Abu Jafar Al Tahawi- The last Hanafi leader from Egypt.

An Account of the Life of One of the Greatest Traditionist, Jurisprudent and Theologian of the Hanafi School.

Abu Ja‘far Ahmad bin Muhammad bin Salamah Al Azdi, Al Hajri, Al- Tahawi, was born at Taha, a village in upper Egypt. His forefathers came from the Yemen to Egypt and settled there after it had come under the Muslim rule. There is a considerable difference of opinion as to the year of his birth. The years 229/843, 230/844, 238/852 and 239/853 are mentioned by different biographers. Al-Sam‘ani asserts that he was born in 229/843 and this is correct. He died in Egypt in 321/933.¹

Al Tahawi was mainly interested in Hadith and Fiqh, and was regarded as one of the greatest Muhaddithin and fuqaha’ of his time. According to Abu Ishaq al-Shirazi, he was the last leader of Hanafi Fiqh in Egypt.² He began to study Shafi‘i Law under his maternal uncle abu Ibrahim Isma‘il Al-Muzani (d. 264/878), the most celebrated pupil of Imam Al Shafa'i, and then leaving his school he took up the study of Hanafi Law under Al Shaykh Abu Ja‘far Ahmad bin Abi Imran (d. 285/898), who became the Chief Qadi of Egypt in 270/883. Different versions are given by his biographers of his conversion to Hanafi school, but the most probable reason seems to be that the system of Imam Abu Hanifah appealed to his critical insight more than that of Imam Shafa‘i. 

Al Tahawi went to Syria in 268/882 for further studies in Hanafi Law and became a pupil of Qadi Abu Khazim ‘Abd al-Hamid bin Ja‘far, the then Chief Justice of Syria. He learnt hadith from a large number of Shaykh's especially from those who visited Egypt at his time, and had also many pupils of distinction. He is a distinguished author of many important works of which the following may be mentioned here: 

1) Sharah Maa'ni Al Athar. 

2) Mushkil Al Athar.

3) Ahkam Al Qur'an.

4) Ikthilaf Al- Ulama.

5) Al-Nawddir Al-Fiqhiyyah.

6) Kitab Al-Shurut al-Kabir.

7) Al Shurut Al-Ausat.

8) Sharh Al Jami Al Saghir.

9) Sharh Al-Jami Al Kabir.

10) Al Mukhtasar.

11) Manaqib Abu Hanifah.

12) Tarikh Al Kabir.

13) Al Radd Ala Kitab Al Mudallisin.

14) Al Radd Ala Abi Ubayd.

15) Al Radd Ala Isa bin Abban.

16) Hukm Aradi Makkah etc.

His original contribution to Hadith literature, so far as we can estimate, is that he introduced a new system of collecting legal traditions, developed a new method of interpreting and harmonizing the conliicting traditions, and adopted a new criterion for criticizing them. His predecessors and contemporaries, the authors of Al Sihah Al Sittah (the Six Canonical Compilations) collecting traditions according to their own standards and principles, left out a large number of genuine traditions. Al Tahawi made a strenuous effort to collect all the genuine legal traditions of the Prophet, narrated by different authorities on a particular subject, together with the opinions of the Companions of the Prophet, their Successors and the distinguished jurisprudents. He then scrutinized traditions (ahadith) and showed by evidence which of them were authentic, strong, weak, unknown, or such as might be supposed to have been repealed. Thus, his collection provided for the scholars an unprecedented opportunity to judge for themselves the merits or demerits of a particular tradition. The criterion for judging the genuineness of a tradition, according to the Traditionists in general, was the Isnad (chain of the narrators), and so they paid greater attention to the scrutiny of the isnad than to the scrutiny of the text (mam) of a tradition. But Al-Tahawi, while scrutinizing a tradition, took into consideration the main as well as the isnad of the tradition. He also aimed at a harmonizing interpretation in case of conflicting traditions. 

Al Tahawi, like Al Maturidi, was a follower of Imam Abu Hanifah (d. 150/ 767) in jurisprudence as well as in theoloy. He wrote a. little treatise on theology named Bayan al Sunnah wal-Jama‘ah, generally known as 'Aqidat Al Tahawiyyah. In the introduction to this treatise he says he will give therein an account of the beliefs of the Ahl al-sunnah wal jama'ah according to the views of Imam Abu Hanifah, Abu Yusuf, and Muhammad Al- Shaybani the well-known jurisprudents of the community. So the importance of his creed lies in the fact that it corroborates the views of Imam Abu Hanifah, the founder of the school, that have come down to us from different sources. Al-Tahawi made no attempt to explain the views of the Imam or to solve the old theological problems by advancing any new arguments. His sole aim was to give a summary of the views of the Imam and to show indirectly that they were in conformity with the traditional views of the orthodox school. 

