Navigation Menu For The Summary
Definition of imtihan (examination)
Approval of imtihan
Reports condemning imtihan and describing it as innovation
Reconciling between approval and condemnation
When imtihan is permissible and when it is condemned
Conclusion
Navigation Menu For The Full Article
Definition of Imtihan (Examination)
Ruling of Examination in I’tiqaad (Belief)
Reports Forbidding Examination and Describing It as an Innovation
Reconciling Between These Reports
Conditions and Limits of Examination
Examination by Titles and Persons
The second angle: That these names and titles are not Sharia based titles.
Summary
Definition of imtihan (examination)
Linguistically, imtihān and mihnah mean testing, trying, and putting to trial. Expressions such as maḥantuhu, imtaḥantuhu, khabartuhu, ikhtabartuhu, balawtuhu and ibtalaytuhu are near in meaning, all turning around examining and trying a person.
The Arabs used al-mihnah for a form of speech by which a person is tested so that the inner state of his heart becomes known through his words, and they used it also for an affliction or trial, whose root sense is linked to striking with a whip. (Tahdhib al Lughah 5/78, Maqayis al Lughah 1/293, Al Ayn 3/253).
In the religious sense, examination in belief is: testing people through certain issues and questions in order to know and uncover their iʿtiqād (belief).
Approval of imtihan
The basic rule is that people are dealt with according to what is apparent from them, and their hidden secrets are left to Allah the Most High. This is supported by the hadith:
“Whoever prays our prayer, faces our qiblah and eats our slaughtered animals, then that is the Muslim who has the protection of Allah and the protection of His Messenger; so do not betray Allah in His protection.” (Al Bukhari 391, Majmu al Fatawa 4/542).
However, if there is a recognised need in the Sharia to uncover what lies behind the apparent, examination becomes permissible and legislated, because there is permissibility for it, when there is a need.
Allah commanded His Prophet ﷺ to examine the believing women who migrated to him, “when the believing women come to you as emigrants, then test them… if you know them to be believing women, do not return them to the disbelievers.” (Al Mumtahana 10).
The Prophet ﷺ examined the slave girl by asking her “Where is Allah?” When she replied, “In the heaven,” he said, “Free her, for she is a believer.” (Sahih Muslim 537). This is a clear, simple examination related to a manifest issue, done for a practical need, namely deciding whether she should be freed.
The Salaf and the muhaddithun practised imtihān when there was a real need, especially in narration of hadith. Ibn Sirin said, “This knowledge is religion, so look carefully at whom you take your religion from,” and he explained that after the tribulation they began to ask for the chain of narration, taking from Ahl al-Sunnah and leaving the people of innovation. (Muqaddimah (Introduction) Sahih Muslim 1/14).
Zaida ibn Qudamah (d. 212AH) would not narrate to anyone until he tested him, asking the stranger where he was from, and the local person about his place of prayer, questioning like a judge asking for proof, then finding out whether he was a person of innovation or not. (Al Muhaddith al Fasil bayn ar Rawi wal Waʿi 574).
Sulayman ibn Harb (d. 224AH) would ask, “Is zina (fornication) by decree?” and require an oath that this was the person’s religion before narrating more than a small number of hadiths to him; he also examined people regarding whether they were Jahmiyyah. (Hilyat al Awliya 3/32–33, Al Firyabi, al Qadar 200).
Hisham ibn Ubayd Allah al Razi (d. 221AH) detained a man accused of tajahhum and said to him, “Do you bear witness that Allah is above His Throne, distinct from His creation?” When the man replied that he did not know what “distinct from His creation” meant, Hisham said, “Take him back, for he has not yet repented.” (Kitab al Uluw 169; see also al Hamawiyyah 325, Dham al Kalam 1210).
Some imams examined by relation to specific known people: Ahmad ibn Abd Allah ibn Yunus (d. 227AH) said, “Examine the people of Mosul with Maʿafa ibn Imran; if they love him, then they are Ahl al-Sunnah, and if they hate him, then they are people of innovation.” (Al Lalikai, Sharh Usul Iʿtiqad Ahl as Sunnah 1/74 no. 58; Tabaqat Ibn Saʿd 9/493).
Beyond iʿtiqād, Ibn Taymiyyah mentions that a believer may need to examine those he wishes to accompany closely, to marry, to appoint to authority, or to employ, in order to uncover righteousness or immorality, truthfulness or lying. He gives examples such as examining the repentance of a woman with whom a man had committed fornication, testing candidates for office like Umar ibn Abd al Aziz did with Ibn Abi Musa, and examining servants known for immorality. (Majmu al Fatawa 15/328–330).
He also mentions that some people of knowledge allowed entering upon soothsayers and fortune tellers in order to examine and expose them, as in the Prophet’s ﷺ testing of Ibn Sayyad with questions about what comes to him and what he sees, and with a concealed word. (Majmu al Fatawa 19/62; Muslim 2925, Tirmidhi 2249, Bukhari 1354).
Reports condemning imtihan and describing it as innovation
There are reports from the Salaf that condemn imtihān and describe it as an innovation and as a practice of the people of desires, especially the Khawarij.
