Question
What do the scholars of religion say on this matter: On which occasions and how many times did the splitting of the chest (shaqq al-sadr) of the Prophet ﷺ take place? Please clarify in the light of the prophetic traditions.
Answer
الحمد لله، والصلاة والسلام علىٰ رسول الله، أما بعد!
Aqul wa-billahi al-tawfiq! From the investigation and study of the traditions and narrations concerning the splitting of the chest, it becomes clear that the splitting of the chest of the Prophet ﷺ is reported to have occurred five times. Muhaddithun and biographers of the Prophet have recorded these narrations in their respective compilations, together with criticism and assessment. Those who seek details should refer to Mawahib, Zurqani, Musnad Ahmad, Abu Dawud, Tayalisi, Darimi, Dala’il Abi Nu’aym, Dala’il al-Bayhaqi, Ibn Asakir, Sunan al-Darimi, Majma’ al-Zawa’id, Zad al-Ma’ad, Fath al-Bari, Tabaqat Ibn Sa’d, Sirah Ibn Hisham, Rawd al-Unuf, Kanz al-Ummal. For Urdu-reading readers, the study of Sirat al-Nabi ﷺ by Sayyid Sulayman Nadwi, vol. 3 is useful. A somewhat detailed account is presented below:
The mentioned occasions of the splitting of the chest (according to the narrations)
1) First time: at the age of five years, during his upbringing with Mai Halimah Sa’diyah.
2) Second time: at the age of ten years.
3) Third time: at the age of twenty years.
4) Fourth time: at the beginning of prophethood.
5) Fifth time: the night of the Mi’raj.
The traditions relating to the second, third and fourth occasions are extremely weak, and the critics of hadith have criticised them. Nevertheless, for clarification, the narration about the age of ten years is presented:
The narration about the age of ten (chain and text)
((عن أبي بن كعب عن أبي هريرة قال يا رسول الله ما أول ما رأيت من أمر النبوة فاستوى رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم جالسا وقال لقد سألت يا أبا هريرة إني لفي صحراء ابن عشرين سنة وأشهر إذا بكلام فوق رأسي وإذا برجل يقول لرجل أهو هو فاستقبلاني بوجوه لم أرها لخلق قط وثياب لم أرها على أحد قط فأقبلا إلى يمشيان حتى أخذ كل واحد منهما بعضدي لا أجد لأخذهما مسا فقال أحدهما لصاحبه أضجعه فأضجعاني بلا قصر ولا هصر أي من غير إتعاب فقال أحدهما لصاحبه أفلق صدره ففلقه فيما أرى بلا دم ولا وجع فقال له أخرج الغل والحسد فأخرج شيئا كهيئة العلقة ثم نبذها فطرحها فقال له أدخل الرأفة والرحمة فإذا مثل الذي أخرج أي ليدخله شبه الفضة ثم نقر إبهام رجلي اليمنى وقال أغد واسلم فرجعت أغدو بها رأفة على الصغير ورحمة على الكبيررواه عبد الله ورجاله ثقات وثقهم ابن حبان ))(مجمع الزوائد)
Summary of meaning: It is narrated from Hazrat Ubayy ibn Ka’b (may Allah be pleased with him) that, in answer to Hazrat Abu Hurairah’s (may Allah be pleased with him) question about the first sign of prophethood, the Prophet ﷺ said: I was ten years and a few months old, in an open field, when a voice came from above my head. Two angels appeared, of handsome face and fine clothing. They seized me by the arms, laid me down on the ground, and split my chest; no blood came out and there was no pain. One said: Remove the rancour and envy; something like a clot of blood was removed and thrown away. The other said: Place in its stead mercy and tenderness; something like silver was put in. Then he struck the toe of my right foot and said: Rise and be safe. After this, in me, the condition of compassion towards the young and mercy towards the elders became dominant.
Discussion on the status of the chain:
Ibn Hibban has declared the chain of this narration trustworthy (thiqah). Sulayman writes: this hadith is present in the Zawa’id of Musnad Ahmad, Ibn Hibban, Hakim, Ibn Asakir and Abu Nu’aym; but the central chain of these books is this:
معاذ بن محمد بن معاذ بن محمد بن ابی کعب عن ابيه محمد عن جده معاذ بن محمد عن ابي كعب –
This chain is extremely weak and consists of unknown narrators. The muhaddith Ali ibn al-Madini says in Kitab al-Ilal:
’’حديث مدنى واسناده مجهول كله لانعرف معاذ ولا اباه ولا جده ‘‘.
