Appendix C: Prophets are Divinely Protected From Sin

APPENDIX C

Imām al-Hudā Abū Manşūr Muĥammad al-Māturīdī998 writes in the tafsīr of the following verse of Sūrah Muĥammad :999

And seek forgiveness for sins of your [household]

and for believing men and believing women.

Allāh táālā says: Seek forgiveness for the sins of yours.1000 It is a valid interpretation that Allāh táālā began the sentence with this word and instructed His Messenger to start [seeking forgiveness] for himself before seeking forgiveness for others, because a man should begin by praying for himself before praying for others.

In reality, this is only a prayer [of forgiveness] for believing men and women other than him – however, he was commanded to to start with his own self as it is a commendable thing to do. Allāh táālā knows best.

It is also possible that there could have been an error on his ﷺ part, and Allāh táālā commanded him to seek forgiveness – but we do not know – and nor should we take upon ourselves and strive to find and record (if any, among) the lapses of Prophets عليهم السلام.

It is a valid explanation that they were commanded to seek forgiveness for anything that may appear1001 like a sin – like Sayyidunā Ibrāhīm عليه السلام, who said:

And it is from Him, I eagerly desire that.

He will forgive my mistakes on the Day of Judgement.1002

However, the ‘sins’1003 or mistakes of Prophets are not the same as the sins of nonprophets, because the sins of non-prophets mean commiting an ugly action which can be major or minor sin; but the ‘sin’ or ‘error’ mentioned about a Prophet refers to his choosing a lesser, but good option instead of the best one – not that they commit any loathsome deed. Allāh táālā gives guidance.

Imām Māturīdī in the tafsīr of the following verse in Sūrah al-Fat’ĥ:

So that Allāh may forgive for you the past sins of your [followers] and those in the future1004

Then [know:] it is not permissible for us to investigate about the error or ‘sin’ [mentioned] on his part – nor strive to learn about it [or say:] “what could it have been?” “what kind of lapse was it?” Because investigating his ﷺ ‘lapse’ [that is mentioned] necessitates diminishing his stature or is akin to finding a fault – it is feared that whoever strives to discover about [such a lapse] would invite the blame of kufr upon himself.1005 Moreover, the ‘sin’ in relation to him ﷺ – or other Prophets عليهم السلام – is not the same as our sins.

Their [action termed as] ‘sin’ is similar to a permissible action in our case – however, Prophets were prohibited from doing it. Allāh táālā knows best.

Al-Muntaqā min Íşmati’l Anbiyā’a1006

Shaykh Abū Manşūr1007 has said: The word al-ghufrān [i.e. pardon] literally means to hide, to conceal. This describes that he was Divinely Protected before Revelation and after, so that not a single sin was committed by him. The root of ghufrān is al-ghafr –another derived word from this root is the mighfar, meaning the helmet [part of body armour] which protects the face and the head so that they do not get hurt.

Abū Álī al-Jūzjānī1008 has said explaining the hadith: Indeed, I seek the forgiveness of Allāh, a hundred times every day. Here the word ‘sin’ is a lapse in reaching the highest state of gnosis of Allāh and falling short in giving thanks for His gifts. Our master ﷺ would progress upon a hundred ranks every day – and every time he progressed a rank, he would seek forgiveness for not having attained the next rank.

It is said: ‘dhanb’ [translated as ‘sin’] is actually any action that would entail admonishment or punishment – it is derived from dhanab which is literally, ‘tail of an animal’ – because the tail is a part that is far end of the animal and ‘follows’ the animal; so also any action of a man that ‘follows’ him in terms of reproachment or punishment [ítāb-adhāb] or shame or embarrassment is known as a dhanb or ‘sin’ irrespective of whether it was due to committing a prohibited action or opposition to a command or selecting the lesser of two praiseworthy actions.

Just like the tail of an animal is at the lowest end of the animal’s body both physically and in its importance, so also the ‘sin’ of the human is the lowest of his actions in rank. The sin of every person varies according to his stature, just like the tail of every animal differs according to the species. The Prophet ﷺ would say this in his prostration: O Allāh.

Forgive me for the actions done in seriousness and in jest. And my errors, done deliberately and every such action that I did [or is possible to do].1009 Thus among every man’s actions there can be high and low deeds according to his rank and his state – and thus one would be embarassed for his actions that are lower according to his state.1010

Sharĥ al-Fiqh al-Akbar of Mullā Álī al-Qārī

Imām Abū Ĥanīfah writes in al-Fiqh al-Akbar: The Prophets – upon all of them be Blessings of Allāh and greetings of peace – every one of them is immaculate and free from the blemish of minor sins and enormities [şaghā’irkabā’ir] and disbelief and loathsome acts [kufr-qabā’iĥ]. However, there were lapses and errors on their part.

