the light of prophethood. It is better for us to practice supplications emanating from the light of prophethood. Besides supplicating and obtaining results, we will thereby gain the additional reward and blessing of reviving the Sunnah and supplicating in the words of the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ). In my book Rahe Belayat, I have cited many supplications, invocations, dhikrs and wirds from sound hadiths. Interested readers may consult it. 2.14.4. Matters Concerning Salat upon the Prophet and Salutation The Exalted Allah has commanded believers in the Noble Qur’an to send salat and salam upon His noble Prophet (ﷺ). In light of hadith, we know that sending salat and salam upon the Noble Messenger (ﷺ) is a highly important act of worship and a very great righteous deed. I have discussed the virtues of salat and salam in detail in Rahe Belayat on the basis of sound hadiths. Among the virtues established by sound hadith are: (1) Allah Himself sends salat and salam upon the person who sends salat and salam. When he sends salat once, Allah sends ten salats (mercies) upon him, raises him ten degrees, records ten rewards for him and forgives ten sins. When he sends salam once, Allah sends salam upon him ten times. (2) As long as the person sending salat remains engaged in it, the angels continue supplicating for him. When he sends salat once, Allah and His angels send seventy salams (mercy and supplication) upon him. (3) The salat and salam of the person who sends them are conveyed, along with his identity, to the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ). (4) The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) himself will supplicate for the person who sends salat. (5) Sending salat is a means of obtaining the Prophet’s (ﷺ) intercession on the Day of Resurrection. (6) The Exalted Allah will accept the supplication of the person who sends salat and resolve all his worldly and otherworldly problems. Despite these many sound virtues of salat, some emotional people have circulated many more fabricated statements as hadiths concerning its virtues. “Allahumma salli ‘ala Muhammad” is the minimum form of salat. Adding “salam” fulfills the minimum form of salutation, such as “Allahumma salli ‘ala Muhammadin wa sallim” or “Sallallahu ‘ala Muhammadin wa sallam.” Sound hadiths contain the Ibrahimic salat and one or two short forms. I have included the forms reported in hadith in Rahe Belayat and Ihya al-Sunan. All the various fixed formulas of salat current in our society are fabricated. Some widespread fabricated or unreliable statements concerning salat and salam 1. The virtue of sending a fixed number of salats on Friday Sound hadiths instruct sending abundant salat on Friday. But no sound hadith mentions sending a fixed number on that day. There is no sound hadith stating that sending salat forty, fifty, one hundred, one thousand, or any similar number of times during that day or night will forgive forty, fifty or one hundred years of sins, or bring a special reward or virtue. A believer should send as much salat and salam as possible on that day. He may set a wird according to his convenience and ability, such as deciding to recite it one hundred, three hundred or five hundred times on Friday or every day. 2. Salat al-Mahi, or the Fish Salat All the events described in Salat al-Mahi, the “Fish Salat,” are false and fabricated. Likewise, everything narrated about its virtues is false and fabricated. This fabricated story says that during the time of the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) a man used to sit on a riverbank and recite salat. A sick fish in the river learned it by listening and continued reciting it, whereupon it became healthy. Later, the fish was caught in a Jewish man’s net. The Jew’s wife tried and failed to cut it. Finally, it was thrown into boiling oil. The fish continued reciting the salat while circling in the boiling oil. Amazed, the Jew took it to the Messenger of Allah’s (ﷺ) presence. Through his supplication, the fish gained the power of speech and related everything. The entire story is a baseless lie. 3. Salat al-Taj, Tunajjina, Futuhat, Shifa and others Salat al-Taj, Salat al-Tunajjina, Salat al-Futuhat, Salat al-Shifa, Salat al-Khayr, Salat al-Akbar, Salat al-Laqqi, Salat al-Hazari, Salat al-Ruhi, Salat al-Bir, Salat al-Nariyyah, Salat al-Shafi‘i, Salat al-Ghawthiyyah, Salat al-Muhammadiyyah, and so on. All these salats were composed by people of later times. Everything said about their virtues is fabricated and false. In most cases, the wording of these salats consists of good statements. But there is no special instruction from the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) to recite them in these forms. Their arrangement was devised by later people. In most cases, reciting them may bring the general reward of sending salat, but the statements reported about their special virtues are fabricated. For example, “Allahumma salli ‘ala Muhammadin nabiyyil-ummiyyi” is a form of salat supported by hadith. Likewise, there is nothing objectionable in the words “Allahumma salli ‘ala Muhammadin bi ‘adadi kulli da’in wa bi ‘adadi kulli ‘illatin wa shifa.” Through this phrase one may hope for the general reward of sending salat. But no special virtue for these has been established from the Messenger of Allah. The same applies to all fabricated salats. Some fabricated salats contain objectionable statements.

2.15. Matters Concerning Good and Bad Omens, Progress and Decline

There is a widespread belief in various commonly available Islamic books and among ordinary Muslims in our society that a certain day, weekday, lunar date, time, or month is inauspicious, ill-fated, and so on. Similarly, it is believed that various actions have evil consequences and that because of such actions people become poor or suffer harm. This belief or notion is not merely an anti-Islamic superstition; moreover, it is stated in the noble Hadith that such a belief causes one’s faith to be destroyed. Allah’s Messenger (ﷺ) strongly disliked believing in ill omens, bad luck, misfortune, and the like, as well as anticipatory despair and pessimism regarding any matter. Conversely, he liked positive thinking, a sense of auspiciousness, and good expectations in all actions and under all circumstances. (Al-Bukhari, al-Sahih 5/2171; Muslim, al-Sahih 4/1745). Positive thinking and good expectations mean continuing to hope for Allah’s mercy. On the other hand, thoughts of ill omens and misfortune mean despairing of Allah’s mercy. Allah’s Messenger (ﷺ) said: “Believing in or attempting to determine an ill omen or bad luck is shirk; believing in or attempting to determine an ill omen or bad luck is shirk; believing in or attempting to determine an ill omen or bad luck is shirk” (al-Tirmidhi, al-Sunan 4/160; Ibn Hibban, al-Sahih 13/491; al-Hakim, al-Mustadrak 1/64; Abu Dawud, al-Sunan 4/17; Ibn Majah, al-Sunan 2/1170. Al-Tirmidhi, Ibn Hibban, al-Hakim, and others deemed the hadith authentic). Many other hadiths have been narrated