Death of the Prophets and their Barzakhi life in the grave
Sayings of the Sahabah showing that the Prophet (saw) is dead
Else Neywli brought many proofs from authentic narrations that the Sahabah did not consider life of the Prophet (saw) in his grave as that of this world.
First the saying of Abu Bakr is well-known at the death of the Prophet (saw) that whoever worshiped Muhammad, then he has died, and whoever worshiped Allah, He is alive.
Among them Ibn Mas’ud and others changed words Tashahud “Salam Aleyka Ya Ayuha Nabiyu” (Peace be upon you O Prophet) and they said as ibn Mas’ood said in words of “Sahih Al-Bukhari”: “When he was seized (Qubidha) we said: “Salam ‘ala” meaning Nabi (saw)”” (Peace be upon the Prophet)
So it is a clear proof that they saw a difference between life and death
Abbas and Fatimah came to ask inheritance of the Prophet (saw) as in “Sahih ul Bukhari”, as they were not aware of the Hadith that the Prophets do not leave any inheritance. And Abu Bakr did not tell them that I do not give you inheritance because the Prophet (saw) is alive. So for all these Sahabah, the Prophet (saw) was dead.
The Prophet (saw) as in “Sahih ul Bukhari” said that if Musa (aley salam) was alive he would follow me. So it shows that Musa is not alive.
Ibn Umar said in “Sahih ul Bukhari” that the Sahabah used to say while Prophet (saw) was alive that the best is Abu Bakr, then Umar then ‘Uthman and after that they did not say anything.
So ibn Umar did not say that when Prophet (saw) was alive in his first life and now he is alive and hidden, rather he said when he was alive.
Abu Dawud brought a chapter that it is permissible to do Sacrifice on behalf of the dead, and he brought a Hadith that ‘Ali did a sacrifice on the behalf of the Prophet (saw) after his death. So Abu Dawud did Qiyas (analogy), as Ali did sacrifice on behalf of the Prophet (saw) after his death, then for others as well sacrifice on behalf of the dead is permissible. And if Prophet (saw) was alive, then the Qiyas would not be correct.
Saying of scholars brought by Neylwi Mamati
Neylwi also in “Nida e Haqq” v 1 p 664 quoted from his teacher Mufti Kifayatullah
“Hudhur (saw) departed after completing his age, and considering his departure with death is correct, in Quran there is: “If he dies or is killed” and “And you will die and they will die”. The meaning of being created from Allah’s light is not correct for anybody to mean that his Bashariyat (being a human) with its consequences and others, was created from Nur (light), and nor his life meant that natural death cannot happen to him, that he is alive now as he was alive before, this saying is clear falsehood (Sarih Butlan). Allah knows best” (“Kifayatul Mufti” v 1 p 74 and 75
In “Kifayatul Mufti” v 1 p 77 : “Prophets are given a particular and distinguished life that is more distinguished than the life of Martyrs, and the life of martyrs is more distinguished than the life of Awliya, but these lives are different from life of this world (Duniyah) because the consequences (lawazim) of the life of this world (Duniyah) is not found in them
Also in “Kifayatul Mufti” v 1 p 91 : “The majority of the Ummah Muhammadiyah say that Hazrat (saw) in his noble grave is alive with a particular life. And then what is the reality of this life, only Hazrat knows its reality, and this life of Huzur (saw) is not Munafi with Itlaq of death (meaning this life does not oppose state of death). Allah said in the Quran addressing Hudhur (saw): “You will die and they will die” and in another place He said: “If he dies or is killed” and Hadhrat Abu Bakr after his departure said addressing the group of Sahabah: “The one who was worshiping Muhammad, then Muhammad has died
About the Mi’raj, the Prophet (saw) was elevated with his body, but other prophets except Isa (aley salam), then there souls prayed behind Prophet (saw) with Mutashakil (conceptual resembling) bodies, and this explanation was given by many scholars like Al-Baydawi in Tafsir of the verse of Isra, Ibn Hajar in “Fath”, As-Suyuti in “Sharh Sudur”, Muhammad Idris Al-Kandhalwi in “Ta’liq us Sabih” v 2 p 229, and ibn ‘Aqil also said the same.
All said that Souls of Prophets were there with Mathali (conceptual) bodies. So it means that these Prophet did not go with their bodies that remained in their graves, so the life of the Prophets in their grave is different from the life of this world. Yet sometimes, their souls are in their bodies and they pray, sometimes their souls are in higher heaven close to Allah leaving their bodies. So it shows that the relation of the body and the soul in the next world has nothing to do with the relation of this life.
An-Nawawi said about this event v 2 p 335: “It is established in the Hadith of Isra that the Prophet (saw) was gathered with all Prophets in the heavens and in Bayt ul Maqdis and he led them in prayer, so it is not far (fala Yub’adu) that Allah resurrected them”
So Nawawi talked of resurrection, and if they were alive with the life of this world, why would they need to be resurrected? So for him as well, the life of Prophets in Barzakh is different from life of this world.
