It is established from the Sunnah of the Prophet and the Companions, may Allah be pleased with them, that wiping over the turban without touching the forehead with the hand is Sunnah. Some people deny this and claim that wiping over the turban is not permissible. Let us thoroughly examine the arguments from both sides and see who are the people of truth.
First, we analyze the affirmative evidences and the objections raised against them:
Argument Number 1:
عن عمرو بن أمیہ قال : رأیت النبی صلی اللہ علیہ وسلم یمسح علی عمامتہ و خفیہ.
Sayyiduna Amr bin Umayyah Zamari, may Allah be pleased with him, narrates that I saw the Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him. He wiped over his turban and both socks.
Imam Ibn Khuzaymah, may Allah have mercy on him (223-311 AH), classifies this hadith as follows:
باب المرخصۃ فی المسح علی العمامۃ.
“The permission to wipe over the turban.”
Imam Ibn Hibban, may Allah have mercy on him (d. 345 AH), states:
ذکر الإباحۃ للمرء أن یمسح علی عمامتہ کما کان یمسح علی عمامتہ، کما کان یمسح علی خفیہ علی خفیہ سواء دون الناصیۃ.
“The statement that it is permissible for a person to wipe only over his turban, even if he does not wipe over the forehead, just as it is permissible to wipe over the socks.
Imam Abu Muhammad Abdullah bin Abdul Rahman Al-Darimi, may Allah have mercy on him (181-255 AH), concluded the chapter as follows:
باب المسح علی العمامۃ.
The statement about wiping over the turban.
He was also asked if he acted upon this hadith? He replied, yes! By Allah.
Evidence Number 2:
عن بلال : أن رسول اللہ ﷺ مسح علی الخفین و الخمار.
“It is narrated from Sayyiduna Bilal, may Allah be pleased with him, that the Messenger of Allah ﷺ wiped over his socks and turban.”
Imam Ibn Khuzaymah, may Allah have mercy on him, also established wiping only over the turban from this hadith
.
Imam Tirmidhi, may Allah have mercy on him, says:
باب ماجاء فی المسح علی العمامۃ.
“The statement of the narrations that have come regarding wiping over the turban.”
Evidence Number 3:
عن ثوبان قال: بعث رسول اللہ ﷺ سریۃ، فأصابھم البرد، فلما قدموا علی رسول اللہ ﷺ أمرھم أن یمسحوا علی الغصائب و التساخین.
It is narrated from Sayyiduna Thawban that the Messenger of Allah ﷺ sent an army, and they suffered from cold. When they came to the Messenger of Allah ﷺ, he ﷺ ordered them to wipe over their turbans and socks.
Imam Hakim رحمه الله (169/1) declared this hadith “authentic,” and Hafiz Dhahabi رحمه الله agreed with him. Also, Janab Taqi Usmani Deobandi Sahib has acknowledged the authenticity of its chain.
Evidence Number 4:
عن المغیرۃ بن شعبۃ، عن أبیہ قال : توضأالنبی ﷺ، ومسح علی الخفین، والعمامۃ.
Sayyiduna Mughirah bin Shu’bah narrates that the Prophet ﷺ performed ablution and wiped over his socks and turban.
Imam Ibn Khuzaymah رحمه الله (1514) and Imam Ibn Hibban رحمه الله (1347) have declared this hadith “authentic.” Also, Janab Taqi Usmani Sahib has acknowledged the authenticity of its chain.
Imam Tirmidhi رحمه الله says:
حدیث المغیرۃ بن شعبۃ حدیث حسن صحیح ، وھو قول غیر واحد من أھل من أصحاب النبی ﷺ، منھم أبوبکر ، و عمر، وأنس، وبہ یقول الأوزاعی، وأحمد، وإسحاق، قالوا: یمسح علی العمامۃ.
