Bukhari

Hadith Commentary:
"Tear them to pieces"—may not even a trace of their rule remain.
This is exactly what happened.
The empire of the Iranians was utterly annihilated during the caliphate of Umar radi Allahu anhu, and since then, the Zoroastrians have never again attained sovereignty; throughout the world, they live as subjects under others.
Even their princesses were taken captive and came under the authority of the Muslims.
What greater humiliation could there be than this? The accursed Khosrow Parviz, being the king of a small country, harbored such arrogance that the letter of the Beloved of the Lord of the Worlds—which he should have placed upon his eyes—he instead tore up, deeming it insignificant.
He received his punishment.
These (ignorant) kings of the world are, in reality, taghut (false gods, tyrants).
Who knows what they think of themselves—say, just as you are, so are the rest of God's creation; what jewels are dangling from you that set you apart? As knowledge advances in the world, the worms in the noses of kings keep falling away, and in this age, no one gives these so-called kings even a penny's worth of attention.
As for greatness and honor, that is another matter entirely.
(The present era—year 1978—is indeed a most instructive and admonishing period.)

Hadith Commentary:
➊
The method of delivering a letter to the Shah of Iran was that it would be sent through the governor appointed by him.
When he, behaving insolently, tore up this letter, the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) invoked a curse upon him. As a result, not a single Kisra remained.
The last Kisra was Yazdegerd, who was also killed during the caliphate of Umar (radi Allahu anhu).
In this way, the rule of the Persians came to an end, and they were forever annihilated and obliterated.
➋
Imam Bukhari (rahimahullah) has established from this the authority of a solitary report (khabar wahid), that the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) would send only one person in such matters and would rely upon him. On this basis, a solitary report is authoritative and reliable.

Hadith Commentary:
It is mentioned in historical accounts that the son of Kisra, who was a young man of a debauched nature, was waiting for an opportunity to eliminate his father Kisra and quickly become the owner of the throne and treasures.
Thus, after Kisra committed this act, soon after, one night his son climbed onto Kisra’s abdomen and stabbed him in the stomach with a dagger, thereby killing him.
Later, when he became the owner of the throne and crown, while inspecting the treasures, he found a vial of medicine in the treasury on which was written “medicine for sexual potency.”
He thought that his father must have continued to indulge in pleasure until the end by consuming this medicine, so he too should take the medicine.
In reality, the vial contained “sam al-far” (a deadly poison). He consumed it, and immediately he too perished.
In this way, his kingdom was shattered, and during the era of Umar (radi Allahu anhu), the entire country became part of the Islamic domain, and the true supplication of Allah’s Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) was fully realized.
It is mentioned in Kirmani and others that the name of his son was Khayruyah, who ripped open the belly of his father, Parvez, and six months later, he himself died by consuming the aforementioned poison.
During the era of Umar (radi Allahu anhu), this country was conquered at the hands of Sa’d ibn Abi Waqqas (radi Allahu anhu).
Here, in the narration, this very Khosrow Parvez is intended, who is referred to by the title Kisra.
(Commentary of Sahih Bukhari, Volume 1, p. 15)

Hadith Commentary:
1.
The companion who delivered the letter of the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) to the governor of Bahrain was Abdullah bin Hudhafah Sahmi (radi Allahu anhu).
The method of delivering the letter to Kisra (the Persian emperor) was that it was first given to his governor, and then he himself would deliver it to the Shah of Iran. When Kisra tore up the letter of the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam), the Prophet (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) invoked a supplication against him, saying that he did not tear my letter, rather he tore himself to pieces.
Consequently, he himself and his government were shattered.
Eventually, when the people of Persia appointed a woman as their leader, the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) said:
“That nation will never succeed which entrusts its affairs of governance to a woman.”
Thus, during the era of Umar al-Faruq (radi Allahu anhu), the fire temple of Iran was extinguished and the Islamic flag was raised there.

2.
The Messenger of Allah (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) first sent an invitational letter to the people of Persia, and then fought jihad against them.
Imam Bukhari (rahimahullah) also holds the position that the invitation to Islam should be given first.
If the non-Muslims do not accept it, then jihad and fighting should be undertaken against them, whereas some are of the opinion that now the invitation to Islam has already spread, therefore now only fighting will take place.
Imam Malik (rahimahullah) says:
Whoever resides far from Dar al-Islam should be invited, but those living nearby do not need to be invited.
In any case, it is not permissible to fight and wage war against those to whom the invitation has not reached, until the invitation is given and the proof is established against them.
And Allah knows best.

