Tirmidhi

Explanation:
1:
The author has cited this hadith in the context of the interpretation of the Divine statement:
﴿قَالَ بَلْ فَعَلَهُ كَبِيرُهُمْ هَذَا﴾ (: al-Anbiya: 64).

Hadith Commentary:
In the narration, three lies are mentioned regarding Ibrahim (alayhis salam), which in reality were not lies.
Because the word "lie" is very far removed from the dignity of the Prophets (alayhimus salam).
Such lies are, in other words, called "tawriyah" (equivocation).
One tawriyah is that which is mentioned in the Noble Qur’an, when he refused to go with his people and said: “Indeed, I am sick” (inni saqeem) — I am compelled not to go due to my pain.
That pain was an allusion to the grief in his heart upon witnessing the evil actions and misdeeds of his people.
Prophets and reformers are always inwardly distressed by the corruption of their people.
This is the meaning of the verse.
By way of tawriyah, this has been described with the word “lie.”
The second apparent lie mentioned in this hadith is declaring Sarah (alayhas salam) to be his sister in order to save her from the oppression of that tyrant king.
This was in the religious sense.
From a religious perspective, all believing men and women are brothers and sisters.
This is what Ibrahim (alayhis salam) intended.
The third lie is related to the idols, as mentioned in the Noble Qur’an: he destroyed his people’s idol-house and placed the axe in the hand of the largest idol, and when questioned, he said that this big idol must have done it. He said this as a form of sarcasm to expose the foolishness of the idol-worshippers.
By way of tawriyah, this too has been described with the word “lie.”
In any case, the objection of the deniers of hadith to this narration is sheer foolishness.
May Allah grant them sound understanding.
Amin.
In the narration, the Arabs are described as a people who drink water from the sky, because the livelihood of the Arabs mostly depends on rainfall.
Although nowadays wells and canals are being constructed there, and these are achievements of the Saudi government.
May Allah strengthen it with His mighty help. Amin.
Hajarah (alayhas salam) was the daughter of that king, whom he, seeking blessing, had placed in the household of Ibrahim (alayhis salam).

Hadith Commentary:
1.
She was the daughter of Hajarah (radi Allahu anha), whom she (Hajarah) had given to the sanctuary of Ibrahim (alayhis salam) for the attainment of blessings. She is the mother of the Arabs, and she has been called "the one who drank the water of the sky," because the livelihood of the Arabs mostly depended on rainwater. Although nowadays wells and canals have been constructed, and all these are achievements of the Saudi government.
﴿أيَّدَهُ اللهُ بِنَصْرِهِ العَزِيز﴾

