Who is a Sahabi?- The understanding of the expression by the Early Muslims.

The development of the term "Sahaba" in relation to the Hadith of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم and the unjustifiable presentation by the Traditionists.

Authors who write about the Companions seldom bother to ask themselves who the Companions actually were. In this article we shall discuss about the term companion” and its development from time to time in relation to the traditions of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم.

The meaning of the term "Companion" was closely linked with the emergence of the Prophetic Traditions as the second most important source of Islamic teachings next to the Qur'an, a process which depended in large part on the efforts of the Traditionists (Ahl Al Hadith) the development of the term "Companion" also owes much to the criticism advanced by the Traditionists' opponents, that is, the Mu'tazilis. The latter's approach to revelation had led them to minimize the importance of Traditions, partly by reducing the number of Companions through a definition so strict that the number of Companions (and therefore the Traditions they narrated) was seriously reduced. Holding the opposite view, the Traditionists did exactly the converse.

We can start the discussion by viewing the position of the Companions in relation to the Qur’an and the Sunnah. Needless to Say, the Qur'an is the most important source of all Islamic teachings. But many detailed rulings (Ahkam) and other religious matters (Umr Al Din) are found not in the Qur'an but in the Sunnah. The Sunnah is based on the knowledge of those who were involved in its transmission, the most important of whom were the Companions. Hence one's failure to know the Companions is a failure to establish proof (hujjah) for one's religious deeds,[1] and it is to be remembered that every action of a Sunni Muslim must have its reference either in the Qur'an or in the Sunnah. Hence Muslims who are unaware of the identity of the Companions are condemned. Knowing nothing about them is considered to be willful ignorance and the greatest denial (ashaddu jahlan wa’azamu inkaran)[2] But those who discredit them are guilty of even worse. Abu Zur'ah al-Razi رضي الله عنه  (200-64/815-77)[3] (see below) declares that

Anyone who disparages one of the Companions is a Zindiq. This is because, according to him, the truth of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم and the Qur'an was handed down to mankind by the Companions; therefore, those who contest the authority of the Companions are similar to those who deny the Qur'an and Sunnah.

Let us first analyze the meaning of the word “Sahaba” by a sahabi himself;

Anas ibn Malik رضي الله عنه , the famous Companion who died between 90-3/708-11, provides perhaps the earliest account of who the first generation of Muslims considered to be Companions. 

Once Musa al-Sayblani asked Anas ibn Malik رضي الله عنه whether there were Companions other than himself who were still alive. To this question Anas answered that some Arabs who had seen the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم were still alive, but they had not accompanied him (baqiya nas min al-a 'rab qad ra 'awhu  fa-amma man sahibahu fa-la)[4]

Here Anas makes a distinct ion between "to see (ra’a and “to accompany (sahiba)." He clearly considered the name Companion to apply only to those who had been with the Prophet for quite a long time.

The implication of Anas's رضي الله عنه  statement is that he did not consider those who only saw the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم to be Companions. Although he knew that there were many who had seen the Prophet, he still referred to himself when he was asked who the last Companion still alive was. Anas was among the six Companions to receive the most Traditions from the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم (aktharu’um hadith or al-mukaththirun. min al-Sahabah 'an al- Nabi)''[5] . He was the Prophet's servant for the last eight or ten years of the latter's Life[6]. He would surely have known those who had accompanied the Prophet during his lifetime, and as a result he ought to have been aware that he was indeed the last Companion still alive. So there can be no serious objection to his statement.

The Traditionists, however, did not regard Anas as the last Companion. For them this honor was held by Abu al Tufayl ('Amir ibn Wâthilah) رضي الله عنه , who died around the year 100/718[7]. Abu Al Tufayl himself made a statement to this effect, saying.

 I saw the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم. There is nobody [who is still alive] on the earth who saw the Prophet except me (ra'aytu Rasul Allah wa-ma ala wajh al-ard rajul ra'ahu ghayri [8]).

 As can be observed, Abu al-'Tufayl used only the word “To  see (ra'a)," not "to accompany (Sahiba)” Whereas Anas stated that he was the last man to accompany the Prophet,  Abu al-Tufayl claimed that he was the last men to see the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم . Based on these statements, Anas رضي الله عنه did not apparently consider Abu al-Tufayl to be a Companion; nor did Abu al-Tufayl himself, for that matter. It was the later Traditionists, who included Abu al-Tufayl among the Companions, who introduced a looser definition. Some Traditionists admitted the difficulty and tried to solve it by acknowledging both Anas and Abu al-Tufayl as the last Companions. So we read such statements as, "The last Companions to die were Anas ibn Malik and then Abu al- Tufayl 'Amir ibn wathilah  (,''[9] or "The last Companion to die was Abu  al-Tufayl, who died in the year 100, whereas the last Companion to die before him was Anas ibn Malik.” [10] Whether they mention Anas first or Abu al Tufayl, this does not hide the fact that in the back of their minds they still acknowledged the truth of Anas ibn Malik's definition.