And [our master] Muĥammad is the Messenger of Allāh – May Allāh shower blessings upon him and upon his descendants and give them greetings of peace. And he is His slave and Messenger – His Chosen one.

He ﷺ neither worshipped an idol, nor assigned a partner to Allāh [i.e. never committed shirk] even for a moment [as short as] the blinking of an eye – and he absolutely, never ever committed either a minor sin or a major sin.

Relevant portions of the commentary on the above passage: {immaculate, free from} that is Divinely Protected. {from minor and major sins} that is, from every kind of sin. {disbelief} this is specifically mentioned because it is the greatest of all sins. As Allāh táālā has said:

Indeed Allāh will not forgive that partners are associated with Him;

And He will forgive anything other than that for whomsoever He Wills.1011 {and loathsome actions} in one manuscript, ‘depravity’ or ‘indecencies’ [fawāĥish] – these are more specific kinds of enormities unlike others as Allāh táālā has said:

And they who abstain from major sins and indecencies.1012

This refers to murder, adultery,1013 homosexuality, stealing, accusing a chaste woman1014 of adultery [qadhaf], sorcery, fleeing from the battlefield, slander, taking interest, misappropriating the property of orphans, tyranny and oppressing fellow beings and attempt to cause strife and mischief in society. Saýīd ibn Jubayr reports that a man asked Ibn Ábbās: “How many are enormities?

Are they only seven?” He replied – “Nearly seven hundred, except that it does not remain an enormity after one seeks forgiveness – and a sin does not remain minor if it is committed repeatedly”.1015 {and it occurred on their part} i.e. about some Prophets – before the revelation of their prophethood – or after their having attained the rank of Messengership. {lapses} i.e. acts of remission. {and errors} i.e. a slip or a stumble in relation to their lofty rank and their venerable and majestic states, as it occurred in the case of Sayyidunā Ādam – when he ate from the [forbidden] tree because of forgetfulness – or he ignored the stricter ruling and opted for the concessionary ruling, based on the assumption that the forbidden tree [was specific] about which Allāh táālā has said:

Do not approach – both of you – this tree1016

He assumed that it was one specific tree and not the species; so he ate from a tree of the same kind – not the specific tree.

This was due to Divine Wisdom – to demonstrate the weakness of human nature and the power and extent of Divine Forgiveness; it is, therefore, said in the ĥadīth: “If you did not commit sins, then Allāh would replace you with another people who would commit sins and seek His forgiveness; Allāh would forgive them.”1017 Elaborating on this point will lengthen the discussion, so we will leave it here and move on.

The aforementioned is the opinion of the majority of scholars, and in contrast to a group of şūfī masters and theologians [mutakallimīn] who claimed that [Prophets] are immune from even slips, forgetfulness and inattentiveness.1018 As for the saying of the Prophet ﷺ, “Indeed there is a clouding upon my heart and indeed, I seek forgiveness of Allāh, hundred times a day,”1019 Imām Rāzī has said in his tafsīr:

Ghayn means something that clouds the heart, or puts a veil upon it – it is like a thin cloud floating in the air – it does not block out the sun completely, but still, obstructs the light. There are various explanations of this statement: First: Allāh táālā informed his Prophet ﷺ about his followers and what would befall them and the disputes among them.

When he was reminded of this, he felt a heaviness in his heart and, therefore, sought forgiveness for his followers.

This is obviously far-fetched because it does not seem plausible that he was reminded of this all the time – especially due to the Prophet’s ﷺ high station. Second: The Prophet continually progressed from one state to another state more exalted than the previous; so he would seek forgiveness for the previous state and tarrying in a lower station and this is in accordance with the verse:

And surely, every successive [state] is better for you than the previous1020 Third: Ghayn can be described as a state of being overwhelmed and absorbed [sukr] in Divine Love, such that he was completely lost [fanā] even to his own self. When he returned to the state of alertness, he would seek forgiveness for slipping from his state of

وحص alertness [şaĥw.]It is thus explained by the masters of ĥaqīqah.1021 I say: This is supported by the ĥadīth: “I have [an exclusive] time with Allāh, in which even the closest Angel is not present” that is, the august Jibril عليه السلام, “nor any other ProphetMessenger,” referring to his own sublime self.1022 However, it is also said that: Seeking forgiveness is not from [coming back to] the state of alertness – but rather from the state of being engrossed as the ĥadīth says: “And indeed, there is a clouding upon my heart that prevents me from beholding my Lord Almighty.”1023 This is a station of intense focus1024 [jam’ al-jam’] where being in the presence of a multitude is not a barrier from unity, nor prevents the unity from multitude.1025 Needless to say, it is the station of Messengership and the station of delivering the invitaton [tablīgh] and proof [dalālah].

