Abdullah Faisal: 100 Fabricated Hadith (Part 2)

 بِسۡمِ اللّٰہِ الرَّحۡمٰنِ الرَّحِیۡمِ

اَلۡحَمۡدُ لِلّٰہِ رَبِّ الۡعٰلَمِیۡنَ

والصلاة والسلام عليك يا سيدي يا رسول الله

In the Name of Allah, the Rahman, the Merciful

All praise belongs to Allah, Lord of the Worlds

Blessing and Peace upon You, my Master, the Apostle of Allah

Continuing the series on Abdullah Faisal, the Jamaican neo-Kharijite and Takfiri extremist, and his controversial book 100 Fabricated Hadith, the eleventh supposedly fabricated Hadith he lists is the famous:

My Companions are like Stars

أَصْحَابِي كَالنُّجُومِ فَبِأَيِّهِمُ اقْتَدَيْتُمْ اهْتَدَيْتُمْ

“My Companions are like the stars. Whomsoever among them you follow you shall be guided.”

Although Abdullah Faisal claims the Hadith is fabricated, the truth is that since it has many routes of transmission some of the Muhaddithin consider it hasan (sound), though others consider it merely da’if (weak). To deem it fabricated is unwarranted, as even then its subject matter is affirmed in the Quran and other authentic Hadith with regard to the uprightness of the Sahabah, radi Allahu anhum.

The Sahabah are the best of the Ummah, and each of them was a true Believer, upon guidance and ultimately guaranteed salvation. Hence, Allah says:

وَالسّٰبِقُوۡنَ الۡاَوَّلُوۡنَ مِنَ الۡمُہٰجِرِیۡنَ وَالۡاَنۡصَارِ وَالَّذِیۡنَ اتَّبَعُوۡہُمۡ بِاِحۡسَانٍ ۙ رَّضِیَ اللّٰہُ عَنۡہُمۡ وَرَضُوۡا عَنۡہُ وَاَعَدَّ لَہُمۡ جَنّٰتٍ تَجۡرِیۡ تَحۡتَہَا الۡاَنۡہٰرُ خٰلِدِیۡنَ فِیۡہَاۤ اَبَدًا ؕ ذٰلِکَ الۡفَوۡزُ الۡعَظِیۡمُ

The first pioneers among the Emigrants and the Helpers, and those who follow them in goodness—Allah is pleased with them and they are pleased with Him. He has prepared for them gardens beneath which flow rivers. Therein shall they abide forever. That is the supreme attainment

(Surah 9, Ayah 100)

The Prophet, sall Allahu alayhi wasallam, said:

أُوصِيكُمْ بِأَصْحَابِي

“I bequeath upon you my Companions.” (Jami al-Tirmidhi: Kitab al-Fitan)

But Abdullah Faisal the Jamaican rejects this Hadith as according to him “As for the Sahaabahs they were not infallible as this fabricated Hadith is suggesting.” (100 Fabricated Hadith, p.35)

Yet by no means is the Hadith even remotely suggesting that the Sahabah, may Allah be pleased with them, are infallible. Must one be assumed infallible before being compared to the stars in the sense of being a means of guidance for the people?

The truth is that Abdullah Faisal and some other ghayr muqallidin (non-conformists) adhere to a methodology which has inherited some degree of rifd and Shiism in their attitude toward the Sahabah, which compels them to immediately dismiss this Hadith and declare it a fabrication. But we Sunni Muslims love this Hadith and even if it is weak we affirm its meaning as true and correct.

If not for women Allah would be worshipped properly

This is the thirteenth in Abdullah Faisal’s list. He criticizes it in the following words, “This fabricated Hadith is repulsive, and it’s against the spirit of Islamic brotherhood and sisterhood. It enhances male chauvinism, which is a form of kufr.” (ibid, p.39)

Whether the narration is actually fabricated is immaterial at this point since I am much more interested in the psychology behind Abdullah Faisal’s harsh criticism of its text. For if he considers this narration “repulsive” then one wonders what he might think of many authentic Ahadith with a similar message and sentiment, for instance:

مَا تَرَكْتُ بَعْدِي فِتْنَةً أَضَرَّ عَلَى الرِّجَالِ مِنَ النِّسَاءِ

“I am not leaving behind me a tribulation more harmful upon men than women.” (Sahih al-Bukhari & Sahih Muslim)

According to Abdullah Faisal’s logic, this Hadith is kufr because it enhances “male chauvinism”?