Note: Actually there is one another person who, by definition, should be considered as the last companion. This is the Prophet Isa عليه سلام . Since he is considered to be a companion and still alive (it is believed that on the eve of the last day he will be sent to kill the Dajjal), then he must be the final companion. Although the traditionists agree on most of these points, they do not as a rule consider him when debating the identity of the last companion.

Coming to the second generation of the Muslim community (the Companions being the first) we find that its members shared this view. Sa'id ibn al-Musayyab رضي الله عنه (d.94/713)[11] is reported to have said that he would not regard anyone as a Companion unless he had stayed with the Prophet one or two years and participated in the Prophet's battles once or twice[12].

 Asim al-Ahwal (d. 142/759),[13] who was responsible for hisbah in Kufa and was a qadi in al-Mada'in for Abu Ja'far, also reserved the name Companion for those who had accompanied the Prophet. Thus he refused to call 'Abd Allah ibn Sarjis a Companion because he had only seen the Prophet and nothing more [14].

Anas ibn Malik, Abu al-TufayI, Sa’id ibn al-Musayyab and 'Asim ibn Ahwal represent the early Muslim scholars who defined Companions in a very limited way. Since the intensity of association (the length of the Companionship) counted for so much, the number of the people who deserved the title of Companion was also limited.

This view may have not created a problem for those of Anas ibn Malik's generation, nor

even for Abu al-Tufayl's, but for the next generation, when the Prophetic Traditions were being compiled and the issue of numbers became more and more important, the limitation created problems.

The Traditionists' concern was to guard the Sunnah of the Prophet as one of the two most important sources of Islamic teachings. The greater the number of Traditions that needed to be preserved, the wider the definition of Companion that had to be allowed. The view of Anas ibn Malik clearly did not support this end. Such a view, were it to have become formal, would have applied to only a very limited number of people, for a great number those who had only seen the Prophet would  be excluded and the status of their Traditions consequently downgraded from Al-musnad to Al- Mursal". And since the majority of the Traditionists classified al-mursal Traditions as weak, this meant that they could not be used as an authoritative source (Hujjah) of law This was disturbing, for instance, to Abu Zur'ah al-Razi who, in response to the question: "Were not the Traditions of the Prophet only 4000 [in number]?" replied angrily: "Whoever said that, may Allah shake his eyetooth! This is the saying of the Zanidiqah. Whoever counts the Traditions of the Prophet, the Prophet died leaving behind him 114,000 Companions who took riwayah from him and heard from him.'[15]

It was in order to maintain the soundness of these Traditions as much as possible that the Traditionists worked hard to formulate a definition which fitted this purpose. In doing so, they totally came up with an unjustifiable definition for “Sahaba”. Ahmad ibn Hanbal رضي الله عنه (d. 241/855) and 'Ali ibn al Madini رضي الله عنه (d. 258/871-2) followed by their student Al-Bukhari رضي الله عنه (d. 257/870), were among the scholars who Expended the greatest effort in revising the early generation's definition. In doing so, they first of all explicitly included the word "ra 'a (to see)" in their formal definition; and Second, they discounted the need to have accompanied the Prophet for any length of time as a requirement for the status of Companion by introducing expressions which indicated a shorter period of acquaintance. Hence a Companion is defined by Ibn Hanbal: "Whoever accompanied (sahiba) the Prophet within a year or a month or a day or a short time or only saw (ra'a) him is one of his companions[16]. ‘Ali ibn al-Madini defines one as "Anybody who accompanied the Prophet or saw him although for very short time of the day ..'[17] And al-Bukhari as ''Whoever accompanied the Prophet or saw him while he was a Muslim.[18]

Although al-Bukhari’s definition, with a slight difference in wording, was then adopted as the Traditionists' formal definition, the Traditionists needed time before realizing that it still had some weaknesses. First of all, it effectively excluded blind Companions like Ibn Umm Maktum who never 'saw' the Prophet. It also left unclear the status of Companions who had apostatized. Could they still be considered as Companions? To solve the first problem some later Traditionists introduced a more neutral verb, i.e., to  meet (laqiya)" as a substitute for the verb ''to accompany(sahiba)" or 'to see (ra’a)” By using the word "to meet (laqya)" the Traditionists were able not only to eliminate the problem of the blind Companions, but also to avoid any ambiguity. To solve the second problem, (that is the case of Companions who apostatized) they added the phrase "and died as a Muslim (wa-mata 'ala al-Islam). So the final definition reads as follows: "Whoever met the Prophet while he was Muslim and died as a Muslim [19].