“Sayyiduna Mughira bin Shu’bah’s hadith is Hasan Sahih. Many scholars among the Companions have this opinion. Among them are Sayyiduna Abu Bakr Siddiq, Sayyiduna Umar Farooq, and Sayyiduna Anas, may Allah be pleased with them all. Imam Awza’i, Imam Ahmad bin Hanbal, and Imam Ishaq bin Rahwayah, may Allah have mercy on them, also hold this belief. They say that wiping over the turban is permissible.”
Evidence Number 5:
عن عاصم قال: رایت انس بن مالک بال، ثم توضا، ومسح علی عمامتہ، وخفیہ.
“Asim, may Allah have mercy on him, narrates: I saw Sayyiduna Anas bin Malik, may Allah be pleased with him, urinate, then perform wudu, and wipe over his turban and socks.”
Evidence Number 6:
عن ابی غالب قال : رأیت أبا أمامۃ یمسح علی العمامۃ.
“Abu Ghalib, may Allah have mercy on him, narrates that I saw Sayyiduna Abu Umamah wiping over his turban.”
Imam Tirmidhi, may Allah have mercy on him, says: وسمعت الجارود بن معاذ یقول: سمعت وکیع بن الجراح یقول: إن المسح علی العمامۃ یجزئہ الاثر.
“I heard Jarood bin Mu’adh narrating that I heard Waki’ bin Jarrah, may Allah have mercy on him, saying: The prophetic hadith ﷺ permits wiping over the turban.”
Objections of the Opponents
Now observe the baseless objections of the Hanafis on these ahadith and their answers:
1:
Objection of Being ‘Ma’ul’ (Defective):
Janab Muhammad Sarfaraz Khan Safdar Deobandi Hayati Sahib (d. 1430 AH) writes: ”
writes that Ibn Abdul Barr, may Allah have mercy on him, says that the narration (of Mughirah bin Shu’bah) about wiping over the turban is ‘ma’ul’ (defective). The reason for it being defective is written in Fath al-Bari Vol. 1, p. 247, Umdat al-Qari Vol. 1, p. 854, and Nayl al-Awtar Vol. 1, p. 182, where the Muhaddith Asili said that the word ‘ʿimamah’ is a mistake of Al-Awza’i (the word ‘ʿimamah’ is an error of Al-Awza’i).”
Analysis:
(1) The statement of Hafiz Ibn Abdul Barr, may Allah have mercy on him, is to be disregarded due to lack of evidence.
(2) Where Asili’s statement has been quoted in Fath al-Bari, Hafiz Ibn Hajar, may Allah have mercy on him, has also refuted it, which Safdar Sahib did not notice and he hastened only to quote the objection. Hafiz Ibn Hajar, may Allah have mercy on him, writes:
وأغرب الأصیلی فیما حکاہ ابن بطال، فقال: ذکر العمامۃ فی ھذا الحدیث من خطا الاوزاعی…. وأما متابعۃ معمر فلیس فیھا ذکر العمامۃ….. وقد ذکرنا أن ابن مندۃ أخرجہ من طریق معمر باثبات ذکر الإمامۃ فیہ، وعلی تقدیر تفرد الأوزاعی بذکرھا لا یستلزم ذلک تخطئتہ، لأنھا تکون زیادۃ من ثقۃ، حافظ، غیر منافیۃ لروایۃ رفقتۃ، فتقبل، ولا توکن شاذۃ، ولا معنی لرد الروایات الصحیحۃ بھذۃ التعلیلات الواھیۃ.
“Ibn Battal has quoted the objection from Asili, in which Asili made a very strange statement; he said that the mention of the turban in this hadith is a mistake of Awza’i… Muammar, who followed up, does not mention the turban… Although we have already stated that the narration reported by Ibn Manda, may Allah have mercy on him, from Muammar’s chain does not include the mention of the turban. Even if it is accepted that Awza’i alone used these words, it does not necessarily mean he erred, because this is an addition by a trustworthy and memorizing narrator which is not contradicted by other narrators, therefore it will be accepted, not rejected. It is futile to reject authentic narrations by making such weak objections.”
