There are three very important issues in the observations of Mi’raj on which there has been disagreement even among the Companions and the Followers, and they are as follows:
➊ Did the Prophet ﷺ attain the honor of seeing Allah Almighty on the night of Mi’raj?
➋ Did Allah Almighty speak directly (without any intermediary) to the Prophet ﷺ?
➌ The verse of the Holy Quran: ﴿ثُمَّ دَنَا فَتَدَلَّىٰ﴾
“Then he drew near and bowed down.” To whom does this refer? Who are دنو and تدلي in relation to each other? Did Allah Almighty come near the Prophet ﷺ and bow to him? Or does it mean that Angel Jibreel (Gabriel) came near and bowed to the Prophet ﷺ?
Explanation of the Vision of Allah Almighty, Speech from Allah, and دنو و تدلي
As far as the first matter is concerned, the fact is that no one in the world, including the Prophets, has been granted the honor of seeing Allah (the Divine Vision). Prophet Musa (Moses) عليه السلام expressed this desire in the world and said: ﴿رَبِّ أَرِنِي أَنظُرْ إِلَيْكَ﴾ “O my Lord! Show me Yourself, so that I may look upon You.” Allah Almighty said:
﴿لَن تَرَانِي وَلَٰكِنِ انظُرْ إِلَى الْجَبَلِ فَإِنِ اسْتَقَرَّ مَكَانَهُ فَسَوْفَ تَرَانِي﴾
“Musa! You can never see Me, but look at the mountain; if it remains firm in its place, then you will surely see Me.”
﴿فَلَمَّا تَجَلَّىٰ رَبُّهُ لِلْجَبَلِ جَعَلَهُ دَكًّا وَخَرَّ مُوسَىٰ صَعِقًا﴾
“So when his Lord manifested His glory to the mountain, He made it crumble, and Musa (Moses) عليه السلام fell unconscious.”
When Musa عليه السلام regained consciousness, he understood that he could not see his Lord in this world with these worldly eyes. Therefore, he supplicated before the Divine Presence:
﴿سُبْحَانَكَ تُبْتُ إِلَيْكَ وَأَنَا أَوَّلُ الْمُؤْمِنِينَ﴾
“O Allah! You are pure, I repent to You, and I am the first of the believers.”
From this incident of Prophet Musa عليه السلام, it is understood that despite being a noble Prophet, he could not bear the vision of Allah Almighty. From this, it is inferred that worldly eyes do not have the capacity to endure the manifestation of Allah Almighty; however, in the Hereafter, Allah Almighty will grant such strength to these eyes that they will be pleased with the vision of their Lord. If the eyes of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم had the capacity by Allah’s will, he could have developed such strength during the Mi’raj (Ascension) that he would have seen Allah. But apart from some sayings of the Companions and the Followers, there is no strong evidence that indicates the affirmation of the vision. Therefore, the most correct view is that the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم also did not attain the honor of seeing Allah during the night of Mi’raj.
In the commentary of Aqeedah al-Tahawiyyah, it is stated:
فإن الرؤية فى الدنيا ممكن، إذا لو لم تكن ممكنة لما سألها موسىٰ عليه السلام لكن لم يرد نص بأنه صلى الله عليه وسلم رأى ربه بعين رأسه، بل ورد ما يدل على نفي الرؤية
“The vision of Allah is possible in this world, because if it were not possible, Musa عليه السلام would not have asked for it. However, there is no text indicating that the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم saw his Lord with his physical eyes; rather, there are explicit statements indicating that he did not see his Lord.”
After this, the author of Sharh Aqeedah al-Tahawiyyah narrated the hadith in which the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم was asked whether he saw his Lord, and he replied: “He is light; how could I see Him?” And in one narration: “I saw the light.” He says: فهذا صريح فى نفي الرؤية “This hadith is absolutely clear in negating the vision.”