That is, the entire chain is from unknown narrators; Mu’adh, his father Muhammad and his grandfather Mu’adh — all three are unknown.
And Abu Nu’aym has written:
هذا الحديث تفرد به معاذ بن محمد و تفرد بذكر السند الذى شق فيه عن قلبه(دلائل النبوة ص:71)
That is, the narration of the splitting of the chest at the age of ten is singly transmitted only by Mu’adh ibn Muhammad.
In Kanz al-Ummal it has also been written as weak; therefore this narration could not be established as authentic.
The narration at the age of twenty
The events of the splitting of the chest at twenty are also weak, and their central chain is again this same Mu’adh ibn Muhammad ibn Mu’adh (as mentioned in Kanz al-Ummal). According to Sayyid Sulayman, in the view of the muhaddithun and the biographers, this narration is not authentic.
The splitting of the chest at the time of the beginning of revelation — review of the narrations
In some narrations from Hazrat Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her) reported in Dala’il Abi Nu’aym, Dala’il al-Bayhaqi, Musnad al-Harith and Musnad al-Tayalisi, the splitting of the chest is also mentioned at the time of the beginning of revelation; but for various reasons these are not acceptable:
Reason 1
The hadith of the beginning of revelation (Sahih al-Bukhari, Sahih Muslim, Musnad Ahmad) narrated from Hazrat Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her) is the most detailed, authentic and preserved, in which, at the first coming in the cave of Hira, there is no mention of the splitting of the chest. Thus, the absence of mention in the most authentic narration indicates the unreliability of this claim.
Reason 2
The central chain of these narrations runs through Abu Imran al-Jawni, and it is extremely weak. The full chain is this:
ابو داؤد قال حماد بن سلمة قال اخبرني ابو عمران الجوني عن رجال عن عائشة رضى الله عنها ان رسول الله صلي الله عليه وسلم اعتكف هو وخديجة شهرا بحراء فوافق شهر رمضان….. نحبط جبريل الي الارض وبقيٰ ميكائيل بين السماء والارض قال فاخذني جبريل فصلقني علاوة القفاشق عن بطني فاخرج منه ماشاء الله ثم غسله في طست من ذهب ثم كفاني كما يكفأ الاناء ثم ختم في ظهري حتي وجدت مس الخاتم.( طيالسي ص:215، 216، مرويات عائشة)
Here the teachers of Abu Imran al-Jawni are unknown. In some copies, between him and Hazrat Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her) Yazid ibn Banyus is mentioned (Musnad Abu Dawud al-Tayalisi p. 217, Dala’il Abi Nu’aym p. 69); if this is the same person, then he is described as a staunch Shi’i and one who fought against Hazrat Ali (may Allah be pleased with him). In Mizan al-I’tidal it is stated:
ما حدث عنه سوى ابي عمران الجوني قال الدولابى وهون من الشيعة الذين قاتلوا علياً ونقل ابن القطان هذا القول عن البخاري فيه قال ابوداؤد كان شيعياً قال ابن عدى احاديثه مشاهير وقال الدارقطنى لابأس به. (دلائل النبوة ص:71)
Criticism takes precedence; on this basis, the event of the splitting of the chest at the beginning of revelation is not authentic.
At the home of Hazrat Halimah Sa’diyah (childhood period) — narrations and chains
In this regard, eight chains have reached the Companions through various routes; among them two chains are authentic and the rest are weak.
A) The first chain and its reality
Chain: Jahm ibn Abi Jahm, Abdullah ibn Ja’far, and then Halimah Sa’diyah. This is in Ibn Ishaq and Dala’il Abi Nu’aym. Here Jahm is unknown, the meeting of Abdullah ibn Ja’far with Halimah is not established, and Ibn Ishaq expressed irsal/doubt: “Abdullah ibn Ja’far said it himself or said it through some source”. In Abu Nu’aym there is no doubt, but the narrators below are criticised.