Hafiz ibn Hajar said in “Fathul Bari” on Sharh of Hadith 3816 of “Sahih ul Bukhari” in which the Prophet (saw) prayed on people of Uhud before his death, Kitab Ghazwah, chapter Uhud:
“The context shows that it was in end of life of the Prophet (saw), as for Tawdi’ (saying goodbye) to the dead, it is possible that the Sahabi meant stopping his visit of dead people with his body, because after his death, although he is alive (after death), but it is next life (Hayat Ukhraviyah) which has no similarity with life of Duniyah. Allah knows best”
There is an authentic Hadith in “Sahih ul Bukhari” that Musa disputed with Adam, and Al-‘Ayni said in “Umdatul Qari” that this Hadith is difficult to be explained, and the same was said by Qadhi ‘Iyad, and when did this happen, or will it happen on judgment day? And Al-‘Ayni mentioned in one possible opinion, that it happened in life of Barzakh and two souls talked. And he did not say that the two bodies talked, if bodies could meet, where would be the difficulty in this Hadith?
Ghulamullah Khan Deobandi Mamati said in his Tafsir: “Allah made the Prophet Uzayr to die so he can be witness of how Allah brings back life to dead, and 100 years passed on him and he remained on the surface of earth without being in a grave, and when Allah resurrected him, He asked him how much did he remain there, and he answered with Zann (speculation) and approximation: “I remained one day or part of a day”, as he did not know that 100 years passed, and it is known from that this great Prophet did not have perception of difference of night and day, and he did not know the time changing in this period. If he knew this then he would make it clear he remained 100 years and would not have said: I remained one day or part of a day.
And it is known from this great event that dead do not hear, because the Prophet Uzayr (aley Salam) did not feel all changes that occurred in this period, and he did not know in these 100 years the night from the day, as he did not hear in this long period any sound from sounds that happened, despite that he was not in a grave but on surface of earth…as it is known from this important event that souls of Prophets are not in their saints body after their death, and that there death is real, and there life in grave is Barzakhi and not Duniyawi Nasawi (life of this world)” (“Jawahir ul Quran” v 1 p 127)
Souls of prophets are in ‘Iliyun
Neylwi brought sayings of many scholars saying that souls of Prophets are in higher places, in Iliyun.
Neylwi quoted from Ibn Rajab in “Ahwal ul Qubur” chapter 9 that souls of the Prophets are close to Allah in ‘Iliyun and they have pleasure of looking at Allah and they enjoy the rivers of Firdaws.
He quoted from Mu’in ud Din An-Nasafi Al-Hanafi from his “Bahr ul Kalam” p 87 that the souls of the Prophets leave their bodies and in Mathali (conceptual) bodies enjoy the pleasures of Firdaws and other places.
In “Tafseer Al-Mazhari” v 1 p 234 it is said that the souls of Prophets leave their bodies and they go to paradise, eat, drink and enjoy and they go close to the ‘Arsh. Ahmad As-Sirhindi said the same as mentioned in “Tafsir Al-Mazhari”.
Ibn Hazm also said that Souls of Prophets leave their bodies and go to paradise as in “Sharh us Sudur” of As-Suyuti p 99,100.
Al-Alusi said in “Ruh ul Ma’ani” v 15 p 161 that Souls of Prophets are in ‘Iliyun and it is established in the “Sahih” that the last words of Prophet (saw) are:
“Allahuma Al-Rafeeqal Al-A’la (the highest company, meaning close to Allah above seven heavens)
And Neylwi also attributed this to Abdel Hay Luknawi from his “Fatawa” v 3 p 11.
And Shabeer Ahmad Uthmani said in “Fathul Mulhim” v 3 p 421: “And after his departure (saw), his noble Ruh settled in Rafiqil ul-A’la with souls of Anbiyah, and this should not give doubt to reject his life in the noble grave, because the Ruh has an link with body Mubarak and …and when one prays on him, Allah returns him his soul until he answers the Salam as it comes in a noble Hadith”
Now if someone says that the soul of the Prophet (saw) is at same time in the grave in the body and in same time in ‘Iliyun, then he has agreed with the Brawlis that the soul of the Prophet (saw) can be in many places so it is possible for all places. Else either they have to say that the Prophet (saw) is with his body in ‘Iliyun, then the grave is empty so they cannot do Istishfa (seeking intercession) on graves or agree that the soul leaves the body so this life is different from the life of this world and this soul can return on some times.