Ibn Sirin (d. 110AH) said, “A man asking his brother, ‘Are you a believer?’ is a trial and an innovation, just as the Khawarij are tested.” (Al Lalikai 5/1060 no. 1804). Ibn Awn, when hearing of someone in Basrah who was testing people, said, “Who is this person who is testing the people?” (Al Firyabi, al Qadar 200).
Ibn Dizil (Ibrahim ibn al Husayn) said when told that Abu Hatim al Razi only narrates after testing, “Abu Hatim with us is the leader of the believers in hadith. Imtihaan (Examination) is the religion of the Khawarij.
Whoever attends my gathering, if he is from Ahl al-Sunnah he will hear what pleases his eye, and if he is from the people of innovation he will hear what Allah will make painful to his eye.” (Siyar Aʿlam an Nubala 13/189).
When al Bukhari entered Naysabur, some people tried to test him concerning the issue of “the utterance of the Qur’an”.
After they pressed him repeatedly, he answered, “The Qur’an is the speech of Allah, not created. The actions of the servants are created. Testing people is an innovation.” The gathering then broke up and he stayed in his house. (Tarikh Dimashq 52/91–92).
Ibn Taymiyyah also described examining people by means of persons as an innovation and from the actions of the people of desires.
He criticised those who examined Muslims regarding their stance toward Yazid ibn Muawiyah, saying that it is obligatory to avoid mentioning Yazid and to abandon examining the Muslims by him, because this is an innovation that opposes the way of Ahl al-Sunnah wal Jamaʿah. (Al Wasiyyah al Kubra, Majmu al Fatawa 3/414).
Reconciling between approval and condemnation
To reconcile this issue we must realise know that Imtihān is only permissible when there is a need or necessity that calls for it, and then only with conditions and limits.
The first condition is that examination must not be tied to hidden matters or to unclear, ambiguous expressions that are open to several meanings and that themselves need explanation.
Asking “Are you a believer?” or forcing people to take positions on technical phrases such as “the utterance with the Qur’an” are examples of condemned examinations, because these are ambiguous to many people and depend on detailed explanation. (Al Lalikai 5/1060; Tarikh Dimashq 52/91–92).
The second condition is that imtihān must not be made a constant habit, generalised over groups, and turned into a standing practice. The legislated forms of examination seen in the Salaf’s actions were tied to clear causes and real needs, sometimes expressly in issues of belief, but without generalising and without making it a permanent test for the masses.
By contrast, the people of innovation made examination a general, continuous method. The Jahmiyyah, based on their philosophical principle that nothing in which accidents and occurrences subsist can be eternal, denied Allah’s attributes, denied that He is above the universe, and denied that He will be seen in the Hereafter. They said that the Qur’an is created separate from Him and that His speech is created.
On this basis they imposed a famous ordeal: they called people to deny the attributes and the seeing of Allah and to affirm that the Qur’an is created, and they tested the imams and the Muslims with these demands.
They imprisoned, beat and even killed those who refused, made acceptance of testimony, appointment to judgeship and imamate, stipends from the treasury, and the ransoming of captives dependent on passing their examination. This continued for more than ten years until Allah removed it through the patience and certainty of the imams, especially Ahmad ibn Hanbal. (Sharh al Asfahaniyyah 372–373; al Furqan bayn al Haqq wal Batil 549).
Ibn Taymiyyah mentions that one of the signs of the people of innovation is that they introduce a belief or action, then obligate the people to it, enforcing loyalty and enmity based upon it, as the Khawarij, Rafidah and Jahmiyyah did with their principles, including the saying that the Qur’an is created. (At Tisʿiniyyah 1/176–177; see also Minhaj as Sunnah 4/537, Bayan Talbis al Jahmiyyah 5/397–398).
Imam al Awzaʿi, in his letter to al Hakam ibn Ghaylan, advised leaving off testing those one suspects and judging people by what is already apparent from them, praising Allah if some hidden contrary state remains concealed.
He warned against argumentation that unsettles the heart and against testing everyone with strange and excessive matters, and urged calmness, humility and preoccupation with what concerned the early righteous in preparing for the Hour. (Hilyat al Awliya 6/140–141).
On this basis Ibn Taymiyyah laid down the principle that no one has the right to examine people using an ambiguous expression that he himself has introduced without clarifying its meaning.
He says that when some Jahmiyyah deny “direction” and “place” for Allah, they intend by that to deny that there is a Lord above the Throne and a God above the heavens, while another group of Jahmiyyah affirm that He is in existing things and thus in fact affirm for Him direction and place. These are obscure usages, and to test people with such language is not permissible. (At Tisʿiniyyah 1/194).
When imtihan is permissible and when it is condemned
Imtihān is permissible and legislated when:
- There is a real need recognised in the Sharia, such as verifying the Islam of a migrant, freeing a slave due to her faith, safeguarding hadith, choosing close companions, confirming repentance in matters of immorality, appointing people to authority, or dealing with servants and dependants whose conduct is in doubt. In such cases the examination focuses on clear, established matters, not obscure formulations. (Al Mumtahana 10; Muslim 537; Muqaddimah Sahih Muslim 1/14; Majmu al Fatawa 15/328–330; 19/62).