1….قال ابن إسحاق حدثني جهم ابن أبي الجهم مولى لامرأة من بني تميم ، كانت عند الحارث بن حاطب ، وكان يقال : مولى الحارث بن حاطب ، قال : حدثني من سمع عبد الله بن جعفر بن أبي طالب يقول : حدثت عن حليمة
B) The second chain (Waqidi)
Ibn Sa’d narrated thus:
“اخبرنا محمد بن عمر عن اصحابه مكث عنهم سنقين حتي فطم وكانه ابن اربع سنين”
First reason (criticism of a narrator)
Muhammad ibn Umar al-Waqidi is weak, and in the view of some even kadhdhab (liar):
قال احمد بن حنبل هو كذاب يقلب الاحاديث قال ابن معين ليس بثقة وقال مرةلايكتب حديثه قال البخارى وابوحاتم متروك وقال ابو حاتم ايضاً والنسائى يضع الحديث.
Second reason (interruption)
By saying “an ashabihi” (from his companions), Waqidi omitted the chain above; therefore the chain is munqati’ (broken).
C) Another chain of Abu Nu’aym
Abd al-Samad ibn Muhammad al-Sa’di from his father, he from his father, and he from a man who used to graze Halimah’s goats — the entire link is unknown.
D) Narration from Ibn Abbas (may Allah be pleased with them both)
In the chain of Ibn Asakir and Bayhaqi is Muhammad ibn Zakariyya al-Ghallabi — a fabricator (wadda’), a storyteller.
E) The long story from Shaddad ibn Aws (may Allah be pleased with him)
In al-Bidayah wa’l-Nihayah (2/276) its gharabah (singularity) is stated. In the chain there are unnamed narrators, and an objection on Abu al-Ajfa’:
” ابن سيرين عن ابى العجفاء عن ابيه فى حديثه نظر.”
In the narration of Makhul al-Shami there is interruption (Makhul did not meet Shaddad’s time, and he was a mudallis) — it is most likely that the dropped narrator is this same Abu al-Ajfa’; Makhul omitted him because of his weakness.
Authentic narrations (childhood and Mi’raj)
((عَنْ أَنَسِ بْنِ مَالِكٍ : أَنَّ نَبِيَّ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ : ” أَتَاهُ جِبْرِيلُ وَهُوَ يَلْعَبُ مَعَ الْغِلْمَانِ ، فَأَخَذَهُ فَصَرَعَهُ ، فَشَقَّ عَنْ قَلْبِهِ ، فَاسْتَخْرَجَ الْقَلْبَ ، فَاسْتَخْرَجَ مِنْهُ عَلَقَةً ، فَقَالَ : هَذَا حَظُّ الشَّيْطَانِ مِنْكَ ، ثُمَّ غَسَلَهُ فِي طَسْتٍ مِنْ ذَهَبٍ بِمَاءِ زَمْزَمَ ، ثُمَّ لأَمَهُ ، ثُمَّ أَعَادَهُ فِي مَكَانِهِ ، وَجَاءَ الْغِلْمَانُ يَسْعَوْنَ إِلَى أُمِّهِ يَعْنِي ظِئْرَهُ ، فَقَالُوا : إِنَّ مُحَمَّدًا قَدْ قُتِلَ ، فَاسْتَقْبَلُوهُ وَهُوَ مُنْتَقِعُ اللَّوْنِ ” ، قَالَ أَنَسٌ : وَكُنْتُ أَرَى أَثَرَ الْمِخْيَطِ فِي صَدْرِهِ .))
In this hadith the splitting of the chest is mentioned, but the wisdom is not explicitly stated.
The explanation of the wisdom comes from the same narrator, Anas (may Allah be pleased with him), in the following hadith of Sahih al-Bukhari:
((عَنْ أَنَسِ بْنِ مَالِكٍ ، قَالَ : كَانَ أَبُو ذَرٍّ يُحَدِّثُ ، أَنَّ رَسُولَ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهِ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ ، قَالَ : فُرِجَ سَقْفُ بَيْتِي وَأَنَا بِمَكَّةَ ، فَنَزَلَ جِبْرِيلُ عَلَيْهِ السَّلامُ ، فَفَرَجَ صَدْرِي ، ثُمَّ غَسَلَهُ مِنْ مَاءِ زَمْزَمَ ، ثُمَّ جَاءَ بِطَسْتٍ مِنْ ذَهَبٍ مُمْتَلِئٍ حِكْمَةً وَإِيمَانًا ، فَأَفْرَغَهَا فِي صَدْرِي ، ثُمَّ أَطْبَقَهُ….. الخ))
Outcome of the research: From an overall study of the books of hadith and seerah, at first glance the impression is of five occasions, but the correct position is that the splitting of the chest is established on two occasions:
1. The period of childhood (with Mai Halima Sa’diyya)
2. The night of the Mi’raj.
The narrations about the other occasions do not meet the standards of the principles of narration.