on this subject. Whatever Allah has prohibited is a cause of misfortune. Allah prohibited it for His servants precisely because it is a cause of misfortune and harm for them. When people engage in such actions, they are deprived of Allah’s mercy and blessings. The haram prohibited by Allah is of two types: (1) Huquq Allah, or haram relating to Allah’s rights, and (2) Huquq al-‘Ibad, or haram relating to the rights of creation. In light of various hadiths, it is known that for the second type of haram, people will be punished not only with punishment in the Hereafter but also through worldly harm in this life. Committing oppression; taking another person’s property against his will through extortion, dowry, or any other unethical means; giving short measure or weight; violating the rights of parents, wives, neighbors, the poor, orphans, relatives, or any other people; depriving someone of what is due to him; harming any of Allah’s creatures or any person; or generally violating Huquq al-‘Ibad are causes of worldly decline. However, believing that any creature of Allah, any weekday, date, lunar date, direction, or any permissible action has an evil influence is a grave wrong and contrary to faith. Many such statements circulate in our society. They are not always called hadiths. But readers generally assume that they must be the words of Allah and His Messenger (ﷺ). Otherwise, how would we know that this causes misfortune and that causes misfortune? Believing these things is contrary to faith. Moreover, considering them to be the words of Allah or His Messenger (ﷺ) is an additional and even graver wrong. 2.15.1. Matters Relating to Time and Place 1. Saturday, Tuesday, the New Moon, the Full Moon, and the Like Believing Saturday, Tuesday, the new moon, the full moon, any lunar date, place, or time to be a cause of misfortune, ill luck, or evil is a despicable falsehood and a severely anti-Islamic belief. Statements such as “bamboo must not be cut on a certain day,” “one must not cut one’s hair,” or “a certain action must not be performed on a certain day,” and so on, are all baseless false superstitions. Believing them incurs the sin of shirk. 2. Lunar Eclipses, Solar Eclipses, Rainbows, Comets, and the Like Everything said about natural phenomena such as lunar eclipses, solar eclipses, rainbows, and comets leaving some special good or bad effect is fabricated and false. Statements such as “a certain thing happens when the moon is eclipsed,” or “a certain result occurs when a rainbow is seen at a certain time,” are fabricated. (Ibn ‘Iraq, Tanzih 1/178, 179, 191; al-Shawkani, al-Fawa’id 2/568). 3. Wednesday or the Last Wednesday of the Month Several fabricated hadiths circulate describing Wednesday or the last Wednesday of the month as unlucky, inauspicious, ill-fated, or bad, or condemning Wednesday. All of them are false. All the days, months, and lunar dates created by Allah are good. Some days or times are better than others, such as Friday, Monday, and Thursday, which are more blessed. However, there is no such thing as misfortune, ill luck, or an ill-fated time. (Ibn al-Jawzi, al-Mawdu’at 1/374–376; al-Suyuti, al-La’ali 1/481–486; al-Sakhawi, al-Maqasid, p. 364; Mulla ‘Ali al-Qari, al-Asrar, pp. 199–200). 2.15.2. Actions Considered Inauspicious or Causes of Decline Various commonly available books state that the following actions are inauspicious, produce bad results, or bring poverty: 1. Reciting salat upon the Prophet while walking and without ablution. 2. Reciting the Noble Qur’an or any verse of the Qur’an without ablution. These two statements are, on the one hand, fabricated and contrary to Islam; on the other hand, they prevent the believer from performing an extremely important act of worship. If one is in a state requiring ghusl, one may not recite the Qur’an. However, Qur’anic recitation without ablution is permissible. Allah’s Messenger (ﷺ) and the Companions used to recite the Qur’an from memory both with and without ablution. It is good to recite dhikr, supplications, salat upon the Prophet, greetings, and so on while in a state of ablution, but ablution and ghusl are not obligatory. Rather, the Sunnah of Allah’s Messenger (ﷺ) and the Companions is to keep one’s tongue and heart occupied with the dhikr of Allah, salat upon the Prophet, and supplication in every state—while walking, traveling, sitting, or lying down, with or without ablution. 3. Putting on a turban while sitting. 4. Putting on pajamas while standing. 5. Wiping one’s face with a sleeve or hem of one’s clothing. 6. Eating and drinking from broken utensils or a broken glass. 7. Eating while walking along the road. 8. Going to the toilet bareheaded. 9. Eating bareheaded. 10. Sewing while wearing the garment being sewn. 11. Extinguishing a lamp by blowing on it. 12. Using a broken comb. 13. Using a broken pen. 14. Cutting one’s nails with one’s teeth. 15. Sweeping the house at night. 16. Sweeping the house with clothing. 17. Looking at one’s face in a mirror at night. 18. Cleaning one’s teeth while walking. 19. Cleaning one’s teeth with a cloth. Many other statements of this kind are also widespread. All of them are fabricated. Believing that any permissible action can cause some harm or evil influence is a grave wrong. Considering these things to be hadiths is an even graver wrong. 2.15.3. Actions Considered Auspicious or Causes of Advancement All the actions that Almighty Allah has commanded His servants to perform bring them worldly and otherworldly welfare, goodness, and advancement. All obligatory, necessary, Sunnah, voluntary, and recommended actions bring people worldly blessings in addition to the reward of the Hereafter. Allah has said: وَلَوْ أَنَّ أَهْلَ الْقُرَىٰ آمَنُوا وَاتَّقَوْا لَفَتَحْنَا عَلَيْهِم بَرَكَاتٍ مِّنَ السَّمَاءِ وَالْأَرْضِ —“If the people of the towns had believed and been mindful of Allah (avoiding the acts Allah prohibited and performing the acts He commanded), We would have opened for them the blessings and goodness of the heavens and the earth.” (Surah 7, al-A’raf: verse 96). Thus, we see that every act of faith and God-consciousness brings blessings. However, Allah is most pleased with acts of serving creation and promoting human welfare, and various hadiths mention that for such actions He grants people special blessings in this world in addition to the reward of the Hereafter. Many fabricated statements are also made in this regard. For example, it is said that a person can become wealthy and fortunate by performing the following actions: 1. Wearing a ring made of agate. 2. Cutting one’s nails on Thursday. 3. Always using shoes or wooden sandals. 4. Keeping vinegar in the house. 5. Wearing yellow shoes. 6. Whoever wears a ring made of emerald or agate will never become poor and will always remain cheerful. Similarly, all statements that a certain action makes a person healthy and strong, increases memory, harms health or weakens memory, improves eyesight, reduces eyesight, brings old age, makes the body fat, weakens the body, and so on, are fabricated.