- The questions relate to plain scriptural truths and well-known marks of Ahl al-Sunnah, such as affirming that Allah is above His Throne, distinct from His creation, rejecting the Jahmiyyah creed, or showing love for imams who are known symbols of the Sunnah like Maʿafa ibn Imran in his town. (Kitab al Uluw 169; Al Lalikai 1/74; Tahdhib al Kamal 9/277).
- The practice remains restricted, occasional, and connected to specific contexts, as seen in the behaviour of Zaida ibn Qudamah, Sulayman ibn Harb, Hisham al Razi, Abu al Abbas al Siraj, Ahmad ibn Yunus and others. (Al Muhaddith al Fasil 574; Hilyat al Awliya 3/32–33; Siyar 13/189; 14/395).
Imtihān is condemned, and becomes innovation, when:
- It is made a general, ongoing action toward the community, as in the mihnah of the Jahmiyyah who forced their doctrine of the created Qur’an and denial of Allah’s attributes upon the imams and the masses. (Sharh al Asfahaniyyah 372–373; At Tisʿiniyyah 1/176–177).
- It is conducted by means of ambiguous, technical or newly-coined expressions that are unclear to many people, such as “Are you a believer?” or detailed formulations about “the utterance of the Qur’an”, or terms about “jiha (direction)” and “makaan (place)”, and then people are divided and judged on that basis. (Al Lalikai 5/1060; Tarikh Dimashq 52/91–92; At Tisʿiniyyah 1/194).
- It is based on non-Sharʿi titles and disputed historical persons, especially where the matter is confused, such as examining people by their stance toward Yazid ibn Muawiyah. Ibn Taymiyyah counted this among the innovations of the people of desires. (Majmu al Fatawa 3/414).
Examining by names and titles has two sides. If the title is Sharʿi and clear, like “Ahl al-Sunnah”, and its opposite is recognised, such as those who revile Abu Bakr and Umar, then asking about it in contexts of real need can fall under the permitted imtihān. Zaida ibn Qudamah’s insistence on knowing whether a man was from Ahl al-Sunnah, and his linking that to when people began to insult Abu Bakr and Umar, is an example. (Tahdhib al Kamal 9/277).
If, however, the title is not a Sharʿi name, then examination by it is in origin an innovation. The case of Abu al Abbas al Siraj testing children with declaring disavowal from the Kullabiyyah, and the later practise of testing people by reference to Imam Ahmad, are explained by noting that these names had become known and settled as markers of clear innovation or clear Sunnah.
Mere affiliation to such titles is itself an innovation, as Ibn Taymiyyah said about mere affiliation to al Ashʿari, but once some titles have become recognised as open banners of innovation, testing by them in contexts of need becomes in reality testing by the clear Sunnah they oppose. (Siyar 14/395; Majmu al Fatawa 5/553–554; 6/359).
Conclusion
Imtihān revolve around the foundation of judging by the apparent. It is a restricted, need-based tool used by Ahl al-Sunnah to protect belief and practice when there is a clear benefit, within the limits of clarity and non-habitual use.
When turned into a general method, bound up with ambiguous expressions, or tied to partisan names and historical disputes, it becomes from the innovations of the people of desires and resembles the way of the Jahmiyyah and the Khawarij.
Full Article
Definition of Imtihan (Examination)
The term imithan (examination) in the Arabic language is used with the meaning of testing. It is said: I afflicted him and examined him, in the same way that it is said: I experienced him and tested him, and I tried him and put him to trial.
(Tahdhib al Lughah by Muḥammad ibn Aḥmad al Azhari 5/78)
وأمّا الأصل الآخَر فقولهم بُلىَ الإنسانُ وابتُلِىَ، وهذا من الامتحان، وهو الاختبار. وقال:
بُلِيتُ وفِقْدانُ الحبيبِ بَلِيَّةٌ … وكم مِنْ كريمٍ يُبْتَلى ثم يَصبرُ
I have been tested (bulītu), and the loss of a beloved is a balīyah (trial),
and how many a noble person is yubtalā (tested), then remains patient (yaṣbir).
(Maqayis al Lughah by ibn Fāris 1/293).
(Al Ayn by al Khalil ibn Ahmad al Farahidi. 3/253).
What is meant by examination in belief is: testing people by means of some issues and matters, in order to seek knowledge of their beliefs and uncover them.
Ruling of Examination in I’tiqaad (Belief)
The foundation in this subject is that people are dealt with according to what is apparent from them, and their hidden secrets are to be left to Allāh the Most High. This foundation is supported by his ﷺ saying:
However, if there is a recognised need in the Sharia to uncover what lies behind these apparent states, then examination is permissible and legislated at that point.
Allāh the Exalted commanded His Prophet ﷺ to examine the women who migrated to him. He the Most High said:
يَا أَيُّهَا الَّذِينَ آمَنُوا إِذَا جَاءَكُمُ الْمُؤْمِنَاتُ مُهَاجِرَاتٍ فَامْتَحِنُوهُنَّ اللَّهُ أَعْلَمُ بِإِيمَانِهِنَّ فَإِنْ عَلِمْتُمُوهُنَّ مُؤْمِنَاتٍ فَلَا تَرْجِعُوهُنَّ إِلَى الْكُفَّارِ
“O you who have believed, when the believing women come to you as emigrants, then test them. Allāh knows best their faith. Then if you know them to be believing women, do not return them to the disbelievers.” (Al Mumtahana 10).