Chapter of Sahih Bukhari Hadith Number: 2936: «بَابُ هَلْ يُرْشِدُ الْمُسْلِمُ أَهْلَ الْكِتَابِ أَوْ يُعَلِّمُهُمُ الْكِتَابَ:»
Relevance between the Chapter and the Hadith:
Imam Bukhari rahimahullah has presented the permissibility of teaching the religion and the Qur’an to the People of the Book in this chapter, but as evidence, the connection between the chapter heading and the hadith is not apparent, because there is no explicit permissibility of teaching any verse mentioned in the hadith. From the chapter heading, it appears that Imam Bukhari rahimahullah inclines towards the view that the People of the Book can be taught the religion and the Qur’an, but there is no such explicit statement in the hadith.
In reality, Imam Bukhari rahimahullah has mentioned this hadith here in brief, and has mentioned the complete hadith in «باب دعا النبى صلى الله عليه وسلم إلى الاسلام والنبوة», in which it is clearly explained that when the Messenger of Allah sallallahu alayhi wa sallam sent a letter to Caesar, he had a verse of the Qur’an written in it:
«﴿قُلْ يَا أَهْلَ الْكِتَابِ تَعَالَوْا إِلَى كَلِمَةٍ سَوَاءٍ بَيْنَنَا وَبَيْنَكُمْ﴾» [آل عمران : 64]
Therefore, from here the relevance between the chapter and the hadith becomes apparent. The aforementioned chapter heading has two parts: the relevance of the first part is that the Messenger of Allah sallallahu alayhi wa sallam invited them to Islam and said: «فان توليت» because this phrase and its manner of expression indicate that the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam was inviting them towards guidance. The second part is that the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam said: «فان عليك اثم الأريسينين.» — this is a mention and a warning. The relevance of both is also clear from the chapter heading.
Therefore, the chapter heading alludes to the fact that it is obligatory upon Muslims, especially Muslim rulers, to present the invitation of Islam to the disbelievers and the People of the Book.
Ibn Battal rahimahullah says:
“It is obligatory upon Muslim rulers to guide the People of the Book and invite them to the religion of Islam, and this is among their responsibilities.” [شرح ابن بطال، ج 5، ص: 116]
Benefit Number 1:
The disbeliever whom it is commanded to teach the Qur’an.
There has been a difference of opinion among the Imams on the issue of whether disbelievers can be taught the Qur’an or not. Some scholars incline towards the view that disbelievers cannot be invited, and some incline towards the view that if it is possible and there is hope for them to accept Islam, then it is permissible.
① The inclination and evidences of Imam Malik rahimahullah:
Imam Malik rahimahullah absolutely considers it impermissible. (See: [اكمال المعلم على شرح صحيح مسلم 5/216])
Imam Malik rahimahullah substantiates his position with this verse of the Qur’an: «﴿إِنَّمَا الْمُشْرِكُونَ نَجَسٌ﴾» [التوبة : 28] meaning, “The polytheists are impure.”
Imam Malik rahimahullah also uses this hadith as evidence, as it is mentioned in the hadith:
«نهى رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم ان يسافر بالقرآن إلى أرض العدو.» [صحيح مسلم، كتاب الإمارة، رقم: 4840]
“The Messenger of Allah sallallahu alayhi wa sallam forbade traveling to the land of the enemy carrying the Qur’an.”
It should also be kept in mind that some of the Malikis, as admonition and advice, permit one or two verses. [اكمال الكمال المعلم: 5/216]
The evidences of the Hanafis:
The Hanafis incline towards the view that there is no harm in teaching the Qur’an, etc., to a disbeliever, whether he is at war (harbi) or under protection (dhimmi). The Hanafis have presented this verse as evidence for their position:
«﴿وَإِنْ أَحَدٌ مِنَ الْمُشْرِكِينَ اسْتَجَارَكَ فَأَجِرْهُ حَتَّى يَسْمَعَ كَلَامَ اللّٰهِ ثُمَّ أَبْلِغْهُ مَأْمَنَهُ ذَلِكَ بِأَنَّهُمْ قَوْمٌ لَا يَعْلَمُونَ﴾» [التوبة : 6]
“If any of the polytheists seeks your protection, then grant him protection so that he may hear the word of Allah.”
The evidence of the Hanafis from the hadith:
«مر النبى صلى الله عليه وسلم على عبدالله ابن أبى قبل أن يسلم وفي المجلس اخلاط من المسلمين و المشركين واليهود فقراء عليهم القرآن.» [عمدة القاري، ج 14، ص: 306]
“The Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam passed by Abdullah bin Ubayy before he had accepted Islam, and in that gathering were Muslims, polytheists, and Jews, so the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam recited the Qur’an to all of them.”
The inclination of Imam Shafi’i rahimahullah:
Both types of statements are established from Imam Shafi’i rahimahullah:
[اكمال المعلم و شرح على صحيح مسلم، 57، ص: 117 - فتح الباري، ج 6، ص: 133]
The inclination of Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal rahimahullah:
Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal rahimahullah considers it permissible on the condition of accepting Islam, so according to him, if there is no hope of accepting Islam, then it is not permissible to teach the Qur’an to disbelievers. [المغني لابن قدامة، ج 9، ص: 289]
The inclination of Hafiz Ibn Hajar rahimahullah:
«والذي يظهر أن الراجح التفصيل بين من يرجى منه الرغبة فى الدين والدخول فيه . . .» [فتح الباري، ج 6، ص: 133]
“What is apparent to me is that if there is hope that a person will enter Islam and he is inclined towards Islam, or at the very least there is no fear of harm from him, then there is no harm in explaining the Qur’an to him.”
If the above evidences of the Imams are considered and reflected upon, then the same conditions emerge as mentioned by Hafiz Sahib.
When the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam sent letters to Heraclius and Caesar, there was hope that someone would accept faith, and on many occasions, such divine assistance was manifested. The Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam forbade carrying the Qur’an to the enemy’s city or country for the very reason that there was a risk of disrespect and insolence there. Therefore, Imam Bukhari rahimahullah’s inclination is that the disbelievers can be guided and they can also be taught the Qur’an.
Benefit Number 2:
In the aforementioned hadith, these words are present: «أن رسول الله كتب . . .» that the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam wrote. It should be remembered that the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam was unlettered; he did not know how to read or write. Hafiz Ibn Hajar rahimahullah writes:
«أن النبى صلى الله عليه وسلم كتب إلى قيصر، و حديثه كتب إلى النجاشي، و حديثه كتب إلى كسرى، و حديث عبدالله بن عكيم كتب إلينا رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم، وغير هذه الأحاديث كلها محمولة على أمر الكاتب.» [تلخيص الحبير، ج 3، ص: 128]
“That is, the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam wrote to Caesar, to Chosroes, and Abdullah bin Uqaym said that the Messenger of Allah sallallahu alayhi wa sallam wrote to us. Besides this, in all other ahadith in which it is mentioned that the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam wrote, all these ahadith are to be understood as meaning that the Prophet sallallahu alayhi wa sallam did not write himself, but had it written by scribes.” [تلخيص الحبير لابن حجر عسقلاني، ج 3، ص: 128 - سير اعلام النبلاء للذهبي، ج 9، ص: 437] or the book of the scribe [تفهيم حديث، ج 1، ص: 73-80]