2.16. Matters Relating to Clothing and Adornment

‘In the book “The Clothing of the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) and the Rulings on Clothing in Islam,” I have discussed in detail the ṣaḥīḥ, ḍaʿīf and mawḍūʿ hadiths concerning clothing. Here I have mentioned some fabricated or forged hadiths on this subject. 2.16.1. Concerning shirts and trousers 1. The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) had only one shirt: It is narrated from Abu al-Dardaʾ (may Allah be pleased with him): “The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) had only one qamīṣ. He did not have more than one qamīṣ.” (al-Ṭabarānī, al-Muʿjam al-Awsaṭ 6/31; al-Haythamī, Majmaʿ al-Zawāʾid 5/121). Imam al-Bukhari and other hadith scholars have stated that the sole narrator of this hadith, Saʿīd ibn Maysarah, used to fabricate and report false hadiths. (al-Dhahabī, Mīzān al-Iʿtidāl 3/233). In light of various hadiths, it appears that the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) wore various kinds of shirts. Some reached down to the ankles. Some were somewhat shorter and reached below the knees. Some had sleeves extending to the tips of the fingers. Others had somewhat shorter sleeves reaching to the wrists. 2. The shirt had no buttons, or it had loops From various hadiths we learn that the shirt of the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) had buttons, although he generally did not fasten them. Various hadiths state that “the buttons of his shirt” were open. This suggests that the shirt of the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) had three or more buttons. Generally, he did not fasten any of these buttons. Some have said that his shirt had no buttons, or that it had fabric loops instead of buttons. We know of no ṣaḥīḥ hadith narrated on this matter. Imam al-Ghazali (d. 505 AH) wrote: “The buttons of his qamīṣ and shirt were fastened. Sometimes he left the buttons open during ṣalāt and outside ṣalāt.” (al-Ghazali, Iḥyāʾ ʿUlūm al-Dīn 2/405). 3. Wearing trousers standing or sitting Some books state that wearing trousers while seated is sunnah or adab. I have not come across any ṣaḥīḥ or ḍaʿīf hadith on this matter. It appears to be the opinion of scholars of later periods. 2.16.2. Concerning caps 4. The turban over the cap as a Muslim emblem Imam Abu Dawud and al-Tirmidhi both compiled a hadith through their teacher Qutaybah ibn Saʿīd. They both say: Qutaybah told us that Muhammad ibn Rabīʿah narrated the hadith to him from a man named Abu al-Hasan al-ʿAsqalani, who narrated it from a man named Jaʿfar ibn Muhammad ibn Rukānah, who narrated it from his father: The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) wrestled with Rukānah and defeated him. Rukānah further said, “I heard the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) say: ‘The distinction between us and the polytheists is the turban over the cap.’” (al-Tirmidhi, al-Sunan 4/247; Abu Dawud, al-Sunan 4/55). After mentioning this hadith, Imam al-Tirmidhi explained that its chain of transmission was not reliable at all. He said that the sole narrator of the hadith was Abu al-Hasan al-ʿAsqalani. No one knew this man’s identity. Moreover, he claimed to have heard the hadith from Rukānah’s son. Nothing is known about whether Rukānah had a son; if he did, who he was or what kind of person he was is unknown. Therefore, the chain of the hadith is wholly unacceptable. Imam al-Tirmidhi’s teacher, the imam of hadith scholars, Imam al-Bukhari, also described the weakness of this hadith in his book al-Tārīkh al-Kabīr. He said that the chain of the hadith consisted of unknown and unfamiliar people. It is also not known that any of them heard the hadith from another. (al-Bukhari, al-Tārīkh al-Kabīr 1/82). Imams al-Dhahabi, al-ʿAjluni and others regarded it as mawḍūʿ, or fabricated. (al-Hakim, al-Mustadrak 3/511; al-Bayhaqi, Shuʿab al-Īmān 5/175; al-Dhahabi, Mīzān al-Iʿtidāl 6/145; al-ʿAjluni, Kashf al-Khafāʾ 2/95). Furthermore, ʿAbd al-Raʾūf al-Munawi, Mulla ʿAli al-Qari, ʿAbd al-Rahman al-Mubarakpuri, Shams al-Haqq al-ʿAzimabadi and other hadith scholars have discussed that the meaning of this hadith contradicts reality. The hadith could have two meanings: 1. The polytheists wear only a cap, while we wear a cap together with a turban. 2. The polytheists wear only a turban, while we wear a turban over a cap. Both meanings contradict the practice of the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) and his Companions, because various hadiths show that they sometimes wore only a cap and sometimes only a turban. Imam al-Ghazali (d. 505 AH) said: “The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) sometimes wore a cap beneath a turban. Sometimes he wore only a cap without a turban. He also wore only a cap without a turban. At other times he wore only a turban without a cap.” (Ibn al-Qayyim, Zād al-Maʿād 1/130). 5. The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ)’s five-sectioned cap It is narrated from Abu Hurayrah (may Allah be pleased with him): “I saw on the head of the Messenger of Allah—may Allah bless him and grant him peace—a tall, raised cap divided into five sections.” The hadith was compiled by the scholar Abu Nuʿaym al-Isfahani in his compilation Musnad al-Imam Abi Hanifah. He said: ʿAbdullah ibn Muhammad ibn Jaʿfar and Abu Ahmad al-Jurjani told me; Ahmad ibn ʿAbdullah ibn Yusuf told us; Abu Usamah told us; Dahhak ibn Hajar told us; Abu Qatadah al-Harrani told us that Abu Hanifah told us, and ʿAtaʾ narrated it to him from Abu Hurayrah, who narrated this hadith. (Abu Nuʿaym al-Isfahani, Musnad al-Imam Abi Hanifah, p. 137). This hadith is forged. Only Qatadah al-Harrani (d. 207 AH) narrated it from Imam Abu Hanifah. No one besides this al-Harrani used these words. None of Imam Abu Hanifah’s numerous students narrated this hadith with these words. Rather, they narrated the opposite wording. According to the narrations of the other students, Imam Abu Hanifah said that ʿAtaʾ narrated from Abu Hurayrah that the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) had a white Shami cap. (Mulla ʿAli al-Qari, Sharḥ Musnad Abi Hanifah, p. 142). Thus, we have seen that according to the narrations of the others the hadith says “Shami cap,” whereas in the narration of Abu Qatadah al-Harrani it says “Khুমasi cap.” From this we understand that Abu Hanifah said “Shami cap,” as all his students reported, and Abu Qatadah made a mistake, intentionally or unintentionally. Alternatively, he may have read the word in a distorted form. Above all, Abu Qatadah was an abandoned narrator. Imam al-Bukhari said that Abu Qatadah al-Harrani was munkar al-hadith. When Imam al-Bukhari called someone munkar al-hadith, or “objectionable narrator,” he meant that he knew the person to report false hadiths. However, instead of directly calling someone a liar, he used the expression munkar al-hadith or similar terms. Moreover, the hadith was narrated from Abu Qatadah al-Harrani only by Dahhak ibn Hujur. The kunya of this Dahhak ibn Hujur was Abu ʿAbdullah al-Manbiji. He too was an extremely weak narrator. Imam al-Daraqutni and other hadith scholars have stated that he fabricated false hadiths. (Imam al-Bukhari, al-Tārīkh al-Kabīr 5/219; al-Dhahabi, Mīzān al-Iʿtidāl 4/319; Ibn Hajar al-ʿAsqalani, Lisān al-Mīzān 7/72). For this reason, the scholar Abu Nuʿaym al-Isfahani, after mentioning the hadith, said: “Only Dahhak narrated this hadith from Abu Qatadah. No one else narrated it from Abu Hanifah or from Abu Qatadah.” (Abu Nuʿaym, Musnad al-Imam Abi Hanifah, p. 137). 2.16.3. Concerning turbans 6. The length of the turban How many cubits long should a turban be, or what is the sunnah concerning the length of the turban? Many statements circulate on this subject. All of them are baseless or speculative. The length of the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ)’s turban has not been reported in any hadith. (al-ʿAzimabadi, ʿAwn al-Maʿbūd 11/89). 7. Wearing a turban while standing Some books state that “wearing a turban while standing” is sunnah or adab. I have not come across any ṣaḥīḥ or ḍaʿīf hadith on this subject. This too appears to be the opinion of scholars of later periods. (al-Munawi, Fayḍ al-Qadīr 4/362). 