(3) Safadri himself admitted that Awza’i is not present in the narration of Tirmidhi; he himself writes: “But in the narration of Tirmidhi, Awza’i, may Allah have mercy on him, is not mentioned.”
But it is regrettable that these people knowingly continue to quote such worthless objections against authentic hadiths. What is the benefit of filling books with such things?
(4) A dependent narration is “weak,” whereas among the earlier scholars, Ibn Khuzaymah, may Allah have mercy on him, Imam Ibn Hibban, may Allah have mercy on him, and Imam Tirmidhi, may Allah have mercy on him, have declared this hadith “authentic.” Furthermore, we have already mentioned that Maulana Taqi Usmani Deobandi Sahib has also accepted its chain of narration as “authentic.”
(5) Safdar Sahib objected to the word “turban” in the hadith of Sayyiduna Mughira bin Shu’bah being dependent, but we have also established the act and ruling of wiping over the turban from the Prophet ﷺ through Sayyiduna Bilal, Sayyiduna Amr bin Umayyah, and Sayyiduna Thawban, may Allah be pleased with them all. The practice of the Companions has also been presented. In the presence of all these things, what status does this objection hold?
Claim of abrogation:
Mr. Taqi Usmani Deobandi Sahib says: “Imam Muhammad, may Allah have mercy on him, has responded to the narrations of wiping over the turban in Muwatta in another way. He writes: It has reached us that wiping over the turban was practiced, so it was abandoned. Maulana Abdul Haq Lakhnawi, may Allah have mercy on him, has written that Imam Muhammad’s reports are from Musnad. If this is true, then the matter becomes very clear and it becomes the best response to the hadiths of wiping over the turban that wiping over the turban has been abrogated.”
Analysis:
1: What is the evidence for the claim of abrogation? Mere blind imitation has caused this baseless claim, because when no effective interpretation was found, the claim of abrogation was made, and this is the habit of the imitators, as Sheikh al-Islam Thani, a divine scholar, Allama Ibn al-Qayyim, may Allah have mercy on him, writes:
وقد اتخذ کثیر من الناس دعوی النسخ و الإجماع سلما إلی ابطال کثیر من السنن الثابتہ عن رسول اللہ، وھذا لیس بھین، ولا تترک لرسول اللہ سنۃ صحیحۃ ابدا بدعوی الإجماع، ولا دعوی النسخ إلی ان یوجد ناسخ صحیح صریح متأخر، نقلتہ الأئمۃ و حفظتہ، إذ محال علی الأمۃ ان تضیع الناسخ الذی یلزمھا حفظہ، وتحفظ المنسوخ الذی قد بطل العمل بہ، ولم یبق من الدین، وکثیر المولدۃ المتعصبین إذا راوا حدیثا یخالف مذھبھم یتلقونہ بالتاویل، وحملہ علی خلاف ظاھرہ ما وجدوا إلیہ سبیلا، فإذا جاءھم من ذلک ما یغلبھم فزعوا إلی دعوی الإجماع علی خلافہ، فإن راوا من الخلاف مالا یمکنھم من دعوی الإجماع فزعوا إلی القول بأنہ منسوخ، ولیست ھذہ طریق أئمۃ الإسلام، بل أئمۃ الإسلام کلھم علی خلاف ھذا الطریق، وانھم اذا وجدوا لرسول اللہ سنۃ صحیحۃ صریحۃ لم یبطلوھا بتاویل، ولا دعوی إجماع، ولا نسخ، والشافعی، واحمد بن أعظم الناس إنکارا لذلک، وباللہ التوفیق.