Wives of the Prophet being mothers of the believers and inheritance of the Prophet (saw)
As for what some people claim that the wives of the Prophet (saw) are forbidden for Nikah after his death and the Prophet (saw) does not leave inheritance is because he is alive with the same life of this world, then no scholar from the Salaf said that. Even Hanafi scholars gave in their books of Tafsir and Hadith other reasons than that.
About the verse forbidding people to do Nikah with wives of the Prophet (saw) after his death (Ahzab: 53), Hanafi scholars (An-Nasafi, Al-‘Imadi, Al-Alusi and others) said reason is Ikram and Ihtiram (respect and giving honour) to the Prophet (saw) and other reasons, none mentioned that the reason is that he (saw) is alive with Jismani Duniyawi life, and they also affirmed that the divorced from the Prophet (saw) is also forbidden (see Al-Jasas and others), so the reason is that they are the mothers of believers.
As for the Hadith : “We do not leave any inheritance, what we leave is Sadaqah (charity)” (Al-Bukhari and Muslim), then Hanafi scholars like Al-‘Ayni said that the reason is to prevent people from saying that the Prophet (saw) gathered wealth for his inheritors, and also that the Prophet is the father of the believers. So his wealth is distributed among all his sons. (“Umadatul Qari” 15/20 Darul Fikr)
And these people also establish Jismani Duniyawi life for martyrs while acknowledging that there wives are not forbidden to others and their wealth is distributed among inheritors, so how can they being alive with Jismani life be the cause of that?
Bralwis saying such falsehood is not surprising, but for the Deoabndis it is very strange. Qasim Nanotwi clearly said in his “Abe Hayat” that the wives of the Prophet (saw) are forbidden because he is alive, and for Nanowti, in fact the soul of the Prophet (saw) never left his body, so the Sahabah buried the Prophet (saw) alive. Deobandis after him said the Prophet (saw) was touched by death then returned to life. Yet for them, the Prophet (saw) is just hiding in his grave. Some even quoted that the Prophet (saw) goes to Deoband to check the records of the Madrasah and learnt Urdu with his contact with Deobandis or the Prophet (saw) comes back to cure some people or others as in “Fazail ul A’mal” of Zakariya Kandhalwi.
Some of the Deobandis objected to the saying of Ahmad Raza Khan Bralwi that the wives of the Prophet (saw) spend the night in the grave of the Prophet (saw), while for them, this should not be a problem, because the Prophet (saw) is just hiding for them, else nothing changed in his state.
Asharis and Maturidis on Nubuwah being permanent after death of the Prophet (saw)
Moreover, Neylwi also explained the difference between Ahul Kalam on how that Prophethood of the Prophet (saw) is permanent (Baqi) after his death.
And Neywli mentioned from the Asha’irah that they say Nubuwah (prophethood) is Baqi Hukman (as a rule) not in reality (Haqiqah) after the Prophet’s death, and the Maturidis like Abul Mu’in An-Nasafi and others answered to the Ash’ari claim saying that Nubuwah is linked with the soul (Ruh) and the soul is Baqi so there is no problem
So none of them mentioned that the Prophet (saw) is alive like before his death and this is the reason why Nubuwah is Baqi.
So Neylwi said that Ash’aris and Maturidis should look at their original books like that of Al-Baqillani and Ab-Nassafi, instead of choosing the Madhab of ibn Fawrak and As-Subki
Muhammad Hasan As-Sanbhuli said in his “Nathm uf Faraid wa Jam’ ul Fawaid” p 66:
“The Madhab of Hanafi Mashaykh is that even now he is Prophet in real sense (Haqiqah), Ash’ari and his followers say that he (saw) is Hukmi Prophet (in ruling) as Abul Mu’in An-Nasafi Al-Hanafi said in “Bahr ul Kalam” and Imam Abul Mahasin Al-Quanwi in his Sharh of “Tahawiyah” and others said the same. Mashaykh Hanfiyah have two proof for their claim, one based on texts and the other based on reason…as for the rational proof is that one truly and in reality described by Risalat and Nubuwah’s is the Soul, and after death, the soul is not affected by alteration and there is no change in his attribute, as it is said in Sharh “Tahawiyah””
Al-Alusi said in “Ruh ul Ma’ani” v 22 p 33 : “Baqa of Risalah and Nubuwah (permanence of prophethood) after his death and others from Prophets and Messengers is in reality (on Haqeeqah) and more than one said that, because the one described with that and faith is the soul and it is permanent without any alteration with death of the body, yes Al-Ash’ari said that it (Nubuwah) is Hukmi (in ruling) after death as said by An-Nasafi”
Dr Shamsudin Al-Afghani in his book “Al-Maturidiyah” vol 1 p 483 also mentioned this difference between Ash’aris and Maturidis and he said that in “Bahrul Kalam” p 61, “Nathmu Faraid” p 49 and “Rawdatu Bahiyah” p 13, the Maturidis said the described with Risalah and Nubuwah is the Ruh and the Ruh is Baqi so the Risalah is Haqiqi after death
Dr Shamsudin Al-Afghani said he did not find any earlier Maturidi saying that Nubuwah is Baqi because the Prophet (saw) is alive with same life of this world
Quotes from “Bahr Al-Kalam” of Abul Mueen An-Nasafi
“Then on the fact whether our Prophet Muhammad (saw) is now a messenger or not.