Arguments of the Vision Affirmers and Their Analysis
Those who believe in the vision of Allah Almighty base their argument mostly on certain parts of the verses of Surah An-Najm:
﴿ثُمَّ دَنَا فَتَدَلَّىٰ. فَكَانَ قَابَ قَوْسَيْنِ أَوْ أَدْنَىٰ . فَأَوْحَىٰ إِلَىٰ عَبْدِهِ مَا أَوْحَىٰ . مَا كَذَبَ الْفُؤَادُ مَا رَأَىٰ . أَفَتُمَارُونَهُ عَلَىٰ مَا يَرَىٰ . وَلَقَدْ رَآهُ نَزْلَةً أُخْرَىٰ . عِندَ سِدْرَةِ الْمُنتَهَىٰ . عِندَهَا جَنَّةُ الْمَأْوَىٰ . إِذْ يَغْشَى السِّدْرَةَ مَا يَغْشَىٰ . مَا زَاغَ الْبَصَرُ وَمَا طَغَىٰ . لَقَدْ رَأَىٰ مِنْ آيَاتِ رَبِّهِ الْكُبْرَىٰ .﴾
“Then he drew near and descended; so he was at a distance of two bow lengths or nearer. Then He revealed to His servant what He revealed. The heart did not lie [about] what it saw. Will you dispute with him over what he saw? And he certainly saw him in another descent, at the Lote Tree of the Utmost Boundary—near it is the Garden of Refuge—when there covered the Lote Tree that which covered it. The sight [of the Prophet] did not swerve, nor did it transgress [its limit]. He certainly saw of the greatest signs of his Lord.”
The first two verses of these are specifically interpreted by some as referring to Allah Almighty, meaning Allah Almighty came so close to the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) that the distance was two bow lengths or even less. However, the following verse “Then He revealed to His servant what He revealed” negates this meaning. When Allah Almighty came so close to the Prophet (peace be upon him) that the distance was two bow lengths or less, then instead of revelation, the words should have been (كلم الله ما كلم) “Allah spoke what He spoke,” because at such proximity, revelation is not done but direct speech occurs; such closeness means face-to-face meeting. What is the meaning of revelation after being face-to-face? After that, there should have been direct conversation. Since this is not the case and the Prophet (peace be upon him) did not converse directly with Allah but the exchange of commands was still through revelation, this is clear evidence that the closeness and approach described in ﴿ثُمَّ دَنَا فَتَدَلَّىٰ . فَكَانَ قَابَ قَوْسَيْنِ أَوْ أَدْنَىٰ.﴾ is between the Prophet (peace be upon him) and Angel Jibreel (Gabriel), not between Allah and the Prophet. Therefore, the more accurate translation is that Angel Jibreel revealed to His servant, i.e., the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), the revelation (of the Quran). Hence, in فأوحى, the pronoun refers to Angel Jibreel (as the context supports), meaning Angel Jibreel conveyed Allah’s revelation, Allah’s Quran, or Allah’s message to Muhammad (peace be upon him). If in فأوحى the pronoun is taken to refer to Allah, the meaning would be: Allah revealed to His servant Muhammad (peace be upon him) (through Angel Jibreel) what He revealed. This meaning would be closer to the context if فأوحى is related to the preceding verse before (علمه شديد القوىٰ) and علمه is considered an interjected phrase up to او ادنيٰ. Hafiz Ibn Kathir (may Allah have mercy on him) has accepted both meanings as correct.
A third interpretation given by some commentators is that in فأوحى the subject pronoun is Allah, in إلىٰ عبده the pronoun refers to Angel Jibreel, and in ما أوحى, أوحى the subject is Angel Jibreel, meaning: “Then Allah revealed to His servant (Jibreel) what Jibreel revealed to Muhammad (peace be upon him).”
In none of these three interpretations does the meaning of direct conversation emerge.
Moreover, an even clearer indication that the pronouns refer to Angel Jibreel is that this event is not related to the Night of Ascension (Laylat al-Miraj). It is actually the event at the beginning of prophethood when the Prophet of Allah saw Angel Jibreel for the first time in his original form. These verses describe that event. Hafiz Ibn Kathir writes:
The Prophet (peace be upon him) saw Angel Jibreel not on the Night of Ascension but earlier when the Messenger of Allah was on earth. At that time, Angel Jibreel descended from the heavens to the earth and approached the Prophet. Angel Jibreel was in the original form in which Allah created him, having six hundred wings. Then the Prophet saw Angel Jibreel a second time near the Lote Tree of the Utmost Boundary, i.e., on the Night of Ascension. This first vision was after the beginning of prophethood when Angel Jibreel first came to the Prophet. Then Allah revealed the initial verses of Surah Iqra to him, after which the revelation temporarily ceased. During this period, the Prophet repeatedly climbed a mountain intending to throw himself down, but whenever he did so, Angel Jibreel called out to him from the heavenly space: “O Muhammad! You are the true Messenger of Allah, and I am Jibreel.” Hearing this, the Prophet’s heart was comforted and his eyes cooled. Whenever he intended to do so, this happened until a time came when Angel Jibreel appeared to the Messenger of Allah in the valley of Makkah in his original form, with six hundred wings and a body whose size filled the space between the heavens and the earth. Angel Jibreel approached the Prophet and revealed to him from Allah what Allah had commanded him. At that time, the Prophet recognized the greatness of the angel who brought the divine message and understood the status of this angel in the sight of the Creator of the universe who sent him.