Imam Abu Hanifah directed his movement against the Kharijites, Qadarites. Mu‘tazilites, shi‘ites, Jabarites, the extreme Murji’ites, and the Hashwiyyah³, the last being a group of the orthodox people who under the influence of the converted Jews, Christians, and Magians fell into gross anthropomorphism, and ascribed to God all the characteristics of a created being.‘ He was the first theologian among the fuqaha’ who adopted the principles and method of reasoning and applied them to a critical examination of the articles of faith and the laws of the Shari'ah. That is why he and his followers were called by the 'traditionists the People of Reason and Opinion (Ashab Al Ra'i wa-l Qiyas). This rational spirit and philosophical attitude were more consistently maintained by Al-Maturidi than by Al Tahawi. Their views on the nature of faith. attributes of God, beatitic vision, divine decree, and human freedom may be mentioned here to indicate the distinctive features of their methods. 

To All the scholars mentioned in the above article, "May Allah be pleased with you All."

¹Al Sam'ani, Al Ansab, Leiden, 1912, Pg 368, Ibn Al Nadim, Al Fihrist, Cairo, Pg 292, Jalaluddin Suyuti, Husn Al Muhadarah, Vol 1, Pg 147, Ibn Khallikan, Waf'at Al Ayn, Vol 1, Pg 19, Al Dhahabi, Tadkirat Al Huffaz, Vol 3, Pg 28, 1915 ed.

²Al Dhahabi, Tadhkirat Al Huffaz, Vol 3, Pg 28, Jalaluddin Suyuti, Husn Al Muhadarah, Vol 1, Pg 147.

According to M.M Sharif, Abdullah Ibn Saba, a convert from Judaism introduced and propagated Anthropomorphic ideas among the Muslims during the caliphate of Ali. He quoted Al Shahrastani to support his claim.

⇛ The following article is written from the book, "The History of Muslim Philosophy- Vol 2," Pg 268 by M.M. Sharif.

Position of Hands in Salah- The Wahhabi Fallacy.

Tying Hands on chest in Salah- A critical analysis of the Hadith of Wa'il ibn Hujr in Sahih of Ibn Khuzaima.

Wahhabism, the ultra conservative sect which claim to follow "True Islam" of the Salaf have left no part of religion where they have not innovated something new, mainly in order to look different from those whom they consider as deviants. Unfortunately for them, they have turned out to be the biggest innovators in Islam, walking in the footsteps of Khawarij and taking a total different path than that of Salaf As Salih. One of the most absurd innovation of theirs is tying hands on the chest during Namaz. Neither the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم, nor any of his pious successors رضوان الله يجمعن have tied their hands towards/on the chest during Namaz.

Note: Many people might question that, "Why women are instructed to tie their hands on chest if it was not done by the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم? The answer to that is, The Prophet himself had instructed the women to do so. It is also proven through the amal of many Sahabiya and Umm Al Momineen Bibi Aisha (رضي الله عنه). It will be discussed else where.

In this article, we will discuss the authenticity of this hadith. The seekers of knowledge would understand it and the ego driven dumb heads would try to deceive themselves and others in one way or the other. The hadith is narrated by Ibn Khuzaima in his sahih, Vol 1, Pg 243, Hadith 479 which is as follows

Sahih Ibn Khuzaima, Vol 1, Pg 243, Narration 479.

It is narrated from Abu Tahir who narrated it from Abu Bakr who narrated it from Abu Musi who narrated it from Mu'ammal who narrated it from Sufiyan who narrated it from Asim bin Kulayb and he from his father who narrated it from Wa'il bin Hujr رضي الله عنه who said,

"I offered the Salat with the Prophet 
صلى الله عليه وسلم and he kept his right hand on his left hand, on the chest."

There are many defects in the chain of narration, but first, we will discuss the wordings in other versions of this hadith.