The reality is that Abdullah Faisal obviously converted to Islam still carrying in his mind and heart some of the foolish feminist notions and supposedly “progressive” and “egalitarian” Western cultural attitudes regarding women. One is at a loss as to what his basis is for declaring “male chauvinism” to be kufr. But it does fit the overall pattern found with Abdullah Faisal in declaring matters to be kufr quite carelessly, as is the hallmark of Kharijites and Takfiris.

That women are a harmful fitnah for men is a basis to reasonably conclude that if not for women men would be able to worship Allah at a higher level, but the divine wisdom ordained otherwise.

Scholars of my Ummah are like Israelite Prophets

This is the eighteenth narration mentioned by Abdullah Faisal. While I agree it has no basis in being attributed to the holy and blessed mouth of the Prophet Muhammad, sall Allahu alayhi wasallam, those like Abdullah Faisal who criticize its meaning have actually failed to understand it. This is part of a general pattern with him and other extremists in lacking the wisdom and intellectual capacity to appropriately interpret statements upon the tongues of the Muslims in a good way rather than rushing to condemnation and takfir. Abdullah Faisal says, “This fabricated Khabar is cited by Qadiyaanis, may Allah curse them, who claim that the possibility exist for prophets to come after Muhammad, sall Allahu alayhi wasallam.” (100 Fabricated Hadith, p.48)

It is true that the dajjal, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad, and his followers cited this narration to justify their heresy. But this saying is accepted by the Sufis who correctly interpret it to mean that the Ulama have a function that is similar to the Prophets in teaching and spiritually guiding the people. By no means does it mean that the Ulama are equal to the Prophets in rank or that attainment of Prophethood is possible for the Ulama after sayyiduna Muhammad, sall Allahu alayhi wasallam. Abdullah Faisal himself cites an authentic Hadith “The learned are the inheritors of the Prophets” (ibid) which is what this statement “the learned of my Ummah are like the Prophets of the Children of Israel” is pointing to. So even if it is not an actual Hadith of Prophet Muhammad it is still true and correct in its meaning.

In the course of his discussion on the nineteenth narration in his list, Abdullah Faisal digresses into a theological discussion concerning tawhid (monotheism), saying, “Tawheed has four branches and anyone who denies one is guilty of denying all, hence he has apostated from the Deen.” (ibid, p.51)

It is the supposed fourth branch of tawhid that is considered controversial, “Tawheed Haakimiya, i.e. to believe Allah, azza wa jall, is the only lawgiver.” (ibid, p.52)

But it should be borne in mind that none of the Salaf or the classical theologians, scholars and jurists of Sunni Islam ever explain tawhid as consisting of four branches with the fourth branch being tawhid al-hakimiyah, meaning that it is from tawhid to affirm that Allah is the “only lawgiver”.

The neo-Kharijites and extremist Takfiris have put forward this notion of tawhid al-hakimiyah to justify their wholesale takfir of large segments of the Muslim Ummah, and particularly the contemporary governments of the Muslims on the basis that they legislate and adhere to legislation that is manmade and therefore guilty of shirk!

We mainstream Sunni Muslims certainly affirm that Allah, holy and exalted is He, is the supreme legislator, and that all mankind is obligated to obey Allah, Whose judgment and legislation supersedes all manmade judgment and legislation.

Nevertheless, if this was a distinct branch of tawhid then none of the creation would be authorized to even legislate or make judgments in the discretionary matters of ijtihad in which the divine Shari’ah is either not explicit or falls silent. If hakimiyah is a distinct branch of tawhid, it would be shirk to even obey any Muslim caliph, emir, sultan, imam, ruler, qadi, etc., even if his commandment or law does not clash with the Shari’ah. That is because just as it is still shirk to worship anything or anyone as a minor god while acknowledging Allah as the supreme God, it therefore follows that to obey the creation as a lesser legislator while acknowledging Allah as the supreme legislator possessing the highest authority must also be shirk if hakimiyah is to be considered a matter connected to tawhid.