From this explanation, it becomes clear that in ﴿ثُمَّ دَنَا فَتَدَلَّىٰ . فَكَانَ قَابَ قَوْسَيْنِ أَوْ أَدْنَىٰ.﴾ the pronouns refer to the same angel mentioned in the preceding verses:
﴿عَلَّمَهُ شَدِيدُ الْقُوَىٰ . ذُو مِرَّةٍ فَاسْتَوَىٰ . وَهُوَ بِالْأُفُقِ الْأَعْلَىٰ .﴾
“The strong [angel] taught him the Quran. He was powerful. So he sat straight while he was at the highest horizon.”
This angel is Angel Jibreel.
The following verses: ﴿ثُمَّ دَنَا فَتَدَلَّىٰ﴾ describe this angel descending to the earth and approaching the Prophet (peace be upon him). This is further supported by the fact that almost the same attributes of Angel Jibreel are mentioned elsewhere in the Quran. Allah Almighty says:
﴿إِنَّهُ لَقَوْلُ رَسُولٍ كَرِيمٍ . ذِي قُوَّةٍ عِندَ ذِي الْعَرْشِ مَكِينٍ . مُّطَاعٍ ثَمَّ أَمِينٍ. وَمَا صَاحِبُكُم بِمَجْنُونٍ . وَلَقَدْ رَآهُ بِالْأُفُقِ الْمُبِينِ﴾
“These verses also describe the power and strength of Angel Jibreel and the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) seeing him at the highest horizons.”
Therefore, among the companions (may Allah be pleased with them) and the followers, those who have identified the pronouns in ﴿ثُمَّ دَنَا فَتَدَلَّىٰ﴾ as referring to Angel Jibreel are correct and this is consistent with other explanations in the Quran and Hadith. It is narrated from Abdullah ibn Mas’ud (may Allah be pleased with him) that the three verses of the Quran: ﴿ثُمَّ دَنَا فَتَدَلَّىٰ﴾ ﴿مَا كَذَبَ الْفُؤَادُ مَا رَأَىٰ﴾ and ﴿لَقَدْ رَأَىٰ مِنْ آيَاتِ رَبِّهِ الْكُبْرَىٰ﴾ mean that the Prophet (peace be upon him) saw Angel Jibreel in his original form, with six hundred wings.
And Abu Hurairah (may Allah be pleased with him) says: ﴿وَلَقَدْ رَآهُ نَزْلَةً أُخْرَىٰ﴾ “Indeed, he saw him a second time or once more descending.” (Both translations are correct) means that the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) saw Angel Jibreel.
Abu Dharr (may Allah be pleased with him) says: I asked the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him): Have you seen your Lord? He replied:
نور أنىٰ أراه؟
“He is light; how could I see Him?”
In another narration, Abdullah ibn Shaqiq (may Allah have mercy on him), a follower, says that he asked Abu Dharr (may Allah be pleased with him): If I had seen the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him), I would have surely asked you. Abu Dharr asked: What would you ask about? Abdullah ibn Shaqiq said: I would ask you: Have you seen your Lord? Abu Dharr replied: When I asked you this, you said: رأيت نورا “I saw a light.”
The meaning of “I saw a light” is “not seeing Allah” because the luminous rays actually veil the sight of Allah. As in a Hadith, the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) said:
إن الله عزوجل لا ينام ولا ينبغي له أن ينام، يخفض القسط ويرفعه، يرفع إليه عمل الليل قبل عمل النهار وعمل النهار قبل عمل الليل، حجابه النور، وفي رواية أبى بكر: النار، لو كشفه لأحرقت سبحات وجهه ما انتهىٰ إليه بصره من خلقه
“Allah Almighty neither sleeps nor is He in need of sleep. He lowers and raises the scales (i.e., increases or decreases provision according to deeds). The deeds of the night are taken before the deeds of the day, and the deeds of the day are taken before the deeds of the night. His veil is light (in one narration, the word ‘fire’ is used). If He were to remove this veil, the manifestations of His face would burn whatever His sight reached among His creation.”