Hadith Commentary:
This hadith has already been mentioned in detail at the beginning of the book.
In this letter, you also wrote a verse from the Noble Qur’an, so the translation of the chapter is established—that is, teaching the Qur’an to the People of the Book. However, this is only when there is hope of good from them.
If there is a risk of insolence or disrespect from them, then the Noble Qur’an should absolutely not be taught to them.

Hadith Commentary:
➊ The Messenger of Allah (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) invited Heraclius, the Emperor of Rome, to the religion of Islam and warned him of an evil end. In this way, he provided him with religious guidance. In this letter, you also wrote a verse from the Noble Qur’an. From this, it is established that the People of the Book (Ahl al-Kitab) may also be taught the Qur’an, but this is permissible only when there is hope for good from them and they show interest as well. If there is a fear of disrespect or insolence from them, and they have neither eagerness nor interest, then in such a situation, the Qur’an should not be taught to them.

➋ It is narrated from Usamah bin Zayd (radi Allahu anhu) that once the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) passed by Abdullah ibn Ubayy, the hypocrite, before he had accepted Islam, while in his gathering were Muslims, polytheists, and People of the Book. The Messenger of Allah (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) recited the Qur’an to them.
(Sahih al-Bukhari, Tafsir, Hadith: 4566)

From this hadith, it is understood that the People of the Book may be taught the Noble Qur’an.
And Allah knows best.

Explanation:
Allah very quickly manifested the effect of the supplication of His truthful Messenger (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam).

Hadith Commentary:
Allah very swiftly manifested the effect of His true Messenger’s (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) supplication.