Some riders were added to these requirements. First, since prophecy (Nubuwwah) was the only reason why Muhammad became such an extraordinary figure, it automatically became the determining factor. In other words, to be a Companion one had to have met or seen Muhammad after he declared his Prophethood. Those who had only seen him before that were not considered companion [20].

Likewise, those who rejected his prophecy after once having been believers would lose the title of Companion. Nevertheless any such apostate who returned to Islam and saw the Prophet before he died could regain the title. One example of this was 'Abd Allah ibn Abi sarh.”[21]. However, the Traditionists disagreed on those who returned to Islam after the Prophet had passed away. Abu al-Hanifah refused to count such people as Companions, because apostasy, he believed, canceled out all their previous deeds. In general, however the Traditionists preferred to count them as Companions. The reason for this is provided by al-Shafi'i. For him, apostasy could only wipe out their good deeds if they were to die during their apostasy; were they to return to Islam, however, their previous good deeds (Achievements, status  etc.) would be restored. [He doesn’t provide any basis for it which is the causes for his stance to be weak].

Secondly, A person's meeting with the Prophet had to have occurred in this real world ('alam al-shahada). Those who met the Prophet in the other world ('al'am al ghayb), such as al-Rabi' ibn Mahmud al-Mardini, a Sufi who met him in a dream [22], could not be counted as companion. The same applies to the prophets (or to be precise, their spirits) who met the Prophet in heaven during his Miraj . The prophet Isa, However, is considered a Companion. The reasons for this are: first, because it was believed that he was still alive and that he saw the Prophet during his Isra Wal Meraj (thus the meeting was a real one); and second, although himself a prophet with his own teachings which are in many ways different from Muhammad's, Isa was now bound by the latter's new message. Hence he believed in Muhammad and was counted as one of his followers [23].

                                                To be continued in the second part.....

➽Conclusion: In order to save the Hadith literature, The traditionists came up with an irrational definition for a Sahabi which not only goes against the standard definition specified by a sahabi Himself and the Tabi'un but also included those people as a companion who betrayed the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم  and His Family عليه سلام . Instead of that, they could have had a moderate approach. [Though this looks like I am criticizing the traditionists, I totally respect them and accept them as my Masters, but still, for the sake of the honour of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم  and His Family عليه سلام , I will definitely consider the Traditionists mistaken].

[1] Ibn al-Athir, Usd al-Ghabah fi Marifat Al Sahabah [Cairo]: al-Sha'b, [1970]-1973), Vol 1, Pg 18.

[2]Ibid,

[3] Al-Mizzi, Tadhib Al Kamal fi Asma Al Rijal, ed. Bashsher Ma'ruf 'Awwad (Beirut: Mu'assasat al-Risalah, 1980-92),Vol 19 : Pg 96; Ibn Hajar al-'Asqalani, al-Isabah fi Tamyiz Al Sahabah (Beirut: Dar Al Kitab

al-'Arabi, n.d.), Vol 1, Pg 18; Khatib al-Baghdadi, Al Kifayah fi ilm al-Riwiyah (Hyderabad: Idarat Jam'iyat Dai'rat al-Ma'arif al-Islamiyah, 1938), Pg 68.

[4] Ibn Al- Salah, Ulum Al Hadith, ed Nur Al Din Itr (Beirut: Dar Al Fikr Al Muasir; Damascus: Dar Al Fikr, 1986), Pg 294; Al Iraqi, Al Taqyid wa al Idah Sharh Muqqadimah Ibn Al Salah ed. Abd Al Rahman Muhammad Uthman (Beirut: Dar Al Fikr, 1981), Pg 299; Al Suyuti, Tadrib Al Rawi Fi Sharh Taqrib Al Nawawi, ed. Abdal Wahhab Abd Al Latif (Madina: Al Matba'ah Al Islamiyah, 1959), Pg 398; Ibn Kathir, Al Ba'ith al Hathith fi Ikkhtisar ulum Al Hadith (Damascu: Dar Al Fikr,n.d), Pg 97-98. Another report gives a slightly different wording, "Qad Baqiya Qawm min Al Arab, Fa amma min Ashabihi fa ana Akhir man baqiya," Al Iraqi, Fath Al Mughith Sharh Fath Alfiyat Al Hadith, ed. Salah Muhammad Uwaydah (Beirut: Dar Al Kutub Al Ilmiyah,n.d), Vol 4, Pg 336.