The narration of Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her) is the clearest and the interpretation of the verses of An-Najm under discussion is also transmitted from the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him). In this regard, this narration is decisive. Masruq (may Allah have mercy on him), a follower, says:
I was leaning against Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her) when she said: In another narration, I asked Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her): Did Muhammad (peace be upon him) see his Lord? She said: Glory be to Allah! Your question made my hair stand on end. Then she said:
O Abu Aisha! There are three things, and whoever claims any of them has certainly fabricated a great lie against Allah. I asked: What are those things? She said: Whoever claims that Muhammad (peace be upon him) saw his Lord has certainly fabricated a great lie against Allah.
Masruq said: I sat down and said: Umm al-Mu’minin! Wait and do not rush. Did Allah not say: ﴿وَلَقَدْ رَآهُ بِالْأُفُقِ الْمُبِينِ﴾
“And he saw him at the highest horizon.” And ﴿وَلَقَدْ رَآهُ نَزْلَةً أُخْرَىٰ﴾
“And he saw him a second time.”
Then Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her) said: I am the first in this Ummah who asked the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) about these verses, and he said: “These verses refer only to seeing Jibreel. I never saw him in his original form except those two times. I saw him descending from the sky, and the size of his original existence filled the space between the heavens and the earth.”
Then Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her) said: O Masruq! Have you not heard that Allah said:
﴿لَّا تُدْرِكُهُ الْأَبْصَارُ وَهُوَ يُدْرِكُ الْأَبْصَارَ ۖ وَهُوَ اللَّطِيفُ الْخَبِيرُ﴾
“Vision perceives Him not, but He perceives [all] vision; and He is the Subtle, the Acquainted.”
Moreover, have you not heard that Allah Almighty says:
﴿وَمَا كَانَ لِبَشَرٍ أَن يُكَلِّمَهُ اللَّهُ إِلَّا وَحْيًا أَوْ مِن وَرَاءِ حِجَابٍ أَوْ يُرْسِلَ رَسُولًا فَيُوحِيَ بِإِذْنِهِ مَا يَشَاءُ ۚ إِنَّهُ عَلِيٌّ حَكِيمٌ﴾
“It is not for any human being that Allah should speak to him except by revelation or from behind a veil or by sending a messenger to reveal, by His permission, what He wills. Indeed, He is Most High and Wise.”
Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her) said: Whoever thinks that the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) concealed anything from Allah’s Book (i.e., did not convey it) has also fabricated a great lie against Allah. Allah Almighty says:
﴿يَا أَيُّهَا الرَّسُولُ بَلِّغْ مَا أُنزِلَ إِلَيْكَ مِن رَّبِّكَ ۖ وَإِن لَّمْ تَفْعَلْ فَمَا بَلَّغْتَ رِسَالَتَهُ﴾
“O Prophet! Convey what has been revealed to you from your Lord. If you do not, then you have not conveyed His message.”
Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her) said: Whoever thinks that the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) foretells the conditions of the coming day has also fabricated a great lie against Allah, while Allah Almighty says:
﴿قُل لَّا يَعْلَمُ مَن فِي السَّمَاوَاتِ وَالْأَرْضِ الْغَيْبَ إِلَّا اللَّهُ ۚ وَمَا يَشْعُرُونَ أَيَّانَ يُبْعَثُونَ﴾
“Say: None in the heavens and earth knows the unseen except Allah.”
From the above explanation, it becomes clear that on the Night of Ascension, the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) neither saw Allah Almighty, nor spoke directly with Allah, nor came close to Allah in the manner that some people interpret (ثم دنا) as referring to Allah Almighty.
The Position of Hazrat Abdullah bin Abbas (May Allah be pleased with them)
In some narrations, it is only from Hazrat Abdullah bin Abbas (may Allah be pleased with them) that it is reported that the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) saw Allah with his eyes. However, on the other hand, it is also narrated from Hazrat Ibn Abbas (may Allah be pleased with him) that the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) saw Allah with his heart. Accordingly, in Sahih Muslim, Hazrat Ibn Abbas (may Allah be pleased with him) said:
The meaning of Allah Almighty’s words ﴿مَا كَذَبَ الْفُؤَادُ مَا رَأَىٰ﴾ and ﴿وَلَقَدْ رَآهُ نَزْلَةً أُخْرَىٰ﴾
is: رآه بفؤاده مرتين “You saw Allah twice with your heart.”