Yet, Allah Himself commands us to obey some of His creation, such as His Apostle, sall Allahu alayhi wasallam, and the human rulers, governors and judges among us. They are authorized to legislate and issue commands in the discretionary matters where Allah has not legislated or given an explicit commandment or prohibition.

What about a ruler who legislates in opposition to the divine Shari’ah? Or a person who willingly obeys a piece of manmade legislation or a commandment that violates the Shari’ah? Should such individuals be considered polytheists guilty of shirk in the matter of hakimiyah?

It is reasonable to say that to reckon manmade legislation as higher than the law of Allah is surely kufr. But not every instance of kufr is shirk. To reject a true Prophet of God is kufr but it is not necessarily shirk. This is because shirk is a specific type of kufr that has been defined. At any rate, the neo-Kharijite concept of tawhid al-hakimiyah is quite problematic at the very least, and it is better to stick with the conceptions of tawhid and shirk that have been explained by our classical Sunni scholars and theologians.

Illegitimate Child

The twenty-second narration in Abdullah Faisal’s list says “An illegitimate child cannot enter the Paradise nor anyone from his descendants to as far as the seventh generation.”

I agree with Abdullah Faisal that this narration, in the apparent, is quite problematic for rationally speaking how can one assign blame to an illegitimate child for the sin of his or her parents?

Nevertheless, the narration is interesting as it is quite similar to a commandment found in the Torah: “A bastard shall not enter into the congregation of the Lord; even to his tenth generation shall he not enter into the congregation of the Lord.” (Deuteronomy 23:2, KJV)

While obviously disagreeing with the meaning of the narration, which contradicts the basic principle of Islam that does not assign responsibility to an individual for the sin of another, I disagree with Abdullah Faisal when he says, “As for the hadith that says the illegitimate child should not lead the salah, this hadith is classified weak. The Imam which the Muslims are not supposed to pray behind is the one who is an open sinner, or the one with a deviant Aqeedah which contains shirk e.g. the Barailwis, the Shias (Twelvers), Democrats etc.” (100 Fabricated Hadith, p.58)

The term Barelawi is usually used by people in the Subcontinent who are not Sunni to refer to the traditional and orthodox Sunni Muslims. Abdullah Faisal is not only a Wahhabi but an extremist Takfiri and neo-Kharijite, currently serving an eighteen year prison term in the United States for attempting to recruit for the terrorist ISIS, and so it is not surprising that he accuses mainstream Sunni Muslims “Barailwis”, of having a deviant aqidah and committing shirk.

With regard to the imamate for the salah of a man born out of wedlock, as a Hanafi it is considered makruh (disliked) in our school as Imam al-Shurunbulali (d. 1069 H) has said:

وكره إمامة العبد والأعمى والأعرابي وولد الزنا والجاهل والفاسق والمبتدع وتطويل

الصلاة

“The imamate of a slave, a blind man, a Bedouin, an illegitimate child, an ignoramus, an open sinner, an innovator and prolonging the salah is disliked.” (Maraqi al-Falah Sharh Nur al-Idah, p.173)

Now the reason for the dislike of a man born out of wedlock leading a congregational salah is that such an individual is usually ignorant and lacks good character due to his family background and lack of valid fatherhood that is often an essential for obtaining knowledge and tarbiyah.

Another reason is that the congregational salah is a very important act of worship which among other functions serves to represent the condition of the particular Muslim congregation. It could reflect badly on the congregation if others come to know that they pray behind a man born out of wedlock, and members of the congregation itself may feel uneasy or disturbed if the status of their imam of being an illegitimate child was disclosed to them. That is because the position of imamate is a noble and respectable one, a figure that the Muslims should look up. But the knowledge that one’s imam is an illegitimate child would likely cause at least some members of his congregation to look down on him and feel he is not a suitable candidate to lead them.