Thus anything that prevents him from reaching a more perfect station is deserving of seeking forgiveness.1026

Sharĥ al-Áqāýid al-Nasafiyyah of Imām Taftāzānī

All the Prophets have duly informed [the Commands] and faithfully conveyed the Message of Allāh táālā. Because this is the actual meaning of Prophethood [nubuwwah – informing of the unseen1027] and Messengership [risālah – conveying the Divine Message].

They are truthful and sincere in preaching and giving good counsel [and guidance] so that the objective of being sent forth as Prophets and Messengers is fully realised. And in this is a pointer that Prophets are divinely protected [máşūm] from [sins, and] especially falsehood in matters related to Divine Law [sharīáh], conveying the commandments of Allāh and guiding the nation.

The unanimously agreed upon position [ijmāá] is that they are divinely protected from deliberately [lying]; they are also divinely protected from inadvertent [errors], according to the majority.1028 Concerning other sins [and mistakes], this requires elaboration [and details are as follows]:

▪ Disbelief [kufr] – Prophets are divinely protected from kufr, before and after Revelation; this is unanimously agreed upon. ▪ Enormities [kabā’ir] – Similarly, they are divinely protected from deliberately committing enormities according to the majority;1029 contrary to the position of the Ĥashawiyyah.1030 The difference is actually based on the argument whether it is impossible according to revealed proof [sharaýī] or rationally impossible [áqlan].1031 ▪ Inadvertently [committing an enormity]: The majority opinion is that it is possible.1032 ▪ Concerning small sins [şaghā’ir] – It is possible [for Prophets to commit] deliberately, contrary to the opinion of Al-Jubbāyī1033 and his followers. ▪ Inadvertently [or due to forgetfulness or oversight] – It is possible according to everyone [bi’l ittifāq], except for such things that are contemptible and indicative of meanness such as stealing a little food1034 or being dishonest and cheating a little [while selling].1035 However, if they ever commit a small sin inadvertently, they will be alerted, and they will refrain from it immediately.

This is the case if it happens after receiving revelation [and Prophethood].

Concerning the possibility prior to [Revelation] there is no [definitive] proof that it is impossible for them to commit major sins [before Revelation], but according to the Mútazilah it is impossible,1036 because it necessitates a prohibitive dislike among their followers and the objective of sending [a guide] will be lost.

The correct position is that it is impossible for them to commit major sins which are abhorrent and despicable,1037 such as adultery of mothers,1038 debauchery and small sins that are indicative of meanness.

The Shīáh claim that it is impossible for Prophets to commit small sins and major sins before Revelation and after; however, they also claim that it is possible for them to pretend commiting disbelief due to expediency [taqiyyah].1039 After having established [that Prophets are immune from sin]1040 the judgement concerning narrations about Prophets, which appear to indicate falsehood [uttered] or a sin [committed] is as follows:

▪ Lone-narrator reports [aāĥād] are rejected forthwith.1041 ▪ Multiple-Narrators reports [mutawātir] will be turned away from the literal meaning and explained favourably if possible; if not, then it would mean that they chose the lesser among two good actions [khilāf al-awlā] or that such a thing occurred prior to their being sent forth [biýthah] as prophets [i.e. Revelation].

Detailed examination of specific cases is found in treatises dedicated to the subject.1042

Al-Nibrās 1043

The text of Sharĥ al-Áqāýid is in bold and in flower brackets.

{All the Prophets have duly informed [the Commands of Allāh] and faithfully conveyed the Message of Allāh táālā because} That is delivering the information and message. {meaning of Prophethood and Messengership} Because ‘Prophet’ is one who ‘gives the news,’ i.e., he informs, and the ‘Messenger’ delivers the commands.

This is an excellent point. {truthful, givers of good counsel to creatures} they seek goodness for them. {so that the benefit of sending forth [on the mission of prophethood] and the Message is not invalidated.

Herein is a hint that the Prophets are Divinely Protected from falsehood} whether in delivering Divine Commands or otherwise {especially in matters related to Divine Law and delivering Divine Commandments and guidance to the people}. Indeed, protection in these aspects is obvious. The three words used here are synonyms and are used for clarification.

He avoided phrasing it like ‘Zayd has come’ or ‘Ámr has gone’.1044 {As for deliberately} It is clear from the author’s words that he refers to falsehood absolutely – whether in delivering Divine Command and Message or otherwise. However, in the discussions of theologians [mutakallimīn] and the author himself, in his other works, they clarify that [impossibility] is about falsehood in delivering the Message;

concerning worldly matters, it is in the category of any other sin.1045 This is the preferred opinion of Khayālī, the research scholar. {By unanimous agreement} Also: miracles [of a Prophet] are evidence of his being truthful in every [Divine] message that he delivers. {As for inadvertently, then according to most} That is, according to the majority, it is impossible to utter a falsehood in conveying the Divine Message, EVEN in forgetfulness or by omission, among whom is Ustādh Abū Is’ĥāq al-Isfarāyīnī.1046 A contrary position is attributed to the judge Al-Bāqillānī,1047 based on the implication that the miracle is a proof of his truthfulness in matters of Divine Message.