Note that Ibn Khuzaima has also narrated two more hadith's in the same chapter, from Wa'il bin Hujr himself on the issue of placing the right hand over the left in salah without the addition of the words, "On the chest." They are narrated from Ibn Idrees and Ibn Fadl respectively (instead of Muam'mal bin Ismail). Imam Ibn Majah in his Sunan, Vol 2, Pg 21, Hadith 810, English Ed, Darussalam Publications (First Ed), has also mentioned this narration of Wa'il bin Hujr without the addition of the words "On the Chest." Similarly, Imam Abu Dawud in his Sunan, Vol 1, Pg 427, Hadith 723, English Ed, Darussalam Publications and Imam Ahmed bin Hanbal in his Musnad, Hadith 18891, Cairo Ed, Imam Tirmidhi and Ibn Hibban has also narrated the same i.e. without the words, "On the Chest."

Sahih Ibn Khuzaima, Vol 1, Pg 242-43

Pg 243, Narrations without the words "On the chest."

Hence, it is clear from the other versions of this hadith that the words, "On the chest" are added by a Sub narrator (Mua'mmal bin Ismail) and doesn't go back to Wa'il Ibn Hujr.

Now, let us discuss about the chain of the narration containing the words, "On the chest." The chain is as follow,

اخبرنا ابو طاهر، اخبرنا ابو بكر، اخبرنا ابو موسي، اخبرنا مومل، اخبرنا سفيان عن عاصم بن كليب عن ابيه عن وائل بن حجر

The main narrator in dispute here is Mua'mmal Ibn Ismail. Lets discuss about the condition of this narrator.

He was one of the Shuyukh's who narrated from the giants like Hammad bin Zaid, Sufiyan Al Thawri, Sufiyan Ibn Uyayna and Fu'dail bin Iyad. He was graded "Trustworthy" by Imam Yahya Ibn Mae'en (Al Jarah Wa Tadeel, Ibn Abi Hatim, Vol 8, Pg 374, Narrator no 1709/ Tadhib Al Kamal, Al Mizzi, Vol 29, Pg 177). But Ibn Abi Hatim himself, after quoting Yahya Ibn Mae'en, said, He is "Truthful" (Saduq), intense in Sunnah but "MAKES MANY MISTAKES".(Al Jarah Wa Tadeel, Vol 8, Pg 374, Narrator no 1709).

Al Jarah Wa Tadeel, Ibn Abi Hatim, Vol 8, Pg 374.

Ibn Sa'ad in his Tabaqat, Vol 8, Pg 63, Narrator 2482 said, "He is TRUSTWORTHY but makes MANY MISTAKES." Al Bukhari said, He is "MUNKAR AL HADITH."(Tarikh Al Sagheer, Vol 2, Pg 279/ Tadhib Al Kamal, Vol 29, Pg 177). Ibn Hibban has mentioned him in his Thiqat, Vol 9, Pg 187 where he also mentioned that He (Mua'mmal) MAKES MISTAKES." Al Dhahabi in his Al Kashf, Vol 2, pg 309, Narrator no: 5747 said, "His narrations, (some are) sound and (some are) erroneous."

Ibn Sa'ad, Tabaqat, Vol 8, Pg 63.

Al Dhahabi again in his Tadhib Al Tadhib, Vol 9, g 164, Narrator no 7070 said, "He was a Shaykh of Hadith but made MANY MISTAKES." Al Dhahabi further says in his Mizan Al Itidal, Vol 4, Pg 228, Narrator no: 8949, that Abu Zuhrah Al Razi said, "He (Mua'mmal) makes MANY MISTAKES." He said, "He is MUNKAR AL HADITH." Ibn Hajr in his Tadhib Al Tadhib, Vol 10, Pg 381 said, "He is TRUSTWORTHY but made MANY MISTAKES."

Al Dhahabi, Mizan, Vol 4, Pg 228.

Many said, "He was a huffaz until his books were buried. Then, he started making mistakes."[Because he was forced to narrate from his memory] (Tadhib Al Kamal, Vol 29, Pg 178).

Al Mizzi, Tadhib Al kamal. Vol 29, Pg 178.

After reading the above Jarah of the scholars, we can understand that the addition of the words "On the chest." in the hadith was a MISTAKE. It is also understood from other shawahid narrations from Wa'il Ibn Hujr. This should be enough for a sane Muslim to accept the truth and, not act upon the added words, but Wahhabi's are known for their ego driven madness. So, we will further discuss the problems in this narration.

The second problem with the chain of narration is Mua'mmal bin Ismail has narrated this from Sufiyan al Thawri. Ibn Hajr writes in his Fath Al Bari, Vol 13, Kitab Al Adab, chapter 15, Pg 529 that, "The narrations of Mua'mmal bin Ismail from Al Thawri are MAUQUF (Stopped/doesn't go back). This further weakens the narration.