8. The color of the turban: white and green turbans The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) wore a black turban most of the time. From the hadiths we see that he used a black turban everywhere—in Madinah, while travelling and in battle. Some scholars of the eighth or ninth century AH stated that the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) used a black turban while staying in Madinah. They presented no proof or hadith in support of this claim. Therefore, the prominent hadith scholar of the ninth century AH, Imam al-Sakhawi (d. 902 AH), called this statement baseless. (Muhammad ibn Yusuf al-Shami, Sīrah Shāmiyyah 7/276). We know that the turban is a matter of clothing and worldly practice. Therefore, without an explicit instruction in the hadith, we cannot declare any color impermissible. However, evidence is needed to say that a particular color is sunnah. Various hadiths generally encourage wearing green clothing. But we have not learned that the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) ever used green for a turban. Nor have we found any ṣaḥīḥ or ḍaʿīf hadith stating that the angels ever wore green turbans. Similarly, we have not learned that he ever wore a white turban. Some chainless Israelite reports state that the Tābiʿī Kaʿb al-Ahbar said: When Jesus (peace be upon him) descends to earth, he will have a green turban on his head. (al-Munawi, Fayḍ al-Qadīr 2/538). 9. The virtue of the turban Various hadiths show that the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) and the Companions wore turbans. However, there is no ṣaḥīḥ hadith encouraging the use of a turban. Everything narrated and circulated on this subject is baseless, fabricated or extremely weak. The hadiths on this matter may be divided into two categories: first, hadiths encouraging wearing a turban as ordinary clothing; second, hadiths encouraging performing prayer while wearing a turban. All hadiths narrated with either meaning are extremely weak and close to fabricated. In particular, all hadiths narrated with the second meaning are unquestionably forged and fabricated. It should be noted that in the book The Clothing of the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) I discussed in detail the chains of these hadiths. I also presented the identities of the lying fabricators in each chain. Here I have mentioned the hadiths briefly. Interested readers can learn the rest of the discussion from the book on clothing. First: The turban for beauty and status Among the forged or extremely weak hadiths narrated to encourage wearing the turban as a symbol of beauty and status are the following: 9.1. The turban increases patience and is the crown of the Arabs A fabricated hadith states: “Wear turbans; this will increase your patience. The turban is the crown, or royal diadem, of the Arabs.” (al-Hakim, al-Mustadrak 4/214; al-Bayhaqi, Shuʿab al-Īmān 5/175; al-Sakhawi, al-Maqāṣid 297). 9.2. The turban is the crown of the Arabs; removing it means defeat Another fabricated hadith states: “The turban is the crown of the Arab nation. When they cast off the turban, their status will also disappear, or Allah will destroy their status.” (Ibid.). 9.3. The turban is the Muslim’s crown; go to the mosque wearing a turban or bareheaded Another fabricated hadith states: “Come to the mosque completely bareheaded, and come wearing a turban, headband or scarf—meaning that when opportunity and convenience permit, come to the mosque wearing a turban rather than bareheaded—for the turban is the Muslim’s crown.” (Ibn ʿAdi, al-Kāmil 6/417–419; al-Albani, Ḍaʿīf al-Jāmiʿ, p. 6; al-Ḍaʿīfah 3/459). 9.4. The turban is the believer’s dignity and the Arabs’ status Another extremely weak and forged hadith states: “The turban is the believer’s dignity and the Arabs’ status. When the Arabs abandon the turban, their status will be ruined.” (al-ʿAjluni, Kashf al-Khafāʾ 2/94; al-Albani, Maqālāt, p. 134). 9.5. The turban is the Arabs’ crown, and sitting wrapped in cloth is their wall Another fabricated hadith states: “The turban is the crown of the Arabs; wrapping one’s two feet and back in a single cloth while sitting is their wall.” (al-Bayhaqi, Shuʿab al-Īmān 5/176; al-Sakhawi, al-Maqāṣid, p. 297). 9.6. Light on the Day of Resurrection for every fold of the turban Another fabricated hadith states: “The distinction between the polytheists and us is the turban over the cap. On the Day of Resurrection, light will be granted for every winding or fold of the turban on the head.” (al-Munawi, Fayḍ al-Qadīr 4/392; al-Albani, Maqālāt, p. 131). 9.7. Wear the turban to oppose the earlier nations Another weak or fabricated hadith states: “Wear turbans and oppose the nations before you.” (al-Bayhaqi, Shuʿab al-Īmān 5/176). 9.8. Honor through the turban and the banner Another weak or fabricated hadith states: “Allah honored this nation with the turban and the banner or standard.” (Saʿid ibn Mansur, al-Sunan 2/246). 9.9. The turban is the attire of the angels Another fabricated hadith states: “Wear turbans, for the turban is the sign or attire of the angels. And let the end of the turban hang down at the back.” (al-Bayhaqi, Shuʿab al-Īmān 5/176; al-Dhahabi, Mīzān al-Iʿtidāl 1/315, 6/294, 7/204; al-ʿAjluni, Kashf al-Khafāʾ 2/94). 9.10. The turban is a barrier between disbelief and faith A fabricated hadith circulated in the name of ʿAli (may Allah be pleased with him) states: “On the day of Ghadir Khumm, the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) put a turban on me and let its end hang down behind me. Then he said: ‘On the days of Badr and Hunayn, Allah helped me through angels wearing turbans in this manner.’ He also said: ‘The turban is a barrier between disbelief and faith.’” (al-Bayhaqi, al-Sunan al-Kubrā 10/14; al-Dhahabi, Mīzān al-Iʿtidāl 1/426, 4/67; al-Mughnī 1/91, 1/333, 2/784). The hadith scholars agree concerning most of these hadiths that they are statements fabricated by liars. There is slight disagreement regarding one or two hadiths. Some have described them as false hadiths, while others, without explicitly calling them false, have described them as extremely weak. (al-Sakhawi, al-Maqāṣid, pp. 297–298; al-ʿAjluni, Kashf al-Khafāʾ 2/94). Second: The virtue of prayer with a turban There is no report anywhere that the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) or his Companions ever wore a turban specifically for prayer. The question now is whether there is any additional reward for performing prayer while wearing a turban. Several hadiths have been narrated on this subject, and the hadith scholars agree that all of them are fabricated. It has been established that well-known lying narrators invented them. Here I mention the hadiths briefly. For a detailed discussion, see the book on clothing. 9.11. The virtue of wearing a white turban on Friday A false statement circulated through Anas ibn Malik (may Allah be pleased with him) says: “Some of Allah’s angels are assigned to the door of the congregational mosque on Friday; they seek Allah’s forgiveness for those who wear white turbans.” (al-Khatib al-Baghdadi, Tārīkh Baghdād 14/206; Ibn Hajar al-ʿAsqalani, Lisān al-Mīzān 6/261). 9.12. The virtue of wearing a turban on Friday A false statement attributed to Abu al-Dardaʾ (may Allah be pleased with him) says: “Allah and His angels send ṣalāt [mercy and blessings] upon those wearing turbans on Friday.” (al-Dhahabi, Mīzān al-Iʿtidāl 1/463; Ibn Hajar, Lisān al-Mīzān 1/488; al-ʿAjluni, Kashf al-Khafāʾ 2/95). 9.13. Two rakʿahs with a turban versus seventy without a turban A forged hadith attributed to Jabir (may Allah be pleased with him) states: “Two rakʿahs of prayer with a turban are better than seventy rakʿahs without a turban, or while bareheaded.” (al-Sakhawi, al-Maqāṣid, p. 298; al-ʿAjluni, Kashf al-Khafāʾ 2/33, 95). 9.14. Prayer with a turban is twenty-five times greater and Friday prayer with a turban is seventy times greater A forged statement circulated through Ibn ʿUmar (may Allah be pleased with him) says: “One prayer with a turban is equal to twenty-five prayers, and one Friday prayer with a turban is equal to seventy Friday prayers.” (al-Sakhawi, al-Maqāṣid, p. 298; Mulla ʿAli al-Qari, al-Asrār, p. 147; al-ʿAjluni, Kashf al-Khafāʾ 2/33, 95). 9.15. Ten thousand rewards for prayer with a turban The liars circulated through Anas ibn Malik: “There are 10,000 rewards for prayer with a turban.” (al-Sakhawi, al-Maqāṣid, p. 298; Mulla ʿAli al-Qari, al-Asrār, p. 147; al-ʿAjluni, Kashf al-Khafāʾ 2/33, 95). Thus, the hadith scholars agree that everything narrated concerning the virtue of performing prayer while wearing a turban is forged and fabricated. 