Prostration of the Sun beneath the Throne of God

 بِسۡمِ اللّٰہِ الرَّحۡمٰنِ الرَّحِیۡمِ

اَلۡحَمۡدُ لِلّٰہِ رَبِّ الۡعٰلَمِیۡنَ

والصلاة والسلام عليك يا سيدي يا رسول الله

In the Name of Allah, the Rahman, the Merciful

All praise belongs to Allah, Lord of the Worlds

Blessing and Peace upon You, my Master, the Apostle of Allah

Allah, holy and exalted is He, says:

وَالشَّمۡسُ تَجۡرِیۡ لِمُسۡتَقَرٍّ لَّہَا ؕ ذٰلِکَ تَقۡدِیۡرُ الۡعَزِیۡزِ الۡعَلِیۡمِ

And the Sun runs its course fixed for it. That is the decree of the Almighty, the All-Knowing

(Surah 36, Ayah 38)

Every body in the Heavens, including our Sun, but also all the stars, planets and moons, are in constant motion, moving along a course that has been set and determined by the Creator.

Some people, including some Muslims, cling to the geocentric model in which the Sun is said to rotate around the Earth, which they believe to be static and motionless. Yet Allah, holy and exalted is He, says:

وَکُلٌّ فِیۡ فَلَکٍ یَّسۡبَحُوۡنَ

Everything floats in an orbit

(Surah 36, Ayah 40)

I believe this nass establishes that the Earth too is included in those bodies in the Heavens which are moving in a circular orbit. To believe the Earth is static or motionless is therefore incorrect and contrary to the explicit Verse of the Holy Quran.

Nor anywhere in the Quran has it explicitly been stated that the course of the Sun is an orbit around the Earth. It is therefore not correct to hold that the Sun circles around the Earth in a rotation that takes about twenty-four hours to complete. So while the Quran affirms that the Sun is moving upon its course, it has not detailed the place or length of that course. According to scientists, the Sun is orbiting around a massive black hole at the center of the galaxy, and it takes over two hundred million years to complete a single orbit.

An authentic Hadith reported in both Bukhari and Muslim, narrated by Abu Dharr al-Ghifari, radi Allahu anhu, has been made controversial because its apparent wording seems to be at odds with the general scientific consensus regarding the course of the Sun:

عَنْ أَبِي ذَرٍّ رضى الله عنه قَالَ قَالَ النَّبِيُّ صلى الله عليه وسلم لأَبِي ذَرٍّ حِينَ غَرَبَتِ الشَّمْسُ تَدْرِي أَيْنَ تَذْهَبُ قُلْتُ اللَّهُ وَرَسُولُهُ أَعْلَمُ قَالَ فَإِنَّهَا تَذْهَبُ حَتَّى تَسْجُدَ تَحْتَ الْعَرْشِ فَتَسْتَأْذِنَ فَيُؤْذَنَ لَهَا وَيُوشِكُ أَنْ تَسْجُدَ فَلاَ يُقْبَلَ مِنْهَا وَتَسْتَأْذِنَ فَلاَ يُؤْذَنَ لَهَا يُقَالُ لَهَا ارْجِعِي مِنْ حَيْثُ جِئْتِ فَتَطْلُعُ مِنْ مَغْرِبِهَا فَذَلِكَ قَوْلُهُ تَعَالَى وَالشَّمْسُ تَجْرِي لِمُسْتَقَرٍّ لَهَا ذَلِكَ تَقْدِيرُ الْعَزِيزِ الْعَلِيمِ

Abu Dharr, radi Allahu anhu, said that the Prophet, sall Allahu alayhi wasallam, said to him when the Sun had set: “Do you know where it goes?” I said, “Allah and His Apostle know best.” He said, “Verily, it goes till it prostrates under the Throne. So it asks permission and permission is given for it. (A time) will come when it will prostrate but that will not be accepted from it and it will seek permission but permission will not be given to it. It shall be said to it, ‘Return from where you came’ so it shall rise from its west, and that (points to) the saying of Allah Most High, ‘And the Sun runs its course fixed for it. That is the decree of the Almighty, the All-Knowing’” (Sahih al-Bukhari: Kitab Bada al-Khalq)

At the outset it should be noted that the eminent Abu Dharr al-Ghifari, radi Allahu anhu, responded to the Prophet, sall Allahu alayhi wasallam, when asked if he knew where the Sun goes by saying, “Allah and His Apostle know best”.