A number of reports have also come from the successors that, taken together, show the legislation of examination and testing when there is a need for that. The narrators of hadith would examine those from whom they took hadith and those to whom they narrated.
Hasan ibn al Rabi narrated to us. Hammad ibn Zayd narrated to us, from Ayyub and Hisham, from Muhammad. And Fudayl narrated to us, from Hisham. And Yakh lad ibn Husayn narrated to us, from Hisham, from Muhammad ibn Sirin, who said,
“This knowledge is religion. So look carefully at whom you take your religion from.”
Abu Jafar Muhammad ibn al Sabah narrated to us. Ismail ibn Zakariyya narrated to us, from Asim al Ahwal, from Ibn Sirin, who said,
“They did not used to ask about the chain of narration. But when the tribulation occurred, they said, ‘Name your men to us.’ Then the people of the Sunnah would be looked at, and their narrations would be taken. And the people of innovations would be looked at, and their narrations would not be taken.”
(Muqaddimah (Introduction) to Imam Muslim’s Sahih 1/ 14).
Abu Umar ibn Suhayl narrated to us. Al Abbas al Tarqufi narrated to us. Muawiyah ibn Amr ibn al Muhallab al Azdi said, Zaida ibn Qudamah (d. 212AH) would not narrate to anyone until he tested him. If the person was a stranger, he would say to him, ‘Where are you from?’ If he was from the people of the town, he would say, ‘Where is your place of prayer?’ He would question him just as a judge questions about proof. When the person answered him, he would then ask about him. If he was a person of innovation” (Al Muhaddith al Fasil bayn ar Rawi wal Wāʿi by 574).
Al Qasim ibn Abi Salih said: During the days of Hajj, Abu Bakr Muhammad ibn al Fadl al Qastani, and Huraysh ibn Ahmad, came to Ibrahim ibn al Husayn. They asked him about the hadith of the Ifk, the narration of al Farawi from Malik ibn Anas (d. 179 AH).
He turned away from them slightly. Al Zafarani, Abu Ishaq Ibrahim ibn Ishaq (d. 311 AH), then said to him, “O Abu Ishaq, do you narrate to the heretics?” He replied, “And who is the heretic?” He said, “This one. Abu Hatim al Razi (d. 277 AH) does not narrate until he tests a person.”
(Siyar Aʿlam an Nubala 13/ 189).
A believer is in need of examining those whom he wishes to accompany and be closely associated with, whether in marriage or in other matters. Allah the Most High said, “O believers, when believing women come to you as migrants, then examine them. Allah knows best their faith” (Surah al Mumtahanah: 10).
Likewise, regarding a woman with whom a man committed fornication, he does not marry her except after repentance according to the soundest of the two views, as shown by the Quran, the Sunnah, and the transmitted reports.
However, if he wishes to examine whether her repentance is genuine or not, then Abdullah ibn Umar (d. 73 AH) said and this is the reported view from Ahmad ibn Hanbal (d. 241 AH) that he should attempt to entice her.
If she responds to him, then her repentance is not sound. If she does not respond, then she has truly repented.
A group said that this form of examination involves seeking immorality from her, and that repentance may be undone. A person’s being may push him to carry out the immoral act, and Satan may make that attractive to both of them, especially if he loves her and she loves him, and especially when immorality has already occurred between them many times, and each has tasted the other. In that case, repentance may be undone, and she may not oppose what he wants from her.
Those who held the first view said that the act intended for examination is not intended for the act itself, so it is not a command to what Allah has forbidden. It is also possible for him not to seek immorality, but rather to speak indirectly while intending something else. Indirect speech for a need is permissible, and in many situations it is even required.
As for undoing repentance, if it is possible for repentance to be undone with him, then it is possible for it to be undone with someone else. The point is to know whether she restrains herself from one who attempts to entice her. If she does not restrain herself from him, then she would not restrain herself from others.
As for Satan making the act attractive to him, this occurs in every matter a person does, even in good actions where he finds inclination within himself.
So if a person wishes to accompany a believer, or a believer wishes to accompany someone about whom immorality has been mentioned and it is said that he repented from it, or such a claim is made about him whether it is true or false, then he examines him through what reveals his righteousness or immorality, his truthfulness or falsehood.
Likewise, when a person wishes to appoint someone to a position of authority, he examines him, just as Umar ibn Abd al Aziz (d. 101 AH) instructed his servant to examine Ibn Abi Musa (d. 42 AH) when his appearance impressed him.
He said to him, “You know my standing with the Commander of the Believers. How much will you give me if I suggest to him that you be appointed?” So he offered him a great amount of wealth, and Umar then knew that he was not suitable for authority.
The same applies in dealings. It also applies to young servants and owned servants who are known, or it is said about them, that they engage in immorality, and a man wishes to purchase them, so he examines them. For an effeminate man is like a prostitute, and his repentance is like her repentance.
Knowing the conditions of people sometimes occurs through the testimony of others, sometimes through criticism and validation, and sometimes through testing and examination.
(Majmu al Fatawa 15/ 328–330).
As for examination in matters of belief specifically, there have come a number of reports from the Salaf that also show its permissibility and allowance.