2.16.4. Adornment and cleanliness 10. The time for wearing new clothing No reliable report has been found stating that the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) preferred any particular time for wearing new clothing. The following hadith has been narrated on this subject, which the hadith scholars have regarded as forged: “When the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) wore new clothing, he wore it on Friday.” (al-Khatib al-Baghdadi, Tārīkh Baghdād 4/136; Ibn Hajar, Tahdhīb 9/228; al-Albani, Ḍaʿīf al-Jāmiʿ, p. 629). 11. Trimming the beard Imam al-Tirmidhi says in his Sunan: Hannad told us; ʿUmar ibn Harun told us; he narrated from Usamah ibn Zayd, from ʿAmr ibn Shuʿayb, from his father, from his grandfather: “The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) used to take from the length and breadth of his beard [i.e., trim it].” After citing the hadith, Imam al-Tirmidhi said: “This hadith is gharīb [weak]. I heard Muhammad ibn Ismaʿil (Imam al-Bukhari) say that ʿUmar ibn Harun is a barely acceptable narrator. Every hadith narrated by him that I heard has some basis, but this hadith has no basis whatsoever. This hadith is known through no one other than ʿUmar ibn Harun.” (al-Tirmidhi, al-Sunan 5/94). From Imam al-Tirmidhi’s discussion we learn three things. (1) This hadith was not narrated through any chain other than ʿUmar ibn Harun. He alone claims that Usamah ibn Zayd al-Laythi told him this hadith. (2) According to Imam al-Bukhari, ʿUmar ibn Harun was not completely abandoned as a narrator. (3) Although a basis was found for ʿUmar ibn Harun’s other hadiths, this hadith was entirely baseless. Many other hadith scholars disagreed with Imam al-Bukhari on the second point. A brief discussion of the matter will help us gain a clear understanding of the hadith scholars’ method of scrutiny and of the disagreement concerning it. ʿUmar ibn Harun ibn Yazid al-Balkhi (d. 194 AH) was a fairly renowned hadith scholar of the second Islamic century. Another notable aspect of him was that he strongly opposed the Murjiʾah and supported the creed of the hadith scholars and Ahl al-Sunnah. As a result, many hadith scholars favored him. However, they noticed that he narrated in the names of some of his teachers many hadiths that none of those teachers’ other students narrated. Comparative examination by the hadith scholars exposed these reports. The hadith scholars differed over identifying the reason for this. Because of his reputation and his opposition to innovation, many hadith scholars held a favorable view of him. In explaining these solitary narrations, they said that perhaps, because he memorized many hadiths, he made unintentional mistakes in some of them. According to these scholars, he did not lie deliberately. Imam al-Bukhari and some other hadith scholars were among them. On the other hand, many other hadith scholars regarded him as an intentional liar. Their investigation exposed his lies. One of them was the renowned contemporary hadith scholar ʿAbdullah ibn al-Mubarak (d. 181 AH). He said: I went to Makkah to learn hadith from Imam Jaʿfar al-Sadiq (d. 148 AH), but he died before I arrived, so I could not learn anything from him. ʿUmar ibn Harun came to Makkah after me, yet he claimed that he had learned many hadiths from Imam Jaʿfar al-Sadiq. This proves that he was a liar. ʿAbd al-Rahman ibn Mahdi (d. 194 AH) said: ʿUmar ibn Harun came to us and narrated many hadiths from Jaʿfar ibn Muhammad (Imam Jaʿfar al-Sadiq). We then calculated ʿUmar ibn Harun’s birth and the date when he went to Makkah to study hadith. We found that Jaʿfar had died before ʿUmar went to Makkah. (ʿUmar was born around 125/130 AH. Jaʿfar al-Sadiq died in 148 AH. During this period ʿUmar did not set out to study hadith.) Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal said that ʿUmar ibn Harun once narrated some hadiths, and later narrated those same hadiths in the names of other teachers and with different chains. Therefore, we abandoned his hadiths. Through such investigations, it became apparent to them that ʿUmar ibn Harun deliberately lied in narrating hadiths. Among the other hadith scholars who called ʿUmar ibn Harun a liar or an abandoned narrator were Yahya ibn Saʿid al-Qattan, Yahya ibn Maʿin, al-Nasaʾi, Salih Jazrah, Abu Nuʿaym, Ibn Hibban and Ibn Hajar. (Ibn Hajar, Tahdhīb 7/441–443; Taqrīb, p. 417). For this reason, some hadith scholars regarded the hadith as forged. (al-Albani, Ḍaʿīf al-Jāmiʿ, p. 653; al-Ḍaʿīfah 1/456–457). It should be noted that it has been narrated through acceptable chains from Companions such as ʿAbdullah ibn ʿUmar (may Allah be pleased with him) and Abu Hurayrah that after Hajj or ʿUmrah, when they shaved their heads, they grasped the beard in their fists and cut whatever extended beyond the fist. (al-Bukhari, al-Ṣaḥīḥ 5/2209; al-Bayhaqi, al-Sunan al-Kubrā 5/104; Ibn Hajar, Fatḥ al-Bārī 10/350). For this reason, some jurists said that it is permissible to cut more than a fistful of the beard. Other jurists said that no matter how long the beard is, it should not be trimmed; only untidy parts may be trimmed. 12. Rings and the properties of stones Among the numerous false and fabricated hadiths circulating in society are hadiths describing the properties of various stones. Among the various satanic means that destroy a Muslim’s faith are astrology and the groups of fraudulent astrologers spread throughout society. Various ṣaḥīḥ hadiths state that if a Muslim visits an astrologer or fortune-teller, or believes what he says, he becomes a disbeliever and his faith is destroyed. It is not possible to discuss this subject here. One of the many deceptions of astrologers is prescribing stones. They advise different people to wear rings set with different kinds of stones. Some even cite hadiths on this subject. Believing that stones possess the power to bring benefit or harm is a belief contrary to faith. This belief entered Muslim society from various non-Muslim societies. The hadith scholars agree that all hadiths concerning the properties of stones are fabricated. No hadith narrated concerning various stones—such as emerald, ruby, zamrud, or agate—is reliable. (Mulla ʿAli al-Qari, al-Asrār, pp. 93–94; al-Maṣnūʿ, p. 51). 13. Seventy times more reward for praying while wearing a ring A fabricated hadith concerning the virtue of rings states: “Performing prayer while wearing a ring brings seventy times more reward than performing prayer without a ring.” The hadith scholars agree that this hadith is baseless and fabricated. It is established in ṣaḥīḥ hadiths that the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) used a ring. However, there is no ṣaḥīḥ hadith stating that he encouraged wearing a ring. (al-Sakhawi, al-Maqāṣid, p. 271; Mulla ʿAli al-Qari, al-Asrār, p. 146; al-Maṣnūʿ, p. 87; al-Zurqani, Mukhtaṣar al-Maqāṣid, p. 125). 14. Rules concerning cutting the nails Regularly cutting the nails is a ruling and sunnah of Islam. The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) did not teach any particular day for cutting the nails. Various books describe different procedures for cutting the nails, cutting them in reverse order, beginning with a particular nail and ending with another, and the virtues or consequences of cutting or not cutting the nails on particular days. All of these are practices introduced in later periods. The hadith scholars agree that everything circulated on this subject is invalid, fabricated and false. Following such rules for cutting the nails is also contrary to the sunnah. The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) instructed people to cut their nails. He did not teach any particular procedure or day. Therefore, cutting the nails on any day and in any manner fulfills this instruction. Imagining a special virtue in cutting the nails on a particular day or in a particular manner means considering the teaching of the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) incomplete and having the audacity to complete his teaching. May Allah grant us the ability to live our lives through the ṣaḥīḥ sunnah. (al-Sakhawi, al-Maqāṣid, pp. 313, 421; Mulla ʿAli al-Qari, al-Asrār, pp. 170, 241).