Many people have used the claim of abrogation (nasikh) and consensus (ijma) as a pretext to dismiss many authentic proven Sunnahs of the Holy Prophet ﷺ. This is not a game or spectacle. No proven Sunnah of the Prophet ﷺ can ever be abandoned merely on the basis of a claim of consensus or abrogation, unless a correct, explicit, and subsequent abrogating hadith is found, which the Imams of the religion have transmitted and preserved. It is impossible for the Muslim Ummah to discard that abrogating hadith, which was necessary to preserve, and yet continue to preserve the abrogated hadith, which has ceased to be acted upon and is no longer part of the religion. Many later biased people have this habit that when they see a hadith that goes against their sect, they insist on interpreting it and, as far as possible, try to attribute it to a non-literal meaning. When a strong argument comes from this side as well, they rush to claim consensus against it. When they see a disagreement that makes the claim of consensus impossible, they quickly declare it abrogated. This was not the method of the Imams of Islam; rather, all the Imams of the religion were against this. When they found any authentic proven Sunnah of the Prophet ﷺ, they did not abandon it with any interpretation, claim of consensus, or claim of abrogation. Imam Shafi’i (may Allah have mercy on him) and Imam Ahmad ibn Hanbal (may Allah have mercy on him) considered this very reprehensible.
If any Hanafi brother has any correct and explicit evidence for this claim of abrogation, he should present it as proof of his impartiality.
2: After the death of the Prophet ﷺ, the practice of the Companions, may Allah be pleased with them all, exposes this claim of abrogation. If this practice was abrogated, the Companions, may Allah be pleased with them all, would have known it first.
Then neither the Tabi‘in nor the Tabi‘ al-Tabi‘in nor any of the Imams of the religion claimed abrogation. Only the rigid followers have had this “inspiration.”
3: According to Maulana Abdul Haqqi Lakhnawi Hanafi Sahib, the reports of Muhammad bin Hasan will not become connected; rather, due to being without chain, they are baseless and false in the scholarly field.
4: According to the stronger opinion of the Muhaddithin, even the reports of Imam Malik, may Allah have mercy on him, and Imam Zahri, may Allah have mercy on him, require verification. How can the reports of these trustworthy and reliable Imams be considered unquestionable, while the reports of weak narrators among Muhaddithin like Muhammad bin Hasan al-Shaybani are used as evidence?
5: Muhammad bin Hasan Shaybani is considered a “matruk” narrator by the muhaddithin and the imams of jarh wa ta’dil, therefore, not only are his statements unreliable, but even his authentic narrations hold no credibility.
6: Even Maulana Taqi Usmani Deobandi himself does not believe this, as is clear from his words “if this is correct,” but why are such statements presented against authentic hadiths?
An invalid interpretation:
Maulana Muhammad Sarfaraz Khan Safdar Hayati Deobandi writes: “Wiping over the turban is after wiping the nasiyah (forehead), as it is in Muslim Vol. 1, p. 134 and Sunan al-Kubra by Bayhaqi Vol. 1, p. 58: ومسح بناصیتا و مسح علی العمامہ and in Tirmidhi Vol. 1, p. 15: أنہ مسح علی ناصیتہ و عمامتہ (He ﷺ wiped over his forehead and turban).”
Analysis:
1: The Prophet Muhammad ﷺ did not perform wiping (masah) over the head only once in his lifetime; rather, he did it many times. Sayyiduna Mughira bin Shu’ba narrated all the methods he observed from the Messenger of Allah ﷺ. If he saw wiping over the entire head, he mentioned it, as found in Sahih al-Bukhari (2918, 5798, 5799). If he saw wiping only over the turban, he also narrated that, as in the narration we mentioned from Tirmidhi. And if he saw wiping over both the turban and the forehead, he narrated that as well, as mentioned by Safdar Sahib in Sahih Muslim.
Therefore, all three cases are established and permissible from the Sunnah. Taking only one and abandoning the others is not a scholarly achievement. If tomorrow someone completely denies wiping over the turban and says that wiping over the turban is not possible in any case and calls it abrogated or starts making such false interpretations, should his statement be accepted?
2: Safdar Sahib has mentioned the narration of Sayyiduna Mughira bin Shu’bah, whereas we have also presented the hadiths of Sayyiduna Amr bin Umayyah, Sayyiduna Bilal, and Sayyiduna Thawban, may Allah be pleased with them all, from which it is clear that the Prophet ﷺ also wiped over the turban alone.
