Bukhari

Benefits and Issues:
This hadith is found not only in Sahih Bukhari but also in [صحيح ابن حبان:348], [السنن الكبريٰ للبيهقي:346/3،219/10], [حلية الاولياء:5،4/1], [شرح السنة للبغوي:19/5ح 1248، وقال : هذا حديث صحيح], and [الصححيه للالباني:1640].

In this hadith, two things are meant by Allah becoming the hearing, sight, hands, and feet:
➊ Allah, the Exalted, fulfills the needs of His servant.
➋ The servant’s eyes, ears, hands, and feet perform only those actions which are beloved to Allah. See: [شرح السنه:ج5، ص20]

This hadith does not establish the belief of hululiyyah (incarnation), because:
Allah, the Exalted, says: “If he asks of Me, I surely grant him.”
From this it is proven that Allah is separate and the servant is separate; the two are not one. Furthermore, from other definitive evidences it is established that Allah, the Exalted, is above His Throne over the seven heavens.

See the refutation by Anwar Shah Kashmiri Deobandi of the scholars of Shari‘ah, and the extraction of the belief of fana fi Allah (annihilation in Allah) by the hululiyyah from this hadith in: [فيض الباري:ج4،ص428]. This is clearly incorrect. If the servant himself becomes God, then what meaning remains for “he asks of Me” and “he seeks refuge with Me”?

Note 1: The above-mentioned narration is hasan li-dhatihi (intrinsically sound) due to Khalid ibn Mukhallad, and with supporting narrations, it is sahih li-ghayrihi (sound due to corroboration). «والحمدلله»

Note 2: The objector of the rejected hadith has written: SA “Imam Bukhari says that Allah Most High incarnates in the servant and becomes his limbs.” (...Muhaddith: p.19) EA Imam Bukhari has not written anything at all about Allah incarnating in the servant, so this statement of the objector is a great lie for which he will have to answer before Allah’s court. «ان شاءالله»