2.17. Concerning eating and drinking

1. Not speaking while eating Everything said in the sense that speaking while eating is forbidden or that one should not speak is fabricated. It is not merely fabricated; it is contrary to authentic hadiths. Various authentic hadiths state that the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) and the Companions used to engage in various kinds of conversation and tell stories while eating. (Sakhawi, al-Maqasid, p. 460; Mulla Ali al-Qari, al-Asrar, p. 265; al-Ajluni, Kashf al-Khafa 2/488; al-Zurqani, Mukhtasar al-Maqasid, p. 203). 2. Not giving salam while eating It is commonly believed that giving salam while eating is improper. It is said: “The person eating should not be greeted.” Sakhawi, Mulla Qari, and Ajluni say that this statement has no basis in hadith. However, if someone has food in his mouth, it is preferable not to greet him. If someone greets him in this condition, he is not obliged to reply. (Sakhawi, al-Maqasid, p. 460; Mulla Ali al-Qari, al-Asrar, p. 265). 3. Healing through a believer’s leftovers Another commonly circulated fabricated statement is: “There is healing in a believer’s leftovers,” or “There is healing in the saliva of a believer.” This has never been a hadith or a statement of the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) . (Sakhawi, al-Maqasid, p. 241; Mulla Ali al-Qari, al-Asrar, p. 129). Eating a believer’s leftovers is not a means of healing, but it is part of Islamic etiquette. The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) , his Companions, and Muslims of later generations would sit together and eat from the same vessel and drink water from the same vessel. This practice still exists in Arabia and Europe. In our country, because of the Indian caste system and untouchability practices, people dislike eating one another’s leftovers. These are attitudes opposed to Islam. 4. Healing by eating salt before and after meals This is another fabricated hadith common in our society: “When you eat, begin with salt and end with salt, for salt is an antidote to seventy kinds of disease….” The hadith scholars unanimously agree that this statement is false and fabricated. (Haythami, Zawa’id Musnad al-Harith 1/526; Daylami, al-Firdaws 3/33; Ibn al-Jawzi, al-Mawdu‘at 2/192). 5. The merit of the red dastarkhan Among the religious people of our country, eating on a red dastarkhan is a famous ‘Sunnah.’ No authentic or weak hadith can be found stating that the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) ever used a red dastarkhan or encouraged its use. Many fabricated statements circulate on this subject. One such fabrication is as follows: “The Revered and Accepted Messenger (ﷺ) ….used to have a red dastarkhan. …..Whoever eats on a red dastarkhan will receive one hundred rewards for every morsel and will have one hundred gates of Paradise assigned to him. In Paradise, that person will continually receive thousands of salutations and blessings from Jesus and the other prophets…. Then the Revered One swore and said: By the God in whose hand is my soul, whoever eats bread on a red dastarkhan will receive the reward of one ‘umrah pilgrimage and the reward of feeding one thousand hungry people to their fill. He will receive so much reward as though he had freed one thousand captives from among my community…….” Many more bizarre, absurd, and fabricated stories and lists of rewards have been presented in this manner. (Shaykh Muinuddin Chishti, Anisul Arwah, pp. 30–31). It should be noted here that many other mistaken or baseless notions about the dastarkhan also exist among us. The Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) used a dastarkhan. However, no instruction or encouragement from him to use it has been transmitted through an authentic chain. Nor did he object to eating without a dastarkhan. Yet we generally attach as much importance to the dastarkhan as we do not attach to many obligations commanded in the Qur’an and hadith, or to many prohibitions declared unlawful. Furthermore, because the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) used a dastarkhan, we assume that he ate by placing plates, bowls, and so on on top of it, as we do. This assumption is incorrect. In his time, a leather dastarkhan, or ‘sufrah,’ was used, and dates, cheese, clarified butter, and other foods were placed directly upon it—without any plates, bowls, basins, or the like. These foods were mixed on the dastarkhan when necessary, and food was eaten from it. (Bukhari, al-Sahih 5/2059).