3: Should the understanding of the hadith be taken from the muhaddithin (scholars of hadith) or from the followers (muqallideen)? The honorable muhaddithin, whose entire lives were dedicated to the service of hadith, have explicitly stated that due to these hadiths, wiping over the turban alone is correct, as Imam Ibn Hibban, may Allah have mercy on him (d. 354 AH), says:
ومسح بناصیۃ، وفوق العمامۃ، قدتوھم من لم یحکم صناعۃ النعلم أن المسح علی العمامۃ دون الناصیۃ غیر جائز، ویجعل خبر عمرو بن أمیہ مجملا، وخبر مغیرۃ الذی ذکرناہ مفسرا لہ أن مسح النبی ﷺ علی العمامۃ کان ذلک مع الناصیۃ فوق المسح علی الناصیۃ دون العمامۃ، إذ الناصیۃ من الرأس، ولیس بحمداللہ ومنہ کذلک، بل مسح النبی ﷺ علی رأسہ فی وضونہ،ومسح علی عمامتہ دون الناصیۃ، ومسح علی ناصیۃ و عمامتہ ثلاث مرار فی ثلاثۃ مواضع مختلفۃ، فکل سنۃ یستمعل من غیر أن یکون استعمال أحدھما حتما، واستعمال الآخر مکروھا.
The words about wiping on the forehead and the turban of the Prophet ﷺ mislead inexperienced people in the field of knowledge into thinking that wiping on the turban without wiping on the forehead is impermissible. They consider the hadith of Amr bin Umayyah to be concise and interpret the mentioned hadith of Mughira bin Shu’bah as an explanation of it, concluding that the wiping on the turban by the Prophet ﷺ was in addition to wiping on the forehead, because the forehead is part of the head. But by the grace and mercy of Allah, this is not the case. Rather, the Prophet ﷺ wiped his entire head during ablution, sometimes wiping only on the turban without wiping on the forehead, sometimes wiping on the forehead and turban both. These were three different occasions and places, so each method is Sunnah and should be followed. One cannot declare following one method obligatory and the other disliked.
4: According to Janab Taqi Usmani Sahib: “It is correct that according to the Hanafi and Maliki schools, the Sunnah of wiping over the turban is also not fulfilled by wiping over the turban.”
If it is indeed the case that wiping over the turban is an unnecessary act and does not fulfill the Sunnah of wiping, then what is the opinion regarding this action of the Prophet ﷺ?
5: After the Prophet ﷺ, the companions also wiping only over the turban is clear evidence that this is a beloved Sunnah of yours ﷺ.
A Composite Fallacy:
Mr. Muhammad Sarfaraz Khan Safdar Deobandi writes: ”
writes that
has made وأضلہ اللہ علی علم both an adverbial accusative and an object, so in this hadith also, ‘علی العمامہ‘ should be considered an adverbial accusative. In this regard, the meaning will be that you ﷺ wiped while being in the state of wearing a turban. Then where was the wiping done? Where it is usually done, that is, on the head. Accordingly,
narrates:
فادخل یدیہ من تحت العمامۃ، فمسح مقدم رأسہ، ولم ینقض العمامۃ. انتھٰی،
And Al-Bayhaqi narrated it in Vol 1, p. 61.
The wiping was done on the head without removing the turban.”
Analysis:
1: Now the true face of these people has come to light, that in reality they want to completely deny wiping over the turban. Safdar Sahib himself is saying that if ‘علی العمامۃ‘ is taken as a circumstantial accusative from the doer, then it would mean that the Prophet ﷺ wiped his head. He did not remove the turban, rather he wiped underneath it. When the Deobandis accept this as true, then what is the use of the aforementioned false interpretations and claims?
2: None of the great hadith scholars have made this interpretation, therefore Usmani Sahib’s understanding is not even comparable to the understanding of the pious predecessors.