[5] Al Suyuti, Tadrib Al Rawi,Pg 41-43; Al Iraqi, Fath Al Mughith, Vol 4, Pg 342-343.

[6] Ibn Al Athir, Usd Al Ghabah, Vol 1, Pg 151.

[7] Ibn Al Salah, Ulum Al Hadith, Pg 300; Al Iraqi, Fath Al Mughith, Vol 4, Pg 353; Al Sakhawi, Fath Al Mughith Sharh Alfiyat li Al Iraqi, ed. Abd Al Rahman Muhammad Uthman (Madina: Al Maktabah Al Salafiyah,n.d), Vol 3, Pg 127; Al Iraqi, Al Taqyid, Pg 313.

[8] Al Suyuti, Tadrib Al Rawi, Pg 412, Also Ibn Athir, Usd Al Ghabah, Vol 6, Pg 177.

[9] Ibn kathir, Al Ba'ith, Pg 102.

[10] Al Nawawi, Al Taqrib wa Al Taysir li Ta'rifat Sunan Al Bashir Al Nadhir fi Usul Al Hadith, ed. AbdAllah Umar Al Bawardi (Beirut: Dar Al Jinan, 1986), Pg 83.

[11] He was the most respected scholar at his time in Madina. See Ibn Sa'ad, Al Tabaqat, Vol 3, Pg 381.

[12] Ibn Al Salah, Ulum al Hadith, Pg 293; Ibn Hajr Al Asqalani, Fath al Bari fi Sharh Sahih Al Bukhari (Beirut: Dar Al Ma'arif,n.d), Vol 7, Pg 4; Khatib Al Baghdadi, Al Kifayah, Pg 68-69; Al Iraqi, Fath Al Mughith, Vol 4, Pg 338; Al Sakhawi, Fath Al Mughith, Vol 3, pg 94.

[13] Ibn Hajr Al Asqalani, Tadhib Al Tadhib (Hyderabad: Majlis Da'irat Al Ma'arif al Nizamiyah, 1325-7H), Vol 5, Pg 42-43.

[14] Khatib Al Baghdadi, Al Kifayah, Pg 68; Ibn Hajr, Fath Al Bari, Vol 7, Pg 4; Idem, Al Isabah, Vol 2, Pg 308; Al Sakhawi, Fath Al Mughith, Vol 3, Pg 93.

[15] Ibn Al Salah, Ulum Al Hadith, Pg 298, Al Iraqi criticizes this report for it does not have any isnad. Al Suyuti however is able to produce its isnad from Al Khatib (Al Suyuti, Tadrib Al Rawi, Pg 406).

[16] "Man Sahibahu Sanatan aw Shahran aw Yawman aw Sa'atan aw ra'ahu fa Huwa min Ashabih", Khatib Al Baghdadi, Al Kifayah, Pg 69; Al Iraqi, Fath Al Mughith, Vol 4, Pg 335; Al Sakhawi, Fath Al Mughith, Vol 3, Pg 86, Fawwaz Ahmad Zamnarli, Aqaid, Pg 28.

[17] "Man Sahiba Al Nabi'aw ra'ahu wa-law sa'atan min nahar fa-huwa min ashabih", Ibn Hajr, Fath Al Bari, Vol 7, Pg 5; Al Sakhawi, Fath Al Mughith, Vol 3, Pg 86.

[18] Khatib Al Baghdadi, Al Kifayah, Pg 69; Al Iraqi, Fath Al Mughith, Vol 4, Pg 335; Al Sakhawi, Fath Al Mughith, Vol 3, Pg 86.

[19] Al Iraqi says that this is the sound expression (of the definition) (Al Ibarah Al Salimah), Al Iraqi, Al Taqyid, Pg 292 and in Fath al Mughith, Vol 4, Pg 336.

[20] An example is Tabi' Al Himyari. He was a guide (dalil) of the Prophet, but he refused to become a Muslim when the Prophet called him. He only became a Muslim in the time of Abu Bakr (Ibn Hajr, Al Isabah, Vol 1, Pg 189).

[21] Al Iraqi, Al Taqyid, Pg 292.

[22] Ibn Hajr, Al Isabah, Vol 1, Pg 513.

[23] Al Iraqi, Al Taqyid, Pg 295-296.