When was RasulAllah ﷺ granted nubuwwah?

Discussion in 'Aqidah/Kalam' started by Aqdas, Apr 27, 2020.

Draft saved Draft deleted
  1. Noori

    Noori Senior Moderator

    Snap 2016-10-19 at 13.31.46.png
    -------------
    Snap 2016-10-19 at 13.34.36.png
    ------------------------------

    Snap 2016-10-19 at 13.35.53.png
    ---------------------------------

    Snap 2016-10-19 at 13.36.58.png
    --------------------------------

    Snap 2016-10-19 at 13.41.12.png

    -------------------------
    Snap 2016-10-19 at 13.42.43.png

    ---------------------------------------
    Snap 2016-10-19 at 13.43.53.png
    ---------------------------------------

    Snap 2016-10-19 at 13.45.41.png
    -----------------------------------------

    Snap 2016-10-19 at 13.47.21.png
    ------------------------------------

    Snap 2016-10-19 at 13.48.02.png
     
  2. Noori

    Noori Senior Moderator

    before i post translations of the other posts by sidi abu Hasan, i would like to present some references which are clearly against his view. in the second clip he said that that it is the aqidah of the karamiyyah sect? would molana sahab dare to declare all these ulama among karamiyyyah? note that references also include your shaykh molana ashraf siyalvi sahab's.

    Snap 2016-10-19 at 13.15.27.png

    ----------------------------------------------
    Snap 2016-10-19 at 13.18.30.png

    -------------------------------
    Snap 2016-10-19 at 13.19.48.png

    ---------------------------
    Snap 2016-10-19 at 13.21.20.png
    ----------------------
    Snap 2016-10-19 at 13.22.50.png

    ----------------
    Snap 2016-10-19 at 13.24.39.png
    ----------
    Snap 2016-10-19 at 13.27.31.png
    ---------
    Snap 2016-10-19 at 13.30.45.png
     
    Unbeknown likes this.
  3. Aqdas

    Aqdas Staff Member

    That might be nistūrā, the monk in busra(?) maybe. When RasulAllah ﷺ was 25 years old.
     
    Last edited: Oct 19, 2016
  4. Isaac Amini

    Isaac Amini Active Member

    I think this is covered in the 2nd clip
     
  5. Aqib alQadri

    Aqib alQadri Veteran

    anbiyaa se karuN arz ay malekoN,
    kia nabiyy hai tumhaara hamaara nabee?

    jaise sab ka khuda eik hai, waise hee,
    in ka, un ka, tumhaara hamaara nabee.

    the above couplets by Ala hazrat, azeem ulBarakat, Daryaae Rehmat, Imam Ahmed Raza Khan fazile barailwi, (alayhe rehamatu-Allahe alQawi) sum up the position of the ahle-Sunnah regarding the universal prophet-hood of our noble prophet (Allah's blessing and peace be upon him).

    he poses a question to the noble prophets thus:-
    I request the prophets thus; "O my Masters!
    Is he also your prophet, Muhammad our Holy Prophet?


    and he received the following reply:-
    just as there is just one God for all, similarly,
    for them and for all, your prophet is our Holy Prophet!
     
  6. Aqib alQadri

    Aqib alQadri Veteran

    Just expanding on brother abu Hasan's post:-

    maulana Saeed sahab should explain whether he considers Hazrat Eisa (alayhe asSalaam) a Nabi or a Rasool. We do consider him one of the Rusul - those that were given Books or a new Shariah and - as being discussed here - commanded to do Tableegh.

    Note that Hazrat Eisa (alayhe asSalaam) uses the past tense "he has made me a Nabiyy" - in the same way that Rasoolu-Allah used the past tense. so it is not necessary to start doing Tableegh to be classified as a Nabiyy.

    Hazrat Eisa (alayhe asSalaam) said these words when he was just a few days old - so did he start doing Tableegh right away or not? so does maulana sahab contend that this Rasool started doing Tableegh right away since he says he received the Book? Obviously, he cannot claim that.

    And if maulana accepts that Hazrat Eisa (alayhe asSalaam) did not start Tableegh whilst in the cradle, then why does he insist that Rasoolu-Allah cannot be said to have received prophet-hood until he started Tableegh??

    maulana Sahab loses the argument both ways.
     
