Definition of sahabi

does ibn abbas raDiyAllahu anhu know more than us?

hadith of bukhari #3764 below:



do we take sayid ibn musayyib's definition, or ibn abbas?

 

خفى المطر الفار

 

@Aqdas your hypothetical questioner is no longer hypothetical - some people are so predictable they never fail our surmises

 

khuub taqiyah hai ke chilman se lage baythe haiN
saaf chhuptey bhi nahin, saamney aatey bhi nahiN

---

by those definitions, hasanayn karimayn raDiyAllahu anhuma would not be Sahabah, because they did not fight alongside RasulAllah sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam in any ghazwah. nor would sayyidah khadijah raDiyAllahu anha be a SaHabiyyah, because she passed away before any of the ghazawat.

----
curiously, even the snippet nawaz posted refutes him - if he had not cut it precisely where it begins to refute his argument:



according to the above opinion those who did not reach puberty or did not understand religious issues are not SaHabah.

bajuri has already mentioned that there are minor disagreements, but thereafter there is a common agreement among hadith scholars which he has mentioned. shiah and shiah influenced people make this to be a big issue, just to deny hazrat muawiyah as a SaHabi, so they can abuse him freely and attempt to duck the objection of reviling a SaHabi.

sure, change the name of beer to something else, say it is not wine and drink it. and fool yourself that you have done nothing wrong. but have you considered:




nas'alu Allaha al-aafiyah.

---

@basirqadri786 : grabbing random quotes and throwing them at random to cause confusion is certainly not appreciated. if you want to participate in a thread to educate, show some decorum, not act like a rowdy member in the audience jeering all the time.

---

 

Apparently, Said ibn al-Musayyab defined a sahabi as the one who accompanied Rasul Allah sallalahu alayhi wa aalihi wasallam for one or two years and participated with Him (saww) in one or two ghazwas. This is from al-kifayah of Khateeb (d. 463). The difference, if correct, suggests a lack of definitive ijma on the definition.

 

waiting for opinions of imams subki, amidi and suyuti.

i can understand that you have a problem with me, but won't you spare imam bajuri?

he just listed three differing opinions, and mentioned his preference. you don't have to criticise just because you have to say something. what is wrong with mentioning the differing opinions here, more so because it is a relevant discussion?

@basirqadri786 : by the way, are you implying that ibn Hajar favoured the position that hazrat khaDir was not a nabiy?

 

Let us read the definitions of some scholars like Subki, Ibn Hajar Asqalani, Amidi, Suyuti.

بدر الدين الزركشى : ذهب الأكثرون إلى أن الصحابى من اجتمع - مؤمناً - بسيدنا محمد - صلى الله عليه وسلم - وصحبه ولو ساعة ، روى عنه أو لا ، لأن اللغة تقتضى ذلك، وإن كان العرف يقتضى طول الصحبة وكثرتها وهو ما ذهب إليه جمهور الأصوليين ، أما عند أصحاب الحديث فيتوسعون فى تعريفهم لشرف منزلة النبى - صلى الله عليه وسلم - ​

Here hour doesn't not mean exactly 60 Minutes, this is a recent invention, it is a phrase, meaning even for a moment/hour

Ibn Hajar says in Isabah:

وأصح ما وقفت عليه من ذلك أن الصحابي من لقي النبي ـ صلى الله عليه وسلم ـ مؤمناً به ومات على الإسلام
​

so here Ibn Hajar says simple meeting is enough and Suyuti followed this def. in Tadrib al-Rawi

Iraqi said

والعبارةُ السالمةُ مِنَ الاعتراضِ أنْ يقالَ : الصحابيُّ مَنْ لقيَ النبيَّ صلى الله عليه وسلم مسلماً ثمَّ ماتَ على الإسلامِ ؛ ليخرجَ مَنِ ارتدَّ وماتَ كافراً
​

We can also present the other view, the opinion of Bukhari and other elders, which is different than the above.

Regarding is Khidr A.S. considered a Sahabi? Then this is disputed, even it is disputed that he is not alive, so how can he be sahabi, here ibn hajar asqalani makes his point, again in Isabah:

فلو كان الخضر موجوداً في عهد النبي صلى الله عليه وسلم لجاء إليه ونصره بيده ولسانه وقاتل تحت رايته ، وكان من أعظم الأسباب في إيمان معظم أهل الكتاب الذين يعرفون قصته مع موسى
​

I am not sure why Bajuri made a disputed issue, as a point of aqida.

قال السهيلي: وقال البخاريّ، وطائفة من أهل الحديث: مات الخَضِر قبل انقضاء مائة سنة من الهجرة، وقال: ونصر شيخنا أبو بكر بن العربي هذا لقوله صَلَّى الله عليه وسلم: عَلَى رَأْسِ مَائةِ سَنَةٍ لاَ يَبْقَى عَلَى الأرْضِ مِمَّنْ هُوَ عَلَيْهَا أَحَدٌ ، يريد ممَّن كان حيًا حين هذه المقالة​

conclusion brother izz al-din: going by def. yes, those prophets should be considered sahaba, but i can't recall any scholar counting them as sahaba. Hope someone can answer your question, which is interesting question and if my own son asked this question, i won't be able to answer it.