Abd Allah ibn Muhammad ibn Jafar (d. 297 AH) narrated to us. He said Ishaq ibn Ahmad (d. 286 AH) narrated to us. He said Said ibn Isa (d. 249 AH) narrated to us. He said, I heard Mahdi ibn Sulayman (d. 235 AH) say,
“I came to Sulayman ibn Harb (d. 224 AH) and found with him Hammad ibn Zayd (d. 179 AH), Yazid ibn Zuray (d. 182 AH), Bishr ibn al Mufaddal (d. 186 AH), and our companions from Basrah. He would not narrate to anyone until he examined him. He would say to him, ‘Is zina (fornication) by decree?’
If he said yes, he would make him swear that this was his religion by which he worships Allah.
If he swore that this was his religion, he would narrate five hadiths to him. If he did not swear, he would not narrate to him.”
Abd Allah (d. 297 AH) narrated to us. He said Muhammad ibn Ishaq al Masuhi (d. 285 AH) narrated to us. He said Abd al Rahman ibn Umar (d. 250 AH) narrated to us. He said Muadh ibn Muadh (d. 196 AH) narrated to us. He said: “When we would come to Sulayman ibn Harb (d. 224 AH), he would not give each one of us more than five hadiths. There was a man with us who began to press him for more. He said, ‘I ask you by Allah, are you a Jahmi?’ The man replied, ‘How perceptive you are. From where did you recognise me?’”
When someone came to him from the people of Basrah whom he did not know, he would say: “I bear witness that the wretched one is he who is wretched in his mother’s womb, and the happy one is he who takes admonition from others.” If the man acknowledged that, he would narrate to him, otherwise he would not narrate to him. (Al Firyabi, al Qadar page 200).
Ibn Abi Hatim said, Ali ibn al Hasan ibn Yazid al Sulami narrated to us. I heard my father say, “I heard Hisham ibn Ubayd Allah al Razi while he had detained a man because of tajahhum (adopting the beliefs of the Jahmiyyah or inclining towards them)
The man was brought to him so that he could examine him. He said to him, ‘Do you bear witness that Allah is above His Throne, distinct from His creation?’ The man replied, ‘I do not know what distinct from His creation means.’ He said, ‘Take him back, for he has not yet repented.’”
Imam adh Dhahabi said: Hisham ibn Ubayd Allah al Razi (d. 221 AH) was from the leading imams of fiqh upon the madhhab of Abu Hanifah (d. 150 AH). He studied fiqh under Muhammad ibn al Hasan al Shaybani (d. 189 AH). He possessed remarkable dignity and great respect in his city. He passed away in the year 221 AH.
Kitab al Uluw lil Ali al ʿAdheem by adh Dhahabi, page 169.
(Also See also al Hamawiyyah 325 and Al Harawi, Dham al Kalam wa Ahlihi 1210)
Al Hakim al Nishapuri (d. 405 AH) said: “I heard Abu Saeed ibn Abi Bakr say, when what occurred with the Kullabiyyah (the followers of Ibn Kullab) occurred in Nishapur, Abu al Abbas al Siraj (d. 313 AH) used to examine the children of people, and he would not narrate to the children of the Kullabiyyah.
One time he made me stand in the majlis (gathering) and said, ‘Say, I declare myself free before Allah the Most High from the Kullabiyyah.’ I said, ‘If I say this, my father will not feed me bread.’ He laughed and said, ‘Leave this one.’”
(Siyar Aʿlam an Nubala 14/ 395).
Reports Forbidding Examination and Describing It as an Innovation
At the same time, there have also come reports from the Salaf that forbid examination, describing it as an innovation and as an action of the people of desires, such as the Khawarij.
When the news of Sulayman at Taymi’s examination of the people of Basrah reached Ibn Awn, who died in one hundred and fifty years after hijrah, he said: “Who is this person who is testing the people?” (Al Firyabi, al Qadar page 200).
Similar to this is what was reported from Ibrahim ibn al Husayn, known as Ibn Dizil (d. 181AH). It was said to him that Abu Hatim ar Razi does not narrate until he examines.
He said: “Abu Hatim, with us, is the leader of the believers in hadith. Examination is the religion of the Khawarij. Whoever attends my gathering, if he is from the people of Sunnah, he will hear what pleases his eye. And if he is from the people of innovation, he will hear what Allāh will make painful to his eye.” (Siyar Aʿlam an Nubala 13/ 189).
When al Bukhari may Allāh have mercy on him entered Naysabur, some of them examined him with the issue of the utterance regarding the Qur’an. Al Bukhari said: “The Qur’an is the speech of Allāh, not created. The actions of the servants are created, and examination is an innovation.”
Abu al Qasim al Khidr ibn al Husayn ibn Abdan (d. 346 AH) informed us. Ali ibn Muhammad al Musayisi (d. 307 AH) informed us. Abd Allah ibn Ahmad ibn al Hasan al Nishapuri (d. 349 AH) narrated to us. Abu al Abbas Ahmad ibn al Hasan al Razi (d. 275 AH) narrated to us. Abu Ahmad ibn Adi (d. 365 AH) said,
A group of shaykhs mentioned to me that when Muhammad ibn Ismail al Bukhari (d. 256 AH) arrived in Nishapur, the people gathered around him and a teaching gathering was established for him. Those who were shaykhs of Nishapur at that time became jealous of him when they saw the people turning towards him and gathering around him. They said to the people of hadith, “Muhammad ibn Ismail says that the utterance of the Quran is created, so test him with this in the gathering.”