    Last edited: Oct 19, 2016
    Ghulam Ali likes this.
  7. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    in sha'Allah, i will explain the below.

    also, i will listen to the new clip later, in sha'Allah. but i have still not finished with mawlana sahib's first clip!

    ---
    نسأل الله العافية
     
  8. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    if you say that imam ghazali said that it means 'taqdir', it was criticised by imam subki:

    mawahib, p31.jpg


    then imam qaSTallani says:

    mawahib, p31b.jpg

    mawahib, p32a.jpg


    ==============================
    shaykh zurqani explaning this says:


    shmawahib,zurqani v1p72.jpg

    shmawahib,zurqani v1p73.jpg
     
    Noori and Unbeknown like this.
  9. Noori

    Noori Senior Moderator

    I just listened to the 2nd clip, but unfortunately in this clip molana sahab's arguments are rather very weak that a child in islamic learning like me can see the fallacies in those arguments. and what is disgusting is that he is indirectly rejecting sahih ahadith, and insinuating that the majority of ahlussunah are karamiyyah .

    but i'll leave it for sidi abu Hasan to deal with it in academic manner and his own style. I will only translate his posts here.
     
  10. Isaac Amini

    Isaac Amini Active Member

    I hope brothers didn't miss this link. This is the 2nd part of the first speech, which includes a Q&A
     
    Noori likes this.
  11. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    i had actually stopped it as a sentence without the question tag:

    and after all these three conditions were not met in the realm of souls [aalam e arwaH].
    and when i saw the 'na', i just added 'isn't it' as the latter [decried] usage in english comes from the expression in hindi/urdu. here it was used as: "isn't it so?"

    ---
     
  12. Unbeknown

    Unbeknown Senior Moderator

    so there are three events:

    1. true dreams
    2. waHiy in the cave of hira
    3. actual proclamation of prophethood/commencement of tabligh

    between the 2nd and 3rd was there not an interval of time? was it not that until the revelation of "qum", (Arise and warn) the actual command for tabligh had not come? so would that mean that only after this verse he (peace be upon him) became a nabyi?

    and the blessed seal on his (peace be upon him) blessed back.

    and the words of a monk (I do not know if he was the same person) are also interesting, "none has sat under this tree but a prophet".
     
    Ghulam Ali likes this.
  13. pedantic note to sidi AH:

    it is more idiomatic in English to translate
    aur ye teenoN sharTeN aalam e arwaaH meiN to nahiN payi gayiN thi na?

    as

    and after all these three conditions were not met in the realm of souls [aalam e arwaH], were they ?



    (instead of the Indo-Pakistani give-away phrase, "'isn't it?")


    --
    Also a maulana told me his name was Sa'eed as-Sa'ad not Saeed Asad. Allah knows best. I'm very surprised by his talk as it goes against what is commonly taught in our mosques and madrassahs...

    --

     
  14. Arshad ul Qadri

    Arshad ul Qadri New Member

    Bahar e Shariat author makes it very simple just in one line:

    dبلکہ محض عطائے الٰہی ہے، کہ جسے چاہتا ہے اپنے فضل سے دیتا ہے، ہاں! دیتا اُسی کو ہے جسے اس منصبِ عظیم کے قابل بناتا ہے، جو قبلِ حصولِ نبوّت تمام

    He mentions Qabl Husul Nubuwwat.

    It could also explain why there is so much igtilaf about what is possible and not, before and after Nubuwwah according the ashari.

    Without a doubt many other Ahadith show that the last Prophet was already a Prophet before his human form. Sallallaahu Alaihi Wasallam.
     
  15. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    imam bajuri quotes sayyidi ali al-khawwaS that: "the prophet was prophet from childhood"

    see tuHfatu'l murid sharh jawharah al-tawHid

    tuhfatmurid.jpg
     
  16. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    the third condition is incorrect according to jumhur position.

    it is not a condition that a nabiy is commanded to do tabligh. and only a rasul is commanded to do tabligh.

    some scholars consider nabiy and rasul as synonymous; but according to jumhur there is a difference. and as we have seen mawlana saeed sahib ALSO makes this difference - he does not consider both the same (for he correctly identifies that a rasul CAN be a non-human, such as an angel).

    more on this later, in sha'Allah.