 

Salam

Is there any mention, in the Aqidah books, about all the Anbiya alKiraam, alayhim alSalawatu wa Salam, because of the Isra, and Masjid alAqsa?

 

that is why they said, 'met' instead of 'stayed in the company' according to the literal meaning of 'saHabi' meaning 'one who had stayed in the company for some time'.

as for ijmaa' - the rafidis generally reject ijma'a.

 

then we must ask, what according to him is the duration that the person must have spent in the company of rasulAllah (peace be upon him) to be known as a sahabi - and what are his proofs. How many hours and how many days and how can it be known with certainty that the qualifying duration had actually been spent in the blessed company.

and what is the definition of this "company" - would staying within a certain radius of masjid nabawi shareef ('ala saHibiha afDalus salaati wat tasleem) suffice or only the minutes spent in the actual presence of rasulAllah (peace be upon him) count. If the former, then what is the radius and what is the proof.

there is a hadith about a companion (raDyiAllahu 'anhu) who accepted Islam, went into battle and was martyred. He did not offer even a single salah in congregation with rasulAllah (peace be upon him) and did not spend even one complete day in his (peace be upon) company.

So according to this hypothetical questioner, would the companion not count as a sahabi?

and if this certifying authority intends to exclude a companion from the blessed jama'ah then he must produce solid proofs for the standards he uses for comparison - not his personal whims actuated by overt/covert prejudices.

 

awn al-murid,p117-119

 

imam ibrahim al-bajuri in tuHfah sh. jawharah, distich #4

muHammadu'l `aaqib li rusli rabbih
wa aalihi wa SaHbihi wa Hizbih

...here, it means the Companion [SaHabiy]: [who is defined as:] a person who [physically] met the Prophet sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam as a believer [mu'min] after the proclamation [bi'ythah] of his prophethood [SallAllahu alayhi wa sallam] in a detectable locus [i.e. on this earth* in a wakeful state]; even if that person did not see RasulAllah SallAllahu alayhi wa sallam, nor reports anything from him, or had reached the age of discerning according to the correct position.​

=====
explaining the above, a SaHabi:

- would have met the Prophet sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam physically
- in a 'detectable locus', place which cannot be denied by anyone; that is the earth
- while being a believer himself/herself
- after the proclamation of prophethood
​

furthermore

- it is not necessary for the person to have physically 'seen' RasulAllah sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam; which includes the blind companions
- it is not necessary that the person should have reported from RasulAllah sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam;
- though there is disagreement, the correct position is that small children are also included among companions.

​

----------------
imam bajuri continues on those who are included among Companions:

as for the statement: "and who died upon faith" [wa maata ala al-islam], it is a condition for continuing status of being a Companion, not for it original application. [for instance,] if a person becomes an apostate, and we seek Allah's refuge, he is not a Companion such as abdullah ibn khaTal.

as for those who reverted to faith such as abdullah ibn abi's sarH, then his status of being a companion is restored, however sans reward according to shafiyis; it is famous that malikis say that the status is not restored, even though it is evident from their books that there are conflicting opinions [among maliki scholars], because of which there is no hindrance [for any of them] to follow the madh'hab of shafiyis [in this issue] as expressed by their senior scholars [ashyakhihim]. and the benefit of restoring the status is in the inclusion of their names as companions and that they are equality in marriage; that is such a revert is known as a SaHabi, and he can marry the daughter of a SaHabi as an equal.

and ibn umm maktum and other blind persons like him are included as SaHabah. his mother earned the appellation, 'umm maktum' because of the loss of his eyesight, and his name was abdullah, he was among the muadh'dhins of RasulAllah sallALlahu alayhi wa sallam.

also included are sayyiduna yisa [ibn maryam] and khaDir and ilyas - `alayhimu's salatu wa's salam.

also included are angels who met with him [SallAllahu alayhi wa sallam] on earth.

thus, sayyiduna yisa alayhi's salam will be the last of the known human Companions. and the angels will live until the blowing of the horn.

khaDir will pass away when the qur'an is taken away; though, some have said that he has already passed away. the summary of this issue is: according to the most reliable position, both khaDir and ilyas are alive - except that ilyas is a Messenger by the qur'anic text: "verily, ilyas is among the messengers" [surah saaffaat, v123].

as for khaDir, it is said that he is waliy, that he is nabiy, or that he is a messenger.

the best route is the middle way, the moderate path.​

======
a little more detail can be found in awn al-murid, which may follow, bi idhnillah.



----
*fi maHall al-ta'arruf; in `awn al-murid, it is explained as: 'on the face of the earth'. meaning, not in a dream, or in the heavens when Mustafa SallAllahu alayhi wa sallam went on his night journey.

 

Brother Abu Hassan needs to answer this one for all of us!