We have written the details of the splitting of the chest so that the picture remains clear for readers, and so that the outlook of the deniers of hadith may also be understood, that is, under the cover of denying hadith, what “service(!)” to the Noble Qur’an is being carried out.
Objections of the deniers of hadith and their answers
First objection
“When, in childhood, the Prophet ﷺ was playing with the children, where was Anas (may Allah be pleased with him)? You are becoming an eyewitness to an event that took place about thirty-six years before your birth.”
First answer
Accounts of the childhood splitting of the chest are narrated not only from Anas (may Allah be pleased with him), but also from the Companions (may Allah be pleased with them) Ibn Abbas, Shaddad ibn Aws, Utbah ibn Abd al-Sulami and others (Sunan al-Darimi, al-Bidaya wal-Nihaya, Majma’ al-Zawa’id, Abu Ya’la, Ibn Asakir etc.). Although the individual chains have weaknesses, when they are considered together with the authentic narration of Anas, supporting indications arise that cannot be ignored.
Second answer
This objection is the result of a superficial reading. In the hadith of Anas (may Allah be pleased with him), Anas did not claim to have been an eyewitness; he only narrates the event. It is possible that he received it directly from the Messenger of Allah ﷺ or from some Companion, and the name was omitted for brevity. In the principles of hadith this is called “mursal of a Companion”, and mursal of a Companion is proof by unanimous agreement.
Second objection
“The heart is merely a lump of flesh; it does not perceive. The center of thoughts and emotions is the brain. If the purpose was to remove the source of evil, the brain should have been split, not the heart.”
Answer
Biological fact: The heart is the capital of human life; if the heart’s movement stops, death occurs immediately. It is observed in practice that when the brain fails, the heart still continues to beat; the reverse is not possible.
Qur’anic testimony: In many places in the Holy Qur’an, the seat of revelation and perception is described as the “heart” (qalb), not the brain.
Texts of the Qur’an (verbatim):
﴿مَن كانَ عَدُوًّا لِجِبريلَ فَإِنَّهُ نَزَّلَهُ عَلى قَلبِكَ بِإِذنِ اللَّهِ مُصَدِّقًا لِما بَينَ يَدَيهِ وَهُدًى وَبُشرى لِلمُؤمِنينَ ﴿٩٧﴾… سورة البقرة
﴿إِنَّ اللَّهَ عَليمٌ بِذاتِ الصُّدورِ﴾
﴿لَهُم قُلوبٌ لا يَفقَهونَ بِها وَلَهُم أَعيُنٌ لا يُبصِرونَ بِها…﴿١٧٩﴾… سورة الأعراف
﴿أَفَلَم يَسيروا فِى الأَرضِ فَتَكونَ لَهُم قُلوبٌ يَعقِلونَ بِها أَو ءاذانٌ يَسمَعونَ بِها فَإِنَّها لا تَعمَى الأَبصـرُ وَلـكِن تَعمَى القُلوبُ الَّتى فِى الصُّدورِ ﴿٤٦﴾…سورة الحج
From these clear verses it is evident that the centre of perception and faith is the “heart”, which is in the chest; therefore, the operation on the heart was exactly in accordance with wisdom.
Verses:
O advisor, understand this much in your heart: even if we are a thousand times ignorant, would we be more ignorant than you?
Everyone will be called by the name of their father — details of the issue
In reply to a question in a previous issue, it was mentioned that on the Day of Judgment every person will be called by the name of his father. Further clarification is presented here.