When the people attended the gathering of al Bukhari, a man stood up and said to him, “O Abu Abd Allah, what do you say about the utterance of the Quran, is it created or not created?” Al Bukhari turned away from him and did not answer him. The man said again, “O Abu Abd Allah,” and repeated the question. Al Bukhari turned away and did not answer him. Then the man said it a third time.
Muhammad ibn Ismail then turned to him and said, “The Quran is the speech of Allah, not created. The actions of the servants are created. Testing people is an innovation.” The man caused disturbance, and the people caused disturbance, and they dispersed from him. Al Bukhari then remained seated in his home.
(Tarikh Dimashq by Ibn Asakir, 52/91 – 92).
It has also been reported from Ibn Taymiyyah may Allāh have mercy on him that he described examination by means of persons as an innovation and that it is from the actions of the people of desires. He criticised the Adawiyyah for examining people with regard to Yazid ibn Muawiyah.
He said to them: “It is obligatory to limit oneself in this matter and to turn away from mentioning Yazid ibn Muawiyah and from examining the Muslims by means of him, for this is from the innovations that oppose the way of Ahlus Sunnah wal Jamaʿah.” (Al Wasiyyah al Kubra, within Majmu al Fatawa 3/ 414).
Reconciling Between These Reports
It is said, in order to reconcile between these texts, that:
The foundation in dealing with people and passing judgement upon them is to consider the outward states of their conditions and to leave their inner secrets to Allāh the Exalted.
However, if there is a need or necessity that calls for examination, then examination is permissible at that time, but with conditions and limits that must be considered. They are:
Conditions and Limits of Examination
First: That this examination is not related to hidden issues or to unclear and ambiguous words.
Second: That examination is not made a constant habit.
This becomes clear when we look at the form of examination that appears in the texts and statements that show its legislation and at the form of examination that the Salaf forbade and prevented.
The texts and reports concerning examination, when taken together, show the permissibility and legislation of examination when there is a need for it. The actions of the Salaf in their examinations plainly show that this examination was supported by clear reasons and that there was a true need for it.
Some of these texts are explicit that this took place in issues of belief. This may be further strengthened by the fact that some of the people of knowledge allowed entering upon fortune tellers and soothsayers in order to examine them and test the reality of their condition, and that whoever has this intention falls outside the threat that has been mentioned regarding them.
Ibn Taymiyyah said about this: “As for when a person asks someone in order to examine his condition and to test what is hidden of his affair, while he himself possesses what enables him to distinguish truthfulness from falsehood, then this is permissible.
(Majmu al Fatawa 19/ 62).
This examination was not by asking about a hidden issue or an ambiguous, unclear matter. Rather, it was by means of a clear and evident matter.
The Prophet’s ﷺ examination of the slave girl was by his question to her about an issue that is innate and clear, which was his asking her about the loftiness of Allāh the Exalted. This examination was one that the need called for, in order to free this slave girl and save her.
As for what has been reported from some of the Salaf, describing examination as an innovation and as an action of the people of desires such as the Khawarij, then when we consider the method of the people of innovation in examination, we find that their examination contains descriptions that are the likely causes for attaching the ruling of prohibition upon examination.
These descriptions include:
Generalising this examination over many groups of people and making it something constant and continuing.
The Jahmiyyah, for example, examined the great imams of the religion and the scholars of the Muslims with the saying that the Qur’an is created. They spread this examination among the people, threatened them with killing, imprisoned some of them, and ordered that the testimony of a witness was not to be accepted until he had been examined.
Shaykh Al Islam Ibn Taymiyyah said: Then the imams of this approach held that it necessarily leads to denying the attributes of the Lord the Most High. Their central proof was that whatever accidents subsist in is, by their agreement, something in which occurrences also subsist according to their imams and the majority of them, such as the Jahmiyyah, the Mutazilah, the Karramiyyah, the Dirariyyah, and the Hishamiyyah.
Because of this, they came to say that no attribute subsists in the Lord, neither knowledge, nor power, nor speech.
So they said that the Quran is created, created separate from Him. Rather, they said that His speech is created and created separate from Him.
They also said that He is not above the universe, because if He were above it, that would require Him to be a body bearing accidents and occurrences. Whatever bears accidents and occurrences is something that occurs.
They also said that He will not be seen in the Hereafter, because nothing is seen except that which is opposite the one who sees it. That would require Him to be in a direction relative to the observer, which would make Him a body bearing accidents, and thus something that occurs.
Because of this foundational principle upon which they built their religion, they tested the imams of the religion and the ulama of the Muslims with the well known ordeal. They called people to deny the attributes, to deny the seeing of Allah, and to affirm that the Quran is created, and other such matters. Allah made firm the imam of the Sunnah who remained patient through the ordeal, Abu Abd Allah Ahmad ibn Hanbal (d. 241 AH).