Thus, from Hazrat Ibn Abbas (may Allah be pleased with him), narrations of both types—seeing with the eyes and seeing with the heart—have been transmitted. Therefore, Hafiz Ibn Kathir says:
وفي رواية عنه: أنه أطلق الرؤية، وهى محمولة على المقيدة بالفؤاد، ومن روى عنه بالبصر فقد أغرب، فإنه لا يصح فى ذلك شيء عن الصحابة رضي الله عنهم
“The absolute vision narrated from Hazrat Ibn Abbas (may Allah be pleased with them) should be interpreted in light of the narration that specifies seeing with the heart, and whoever narrated from him the vision with the eyes has said something very strange, because nothing authentic has been established from the Companions regarding this.”
The researcher of the era, Sheikh Nasiruddin Al-Albani (may Allah have mercy on him), says:
وبالجملة، فتفسير الآية من ابن عباس برؤية الله تبارك وتعالىٰ ثابت عنه، لكن الأخذ بالتفسير الذى ذكرنا عنه مرفوعا أولىٰ منه والأخذ واجب، دون الموقوف، لاسيما وقد اضطرب الرواة فى هذه الرؤية، فمنهم من أطلقها كما فى حديث الترجمة وغيره، ومنهم من قيدها بالفؤاد كما فى رواية مسلم المذكور، وهى أصح الروايات عنه، والله أعلم
“In any case, the interpretation of the verse of An-Najm regarding the vision of the Creator is established from Hazrat Ibn Abbas (may Allah be pleased with them), but compared to this, the interpretation of this verse which we have mentioned from the Prophet (peace be upon him) (through the narration of Sayyida Aisha, may Allah be pleased with her) is better. Therefore, it is obligatory to accept the raised (Prophetic) statement over the suspended (Companion’s) statement. Especially since the narrators who narrated from Ibn Abbas expressed confusion about this vision; some said absolutely (that the Lord was seen), and some restricted it to the heart (that He was seen with the heart), as in the narration of Muslim, and this is the most authentic narration among the narrations transmitted from Hazrat Ibn Abbas (may Allah be pleased with them). And Allah knows best.”
This is also written by Hafiz Ibn Hajar, may Allah have mercy on him:
جاءت عن ابن عباس أخبار مطلقة وأخرىٰ مقيدة، فيجب حمل مطلقها علىٰ مقيدها
“There are narrations from Hazrat Ibn Abbas, may Allah be pleased with him, about seeing in an absolute sense and also specific narrations about seeing with the heart. Therefore, it is necessary to interpret the absolute as restricted (to the specific narrations).”
That is to say, it will be said that Hazrat Ibn Abbas, may Allah be pleased with him, means seeing with the heart, not with the eyes. Hafiz Ibn Hajar further writes:
وعلىٰ هذا فيمكن الجمع بين إثبات ابن عباس ونفي عائشة بأن يحمل نفيها علىٰ رؤية البصر، وإثباته علىٰ رؤية القلب
“The narration from Hazrat Ibn Abbas, may Allah be pleased with both of them, about seeing with the heart allows for reconciliation and harmonization between these two positions, that is, between the position of Ibn Abbas, may Allah be pleased with him, affirming the vision, and the position of Hazrat Aisha, may Allah be pleased with her, denying the vision. In this way, the denial of Hazrat Aisha, may Allah be pleased with her, is interpreted as denial of vision with the eyes, and the affirmation of Hazrat Ibn Abbas, may Allah be pleased with both of them, is interpreted as vision with the heart.”
This reconciliation unifies the stance of all the Companions, may Allah be pleased with them, and there remains no disagreement among them. They all agree that the Messenger of Allah, peace and blessings be upon him, did not see Allah with his eyes. What remains is the question of what seeing with the heart means. Its reality is something we can neither know nor explain. Its meaning is known only to Allah Almighty.
The narration of Shareek bin Abdullah and its misconception and uniqueness
Now remains the matter of the narration of Shareek bin Abdullah, which is in Sahih Bukhari’s Book of Tawheed. In it, he narrates from Hazrat Anas bin Malik (may Allah be pleased with him). It states that after the seventh heaven, the Prophet (peace be upon him) ascended higher, which only Allah knows, until he reached Sidrat al-Muntaha, and the Almighty, the Compeller, came near and descended (or bowed down) until He was as close as the length of two bows or even less. Then Allah revealed the command making fifty prayers obligatory upon your Ummah.