Ibn Hajr, Fath Al Bari, Vol 13, Pg 529

The third problem with the chain is that, this narration is reportedly narrated from Imam Sufyan Al Thawri رضي الله عنه but it is well known that his stance on the issue of placing hands in salat was in accordance with Imam Abu Hanifa رضي الله عنه. Like Imam al Adham, He didn't practise Rafa'yadein and tied his hands below the navel. It is seen in Sharah Muslim by Imam Nawawi, Vol 4, Kitab Al Salat, Chapter of tying hands below the navel in Salat, Pg 114,

Abu Hanifa, Sufiyan Al Thawri, Ishaq bin Ruwayah, Ishaq bin Marwazi (رضي الله عنه) were of this position because they had a narration of Imam Ali عليه سلام who said, "Verily, it is from the sunna to place the right hand over the left under the navel".

Al Nawawi, Sharah Sahih Muslim, Vol 4, Pg 114.

Note: This narration from Hazrat Ali عليه سلام contains a weak narrator but the matn is supported by many Shawahids. That's why it is acted upon. This will be discussed in an another article if Allah permits.

How can a person like Imam Sufiyan (with such great status and caliber), teach one thing and follow the other. This clearly proves that the words "on the chest", is an error.

If we observe the text of Sahih Ibn Khuzaima, one would find Imam Ibn Khuzaima commenting on the authenticity of the narrations soon after narrating them. But in this case, we don't find him commenting anything below the narration. Hence it would be stupidity to believe that every narration in it is sound because it came in a book with the initial "Sahih".

Important of all, this narration neither has any Shawahids nor is it narrated from any other companion or from another chain of transmission.

☆CONCLUSION: 

1) This narration of Ibn Khuzaima, narrated from Wa'il Ibn Hujr comes with many other chains without the words, "On the Chest." This is a single narration with these words and hence will be considered as an error based on Usul Al Hadith. Those words are to be considered as Fabrication.

2) Mu'ammal Bin Ismail was a trustworthy Hafiz but he made many mistakes in narrating the hadith, because his books were buried and he was forced to narrate from his memory. This narration seems like one of his mistake.

3) The connection between Mu'ammal Bin Ismail and Imam Sufiyan Al Thawri is Mauquf (broken). Mauquf narrations are weak even near Wahhabi scholars.

4) Imam Al Thawri himself believed in placing the hands below the navel in Salah. How could he narrate something which he doesn't believe? If this narration is supposed to be sound, then why didn't he change his stance?

5) Imam Ibn Khuzaima himself remained silent on the soundness of this narration. Hence it cannot be said that Ibn Khuzaima deemed this narration to be sound.

For all the scholars mentioned in this article, "May Allah be pleased with them All."

→Fiqh Al Imam by Abdur Rahman bin Yusuf was referred to improve this article.

Za'kah on Exploitable Assets

Zak'at on items rented for profit.

Exploited assets are defined as forms of wealth used to produce exchangeable services or goods that are sold for profit without exhausting the exploited assets themselves. They include assets rented for profit, such as residential buildings, means of transportation, jewelry, and other material used for rental purposes. Also in this category are livestock raised for milk, wool, or meat, and factories, plants, or equipment used for producing goods.

The difference between assets used for exploitation and those used for trading is that the former remain as permanent capital, while the latter change hands.

We have two groups among the jurists, one which restricts the zakatability of these assets and the one which expands the zakatability to include those assets. This article is written chiefly to refute those who restrict the Zakatability of exploitable assets for profit.

Those who restrict the Zakatability of Rent-able Items:

Those who tend to limit the zakatability argue that:

1. The Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم defined the zakatable assets, and did not mention among them these exploited ones such as buildings, rented animals, and productive machinery. The principle is that people must not be obligated to pay any charge without a clear text. There is no such text.

2. Jurists throughout the history of Islam and in all its various countries did not obligate zakah on those assets.

3. We have on hand scholarly opinions that negate the zakatability of exploited assets. Jurists have stated that residential home, craftsman's tools, transportation animals, home furnishings, etc., are all exempt from zakah. This means factories, buildings, cars, planes, and ships are not zakatable, regardless of their size, value, or income.

When the earnings of these assets are received, retained for one year, and exceed

nisab, they are then zakatable, like money.