This is significant because these days some Wahhabis and other misguided individuals and groups who seek to diminish the lofty status of the Holy Prophet Muhammad, sall Allahu alayhi wasallam, deem it to be either shirk or bid’ah to say, “Allah and His Apostle know best”. They reckon it to be partnering the Prophet with Allah in possessing knowledge of the unseen. But we Sunni Muslims stick to the way and understanding of the illustrious Sahabah like Abu Dharr, radi Allahu anhu, who would say, “Allah and His Apostle know best” so we are happy to say this too.

In response to the so-called rationalist and scientific objections to the aforementioned Hadith, Allamah Shabbir Ahmad Uthmani (1886-1949) composed a treatise entitled Sujud ash-Shams (Prostration of the Sun), with a helpful introduction by one Maulana Sayyid Hasan, who was a teacher at Dar ul-Ulum, Deoband. This introduction contains the essential answers to the doubts raised against the Hadith, and I shall refer to it here.

Allamah Shabbir Uthmani is to be credited with dissenting from his fellow colleagues of the Deobandi school who overwhelmingly opposed the movement for the establishment of a homeland for the Muslims of India—Pakistan. He accepted the leadership of Qaid Azam, Muhammad Ali Jinnah (1876-1948), may Allah have mercy on him, who became the undisputed leader of the Muslims of India and labored tirelessly and fearlessly for the establishment of Pakistan despite insurmountable opposition. For this reason the Qaid Azam found it fit to state in his will that Allamah Shabbir Uthmani be given the honor to lead his funeral prayer.

Now coming to the introduction to the treatise Sujud ash-Shams, before I relay the common doubts and their answers regarding the Hadith in question, it should be made clear that it is pure misguidance for any Muslim to reject this Hadith outright. This Hadith is unquestionably authentic and contains the words of our Holy Prophet, sall Allahu alayhi wasallam. To deny the words of the Prophet, peace be upon him, which he relayed on the basis of divine revelation or inspiration is as if one is rejecting his Prophethood, and rejection of that is plain kufr.

The first doubt mentioned is that since the Sun is constantly moving in reality it cannot be said to actually rise or set. When the Sun is apparently rising in one part of the Earth it is simultaneously seen setting in another part, in other words, the Sun is constantly seen rising and setting somewhere on the Earth. In light of this is it not problematic for the Prophet, sall Allahu alayhi wasallam, to have spoken about the “setting” of the Sun?

The answer is that it is quite possible and reasonable to say that what is intended by ghurub or setting of the Sun is its setting from the perspective of a place or population. The context of this Hadith is therefore that the perspective from which the Sun is setting is the perspective of the place and people of Medina. In short, when the Prophet, sall Allahu alayhi wasallam, spoke of the “setting” of the Sun he did not mean setting in a real, objective sense but rather in a figurative, subjective sense.

*Here I will add that till this day virtually everyone uses the expressions of rising and setting with regard to the Sun, as that is simply the nature of human language. Allah and His Apostle have chosen to communicate the revelation and the guidance to us through the medium of language so that we may comprehend.

The second doubt is that since the Sun is an inanimate object, without consciousness, intelligence, life or a will of its own, then why did the Prophet, sall Allahu alayhi wasallam, speak of it performing prostration to God, seeking permission and receiving permission?