Hafiz Ibn Hajar (may Allah have mercy on him) says:
“The Hadith of Mi’raj has been narrated by a group of the Sahabah (may Allah be pleased with them), but in the Sahihayn (Bukhari and Muslim), all the chains revolve around Hazrat Anas (may Allah be pleased with him), meaning they are narrated through him, although there is disagreement in the statements of the narrators who narrate from him. One narrator who reports something is not found in the narration of another.”
Thus, Shareek’s narration is very different from all other narrators who narrate from Hazrat Anas (may Allah be pleased with him), and it contains such peculiarities that are not found in any other narration. For this reason, the Muhaddithin have considered these peculiarities as his misconception. Hafiz Ibn Hajar (may Allah have mercy on him) has listed more than ten such misconceptions of his.
In the above excerpt, Shareek alone attributes the pronouns of ﴿ثُمَّ دَنَا فَتَدَلَّىٰ فَكَانَ قَابَ قَوْسَيْنِ أَوْ أَدْنَىٰ.﴾ to Allah, which is also a misconception because no other narrator who narrates from Hazrat Anas (may Allah be pleased with him) has mentioned this. Accordingly, Imam Muslim (may Allah have mercy on him), after narrating the Hadith of Mi’raj which is narrated through Thabit al-Bunani from Anas, refers to Shareek bin Abdullah’s narration from Anas and says:
وساق الحديث بقصته نحو حديث ثابت البناني، وقدم فيه شيئا وأخر وزاد ونقص
“Shareek has narrated the story of Mi’raj in the same way as Thabit al-Bunani narrated it, but Shareek has altered some things in order and has also committed additions and omissions.”
Hafiz Ibn Kathir (may Allah have mercy on him), quoting Imam Muslim’s statement about Shareek, writes:
“And it is as Imam Muslim said. Because Shareek bin Abdullah bin Abi Namar showed confusion in narrating this Hadith and his memory became weak, and he could not remember it correctly, as will be detailed when other Hadiths are mentioned. Some have considered it a dream as a prelude to Mi’raj. Hafiz Abu Bakr (may Allah have mercy on him), i.e., Imam Bayhaqi, said about Shareek’s Hadith: This is an addition in which he is unique. He said this according to the belief of those who say that the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) saw his Lord, meaning the narrator Shareek bin Abdullah’s statement: ‘Then the Compeller, the Mighty, came near and descended, so He came as close as the length of two bows or less.’
Imam Bayhaqi (may Allah have mercy on him) further writes:
“And the statement of Hazrat Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her), Ibn Mas’ud (may Allah be pleased with him), and Abu Hurairah (may Allah be pleased with him) that they interpreted these verses as referring to the vision of Jibreel (peace be upon him) is more correct.”
Hafiz Ibn Kathir (may Allah have mercy on him) says:
What Imam Bayhaqi said on this issue is true, because Hazrat Abu Dharr (may Allah be pleased with him) asked the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) whether he had seen his Lord, and the Prophet (peace be upon him) said: “He is light; how could I see Him?” In one narration, the Prophet (peace be upon him) said: “I saw light (not Allah).”
And in Surah An-Najm, Allah’s statement: ﴿ثُمَّ دَنَا فَتَدَلَّىٰ﴾ refers only to Jibreel (peace be upon him), as narrated in Sahihayn from Umm al-Mu’minin Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her), Ibn Mas’ud (may Allah be pleased with him), and similarly in Sahih Muslim from Abu Hurairah (may Allah be pleased with him). None of the Sahabah (may Allah be pleased with them) oppose interpreting this verse as referring to Jibreel (peace be upon him).