Disproving the evidence of the restrictors

1.      The fact that the Prophet (p) does not mention a certain asset as zakatable is not in indication of non-zakatability, because the Prophets only mentions growing assets common in Arab society at his time, such as camels, cows, lambs, wheat, barley, dates, raisin, and silver money. Muslims throughout generations obligated zakah on many assets by analogy to these mentioned by the Prophet, because of the general terms used in the texts, and in consideration of the objectives of zakah. Some examples are:

A. Al Shafi'i رضي الله عنه says in al Risalah about the zakatability of gold, "The Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم  imposed zakah on silver. Afterward, Muslims collected zakah on gold, either by virtue of a text from the Prophet that did not reach us, or by analogy, since gold is used by people as a determinant of value for their exchange, before and after Islam."[1] [Scans Below pg 192-194].

The possibility that there is a saying that did not reach al Shafi'i is very remote. The only reason, then, is analogy, as stated by Abu Bakr bin al 'Arabi in Sharh al Tirmidhi: "The Arabs' trade at the time of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم used silver currency, so the Prophet mentions it to mean all money used. His mentioning of silver was understood as inclusive of all kinds of money, but when people in later generations started asking for a specific text on everything, God shut in their faces the door of guidance and they deviated from the track of their predecessors."[2]

Scan from Sharah Tirmidhi, Vol 3, Pg 194.

 B. There is no clear text about the zakatability of trade assets. In spite of that, Ibn al Mundhir reports that they are zakatable by ijma'. Only the Zahiris disagree.

C. Hazrat Umar رضي الله عنه ordered zakah on horses because he realized that they had become valuable wealth. Imam Abu Hanifah رضي الله عنه agrees with 'Umar رضي الله عنه on this issue as long as the horses are retained for growth and pastured naturally.

D. Imam Ahmad رضي الله عنه obligates zakah on Money on the basis of the report from the Companions and by analogy to grains and fruits. He further obligates zakah on all minerals by analogy to gold and silver, and by virtue of the general verse, "And out of that which We have produced for you from the earth. . ."

E. Imam Al Zuhri, al Hasan, and Abu Yusuf (رضي الله عنه) obligate a one-fifth charge on pearls. amber, and other extracts from the sea, by analogy to rikaz and minerals.

F. All known schools of thought utilize analogy in the rules of zakah. The Shafi'ites, for example, use analogy in the zakatability of food items although the sayings mention only a few of these items by name.

2.      The claim that no Muslim jurists impose zakah on exploited assets is refuted on the basis that the concept of retaining the asset and exploiting it for production or rental is a modern innovation that did not exist at the time of the great Muslim jurists. Yet we find their statements indicate that such assets would be zakatable

3. The fact that jurists exempt residential houses and craftsmens tools from zakah cannot be extended to include buildings exploited for rent and factories or plants established by industrial growth. Riding animals of the past are by no means similar to modern cars, planes, and gigantic ships, while personal home furnishings of the past differ substantially from today's furniture rental businesses. Our predecessors did not err when they decided that furniture and tools are not zakatable; they applied strictly and rationally the rules for zakatability to the circumstances of the age in which they lived. The author of al Hidayah rationalizes the exemptions of such items "because they are utilized for essential needs and also do not grow."[3] The author of al 'Inayah comments, "Each of these two traits is alone an obstacle to zakatability. Residential quarters are indispensable for people as is clothing. As for growth, it may either be a characteristic of the item itself, as in the case of gold and silver, or it may be merely by designation, as in the case of business inventory."[4] Jurists unanimously agree that a house taken as a residence by its owner is not zakatable. This exemption is a expression of Islamic justice, especially when compared with most contemporary real estate taxes, which usually do not give such consideration.

It is essential to point out that the rationalization or the exemption of housing, clothing, tools etc., from zakah on the basis that they are non-growing and utilized for essential needs, is itself an indication that any of these items becomes subject to zakah if it is used for growth and for non-essential needs.

[1]. Al Risalah, Imam Shaf'ai, ed. Ahmad Shakir, pp. 193-194.

[2]. Sharh al Tirmidhi, Imam Abu Bakr Ibn Al Arabi, Vol. 3, p. 104.

[3]. Al Hidayah with Fath al Qadir, Vol. 1, p. 487.

[4]. Al 'Inayah, p. 487

Note: The following paragraphs are taken from the book, "Fiqh Al Zakah by Dr. Yusuf Al Qaradawi."

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.