2.
Regarding Ibrahim (alayhis salam), Allah the Exalted has said:
“He was indeed a man of truth and a Prophet.” (Maryam: 19/41)
Some people, in view of this noble verse, object to the aforementioned hadith in Sahih Bukhari and, speaking disrespectfully about its authenticity, have written:
A group, in their excess of adherence to narration, goes so far that the truthfulness of a few narrators of Bukhari and Muslim is dearer to them, and they do not care that this results in an accusation of lying against a Prophet, even though two of these three (incidents) are mentioned in the Noble Qur’an.
You broke the idols, but when asked, you said:
“It was the biggest one among them who did it.” (Al-Anbiya: 21/63)
Similarly, when your people went out to celebrate, and you were asked to accompany them, you said:
“I am sick.” (As-Saffat: 37/89)
Then you went and broke their idols, so how could you have been sick at that time? Are these not things contrary to reality? In fact, the real focus of the objectors should be towards the Noble Qur’an, not towards the rejection of hadith. Then, at the beginning of the hadith, the Messenger of Allah (sallallahu alayhi wa sallam) said these words: that Sayyiduna Ibrahim (alayhis salam) never lied. This is a great testimony to his being truly truthful (siddiq), that in his 175-year life, he did not utter a statement contrary to reality more than three times, whereas we, not in our whole lives but in a single day and night, lie many times.
Let the objectors themselves decide: if a person, in his long life, does not utter a statement contrary to reality more than three times, can he not be called siddiq (utterly truthful)? Then, as for these three occasions, as is established from the above hadith:
The incident of Sarah, although it too was for the sake of Allah, yet there was also some personal benefit in it. This statement was also made to save his own life. The custom of that king was that he would forcibly seize a beautiful woman. If her husband was with her, he would have him killed; but if her brother or another relative was with her, he would only seize the woman and spare the man’s life.
If Ibrahim (alayhis salam) uttered a statement contrary to reality to save his own life, what calamity is there in that? In fact, even that does not really constitute a lie, as the words of the hadith indicate that she was his religious sister.
If, for the sake of saving one’s life, eating carrion is permissible, then why should uttering a statement contrary to reality not be allowed? For saving one’s life, Allah the Exalted has even permitted uttering a word of disbelief, provided that there is no such thing in the heart. (An-Nahl: 16/106)
Always speaking the truth, and avoiding lies and statements contrary to reality, is a legal (shar‘i) command. However, at times, the Shari‘ah has permitted statements contrary to reality, for example:
To reconcile between husband and wife, it is permitted to make up things and say statements contrary to reality, because in this there is an aspect of goodness and reform. Similarly, in jihad, to frighten the enemy, such statements are permitted, even though, linguistically, these statements can also be called lies.
In any case, to make such statements as a form of allusion or necessary implication for a religious purpose, which outwardly appear contrary to reality, is not the kind of lie for which there is a warning (wa‘id). Doing so is not only permissible, but sometimes necessary.
Such statements, from an apparent perspective, can be called lies, but in reality, they are not lies; rather, this is called tawriyah (equivocation).
In any case, this hadith is a proof of the greatness of Ibrahim (alayhis salam), and for this reason, Imam Bukhari (rahimahullah) has narrated it.
To criticize it or to deny its authenticity has nothing to do with reality; rather, all these are baseless things which the deniers of hadith have popularized in order to create aversion to hadith.

Hadith Commentary:
Vocabulary of the Hadith:
(1)
Kadhbaat:
This is the plural of kadhba (lie).
According to Imam Ibn Anbari,
there are five forms of kadhb (lying).
(1)
The narrator changes what he has heard,
and conveys and relates it as such,
without knowing the reality.
This form makes a person sinful and destroys nobility.
2.
To make a mistake,
to err,
in the speech of the Arabs, this meaning of kadhb is frequently used.
(3)
To be nullified, to be reduced to dust,
it is said,
kadhaba ar-rajul:
A man's hope and expectation have been dashed,
he has failed.
(4)
To deceive someone.
(5)
To say something that resembles a lie,
but the intended purpose is correct, and in the hadith "kadhabaat Ibrahim thalaath kadhbaat,"
this is the intended meaning: that he said something resembling a lie,
while in reality all three statements were true in their ruling.
(Taj al-‘Arus, section kaf, chapter ba’)
Thus, the word kadhb is used for tawriyah (equivocation) and ta‘reedh (indirect speech).

(2)
Inni saqeem:
I am ill.
They understood this as a physical and material illness,
whereas your (Ibrahim’s) intent was a spiritual illness—that my soul is agitated due to your polytheistic actions, and I am distressed because of your shirk. It is also possible that you meant: I fear that if I go with you, I will become ill upon witnessing your polytheistic actions.

(3)
Bal fa‘alahu kabeeruhum hadha:
That you consider these idols to possess benefit and harm and regard the greatest among them as the doer,
I say,
this deed was done by this great one,
so ask them,
if they can speak.
In other words, this was said as sarcasm and mockery,
just as a person with poor handwriting asks his calligrapher friend about a beautiful script,
"Did you write this?" and the friend replies,
"No sir, you wrote it yourself."
The purpose is:
What is the need to ask? Of course, I wrote it.
That is, outwardly something is negated,
but in reality, it is affirmed.