The answer is that the premise is incorrect to assume that the Sun does not possess consciousness. The Holy Quran teaches that the bodies in the Heavens, including the Earth, voluntarily submit to the command of the Creator (Surah 41, Ayah 11), and that that which is in the Heavens and the Earth prostrates to Allah, either willingly or through coercion (Surah 13, Ayah 15). The reality of the Sun’s consciousness is beyond our comprehension, but it is not like human consciousness. What is intended by prostration of the Sun is not necessarily the sensory or physical prostration we humans are commanded with, i.e., placing our face upon the ground, but a different type of prostration fitting for the Sun whose purpose, like our prostration, is to symbolize its humility and subjugation to God.

*Whether the seeking of permission by the Sun is literal or figurative cannot be determined with any degree of certainty. But it is possible that such expressions have been used in the Hadith to signify that the Sun is ultimately under the control and authority of Allah. The purpose of the Hadith is to magnify and glorify Allah by giving the example of the Sun, a massive, fiery creation, being subjected to Him, despite the Sun’s apparent grandeur having caused a portion of mankind to be deluded into thinking the Sun is a god and worthy of worship.

The third doubt is that since everything is already beneath the Arsh (Throne of God), which extends over the entirety of the Heavens and the Earth, then is it not problematic for the Prophet, sall Allahu alayhi wasallam, to say as per this Hadith that after setting the Sun goes beneath the Throne?

The answer is that it is true that everything in the Heavens and the Earth is already beneath the Throne, including the Sun. What then is intended by the statement of the Prophet, peace be upon him, that the Sun goes to prostrate beneath the Throne is that either it means a particular place beneath the Throne assigned for it to enter into the state of prostration, or it is merely an expression whose purpose is to say that the Sun does not actually physically move to a particular place in order to prostrate but that when the Sun enters a state of prostration at that time it may be said to have gone beneath the Throne.

*I tend to agree with the latter explanation. Another version of this Hadith, which is essentially the Prophet’s explanation of the Ayah I quoted in the beginning from Surat Ya Sin (Ayah 38), has the Prophet saying:

مُسْتَقَرُّهَا تَحْتَ الْعَرْشِ

“Its course is beneath the Throne” (Sahih al-Bukhari: Kitab al-Tafsir)

Therefore, there is no doubt the Sun is constantly beneath the Throne, as the Throne extends over and above the entirety of the cosmos. Hence, when the Prophet said the Sun goes to prostrate beneath the Throne it does not necessarily mean the Sun moves physically from one location to another but that it enters an internal state of being in which it may be said to be offering prostration to God in a manner that Allah has prescribed for it. Even in our own language we say expressions like “he has gone to sleep” or “he went to sleep”. Here going to sleep does not mean going to a physical place that is called sleep but entering into a particular internal state known as sleep. And this is similar to how we say that while we are constantly in the presence of Allah, facing Him, but when the time for worship comes we enter a particular mindset, and standing in the direction of the Qiblah is intended to symbolize that mindset, in which we direct our focus to Allah, so that it may be said that now we are in His presence and facing Him.

The fourth doubt is that when the Sun is in a state of prostration, should we not assume that during the duration of its prostration it remains still, whereas scientifically we know the Sun is constantly in motion and does not take pauses to rest.

In answer to this doubt the words of a version of the Hadith found in the Mustadrak of al-Hakim have been quoted:

فَتُحْبَسُ مَا شَاءَ اللَّهُ ثُمَّ يُقَالُ لَهَا اطْلُعِي مِنْ حَيْثُ غَرَبْتِ

“It will be detained as long as Allah wills then it will be said to it, ‘rise from where you set.’”

*The truth is that time is the creation of Allah and He has power over it and manipulates it as He wills. There is a multidimensional aspect to time that we are unable to perceive. In other words, it may be that when the Sun is detained it is for a duration of time that either transpires in another dimension or its duration is so instantaneous or momentary that we are unable to measure or perceive it, and from our perspective and calculation it appears that the Sun is simply constantly moving without any pause or rest.

We should also know that when Allah commands the Sun to rise or set, or when He will command it to reverse itself, it is not necessary that this means the Sun fulfills such commands in its own physical movement, but it is also reasonable to say that the Sun is made to appear either rising or setting, from either the east or the west, through the movement of the Earth.

والله ورسوله اعلم

And Allah and His Apostle know best!