3: Sahib Rooh al-Ma’ani must have indeed taken ‘واضلہ اللہ علی علم‘ as a circumstantial accusative from the doer, but Safdar Sahib’s purpose will not be achieved by this construction. The words of Sahih Bukhari are:
رأیت النبی ﷺ یمسح علی عمامتہ وخفیہ.
“I saw the Prophet ﷺ wiping over his turban and socks.”
If Safdar Sahib and his leader Usmani Sahib’s method is applied here as well, the text would be: “Yamsah Hal Kunah Mutamamman Wala Bisa Khafiyah” (He wipes over the headgear completely or lightly). At that time, you were wearing a turban and socks. So, will the wiping over the socks be denied here? If not, then why deny wiping over the turban using the same reasoning?
It is obvious that just as wiping was done over the socks worn, similarly wiping was done over the turban worn. Moreover, regarding wiping over turbans, the command of the Holy Prophet ﷺ that we mentioned cannot be interpreted away by this reasoning.
4: The narration from Sunan Abi Dawood, which was used to support this interpretation, is not a reliable basis. A detailed discussion on this will come in the opponents’ arguments. ان شاء اللہ !
5: Those companions of the Prophet (peace be upon him) who believed in and practiced wiping over the turban did not understand this matter. Were the companions of the Prophet (may Allah be pleased with them all) and the great hadith scholars devoid (God forbid) of the understanding of Arabic linguistics that centuries later, Safdar Sahib’s praised Janab Usmani Sahib received this “inspiration”?
An Excuse:
Janab Muhammad Sarfaraz Safdar Deobandi Sahib writes:
”
states that Imam Sarkhasi wrote in
that at that time the wiping over the turban was due to illness, and the issue of excuse is separate. Accordingly, Qadi Abu Bakr Ibn al-Arabi, in
, writes that there was a cold or headache, because of which the Prophet ﷺ wiped over the turban, and
narrates that the Prophet ﷺ sent an army. Some of them were wounded. They complained of cold, so the Prophet ﷺ permitted wiping over the turbans (asā’ib) and socks (tasākhīn). Imam Hakim, may Allah have mercy on him, and Dhahabi, may Allah have mercy on him, both say it is authentic according to the condition of Muslim. Asā’ib is the plural of ‘asabah’, meaning turbans, and
states that tasākhīn means socks; there is no singular form of this word. Both these words are found in
.”
Analysis:
1: You saw that initially, wiping over the turban was considered possible, defective, excessive, and many other things were said. Safdar Sahib put all his effort into denying them, but now immediately the stance has changed again that indeed you ﷺ wiped over the turban, but…
Isn’t this contradiction in narration, lack of evidence, and boldness and confusion in opposing the Sunnah a clear proof? Is there anyone in the world who wants to deny any verse of the Holy Quran and Satan does not provide some interpretation or justification? In that case, everyone can make their own religion according to their wishes!
2: There is no evidence to interpret wiping over the turban as an excuse. No authentic hadith proves that you ﷺ did this because of an excuse. The claimant should present evidence.
3: We have presented not one but several authentic hadiths as proof of wiping over the turban by you ﷺ. Was the Prophet ﷺ suffering from a cold, flu, or headache on all those occasions?
4: The order given to the army men to wipe over their turbans is a general permission. There is no authentic hadith proving that the Prophet ﷺ only allowed this for the wounded.
5: Why would the Companions, may Allah be pleased with them all, not have known this? Neither the Tabi‘in nor any of the Imams of the religion found any excuse to deny wiping over the turban.
A lexical objection:
Mr. Zafar Ahmad Thanvi Deobandi writes:
اما حدیث ثوبان، فلیس فیہ دلالۃ علی المسح علی العمامۃ صراحۃ، لما فیہ من لفظ العصائب، وھو جمع عصابۃ، یطلق علی کل ما یعصب بہ سواء کان مندیلا أو خرقۃ أو عمامۃ…. فیحتمل أن یراد بھا العمائم أو الخرق المشدودۃ علی الجروح.