Benefits and Issues:
In this hadith, three kadhbaat (lies) are attributed to Ibrahim alayhis salam,
while the Noble Qur’an gives Ibrahim alayhis salam the honorable title of siddiqan nabiyya (most truthful prophet),
therefore, some early and later scholars have rejected this agreed-upon narration (i.e., in Bukhari and Muslim),
whereas the word kadhbaat here is used for tawriyah and ta‘reedh (equivocation and indirect speech),
and the use of tawriyah and ta‘reedh is absolutely permissible,
in which the speaker intends a meaning that is correct and true,
while the listener understands another meaning,
according to which the speaker’s intended meaning is not correct.
As in the famous incident of Abu Talhah radi Allahu anhu and Umm Sulaym radi Allahu anha,
when Umm Sulaym realized that Abu Talhah radi Allahu anhu would return home exhausted after a day of hard work,
it would not be appropriate to inform him of the tragic death of his beloved child in such a state.
She decided to inform him in the morning when he would be rested.
So she laid her child on the bed, covered him with a sheet, and placed him in a corner of the house.
When Abu Talhah radi Allahu anhu came home and immediately asked,
“How is the child?” Umm Sulaym radi Allahu anha replied:
“Hada’a nafsahu wa arju an yakuna qad istaraha,”
“He has found peace, and I hope he is now at rest.”
Abu Talhah radi Allahu anhu understood that the child had truly found relief and his illness had passed,
whereas Umm Sulaym’s intent was that the child had passed away,
and thus all his pain and illness had ended.
So, according to Abu Talhah’s understanding, this meaning was not correct,
but according to Umm Sulaym’s understanding and intent, it was correct.
This is called ta‘reedh (indirect speech).

And from this hadith it is known that
Ibrahim alayhis salam, throughout his life,
very rarely resorted to tawriyah and ta‘reedh,
and on the Day of Judgment, he will present this as one of his weaknesses.
So, does this hadith indicate his greatness and status, or does it insult him?
First, an incorrect meaning was taken, and then, under its pretext, a sound hadith was rejected.

Ibrahim alayhis salam advised Sarah to call herself his sister because a sister, after all, is someone who belongs to another household,
she is destined to go to another home,
but a wife is a companion for life,
she is to remain with her husband.
Therefore, if she said, “I am Ibrahim’s wife,” the ruler would have cleared the way for himself by having Ibrahim killed,
and there would have been no hope for Sarah to escape his clutches.
On the contrary, if Ibrahim alayhis salam remained alive,
he could devise some means for her rescue and deliverance,
as he immediately stood in prayer and began supplicating to Allah.
Thus, his life was saved, and as a result of the supplication, the honor and dignity of both husband and wife were preserved,
and they were even given a maidservant.
When the tyrant ruler attempted to assault her, the hand of the ruler was seized with great severity as a result of the supplication of Ibrahim and Sarah,
and he immediately requested supplication (for relief),
but due to his treachery, his affliction increased,
until, due to suffocation, he began to rub his heels and Sarah feared that she would be accused of murder,
so she prayed for him,
and in the end, despite his request for supplication, she called him a shaytan, i.e., a great rebellious jinn,
because these people attributed great feats to the jinn and held them in high esteem and veneration.
Therefore, to please them, he presented his own daughter Hajar as a maidservant to Sarah so that her anger would subside and she would not harm him.

(For further details, see Khayr al-Anam, pp. 237–245)
Since the lineage of the Arabs was pure, or their livelihood depended on animals,
which were raised on grass, and grass comes from heavenly rain,
they were called ma’ al-sama’ (water of the sky),
and according to Qadi ‘Iyad,
by this is meant the Ansar,
and their ancestor was called Ma’ al-Sama’.