    ---
    but we need to close point #2 still.

    in surah maryam, verse 30, hazrat yisa alayhi's salam says:

    [​IMG]

    and he said, verily i am a slave of Allah, and He has given me the Book, and has made me a prophet.


    hazrat yisa alayhi's salam was a newborn child - what would be your reply to a christian who says: hazrat yisa alayhi's salam is superior to hazrat muhammad salawatullahi wa salamuhu alayh, because hazrat yisa alayhi's salam was a prophet since birth and hazrat muhammad sallALlahu alayhi wa sallam BECAME a prophet after 40 years.

    imam nasafi quotes an opinion that says he was given nubuwwat in his childhood.

    tafnasafi v2p334.jpg

    ===
    of course, there are explanations. most mufassirin explain that the revelation is to be given in the future, but as it is a foregone conclusion and a definite occurrence that is destined, it is said here. such as the verse below:

    [​IMG]


    the command of Allah cometh [i.e., judgement day and punishment for disbelievers]​

    even though judgement day is still far, past tense is used to mean that it is a definite occurrence.

    see tafsir kabir for lengthy dissertation and proofs for both positions; one group says that hazrat yisa was a prophet in childhood, and the other says he becomes a prophet in the future at age thirty when he receives waHy. a similar verse is about hazrat yahya alayhi's salam, but it is open to interpretation as it says: "hukm" and those who do not accept will say "hukm" here does not mean prophethood/nubuwwah.


    [​IMG]
    o yahya, take hold of the Book firmly. and we gave him the command [prophethood] in his childhood.


    alahazrat translates it:

    kanz.jpg

    as qaDi bayDawi has said:

    baydawi v5p544.jpg

    though other mufassiring say it means: 'fiqh fi'd din'

    wAllahu a'alam.

    ----
    ali al-qari in daw al-ma'ali, under the verse:

    wa farDun lazimun taSdiqu ruslin
    wa amlakin kiramin bi'n nawali

    says:

    it is quite probable that the poet/author prefers the position that nabiy and rasul are synonymous (mean the same); and this is ibn humam's preferred position. however this is against the majority (jumhur) because rasul/messenger is a special nabi/prophet. and [a prophet] is a human to whom revelation is sent, regardless whether he is commanded to do tabligh [deliver the message] or not; however rasul or messenger is [certainly] commanded to deliver the message.

    ===
    i do not want to digress too much, but the point mawlana saeed makes that it is a condition that prophets should do tabligh is debatable. hence, it doesn't bolster his position.

    wAllahu a'alam.
     
    Ghulam Ali, Aqib alQadri and Aqdas like this.
  17. Isaac Amini

    Isaac Amini Active Member

    Last edited: Oct 19, 2016
  18. Isaac Amini

    Isaac Amini Active Member

    I have no issue accepting the truth. I have no issue in accepting Allama Saeed Asad is wrong on this matter if it is proved so. My loyalty lies with the truth. I say this sincerely
     
    Ghulam Ali and Unbeknown like this.
  19. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    brother, i am hoping you will be soon included in the 'we' above...and mawlana saeed asad sahib as well. in sha'Allah wa bi tawfiqih.

    : )
     
    Nur al Anwar likes this.
  20. abu Hasan

    abu Hasan Administrator

    mawlana saeed sahib says:

    nabi kahte kise haiN

    nabi ke liye 3 sharToN ka hona zaruri hai, teen shartoN ka.

    pahle number par, ke woh bashar ho. koyi ghayr e bashar nabi nahiN ho sakta. rasul ho saktey haiN. lekin nabiy ke liye zaruri kya hai, ke woh kya ho, bashar ho. bahar e shariat safah 10 utha ke dekh leN.

    doosra. waHy ke baghayr nubuwwat nahiN milti. nabiy kis se banta hai. waHy se. jab tak waHy nahiN aati nabi nahiN ban'ta. do sharteN.

    aur teesri shart kya hai. ke uske aage ummat bhi ho. Allah ka paygham us par aaye - aur woh aagey kisi ko pahuNchaye.

    ye teen sharTeN hoN to shar'an phir usko nabi kaha jata hai.

    ====
    aur ye teenoN sharTeN aalam e arwaaH meiN to nahiN payi gayiN thi na? sarkar us waqt bashari Haalat meiN nahiN the. sarkar par waHy nahiN aayi thi. aur nabiy karim alayhi's salatu wa's salam ke liye Allah ne koyi ummat bhi muqarrar nahiN ki thi ke inko paygham sunaO mera.


    ===================

    translation:

    who is called a prophet?

    there are 3 conditions necessary for a prophet.