“There is no explicit evidence from the hadith of Thawban for wiping over the turban, because the word ‘‘asā’ib’ is the plural of ‘‘asabah’ and this word is used for anything that is tied, whether it is a handkerchief, a piece of cloth, or an ‘imamah’ (turban)… Therefore, there arises a possibility that it refers either to turbans or to bandages tied over wounds.”
Analysis:
1: If its meaning is possible, then the honorable hadith scholars and imams of the religion have determined its meaning. Imam Abu Dawood, may Allah have mercy on him, and Imam Ibn al-Mundhir, may Allah have mercy on him, among others, have explicitly stated its meaning as turbans. Therefore, the possibility suggested by the followers has no standing against the determination made by the hadith scholars.
2: Respected Muhammad Sarfaraz Khan Safdar Deobandi himself has determined this very meaning. Knowing the correct matter, how do these people present such incorrect statements against authentic hadith with such audacity?
Objection on the Understanding of the Companions:
Respected Muhammad Sarfaraz Khan Safdar Deobandi Hayati, benefiting from “Taqreer Tirmidhi by Mahmood al-Hasan Deobandi,” writes:
” او أنہ سوی عمامتہ، فظن الراوی أنہ علی العمامۃ.
. (Or it is possible that the Prophet ﷺ adjusted his blessed turban, so the narrator (Companion) understood that the Prophet ﷺ wiped over the turban. (In summary from Taqreer al-Tirmidhi by Sheikh al-Hind)).”
Analysis:
1: Do the Deobandis hold the view that even the eyes that saw and the ears that heard could not truly understand the sayings and actions of the Holy Prophet ﷺ? Is this understanding not an objection to the Companions and a conspiracy to open the door to denying Hadith? When someone wants to deny a Hadith, they say that the Companion who narrated it did not understand it correctly; in reality, the matter was like this…
This suspicion against the Companions, may Allah be pleased with them all, and such confidence in their so-called jurists’ “fiqh” that they subject the Hadith of the Prophet to interpretations. For Allah’s sake, Deobandi brothers, think about what answer you will give before Allah?
2: The Deobandi scholars themselves have considered this against the honor of the Companions, as Mr. Anwar Shah Kashmiri Deobandi writes:
وأجاب عنہ بعض الحنفیۃ أنہ سوی عمامتہ بعد المسح و ظنہ الراوی مسحا، فعبر عن التسویۃ بالمسح علی العمامۃ، قلت: وھذا الجواب لیس بمرضی عندی، لأنہ یفضی إلی تغلیط الصحابی الذی شاھد الواقع، وحکی عند کما رأی، و معلوم أنھم من أذکیا الامۃ، کیف یمکن أن یخفی علیھم الفرق بین المسح و التسویۃ؟.
Some Hanafis have responded that the Prophet ﷺ straightened his turban after wiping (masah). The narrator considered that as wiping. Therefore, straightening the turban was interpreted as wiping. I say that this response is not correct in my view, because it leads to declaring a mistake on the companion who was an eyewitness to this incident and who narrated it exactly as he saw it. It is established that the companions of the Prophet, may Allah be pleased with them all, are the purest people of the Ummah. How is it possible that they would not distinguish whether the Prophet ﷺ straightened his turban or wiped over it?
Mr. Taqi Usmani Deobandi, refuting this baseless statement of his “Sheikh al-Hind,” writes:
Some individuals have responded that the Prophet ﷺ must have corrected the turban after wiping the head, which the narrator misunderstood as wiping over the turban, but this response is weak because it amounts to mistrusting the understanding of trustworthy narrators. Whereas the narrations of wiping over the turban have been transmitted from multiple companions, and considering all of them as mistaken is a suspicion.
Now let our Deobandi brothers decide whether the attitude of their scholars, which involves mistrust towards the companions of the Prophet, may Allah be pleased with them all, and other hadith scholars, is in opposition to or in accordance with hadith? Also, is this the way of the people of truth?