2.18. Matters Relating to Marriage, Family, Society, and Other Subjects

2.18.1. Marriage, Family, and Married Life The family is an extremely important part of the Islamic way of life. Many instructions concerning the formation of a family, the mutual responsibilities, duties, and compassion of family members, the mutual responsibilities of husband and wife, and the merit of joy and fulfillment in married life have been transmitted in various authentic hadiths from the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ). Alongside them, countless fabricated, baseless, forged, or weak statements circulate in society in the name of hadith. What is most astonishing is that, leaving aside the authentic hadiths in the famous hadith collections, we write or verbally transmit countless fabricated statements without sources in various books. Because of the increased size of this book, it is not possible to mention authentic hadiths on every subject. I will only briefly mention some fabricated statements. 1. Two rak‘ahs of a married person equal seventy rak‘ahs of an unmarried person A commonly circulated forged hadith: “Two rak‘ahs of a married person are better than seventy rak‘ahs of an unmarried person.” 2. Two rak‘ahs of a married person equal eighty-two rak‘ahs of an unmarried person Another commonly circulated forged hadith: “Two rak‘ahs of a married person are better than seventy rak‘ahs of an unmarried person.” The Qur’an and hadith command marriage and mention its merits. But these two hadiths are forged and fabricated. (Ibn al-Jawzi, al-Mawdu‘at 2/164; Dhahabi, Mizan al-I‘tidal 6/21; Ibn Hajar, Lisan al-Mizan 5/15). 3. Scattering, picking up, or scrambling for dates at a wedding Several hadiths have been transmitted on this subject. None of them is authentic. Their chains are extremely weak and contain a lying narrator. Therefore, the hadith scholars regarded them as forged. (Tabarani, al-Awsat 1/44; Ibn al-Jawzi, al-Mawdu‘at 2/170–172; Dhahabi, Mizan al-I‘tidal 2/23; Ibn Hajar, Lisan al-Mizan 2/19). 4. Rules concerning marital intercourse Just as Islam strictly forbids extramarital relations, it also encourages married couples to enjoy all the pleasure, delight, amusement, and emotion of their life and youth. Islam has not prohibited or declared unlawful any day, date, weekday, lunar date, time, object, or method for the couple’s natural enjoyment. There is no veil between husband and wife, nor any prohibition on looking at or touching anything. Many fabricated, baseless, and forged hadiths contain various false statements about marital intercourse: Do not have marital relations at such-and-such a time, on such-and-such a day, weekday, night, or lunar date, or such-and-such harm will occur, or the child will suffer such-and-such illness…. Or do not have intercourse in such-and-such a manner or position, or such-and-such harm will occur, or the child will have such-and-such defect…. Or do not speak, look, or touch during intercourse, or such-and-such illness or harm will occur…. Or intercourse at such-and-such a time, weekday, or lunar date will make the child fortunate or unfortunate….. All of these are false, fabricated, and forged statements. It is reported in an authentic hadith that some such superstitions existed among the Jews of Medina. Then Almighty Allah revealed verse 223 of Surah al-Baqarah in the Noble Qur’an, refuting those superstitions. (Muslim, al-Sahih 2/1059; Ibn Kathir, Tafsir 1/262; Ibn al-Jawzi, al-Mawdu‘at 2/175–176; Albani, Da‘ifah 1/351–356). 5. A wife’s Paradise lies beneath her husband’s feet A widely circulated book states: “The Revered One (ﷺ) said, ‘The Paradise of wives lies beneath their husbands’ feet.’” (Mawlana Ghulam Rahman, Maqsudul Mominin, p. 328). This is a baseless and fabricated statement. It is not known to have been transmitted from the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) through any authentic, weak, or forged chain. The guidance of the Qur’an and hadith indicates that the Paradise of both husband and wife is in the hands of each other. Allah’s pleasure can be attained only by fulfilling their mutual responsibilities and rights. 6. The reward for pregnancy and childbirth In various places, the Noble Qur’an specifically mentions matters related to the honor of the mother’s womb, pregnancy, breastfeeding, and so forth. The Noble Hadith generally mentions ordinary rewards for managing a household, raising children, and similar matters. But the fabricators, according to their habit, invented many hadiths describing separate bizarre merits and rewards for every action or condition. These are widespread in our society. Indeed, various printed posters, calendars, and so forth are produced using such baseless statements. A popular book states: “The revered master (ﷺ) once addressed the women, saying: When a woman becomes pregnant by her husband, from then until the onset of labor she will constantly receive the reward of fasting during the day and performing voluntary prayers at night. When labor begins, God Almighty stores for her in Paradise such things that no inhabitant of earth, heaven, Paradise, or Hell knows of them. When she gives birth, until she weans the child, Allah grants her one good deed in exchange for every sip of milk. If she dies during that period, she will attain the rank of a martyr. If she must stay awake at night for her child, Allah will grant her, in place of that night’s wakefulness, the reward of freeing seventy slaves. Then he also said that these rewards will be given only to those women who always obeyed God’s command and their husbands’ command and were able to become included among the virtuous women. Women disobedient to Allah and their husbands will never receive those rewards.” (Mawlana Ghulam Rahman, Maqsudul Mominin, pp. 331–332). This statement is a willful translation of a forged hadith. (Ibn al-Jawzi, al-Mawdu‘at 2/178; Suyuti, al-La’ali 2/174–175; Ibn Iraq, Tanzih 2/203–204, 211). In addition, many more bizarre, false, fabricated, and baseless statements have been written in the name of hadith, filling page after page of these books with ink. Most of what is written as hadith in these books is fabricated and forged. 2.18.2. The Merit of Age and Respect for the Elderly The Qur’an and hadith teach various forms of social etiquette. One of them is respecting the elderly. Various hadiths command giving the older person the opportunity to speak first, handing an item to him first, or giving priority in similar social actions and honors. In general, we are commanded to respect the elderly and old people. An authentic hadith states: “Whoever does not show compassion to the young among us and does not recognize the rights of our elders (does not respect our elders) is not one of us.” (Hakim, al-Mustadrak 1/131; Tirmidhi, al-Sunan 4/321–322). In another hadith, the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) said: “Part of showing reverence to Allah is honoring a white-haired, white-bearded elderly Muslim….” (Abu Dawud, al-Sunan 4/261; Albani, Sahih al-Jami‘ 1/438). 1. Respecting the elderly is respecting Allah However, as with other matters, fabricators have also invented forged hadiths on this subject. Among the forged and extremely weak hadiths concerning it is: “Honor your shaykhs or elderly people, for honoring the elderly is part of honoring Allah.” The meaning of this hadith is close to that of the reliable hadiths mentioned above. However, no hadith with these words has been transmitted from the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ). Therefore, the hadith scholars unanimously agree that this wording is forged. (Ibn Iraq, Tanzih al-Shari‘ah, p. 207). 2. An elder of a lineage is like a prophet among the ummah Another forged hadith on this subject states: “The shaykh or elderly respected person of a people or tribe is like a prophet among the ummah.” (Ibn Iraq, Tanzih al-Shari‘ah, pp. 207–208). In the time of the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) and for several centuries afterward, shaykh had two meanings. The first was ‘an elderly person,’ which is the word’s original lexical or customary meaning. The second was ‘tribal chief.’ In later times, Sufi elders were also called shaykhs. The Persian word pir has the same meaning. After the word shaykh began to be used in a third sense, some people unaware of the fabrication of this hadith cited it as evidence for the status of the shaykhs or pir-mashayikh of the spiritual path. We know that pir-mashayikh have status as righteous servants and as teachers or guides on Allah’s path. However, their status has no connection with this forged hadith. 3. Punishment forgiven for a gray-haired old man or woman Another statement of this kind is fabricated. Allah says: “I feel ashamed to punish My servants in Hell after their hair and beards have turned gray within Islam.” (Ibn Iraq, Tanzih al-Shari‘ah, pp. 204–205). Another statement of this type is: “When someone reaches sixty years of age in Islam, Allah makes Hell forbidden for him.” (Ibn Iraq, Tanzih al-Shari‘ah, p. 227). 4. If one is not good by forty, prepare for Hell Another fabricated statement is: “When a person reaches forty but has not become more good than bad, let him prepare for Hell.” (Ibn Iraq, Tanzih 1/205–206).