Chapter of Sahih Bukhari Hadith No. 6502: «بَابُ التَّوَاضُعِ:»
Relevance between the Chapter and the Hadith:
In the translation of the chapter, Imam Bukhari rahimahullah has clarified the issue of humility and modesty, stating that it is necessary for a servant to possess humility and modesty. Under this chapter, he has mentioned two hadiths. The first hadith is narrated from Sayyiduna Anas radi Allahu anhu, in which the relevance to the chapter is evident from these words: «إن حقا على الله أن لا يرفع شيئا من الدنيا الا وضعه». The second hadith is narrated from Sayyiduna Abu Hurairah radi Allahu anhu, and its relevance to the chapter is difficult because the words of humility and modesty are not mentioned in this hadith. Responding to this, Hafiz Ibn Hajar rahimahullah writes:
«أشكل وجه دخول هذا الحديث فى باب التواضع حتى قال الداوردي، ليس هذا الحديث من التواضع فى شيئي، و قال بعضهم: المناسب إدخاله فى الباب الزي قبله وهو مجاهدة المرء نفسه فى طاعة الله تعالى، وبذالك ترجم البيهقي فى ”الزهد“ فقال: فصل فى الاجتهاد فى الطاعة وملازمة العبودية: و الجواب عن البخاري من أوجه، أحدهما أن التقرب إلى الله بالنوافل لا يكون ألا بغاية التواضع لله و التوكل عليه، ذكره الكرماني: ثانيها ذكره أيضا فقال قيل الترجمة مستفادة مما قال ”كنت سمعه“ و من التدرد، قلت: و يخرج منه جواب ثالث: و يظهر لي رابع، و هو أنها تستفاد من لازم قوله ”من عادى لي وليًا“ لأنه يقتضي الزجر عن معاداة الأولياء المستلزم لموالاتهم، وموالاة جميع الأولياء لا تتاتي إلا بغاية التواضع.» (1)
“Including this hadith in the chapter of humility is problematic, to the extent that Dawardi rahimahullah said that this hadith has no connection with humility. Some have said: its inclusion would have been appropriate in the previous chapter, which was about obedience to Allah and striving against the self. Along with this, Imam Bayhaqi rahimahullah, in his Kitab al-Zuhd, titled his chapter as follows: «فصل فى الاجتهاد فى الطاعة وملازمة العبودية». Several answers have been given on behalf of Bukhari. One is that nearness to Allah through supererogatory acts (nawafil) is not achieved except with utmost humility (modesty) for Allah and reliance upon Him; this is mentioned by Imam Karmani rahimahullah. The second is that the translation of the chapter «كنت سمعه» and what is derived from hesitation; this too is quoted from Karmani. According to Ibn Hajar rahimahullah, from this comes a third answer, and a fourth answer that has become apparent to me is that the translation «من عادى لي وليا» is derived from its necessary implication, because warning against enmity with the friends of Allah and the necessity of befriending them is implied, and befriending all the friends of Allah is only possible through utmost humility, as some of them may be disheveled and dusty in appearance. Many hadiths have been narrated encouraging and urging humility.”
The readers have read the excerpts of Hafiz Ibn Hajar rahimahullah. According to Hafiz Sahib, the relevance between the hadith and the chapter is established in such a way that when a servant becomes occupied in obedience to Allah and engaged in His worship, it becomes a means of nearness to Allah. This is only possible when the servant possesses humility and modesty.
Muhammad Zakariya Kandhlawi rahimahullah, while explaining the relevance between the chapter and the hadith, says:
«و الأوجه عندي فى مناسبة الحديث الثاني بالترجمة انها فى قوله: ”من عادى لي وليًا“ فإن المتواضع لا يعادي أحدًا فضلًا عن الأولياء.» (2)
Allamah Qastallani rahimahullah writes:
«مناسبة الحديث الترجمة تستفاد من لازم قوله: ”من عادى لي وليًا“ لأنه يقتضي الزجر عن معاداة الأولياء المستلزم لموالاتهم.» (3)
“That is, the relevance of the hadith to the translation of the chapter is derived from the necessary implication of «من عادى لي وليًا», because warning against enmity with the friends of Allah and the necessity of befriending them is implied, and befriending all the friends of Allah (i.e., their sainthood) is only achieved through utmost humility.”
Allamah Ayni rahimahullah, after mentioning the objections raised on the translation of the chapter, reconciles the hadith and the chapter by writing:
“Nearness to Allah is established through supererogatory acts (nawafil), by which the love of Allah is attained, and this is associated with humility and abasement (i.e., utmost modesty).” (1)
From all this discussion, the relevance between the chapter and the hadith is established in the sense that the chapter mentions adopting humility, and under the chapter, the qualities of the friend of Allah are mentioned. Therefore, the friend of Allah is the one who makes humility obligatory upon himself, because in the Noble Qur’an, humility and modesty are also mentioned among the qualities of the friends of Allah. Thus, from here, the relevance between the chapter and the hadith is established.
Benefit:
Some have criticized the chain of the aforementioned hadith. In the chain, «خالد بن مخلد القطواني الكوفي» is present, and three types of criticisms have been reported about him:
a: «له مناكیر»
b: «منكر الحديث»
c: «مفرط فى التشيع»
Now, let us look at these three criticisms in the books of narrators to see what is said about these points there, and what the noble hadith scholars (muhaddithun) have decided about Khalid ibn Mukhallad overall.
Criticism on Khalid ibn Mukhallad and its details:
Hafiz Ibn Hajar rahimahullah, in his renowned book «تهذيب التهذيب», says:
«قال عبدالله بن أحمد عن أبيه: له أحاديث مناكير.»
«و قال أبو حاتم: يكتب حديثه، ولا يحتج به.»
«و قال الآجري عن أبى داؤد: صدوق ولكنه يتشيع.»
«و قال ابن سعد: منكر الحديث مفرطًا فى للتشيع.» [477/2]
“Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal rahimahullah says: His hadiths are munkar (denounced).”
“Imam Abu Hatim says: His hadith should be written, but not used as proof.”
“Imam Ajuri reports from Abu Dawud rahimahullah: He was truthful (saduq), but he was a Shi’i.”
“Ibn Sa’d says: People have rejected his hadiths, and he was a Shi’i.”
Khalid ibn Mukhallad was neither an extreme Shi’i nor are the hadiths he narrated in Sahih Bukhari among the denounced (munkar) ones. Imam ‘Ajli rahimahullah himself called him “qaleel al-shi’ah” (slightly Shi’i) in his book, as he says:
«قال العجلي: فيه قليل تشيع.» (1)
“That is, his Shi’ism was very slight.”
As for the statement of Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal rahimahullah that there are munkar narrations in his reports, remember, this ruling applies to some of his hadiths, not all.
Hafiz Ibn Hajar rahimahullah says:
«قال الأزدري فى حديثه بعض المناكير.» (2)
“There are munkar narrations in some of his hadiths (not all of them).”
Hafiz Ibn Hajar rahimahullah, regarding Khalid ibn Mukhallad and other narrators accused of being heavy Shi’is, writes:
«اما التشيع فقد قدمنا أنه إذا كان ثبت الأخذ والأداء لا يضره.» (3)
“A Shi’i who is reliable and precise in transmission, then there is no harm in him.”
As for the issue of his narrations being munkar, Ibn ‘Adi rahimahullah has collected all his munkar narrations in his book «الكامل», but the narration of Bukhari which we are discussing is not mentioned by Ibn ‘Adi rahimahullah in «الكامل», which is clear evidence that the hadith of Khalid ibn Mukhallad reported in Bukhari is completely authentic and not among the munkar narrations. Thus, Hafiz Ibn Hajar rahimahullah writes:
«و أما المناكير فقد تتبعها ابن عدي من حديثه، و أوردها فى كامله، و ليس فيها شييء مما أخرج له البخاري.» (1)
“Ibn ‘Adi searched for and recorded all the munkar narrations of Khalid in his book al-Kamil, and the narration which Imam Bukhari rahimahullah included in his Sahih is not among them.”
For details, see all the narrations of Khalid that Ibn ‘Adi recorded in al-Kamil. (2)
As for the statement of Abu Hatim rahimahullah, in which he wrote two things: «يكتب حديثه» and «لا يحتج به», remember! Neither of these statements is of the type that would require abandoning Khalid’s narration, especially the narration reported by the two Shaykhs (Bukhari and Muslim). Imam Ibn Taymiyyah rahimahullah, regarding Abu Hatim’s statement, says:
«و أما قول أبى حاتم: يكتب حديثه ولا يحتج به، فأبوحاتم يقول: مثل هذا فى كثير من رجال الصحيحين.» (3)
“That is, this statement of Abu Hatim: «يكتب حديثه ولا يحتج به» Abu Hatim has said this about many narrators of the Sahihayn.”
Therefore, the word «يكتب حديثه» is not among the words of authentication, and the second statement: «لا يحتج به» is a light criticism, meaning it does not affect the narrator’s integrity, because its meaning is that the narrator is not a “proof” (hujjah), and “proof” is a higher level in the degrees of authentication, even higher than “trustworthy” (thiqah). It is well known that
«”حجة“ وهو أقوى من ”ثقة“»
Understand the strength of “proof” from this statement: Imam Ajuri rahimahullah asked Imam Abu Dawud rahimahullah:
«عن سليمان بن بنت شرحبيل فقال: ”ثقه يخطيء كما يخطيء الناس“، قال الآجرى، قلت: هو حجة؟ فقال: الحجة أحمد بن حنبل رحمه الله.» (4)
Therefore, if a narrator is not a “proof,” he may still be “trustworthy” (thiqah), “truthful” (saduq), etc., and in light of these statements, his narration is accepted. Such statements exist regarding Khalid ibn Mukhallad, which make his narration acceptable. Thus, Hafiz Ibn Hajar rahimahullah writes:
① «قال الآجرى عن أبى داؤد: صدوق.» “Imam Abu Dawud rahimahullah called him saduq (truthful).”
② «قال أبوحاتم: يكتب حديثه.» “Abu Hatim rahimahullah says: His hadiths should be written.”
③ «قال عثمان الدارمي عن ابن معين: ما به بأس.» “Uthman al-Darimi narrated from Ibn Ma’in that: «ما به بأس».”
④ «قال ابن عدي: وهو عندي إن شاء الله لا بأس به.» “Ibn ‘Adi says: In my view, insha’Allah, «لا بأس به» (he is trustworthy).”
⑤ «قال العجلي: ثقة.» “Imam ‘Ajli rahimahullah says: He is trustworthy.”
⑥ «و قال صالح بن محمد جزرة: ثقة فى الحديث.» “Salih ibn Muhammad says: He is trustworthy in hadith.”
⑦ Uthman ibn Abi Shaybah writes: «هو ثقة و صدوق» “He is trustworthy and truthful.”
⑧ «ذكره ابن حبان فى الثقات.» “Ibn Hibban rahimahullah mentioned him among the trustworthy.”
⑨ «قال الأزدي: هو عندنا فى عداد أهل الصدق.»
For the biography of Khalid ibn Mukhallad, refer to these books [تهذيب الكمال: 363/1 - تاريخ الكبير للبخاري: 174/3 - تاريخ الصغير للبخاري: 331/2 - الجرح و التعديل: 1599/3 - الوافي بالوفيات: 375/13 - الكاشف: 274/1]
The conclusion of the discussion is that a narrator not being a “proof” does not contradict his authentication and integrity. Therefore, the narration of Khalid ibn Mukhallad will be accepted, especially when Bukhari and Muslim have narrated from him.
Also, keep this beneficial principle in mind: When Imam Bukhari and Imam Muslim rahimahum Allah narrate from a narrator in the Sahihayn, then that narrator has crossed the bridge (i.e., is accepted). «قد جاوز عن القنطرة».
Shah Waliullah al-Dihlawi rahimahullah, discussing this beneficial principle, writes:
«أما الصحيحان فقد اتفق المحدثون على أن جميع ما فيهما من المتصل المرفوع صحيح بالقطع، وأنهما متواتران إلى مصنفيهما، و أنه من يهون من أمرهما فهو مبتدع متبع غير سبيل المؤمنين.» (1)
There is consensus among the hadith scholars regarding the narrations of Sahih Bukhari and Muslim, that all of them are connected, elevated (marfu‘), and absolutely authentic, and both reach their authors through tawatur (mass transmission). Whoever turns away from this principle is an innovator and opposes the way of the believers.
Hafiz Abu Bakr al-Hazimi rahimahullah writes:
«قد يكون الحديث عند البخاري ثابتًا وله طرق أخرى بعضها أرفع من بعض.» (2)
“The hadiths that are with Imam Bukhari rahimahullah are established, and there are other chains for them, which are even stronger.”
Imam Nawawi rahimahullah says:
«و انما يفترق الصحيحان و غيرهما من الكتب فى كون ما فيهما صحيحًا لا يحتاج إلى النظر فيه بل يجب العمل به مطلقًا.»
“That is, the hadiths of Bukhari and Muslim are authentic; there is no need to examine them, rather, one should act upon these books absolutely (i.e., there is no need for further investigation or verification).”
He further says:
“Indeed, the Ummah has accepted the hadiths of Bukhari and Muslim with tacit approval; acting upon their hadiths is obligatory, because these are the most authentic books after the Noble Qur’an. There is no need to examine (investigate) their chains, rather, one should act upon them.”