Arguments of those who hold that people will be called by their mothers’ names, and the answers
Argument 1: The narration of Tabarani
“عن ابن عباس ان الله يدعوا الناس يوم القيامة بامهاتهم سترا سنه علي عباده”
Answer: This hadith is extremely weak. Hafiz Ibn Hajar (may Allah have mercy on him): “Its chain is very weak” (Awn al-Ma’bud p. 442, vol. 4; Fath al-Bari p. 464, vol. 10). Hafiz Ibn al-Qayyim also called it weak in the margin of Sunan Abi Dawud; Mulla Ali Qari al-Hanafi wrote that it is false (batil):
” ومن ذالك حديث الناس يوم القيامة يدعون بامهتهم لابائهم هو باطل”(فتح الباری، ص:464، ج10)
Moreover, this hadith contradicts the authentic hadiths that follow, and in some routes the wording is “bi-amamihim” (by their leaders), not “bi-ummahatihim” (by their mothers). For this reason too, it cannot be used as evidence.
Argument 2: Consideration for Isa (peace be upon him)
Since Prophet Isa (peace be upon him) was born without a father, everyone will be called by their mother’s name.
Answer: A reply to this was given in the previous publication.
Argument 3: The noble lineage of Hasan and Husayn (may Allah be pleased with them)
The proposal of Imam al-Baghawi (may Allah have mercy on him): “Li-sharaf al-Hasan wal-Husayn” — that is, consideration of the lineage of Sayyida Fatima (may Allah be pleased with her).
Answer: This is a fabricated and baseless claim. The nobility of Husayn (may Allah be pleased with him) includes the paternal lineage of Hazrat Ali (may Allah be pleased with him) and his own piety and purity. Moreover, this is contrary to the explicit narration in Sahih al-Bukhari as well.
Argument 4: Concealing the faults of those born of unlawful unions
That calling by the mother’s name provides concealment.
Answer: The purpose is identification and distinction, and identification is clearer through the father’s name than through the mother’s. If there is any disgrace in calling by the father’s name, it falls upon the adulterer and adulteress; the children are innocent. Moreover, this is not contrary to the principle of “الولد للفراش وللعاهر الحجر” either.
The correct position and evidences
In the light of authentic hadiths, every person will be called by the name of his father:
Hadith of Bukhari
عَنْ ابْنِ عُمَرَ رَضِيَ اللَّهُ عَنْهُمَا عَنْ النَّبِيِّ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ قَالَ إِنَّ الْغَادِرَ يُرْفَعُ لَهُ لِوَاءٌ يَوْمَ الْقِيَامَةِ يُقَالُ هَذِهِ غَدْرَةُ فُلَانِ بْنِ فُلَانٍ(صحیح البخاری:ص912، ج2)
From this it is clear that “so-and-so son of so-and-so” is the call made by the father’s name (and not “so-and-so son of so-and-so [a woman]”). The muhaddith Ibn Battal:
” في هذا الحديث رد القول من زعم انهم لا يدعون الا بامهتهم سترا على آبائهم.(فتح البارى، ص:464،ج:10)
And further:
” والدعاء بالآباء اشد فى التعريف، وابلغ فى التميز وفى الحديث جواز الحكم بظهر الامور”.
Hadith of Abu Dawud
أَبِي الدَّرْدَاءِ قَالَ قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صَلَّى اللَّهُ عَلَيْهِ وَسَلَّمَ إِنَّكُمْ تُدْعَوْنَ يَوْمَ الْقِيَامَةِ بِأَسْمَائِكُمْ وَأَسْمَاءِ آبَائِكُمْ فَأَحْسِنُوا أَسْمَاءَكُمْ قَالَ أَبُو دَاوُد ابْنُ أَبِى زَكَرِيَّا لَمْ يُدْرِكْ أَبَا الدَّرْدَاءِ(عون المعبود شرح ابی داؤد، ص:442، ج:4، فتح الباری، ص:476، ج:10)
Although Imam Abu Dawud and Hafiz Ibn Hajar called it munqati’ (broken chain), Ibn Hibban declared it authentic
Conclusion: According to authentic hadiths, everyone will be called by their fathers’ names; Hazrat Isa (peace be upon him) is excepted from this. The narration about calling by the mother’s name is munkar/da’if, and according to Mulla Ali Qari, even mawdu’. Some have reconciled that some people will be called by their mothers’ names; but according to the hadith of Ibn Umar and the research of Ibn al-Qayyim, the preponderant view is that the actual calling will be by the father’s name.
ھذا ما عندي والله أعلم بالصواب