Hadith Commentary:
➊
Imam Bukhari rahimahullah has established various chapters to explain the categories of bearing (tahammul) hadith.
This chapter is for the affirmation of *munawalah* and *mukatabah*.
In this hadith, *munawalah* occurs in such a way that the Messenger of Allah sallallahu alayhi wa sallam gave a written letter to Abdullah bin Hudhafah Sahmi radi Allahu anhu and said: deliver this letter to the governor of Bahrain and tell him to convey it to the king of Persia, Kisra, even though Abdullah radi Allahu anhu neither read nor heard the letter himself.
Although this is not *munawalah* in the technical sense, for Imam Bukhari rahimahullah even a slight relevance is sufficient for affirmation.
And the application of *mukatabah* is entirely apparent.
(Fath al-Bari: 1/205)
Shah Waliullah Muhaddith Dehlawi rahimahullah states that the author mentioned two matters in the chapter heading: *munawalah* and *mukatabah*, then from the hadith presented, the second part of the heading is established, from which the first part is proven even more so.

➋
After the Treaty of Hudaybiyyah, the Messenger of Allah sallallahu alayhi wa sallam sent invitational letters to the kings of the world; the letter mentioned in the hadith is also a link in this chain.
He entrusted this letter to Abdullah bin Hudhafah Sahmi radi Allahu anhu so that he could deliver it to the king of Persia, Kisra, through the governor of Bahrain.
This was during the era of Khosrow Parviz.
The supplication of the Messenger of Allah sallallahu alayhi wa sallam was fulfilled word for word: Khosrow Parviz was killed by his son Shiruya, and he himself perished after consuming deadly poison.
After this, the affairs of the kingdom were handed over to his daughter, who could not manage this vast empire; eventually, anarchy began and the kingdom was wiped out completely.
(Sharh al-Kirmani: 2/22)
From this hadith, it is proven that the scholarly statements of the people of knowledge can be written and sent to other countries. It is also understood that before declaring war on a non-Muslim government, it should be invited to Islam; if they show disrespect and insolence, then supplication against them should be made.
The authority of a solitary report (khabar wahid) is also established from this hadith.
(Sharh al-Kirmani: 2/22)

Hadith Commentary:

Kisra did not commit only this act of insolence; rather, he also wrote to his governor Bazan, instructing him to go to Madinah and meet this Prophet. If he repents from his claim of prophethood, that is better; otherwise, behead him and bring his head to me.

Accordingly, Bazan came to Madinah and conveyed Kisra’s command.

The Messenger of Allah (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) said: “You should know that tonight my Lord, exalted is He, has had him killed at the hands of his son Shiruwayh, and now your rule is about to be shattered.”

This incident occurred in the 7th year of Hijrah, in the month of Jumada al-Awwal.

Shiruwayh remained the king of Persia for six months.

One day, he found a vial of medicine in the treasury, on which was written that it was a medicine for sexual potency.

He consumed it and perished.

After him, Kisra’s granddaughter named Purān became the national ruler, who was the daughter of Shiruwayh. Regarding her, the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) said: “How can a nation prosper that appoints a woman as its ruler?”

Hadith Commentary:
Benefit:
The king of Persia, Kisra, not only committed the insolence of tearing up the letter, but also wrote to his governor Bazan, instructing him to go to Madinah Tayyibah and meet this man. If he repents from his claim of prophethood, then that is better; otherwise, behead him and bring his head to me. Accordingly, Bazan came to Madinah and, after reading out Kisra’s order, the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) said:
“Tonight, my Lord has had him killed at the hands of his son Shiruwayh, and now your kingdom is about to be torn apart.” Thus, for six months his son Shiruwayh remained the king of Persia, then he too died by poison.
Ultimately, during the caliphate of Umar (radi Allahu anhu), this empire was destroyed and the thousand-year-old fire temple was extinguished forever.
(Fath al-Bari: 8/160)
The Messenger of Allah (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) sent invitational letters to various kings, the details of which are as follows:
©.
To the king of Alexandria, Muqawqis, through Hatib bin Abi Balta’ah.
©.
To the king of Ghassan, Harith bin Abi Shamir, through Shuja’ bin Wahb.
©.
To the king of Abyssinia, Najashi, through Amr bin Umayyah.
©.
To the king of Rome, Caesar, through Dihyah Kalbi.
©.
To the king of Persia, Kisra, through Abdullah bin Hudhafah.
©.
Sulayt bin Amr was sent to Hawdhah bin Ali al-Hanafi, and likewise, Amr bin al-As (radi Allahu anhu) was sent to Jayfar and ‘Abbad. All the envoys returned during the lifetime of the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam), except for Amr bin al-As (radi Allahu anhu), who returned after his (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) passing.
(Fath al-Bari: 8/160)
The letter of the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) that was written to the king of the Iranian superpower, Khosrow Parviz.
The blessed letter appears torn.
It still exists today in its original state.