The Mutaqashafah and Karamiyah said that accident does not persist in two times, hence they said that our Prophet (saw) now is not a messenger.
Abul Hasan Al-‘Ashari said: the messenger now is in the ruling of messengerhood (hukm ar-risalah) and the ruling of something stands on the position of the basis (asl) of something.
Do you not see that the Idah when it is in the ruling of Nikah, it takes the position of Nikah?
And likewise the person who had ablution and was praying and then had hadath so he went to do ablution, he would be in the ruling of prayer, and not in the actions of the prayer, because if he was in the actions of prayer, his prayer would not be permissible with Hadath.
Likewise for the Prophethood (nubuwwah) of our prophet Muhammad (saw) was an accident, and even if the accident does not persist in two times but he is in the hukm of risalah.
And the evidence that the accident does not persist in two times is that the one who prays Zuhr and finishes it, it is not said that he is in prayer, because if he was in prayer, it would not be permissible for him to eat, drink and speak” End of Nasafi’s words
To understand this ilmul Kalam speech is that their Greek predecessors said creation is either a substance (Jawhar) which exists by itself like bodies or an accident (ardh) which does not exist by itself.
So they classified the soul and attribute of prophethood as accidents as they exist not by themselves but attached to a substance.
And among their rules is that accidents does not remain in two times, so after the death of the Prophet (saw), the accident if prophethood cannot remain according to ilmul Kalam.
So Asharis according to Nasafi went to say that Prophethood is remaining only in ruling, while Maturidis went to say that prophethood is attribute of the soul (not body) and the soul remains after day death so he (saw) is a prophet now in reality as his soul is the same.
Ibn Fawrak said that the Prophet (saw) was now not a Prophet rather he was before in his lifetime, as it is claimed by ibn Hazm who imputed kufr on him for this (see sh Dimashqiah’s “Nawqif ibn Hazm minal Ashairah, which tells that ibn Fawrak was poisoned by the ruler for this saying)
Shurunbulali on the Prophet (saw) being a prophet now
Shurunbulali is one of greatest Hanafi scholar and a Maturidi. he is author of many Hanafi books of Fiqh such as “Nur Al-Idah”, and its explanation maraqi Al-Falah. he also authored a book called “Maraqi Sa’adat” which has been translated into english by Faraz Khan, a student of Faraz Rabbani
It is written in “Ascent to felicity” eng trans. P 34:
“Similarly, prophets and messengers are actual prophets and messengers after their death. This is because which actually possesses the attribute of prophethood or belief is the spirit (ruh), which does not change with death” End of Shurunbulali’s words
So this implies that for these maturidis scholars, the relation between the body and the soul of Prophets in their graves is not like the same as in this life, else why would they need to such an explanation and limit this attribute to the soul
Yet none of these Asharis and Maturidis said that the Prophet (saw) is alive in his grave like his life of duniyah, hence he is a prophet now in reality. And Nasafi did not mention any such explanation.
Why would they resort to say he (saw) is now a prophet in ruling or that nubuwah us linked to soul and soul did not change.
This established that for Asharis and Maturidis, the link between body and soul in grave is different and life in grave is barzakhi.
So one can see that if there was any difference in Maturidiyah then An-Nasafi and others would mention it, yet they attributed to their Mashaykh Ahnaf the saying of Ruh being Baqi and not the Body with Ruh being Baqi. And An-Nasafi seems not to know any Maturidi claiming that Prophet (saw) is alive like life of this world
Yet if someone was to find a Qat’i proof clearly saying that soul of the Prophets do not leave their bodies in their graves and they remain alive like the life of this world, then it does not imply listening from people of this world, because there is a veil between this world and other, and yet if someone believes in dead listening from alive, then he has to show that Istishfa on graves is legislated. The Prophet (saw)’s mission was to leave people on a clear path, teaching them all that is beneficial for them, so we need a proof showing that the Prophet (saw) said it is legislated and Sahabah acted on Prophet’s recommendation…
Note: For Ahlus Sunnah, there is no such problem to say that Nubuwwah is in ruling or linked to the soul, as for us, prophethood is not an accident, so the Prophet (saw) is a Prophet in reality in his life of Barzakh, that is different from the life of this world, and this attribute of Prophethood did not cease after the Prophet’s death and in his Barzakhi life, in which the soul and body have a different relation that what it was in this world.
May Allah send Salah and Salam on the Prophet (saw), his family and companions