And in the Tafsir of Surah An-Najm, Hafiz Ibn Kathir writes:
“And what we have said that مقترب, the one who came near between himself and the Prophet (peace be upon him), is Jibreel (peace be upon him). This is the statement of Umm al-Mu’minin Aisha (may Allah be pleased with her), Ibn Mas’ud (may Allah be pleased with him), Abu Dharr (may Allah be pleased with him), and Abu Hurairah (may Allah be pleased with him). Imam Muslim (may Allah have mercy on him) narrated in his Sahih from Ibn Abbas (may Allah be pleased with them both) who said that the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) saw his Lord twice with his heart. So he attributed one of these visions to this verse. And Shareek bin Abdullah bin Abi Namar’s narration of Israa, which is through Hazrat Anas (may Allah be pleased with him), says ثم دنا الجبار رب العزة فتدلىٰ, i.e., attributing the pronouns in this verse of An-Najm to Allah and saying: ‘Then the Compeller, the Lord of Glory, came near and descended.’ (This is not correct.) Therefore, many have criticized the text of this narration and mentioned its oddities. So if this narration is authentic, it will be applied to another time and another story, not accepted as the Tafsir of this verse. Because the context of the verse clearly shows that this event happened when the Messenger of Allah (peace be upon him) was on earth, not during the night of Mi’raj in the heavens. Therefore, Allah said afterwards: ﴿وَلَقَدْ رَآهُ نَزْلَةً أُخْرَىٰ. عِندَ سِدْرَةِ الْمُنتَهَىٰ.﴾ ‘He saw it once again near Sidrat al-Muntaha.’ So this is the event of the night of Mi’raj, and the earlier vision of Jibreel was on earth.”
Imam Nawawi, quoting Qadi Iyad (may Allah have mercy on him), writes:
There are many misconceptions in Shareek’s narration of the Hadith of Mi’raj, which scholars have pointed out, and Imam Muslim (may Allah have mercy on him) also warned about it by saying that he committed alterations in order and additions and omissions. (Then after giving examples of some of his misconceptions and clarifying them, Imam Nawawi said:) What Qadi Iyad said about Shareek’s narration, and that the scholars have criticized him, is not only Qadi’s view but also others have said the same. Hafiz Abdul Haq (may Allah have mercy on him) in his book “الجمع بين الصحيحين” has quoted this Hadith in the same words (as detailed in Bukhari’s Book of Tawheed) from Shareek’s narration and wrote that he made unknown additions and used unfamiliar words, whereas the Hadith of Mi’raj has been narrated by a group of pious and renowned Hafiz and Imams like Ibn Shihab (Zuhri), Thabit al-Bunani, and Qatadah (may Allah have mercy on them), all of whom narrated through Hazrat Anas (may Allah be pleased with him), but none of them mentioned what Shareek narrated from Anas. Shareek is not considered a Hafiz by the Muhaddithin. Therefore, the other narrations mentioned before are reliable.
Sheikh Nasiruddin al-Albani, after mentioning Shareek’s misconceptions and peculiarities, writes:
قلت: ولذٰلك فإن القلب لا يطمئن للإستفادة من حديثه إلا فيما توبع عليه وهو قليل جدا، وقد حسن الحافظ بعضها، والله أعلم
“I say: Therefore, one does not feel assured in benefiting from his Hadith except for those matters which other narrators also mention, and those are very few, and Hafiz Ibn Hajar (may Allah have mercy on him) has called some of them Hasan.”
And Allah knows best.”
Besides them, Imam Khattabi, Imam Abu Muhammad Ibn Hazm, and Hafiz Ibn Hajar (may Allah have mercy on them) have also mentioned Shareek’s peculiarities and misconceptions, details of which can be seen in
. Although some scholars have offered explanations for these peculiarities and misconceptions that bring Shareek’s narration closer to the details narrated by other narrators, these explanations are not free from difficulties. Therefore, only those parts of Shareek’s narration are authentic which conform to the narrations of other narrators, and his misconceptions and peculiarities are unacceptable. In this regard, his narration is not rejected because he is a narrator of Bukhari and his narration is in Sahih Bukhari, and the Muhaddithin have not considered some historical misconceptions as damaging to the authenticity of the chain. Only misconceptions are not accepted. Shareek is generally counted among the trustworthy narrators by the Muhaddithin, and the entire Hadith of a trustworthy narrator is not rejected due to his misconception. Thus, Ibn Tahir writes:
وعلىٰ تقدير تسليم تفرده لا يقتضي طرح حديثه فوهم الثقة فى موضع من الحديث لا يسقط جميع الحديث، ولا سيما إذا كان الوهم لا يستلزم ارتكاب محذور، ولو ترك حديث من وهم فى تاريخ لترك حديث جماعة من أئمة المسلمين
“Accepting Shareek’s peculiarities does not necessitate abandoning his Hadith, because a trustworthy narrator’s misconception at any point in the Hadith does not invalidate the entire Hadith, especially when his misconception does not lead to any forbidden implication. If Hadiths were abandoned due to historical misconceptions, then the Hadiths of a group of the Imams of the Muslims would have to be abandoned.”