2.19. Matters Relating to Language, Occupations, and Other Subjects

Islam is Allah’s chosen religion, din, or way of life for people of every age, language, and society. Here, no one has greater or lesser honor because of language, color, country, tribe, lineage, era, and so forth. This has been stated repeatedly in the Qur’an and hadith. From the second century of the Hijrah onward, many fabricators exploited ethnic, linguistic, occupational, and other divisions to invent various hadiths for and against different people. Some fabricated statements in favor of the Arabic language and against Persian; others did the opposite. Similarly, hadiths were fabricated in favor of and against Arabs, Persians, Turks, Negroes, Romans, Greeks, Africans, and various other peoples and races. Hadiths were fabricated in favor of and against various occupations such as goldsmiths, weavers, fishermen, barbers, and so forth. Their fabrications were exposed through examination and scrutiny of their chains. Moreover, they contradict Islamic values. The sole standard of human honor is taqwa, or integrity. Condemning someone or considering someone inferior on the basis of occupation, language, color, tribe, lineage, and so forth contradicts the clear guidance of the Qur’an and hadith. Among such forged hadiths are: 1. Love the Arabs for three reasons Arabic is the language of the Qur’an and the language of the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) . Therefore, all believers naturally love the Arabic language. Centering on this natural love of the language, fabricators invented many hadiths concerning the merit of loving Arabs. One commonly circulated hadith states: “Love the Arabs for three reasons: I am an Arab, the language of the Qur’an is Arabic, and the language of Paradise is Arabic.” Most hadith scholars have identified this statement as a fabricated and false hadith. Some have mentioned it as weak. Examination of its chain shows that the statement is fabricated. (Hakim, al-Mustadrak 4/97–98; Suyuti, al-La’ali 1/442; Sakhawi, al-Maqasid, pp. 45–46; Albani, Da‘ifah 1/293). 2. The grave sin of speaking Persian Hakim al-Naysaburi, in his al-Mustadrak, quotes the following hadith from the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) through Anas: “If someone speaks Persian, it will increase his filthy sins and diminish his humanity and personality.” The sole narrator of this hadith is Talhah ibn Zayd al-Ruqqi. He claimed that Imam al-Awza‘i narrated it to him from Yahya ibn Abi Kathir, from Anas. The hadith scholars described this man as abandoned and extremely objectionable. Therefore, Ibn al-Jawzi, Dhahabi, and other hadith imams considered the hadith fabricated and false. It is noteworthy that, in addition to the weakness of its chain, the hadith is rejected because its meaning contradicts Islamic values. (Ibn ‘Adi, al-Kamil 4/108–110; Hakim, al-Mustadrak 4/98; Dhahabi, Mizan al-I‘tidal 3/463–464; Ibn Iraq, Tanzih 2/291). 3. Condemning various occupations Among the forged hadiths that have had a lasting, harmful influence in our society are various fabricated hadiths directed against people in occupations such as weaving, tailoring, metalworking, barbering, and so forth. Islam encourages labor, work, and occupations. All kinds of occupations and work are praised. In contrast, these fabricators invented hadiths in the name of the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) condemning various occupations. For example: weavers or barbers are not equal in marital status to other Muslims; metalworkers or goldsmiths are the greatest liars; weavers will be the followers of the Dajjal; and condemnation of animal traders, butchers, or hunters. (Daylami, al-Firdaws 3/89; Ibn al-Jawzi, al-Mawdu‘at 1/162–163; Dhahabi, Mizan al-I‘tidal 5/174–176; Ibn Iraq, Tanzih 1/254–255; Albani, Da‘if al-Jami‘, pp. 562–563). The circulation of these forged hadiths has created anti-Islamic attitudes in Muslim society, including hatred of various occupations and hatred of work. 2.18. Some Other Fabricated Hadiths We know that one must work in this world for the Hereafter. However, a statement is commonly circulated in this sense that has no basis. It says: “The world is the farming ground of the Hereafter.” Although the meaning is correct, it is not a hadith. It has not been transmitted anywhere through an authentic, weak, or forged chain. Relying only on popular hearsay, many have written, said, and continue to say that it is a hadith. (Saghani, al-Mawdu‘at, p. 64; Sakhawi, al-Maqasid, p. 227; Mulla Qari, al-Asrar, p. 123; Darwish Hut, Asan al-Matalib, p. 110). 2. The good deeds of the righteous are sins for those close to them A commonly circulated statement that is generally cited as a hadith says: “The good deeds of righteous people are counted as sins for those close to them (the saints of Allah).” The hadith scholars unanimously agree that this is not a hadith; rather, it is a statement of the third-century saint Abu Sa‘id al-Kharrar (286 AH). (Ibn Taymiyyah, Ahadith al-Qussas, p. 84; Sakhawi, al-Maqasid, p. 199; Mulla Qari, al-Asrar, p. 113; al-Masnu‘, p. 64). 3. There is no salat without concentration Another baseless fabricated statement circulated as a ‘hadith’: “There is no salat without presence of heart.” The importance of concentration in salat can be understood from the Qur’an and various authentic hadiths. However, this statement is not a hadith; rather, it is an invented statement without a chain. 4. Die before you die A fabricated statement circulated in the name of hadith: “Die before you die.” Ibn Hajar al-‘Asqalani, Sakhawi, Mulla Ali al-Qari, and other hadith scholars unanimously agree that this is a baseless fabricated statement. (Sakhawi, al-Maqasid, p. 432; Mulla Qari, al-Asrar, p. 246; Darwish Hut, Asan al-Matalib, p. 235; Ajluni, Kashf al-Khafa 2/384). 5. The enormity of smoking A commonly circulated periodical (Anjuman Ahmadiyya Rahmania Sunniya, Chittagong, monthly Tarjuman, 25th year, issue 4, May–June 2005, p. 57) states that two fabricated hadiths against smoking are circulated in some areas of our country: “Whoever smoked is as though he drank the blood of the prophets.” “Whoever smoked is as though he committed adultery with his mother inside the Ka‘bah.” It is difficult to believe that anyone could utter such vile, filthy, and worthless statements as hadith. In every case, they are vile falsehoods and fabrications. 6. The madrasa is the Prophet’s house A very widely circulated and favorite hadith of preachers in our country is: “The mosque is Allah’s house, and the madrasa is my house.” This statement, made in the name of hadith, is a vile falsehood and fabrication. It has not been transmitted from the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) through any authentic or weak chain, let alone a forged or fabricated chain. The word madrasa itself was not used during the first two centuries of Islam. Final Words I am ending this discussion of fabrications in the name of hadith here. Countless forged hadiths are widespread around us. Their prevalence can be observed everywhere—in sermons, discussions, writing, and research. In this book I have tried to discuss some of these countless forged statements circulated and propagated in the name of hadith or the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ). If Almighty Allah grants mercy and tawfiq, I will discuss other common fabricated, false, and unreliable statements in subsequent volumes. With the hope of reviving the authentic Sunnah of Sayyid al-Mursalin, Rahmat lil-‘Alamin, Muhammad, the Messenger of Allah (ﷺ) , and of protecting ourselves from the grave sin of discussing, transmitting, practicing, or believing false, forged, baseless, or unreliable statements, I have attempted to write something on this subject despite my inadequacy and weakness. Naturally, there are many errors in it. I seek Allah’s forgiveness and repent for all my errors. Whatever beneficial exists in this humble effort is entirely due to Almighty Allah’s mercy and tawfiq. I pray at His holy court that He graciously accept this small effort in the service of the Sunnah of His beloved Messenger (ﷺ) and make it a means of salvation for me, my parents, and all readers. Amin! وصلى آللًه على محمد آلنبى آلأمى وآله وأصحبه أجمعين وآلحمد للًه رب آلع مين

Forgery in the Name of Hadith