Benefits and Issues:
It is in no way permissible to call one’s wife “sister” out of habit or as an expression of love and respect. However, if someone says it as a form of equivocation (tawriyah) due to a genuine legal (shar‘i) necessity, then it is permissible.
As has been mentioned in the well-known story of Ibrahim (alayhis salam).

2.
Some modernists consider this hadith regarding Ibrahim (alayhis salam) to be unacceptable.
In fact, they refer to the entire corpus of hadith as a suspicious non-Arab conspiracy and call it by all sorts of unknown titles. Their style of writing and speech is such that, in comparison to the Qur’an, it is easier and preferable for them to reject and declare weak the narrators of hadith, rather than to criticize the Qur’an itself.
The Qur’an has explicitly stated about Ibrahim (alayhis salam) that (إِنَّه كانَ صدِّيقًا نَبِيًّا) (Maryam: 41) — “Indeed, he was a man of truth and a prophet.” Those who hold this view should reflect that the Qur’an has also reached us through the same narrators through whom the hadith have reached us.
The unparalleled principles of the highest standards of truthfulness and honesty are the same in the transmission and narration of both the Noble Qur’an and the Prophetic hadith.
Wherever there is a difference, it is not hidden from the insight of the scholars, and for this reason, hadith have been divided into various categories and their rulings have been explained separately.
To claim that this hadith is actually contrary to the Qur’an is against scholarly integrity.
It is appropriate to present the following excerpt from Tafsir Ahsan al-Bayan (by Hafiz Salahuddin Yusuf rahimahullah).
The respected Hafiz, under Surah al-Anbiya, verse 63 (قَالَ بَلْ فَعَلَهُ كَبِيرُهُمْ هَذَا فَاسْأَلُوهُمْ إِنْ كَانُوا يَنْطِقُونَ), writes: (These statements of Ibrahim alayhis salam) certainly cannot be called lies in reality.
In other words, “lying” in the sight of Allah is not subject to accountability because they were spoken for the sake of Allah alone.
And in such a case, no sinful act can occur.
And this is only possible if, despite being apparently a lie, it is not actually a lie in reality.
But (since this was done by Ibrahim Khalilullah alayhis salam, such a noble and great person), it has been described as “lying,” just as the words ‘asa’ (disobeyed) and ‘ghawa’ (went astray) have been used for Adam (alayhis salam).
Although, in the Qur’an itself, their act of eating from the tree has also been described as a result of forgetfulness and weakness of resolve.
The clear meaning of this is that an action can have two aspects.
From one perspective, it may be praiseworthy, and from another, it may have an apparent aspect of blame.
The statement of Ibrahim (alayhis salam) is, from this aspect, apparently a lie because it was contrary to the actual event.
He himself broke the idols,
but attributed it to the largest idol.
However, since his purpose was to establish proof and affirm monotheism (tawhid), in reality, we will call it a method of establishing proof and a way of exposing and expressing the foolishness of the polytheists, rather than a lie.
Moreover, the context in which these “lies” are mentioned in the hadith is also worth considering: it is to excuse himself from interceding before Allah on the Day of Gathering (Hashr) because three slips occurred from him in the world.
Whereas, in reality, those are not slips — in terms of reality and purpose, they are not lies.
But due to the immense awe and majesty of Allah, he will be so fearful that these matters, due to their apparent resemblance to lying, will seem blameworthy to him.
Thus, the purpose of the hadith is by no means to prove that Ibrahim (alayhis salam) was a liar, but rather to express the state that will overcome him on the Day of Resurrection due to the fear of Allah.
Furthermore, it is noteworthy that two out of these three matters are themselves mentioned in the Qur’an; the hadith only refers to them.
The third matter is mentioned only in the hadith, but in the circumstances in which it was said, the Qur’an itself has permitted even the outward expression of disbelief (kufr).
Therefore, if these people wish to criticize the hadith, they should first criticize the Qur’an,
and declare their disassociation from it.