Sheikh Albani (may Allah have mercy on him), clarifying this point, writes:
حتىٰ صار عرفا عاما أن الحديث إذا أخرجه الشيخان أو أحدهما فقد جاوز القنطرة ودخل فى طريق الصحة والسلامة، ولا ريب فى ذٰلك، وإنه هو الأصل عندنا، وليس معنىٰ ذٰلك أن كل حرف أو لفظة أو كلمة فى “الصحيحين” هو بمنزلة ما فى القرآن لا يمكن أن يكون فيه وهم أو خطأ فى شيء من ذٰلك من بعض الرواة، كلا فلسنا نعتقد العصمة لكتاب بعد كتاب الله أصلا
“It has become common knowledge that when Imam Bukhari and Muslim or either of them narrate a Hadith, that Hadith crosses the bridge and enters the path of authenticity and soundness. There is no doubt about this, and this is our principle. But this does not mean that every letter, word, or phrase in Sahihayn is on the level of the Qur’an. It is possible that due to some narrators, there may be misconception or error in some of them. Certainly not. We do not believe in the infallibility of any book after the Book of Allah.”
In any case, from this detailed explanation it is clear that during the night of Mi’raj, the Prophet (peace be upon him) neither saw Allah, nor had direct conversation with Him, nor did he have that دنو و تدلي relationship with Allah which some have expressed in the Tafsir of the verse of Surah An-Najm.
Imam Ibn al-Qayyim’s Position and Its Refutation
Imam Ibn al-Qayyim has acknowledged
that the two mentions of دنو و تدلي in Surah An-Najm refer to the Prophet ﷺ and Hazrat Jibril (AS). However, he wrote that during the Mi’raj, besides this, there was also closeness between Allah and the Prophet ﷺ, in which Allah Almighty descended so close and low that the distance between them was about the length of two bows or even less.
This position of Imam Ibn al-Qayyim, may Allah have mercy on him, has also been cited by the author of Sharh Aqeedah al-Tahawiyyah and the distinguished scholar Maulana Safiur Rahman Mubarakpuri “الرحيق المختوم” has also adopted the same stance.
But the basis of this position, as explained earlier, is the words of Sharik bin Abdullah’s narration in which he said that after the Prophet ﷺ reached Sidrat al-Muntaha, the Almighty Lord came near and descended so close that He was as near as the distance of two bows or even closer.
However, the hadith scholars and commentators have clarified that this is a misconception and a unique interpretation of the narrator Sharik. Therefore, this part of Sharik’s narration is unacceptable. Accordingly, in the footnotes of Sharh Aqeedah al-Tahawiyyah, Sheikh Nasiruddin al-Albani, may Allah have mercy on him, writes:
إن الدنو المذكور فى هذا السياق هو من رواية شريك بن عبد الله بن أبى نمر الذى غلطه الحافظ فى ألفاظ من حديث الإسراء كما ذكر المؤلف آنفا، ومن ذٰلك هٰذا اللفظ كما بينه الحافظ ابن كثير فى تفسير الإسراء ومن قبله البيهقي فى “الأسماء والصفات
“In this context, the دنو (Divine proximity) mentioned is from the narration of Sharik bin Abdullah bin Abi Namar, which hadith scholars have found errors in regarding the Mi’raj narration. Among these errors are the words as explained by Hafiz Ibn Kathir, may Allah have mercy on him, in his Tafsir of Surah Al-Isra, and before him Imam Bayhaqi in the ”الأسماء والصفات“ book.”
Similarly, the editor and verifier of “Zad al-Ma’ad” writes:
هٰذه الجملة من الزيادات التى أخرجها البخاري فى صحيحه من طريق شريك بن عبد الله بن أبى نمر وهى من أوهامه التى تفرد بها، فكان علىٰ المؤلف رحمه الله أن ينبه علىٰ ذٰلك
“This sentence is among the additions that Imam Bukhari included in his Sahih from the narration of Sharik bin Abdullah, and it is among those misconceptions that he alone reported. Therefore, it was the author’s (Imam Ibn al-Qayyim’s) responsibility to warn against it (not to consider it authentic and narrate it).”