    1. he should be human. a non-human cannot be a prophet. they can be messengers [rasul], but it is necessary for a prophet to be human. check page no.10 in bahar e shariat.

    2. without revelation [waHy] one does not RECEIVE prophethood. what makes one a prophet? revelation [waHy]. UNTIL revelation is received one does not BECOME a prophet. that makes two conditions. [emphasis mine]

    3. and what is the third condition? that there should be his followers too. the message of Allah ta'ala comes to him [i.e. prophet] and he [the prophet] will forward the [message] to the followers.

    if these three conditions are met, then by Divine Law (shariah) he is called a prophet.

    and after all these three conditions were not met in the realm of souls [aalam e arwaH], isn't it? because our Master was not in his human state at that time. our Master had not received any revelation. and for our Noble Prophet sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam - Allah ta'ala had not ordained [muqarrar] a group of followers [ummat] and commanded: 'deliver My message to them'.


    ======================
    there are a few objections on this speech.

    the first condition is as stated in bahar e shariat. no objection on that one, and no argument concerning that.

    the second condition...um...i do not like the way `allamah sahib phrased it. let us go back to bahar e shariat for this one.

    bahar, v1p29.jpg

    this translates to:

    for one to be a prophet, it is necessary that he should receive revelation [waHy] - whether it is [delivered] by an angel or he receives without any intermediary.

    blink and you will miss it.

    allamah sahib said: "without revelation [waHy] one does not RECEIVE prophethood." this specifically means that UNTIL revelation is received that person is not a prophet. and he emphasises it in the next sentence: "UNTIL revelation is received one does not BECOME a prophet."

    of course, he has phrased it in this manner because it suits his position.

    ---
    now, if RasulAllah sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam BECAME a prophet AFTER receiving revelation in hiraa - then what about the first hadith in sahih bukhari titled: "the beginning of revelation" it is a lengthy hadith, and i quote just the portion that is relevant to our discussion;bukhari, hadith #4953 [again this is in bab al-tafsir, and i have selected this version for the commentary that follows]:

    bukhari, 4953a.jpg


    now, in this hadith, it is said that the beginning of revelation to RasulAllah sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam was in the form of true dreams. a few questions:

    1. were these dreams prior or after the 40th year?

    2. were these dreams prior or after the revelation in cave hira?

    3. it is a well-known and accepted position that the dreams of prophets are also waHy; are these dreams waHy?

    4. if it were before the 40th year, was he a prophet THEN? or did he BECOME a prophet ONLY after the event in cave hira where he received what is known as the first revelation [first is relative and subjective. it means first from the qur'an. wAllahu a'alam.]? if not, why not?

    ---
    imam ibn Hajar explaining this writes: [fat'H al-bari vol.11/p.105]

    fath.v11p105a.jpg


    even if one says that the dreams were in the 40th year, the claim that he was MADE a prophet in cave hira doesn't stand. because in the above passage ibn Hajar says: "the beginning of the advent of waHy was dreams" and then adds, "however those signs that absolutely proved his being a prophet were long before this; things such as salutation of stone as found in the hadith of muslim etc."

    the question is, when those stones/pebbles saluted RasulAllah sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam, what did they say?

    ---
    let us have a quick look on what imam ayni has to say in his umdat al-qari v19, p438:

    umdatqari v19p438.jpg



    "...otherwise, the proof of prophethood [dalayil al-nubuwwah] had appeared in him long before; such as hearing from baHirah the monk, and hearing near the ka'abah: 'fasten your lower garment [izar] and saluting of the stone."

    so when we refer to the hadith of sahih muslim #2277:


    muslim, 2277.jpg


    RasulAllah sallAllahu alayhi wa sallam said: "verily i recognize the stone in makkah which saluted me BEFORE I WAS SENT FORTH (ub'ath) and verily, i recognise/know it [even] now."

    ---
    the question here is more difficult: why did RasulAllah sallALlahu alayhi wa sallam say: 'before i was sent forth" i.e. 'biythah' and not 'before i was given prophethood?'

    and baHirah recognised WHO? prophet or not-prophet?


    ----
    it should be known that in arabic when they use 'before prophethood' they mean, before biythah; not that he was a non-prophet and THEN he was given prophethood and THEN he became a prophet at 40.

    [to be continued, in sha'Allah]

    wAllahu a'alam wa ilmuhu atam.
     

    Attached Files:

Share This Page