Hadith Commentary:
The scholars of hadith have discussed this hadith, and its narrator Khalid ibn Mukhallad has been called "munkar al-hadith" (one whose narrations are rejected).
I, Waheed al-Zaman, say that Hafiz Ibn Hajar has mentioned other chains for it, though most of them are weak.
However, when all these chains are combined, the hadith becomes hasan (good). And Abu Dawud has called Khalid ibn Mukhallad "saduq" (truthful) (Waheedi).
The meaning of this hadith is not that the servant becomes identical with Allah, as—Allah forbid—the proponents of ittihadiyyah (unity of existence) and hululiyyah (incarnation) claim. Rather, the meaning of the hadith is that when a servant becomes immersed in My worship and attains the rank of belovedness, then all his outward and inward faculties become subservient to the Shari‘ah. He uses his hands, feet, ears, and eyes only for those actions in which is My pleasure.
No action contrary to the Shari‘ah is committed by him.
(And associating anyone with Allah in worship is shirk, the perpetration of which leads to entry into the Fire.
To learn the details of tawhid (monotheism) and the Shari‘ah, one should study "Taqwiyat al-Iman"; Arabic speakers should study "al-Din al-Khalis."
And with Allah is success.)

Hadith Commentary:
(1)
The definite meaning of this hadith is not that the servant becomes identical to Allah, na'udhu billah, as the Hululiyyah or Ittihadiyyah claim. Rather, the meaning of the hadith is that when My servant becomes immersed in My worship and reaches the rank of belovedness, then all his outward and inward faculties become subject to the Shari‘ah. He uses his hands, feet, ears, and eyes only for those actions which are in accordance with the will of Allah, the Exalted. No action contrary to the Shari‘ah is committed by him. In any case, the aforementioned perfections are attained through the fulfillment of obligatory acts (fara'id) and supererogatory acts (nawafil) and through the blessings thereof.

(2)
The relevance of this hadith to the chapter heading is as follows: After fulfilling the obligatory acts, only that person can attain nearness to Allah through supererogatory acts (nawafil) who is extremely humble and modest; a proud person cannot attain this rank. Furthermore, this hadith prohibits enmity and hostility towards the friends of Allah (awliya’ Allah), which means that they should be loved. And only a person who possesses humility and modesty loves all the awliya’, because some of the awliya’ are dusty and disheveled in appearance, and in such a state, loving them is not within the capacity of every person.

Hazrat Anas radi Allahu anhu describes the humility of the Messenger of Allah sallallahu alayhi wa sallam: He would visit the sick, attend funerals, accept the invitation of a slave, and would ride on a donkey. On the days of the battles against Banu Qurayza and Banu Nadir, he was riding a donkey, and on the occasion of the Battle of Khaybar as well, he was riding a donkey whose bridle was made of a rope of palm fibers, and beneath him was a saddle made of palm fibers. (Sunan Ibn Majah, Kitab al-Zuhd, Hadith: 4178)