Allah also kept firm upon the Sunnah the rest of the imams of the Sunnah, hadith, and fiqh, even though some of them outwardly agreed with them and later admitted that they only agreed under coercion, when they threatened the people with killing, imprisoned some of them, killed some of them, and ordered that the testimony of no witness be accepted until he was examined and agreed with them upon the saying of the Jahmiyyah.
No judge was appointed, nor any imam of a masjid, until he agreed with them. No provision from the public treasury was given except to one who agreed with them. No captive was ransomed from the hands of the disbelievers until he agreed with them.
This ordeal continued for more than ten years. Then Allah the Most High removed it through what He granted the imams of the religion of patience and certainty. Allah the Most High said,
“And We made from among them leaders who guide by Our command when they were patient and when they had certainty in Our signs” (Surah al Sajdah 32:24).
(Sharh al Asfahaniyyah by Ibn Taymiyyah 372–373, al Furqan bayn al Haqq wal Batil 549).
He also said: “Because of this, one of the distinguishing signs of the people of innovation is introducing a belief or an action, then obligating the people to it and forcing them upon it, or showing loyalty on the basis of it and enmity toward those who leave it. In this way the Khawarij introduced their belief, imposed it upon the people, and showed loyalty and enmity on its basis.
Likewise, the Rafidah introduced their belief, imposed it upon the people, and showed loyalty and enmity on its basis. Likewise, the Jahmiyyah introduced their belief, imposed it upon the people, and showed loyalty and enmity on its basis.
This occurred because they possessed power during the rule of the three caliphs in whose time the imams were subjected to examination so that they would agree with the belief of Jahm ibn Safwan, whose starting point was the claim that the Quran is created. They punished those who did not agree with them upon this.” (At Tisʿiniyyah 1/ 176–177)
See also Minhaj as Sunnah an Nabawiyyah 4/ 537, Bayan Talbis al Jahmiyyah 5/ 397 – 398).
Included in the method of the people of innovation and desires is examination by means of ambiguous words.
Upon this we can understand the words of Ibn Sirin and al Bukhari may Allāh have mercy on them. For examination by asking, “Are you a believer?” and examination upon the statement concerning “the utterance with the Qur’an” is examination by means of issues and words that are ambiguous and open to several possible meanings.
It is not examination by means of clear and evident issues and recognised scriptural expressions. These issues that are open to several possible meanings can be obscure to many people and themselves need explanation and clarification. Therefore examination by means of them is not like the Prophet’s ﷺ examination of the slave girl by saying to her, “Where is Allāh?”
Perhaps this explanation is further supported by what Imam al Awzaʿi (d. 157AH), said when advising one of his companions: “Leave examination of the one about whom you have doubts, and place his matter upon what has appeared to you from him. Do not be from those who examine everybody they meet with obscure and strange matters.”
Ibrahim ibn Abd Allah narrated to us. Muhammad ibn Ishaq (d. 151 AH) narrated to us. Al Hasan ibn Abd al Aziz narrated to us. Abd al Rahman ibn Ali narrated to us, from Hatl, from al Awzai (d. 157 AH), that he wrote to al Hakam ibn Ghaylan al Qaysi,
“I wished, may Allah have mercy on me and on you, that He cause you to stop what you have practiced of disputation, even in matters you believe you know well. Make remembrance of the return to Allah a share at the beginning and end of your day, and do not let the agitation of others fully consume you. Leave testing those you have suspected, and judge their affair based on what has already appeared to you from them.
If something contrary is hidden from you, then praise Allah for the well being He has granted you. If an innovation appears to you from someone, then turn away from his innovation. Leave argumentation that unsettles the heart, plants resentment, hardens the heart, and weakens caution and piety in speech and action. Do not be among those who test everyone they meet with strange and excessive matters, for what is there that a person cannot fabricate against another.
Let what comes from you be marked by calmness and humility, seeking Allah through it. Let what preoccupied the righteous before you also preoccupy you, for the weight of the Hour greatly burdened them. Tears from humility carved paths upon their cheeks. Out of fear, they folded thirst and hunger upon themselves. They burdened themselves so that people could be at ease.
We ask Allah to grant me and you beneficial knowledge and humility that will secure us from the greatest terror. He is the Most Merciful of those who show mercy. Peace be upon you.”
(Abu Nuaym, Hilyat al Awliya 6/ 140–141).
Because of this, Ibn Taymiyyah said: “No one has the right to examine people by means of an ambiguous word that he himself has invented, without clarifying its meaning.”
The shaykh said: Thus the Jahmiyyah who deny direction and spatial location for Allah intend by this that there is no Lord above the Throne and no God above the heavens. As for the Jahmiyyah who say that He is within existing things, they in fact affirm direction and spatial location for Him.
I clarified in the response the invalidity of the view of both groups of the Jahmiyyah, those who negate and those who affirm. The negating Jahmiyyah do not worship anything, while those who affirm worship everything.
I mentioned these two categories because this is what the mutakallim philosophers customarily intend when they deny direction and spatial location for Allah. If they intended a different meaning, then it was upon them to explain it, since the wording itself does not indicate it. No one has the right to test people using an ambiguous expression that he himself introduced without clarifying its meaning.
(At Tisʿiniyyah 1/ 194).
Any examination that is free of these descriptions is permissible at that point.
Examination by Titles and Persons
As for examination by titles and by persons, then in order to clarify its ruling specifically, it is necessary to look at these names and titles from two angles.
The first angle: That, alongside the condition of need and the clarity of the issue, these names are from those names that the Sharia has recognised and favoured.
The second angle: That these names and titles are not Sharia based titles.
Ibn Taymiyyah forbade examination by means of this type of titles and judged it to be an innovation. His explanation may be understood accurately if we consider the conditions mentioned earlier.
Examination in relation to the position towards Yazid ibn Muawiyah, as Ibn Taymiyyah mentions, is in reality examination by means of an issue in which there is confusion and uncertainty. For that reason, examination by means of it is forbidden.
There is, however, a possible objection to Ibn Taymiyyah’s explanation in what was previously quoted from the action of Abu al Abbas as Siraj in examining the children of the Kullabiyyah. He would say in this examination: “Say: I disavow myself before Allāh the Exalted from the Kullabiyyah.”
There is also his own mention of the practice of the people of knowledge in examining people with Imam Ahmad. He said: “To the point that the people of knowledge, after the appearance of the inquisition, would examine people by reference to him. Whoever agreed with him was a person of Sunnah, otherwise he was a person of innovation.”
Ibn Taymiyyah says: No one among people of sound reason ever said this, and we do not know of anyone who held this view. Rather, it does not even occur to the minds of the vast majority of people, until Ibn Kullab introduced this statement (the belief of kalam nafsi).
What pushed him toward this was that those philosophers, when they made the consequence of their foundational belief clear, namely the claim that the Quran is created, they made this known at the beginning of the 2nd century. When the ulama of the Ummah heard this, they rejected it. Then whenever this claim appeared, the ulama would reject it. The words of the Salaf and the imams in condemning it are well known and widely transmitted.
Eventually, these philosophers gained influence through their newly introduced discourse during the rule of al Mamun, and they brought him into it, presenting to him the arguments they relied upon.
They said that either the universe is created or it is eternal.
This second claim is clear kufr (disbelief), whose corruption is known by reason and revelation. If the universe is created and brought into existence after not being, then nothing remains eternal except Allah alone. If the universe were eternal, that would require the existence of another eternal alongside Allah.
Likewise, regarding speech, if it were to subsist in His being, this would require the continual occurrence of events and their subsistence in the Lord.
This would invalidate the argument that had become famous among them for the createdness of the universe. If His speech were separate from Him, that would require the existence of a created thing in eternity, which is a claim of the eternity of the universe.
When the people were tested with this matter, and this ordeal became widespread, Allah made firm whom He willed from the imams of the Sunnah.
The imam whom Allah made firm and established as the imam of the Sunnah, to the point that the people of knowledge later used him as the standard by which they tested others, so that whoever agreed with him was regarded as Sunni and whoever did not was regarded as an innovator, was Ahmad ibn Hanbal. This occurred when the ordeal became manifest and the imams were tested through him. He remained firm upon the belief that the Quran is the speech of Allah and not created.
When al Mamun reached the frontier city of Tarsus, he wrote a letter from al Massisah to his deputy in Iraq, Ishaq ibn Ibrahim. He summoned the ulama, the jurists, and the judges. They refused to respond and to agree.
He wrote back again, and then sent a second letter in which he said concerning the two judges, Bishr ibn al Walid and Abd al Rahman ibn Ishaq, that if they did not agree, their heads were to be struck. As for the rest, if they did not agree, they were to be bound and sent to him.
The two judges then agreed and mentioned to their companions that they were compelled. Most of the people agreed before being bound when they saw the threat. Six individuals did not agree, so they were bound. When they were bound, the rest agreed except for two, Ahmad ibn Hanbal and Muhammad ibn Nuh al Nishapuri.
They were sent to him in chains. Muhammad ibn Nuh died on the road, and al Mamun died before Ahmad reached him. Then his brother Abu Ishaq took authority, and Ahmad ibn Abi Duad was appointed over the judiciary. Ahmad ibn Hanbal remained imprisoned from the year 18 until the year 20.
(Majmu al Fatawa 5/553–554).
The answer to this is that the examination of Abu al Abbas as Siraj, although it was by means of a name and a title that is not a Sharia title, was nonetheless by a title that had become known and recognised as an innovation and as contrary to Sunnah, and that no ambiguity remained concerning it.
Ibn Taymiyyah himself considered mere affiliation to such titles to be an innovation. He said: “However, mere affiliation to al Ashʿari is an innovation.” (Majmu al Fatawa 6/359).
As for examination by means of Imam Ahmad may Allāh have mercy on him, this can be understood in a similar way to what was said concerning as Siraj. It is said: Imam Ahmad may Allāh have mercy on him became, by what Allāh bestowed upon him of defending Sunnah, a clear symbol for Sunnah. Many people traced themselves back to him.
Among those who follow the madhhabs are some who trace themselves back to their imam in the branches of jurisprudence and trace themselves back to Ahmad in the foundations of belief.
Examination by means of him was not for mere affiliation to him, but for agreement with him concerning what he was upon of pure Sunnah in the issue of the Qur’an, that it is the speech of Allāh sent down, not created, and in other matters.