Other scholars have said that Bāqillānī did not deny Divine Protection [íşmah] per se, rather his argument is: The proof for íşmah is by unanimous agreement [ijmāá] and the scripture [nuşūş] – not miracles.

According to Qāđī Íyāđ al-Mālikī,1048 [Prophets are] Divinely Protected from falsehood absolutely; whether in matters of religion or otherwise; whether deliberately or inadvertently and he claimed that our elder scholars [salaf] are unanimously agreed on this point because they promptly accepted the [Prophet’s] words, without any hesitation or seeking clarification whether those [words] were deliberately said or inadvertently said – and because if it is known that a person can utter a lie, then there is a possibility of falsehood in one’s speech, then the trust in his word is lost and he cannot be relied upon and this is against the wisdom in sending forth a Prophet.1049 {Concerning all other sins} i.e., other than falsehood in delivering Divine Message and Commandments {requires elaboration, and that is: they are protected from disbelief prior to Revelation, and after; by unanimous agreement} Qāđī Íyāđ said: Numerous reports validate each other in this matter, and there is not a single report that a disbeliever was given Prophethood.

In fact, some scholars have said this would essentially provide a strong argument for disbelievers against them.1050 {similar, is deliberately committing major sins} i.e., after Revelation; here ‘sins’ are other than disbelief.1051 {according to the majority} i.e. all others except the Ĥashawiyyah.

{contrary to the Ĥashawiyyah} pronounced as Ĥashwiyyah or Ĥashawiyyah.1052 They are a heretical sect and various reasons are mentioned for the name of their sect. It is said that it is because they are anthropomorphists; because a body is ‘composed’ [of matter] – or ‘filled with’ and is known as ĥashw.

It is said that they are termed so because of the word ĥashā, which means margin or fringe; this is because they would attend the gathering of Ĥasan al-Başrī and [when they spoke of their beliefs] he rejected their ideas and said: “push them to the fringes” or “ask them to sit in the corners.” It is said that they would insist on taking narrations literally and without proper research; ĥashw means verbiage.

It is also said that they originated from a place called Ĥashwah in Khorasan. {Rather, the difference is regarding the impossibility being established by revealed proof} This is the position of majority Asharites who said: Divine Protection [for Prophets] other than from falsehood in delivering the Message cannot be established rationally.1053 The miracle is a proof of their being truthful only in delivering the message; rather it is known from the scriptures and it was unanimously agreed upon [by the ummah] before the appearance of dissenters.1054 This is the preferred position of Qāđī alBāqillānī.

{or rational proof} This is the position of some Ashárī scholars and the majority of Mutazilites – whose proof is that the appearance of a major sin [on the part of the Prophets] causes people to dislike them and therefore leads to repulsion which repudiates the wisdom of sending a Messenger; this is the preferred position of Ustādh Abū Is’ĥāq.

An objection on this position is that it causes revulsion and dislike only if it is known by people, not in its actual occurrence – and occurrence does not necessarily mean that others come to know of it.1055 {and concerning} committing a major sin after Revelation {inadvertently} similarly, due to error of judgement {a majority allowed it} in Sharĥ al-Mawāqif 1056 and Sharĥ al-Maqāşid1057 the preferred opinion is against this.

Qāđī Íyāđ has mentioned unanimous agreement [ijmāá] that they are protected from all major sins without any rider, on [the sins] being deliberate or inadvertently. {as for small sins} after Prophethood1058 {according to the majority it is possible even deliberately} among whom is Imām alĤaramayn.1059 {contrary to Jubbāyī and his followers} among the Mutazilites. The exegete [i.e.

Taftāzānī] has followed the author of Al-Mawāqif1060 here, and it is an error; because the preferred position of Ashárī scholars is that they negate the deliberate committing of small sins [by Prophets] as explained in Sharĥ al-Mawāqif. This is also the preferred opinion of the exegete himself in his [other works such as] Al-Tahdhīb1061 and Sharĥ al-Maqāşid.

The Jubbā’iyyah sect says: A small sin cannot be committed by Prophets except inadvertently or due to an error of judgement. All other Mutazilites – such as Jāĥiż and Nażżām1062 – say that it is possible that they could deliberately commit a small sin, however upon the condition that they would be made aware of this and they would refrain from it immediately.

{and it is possible} for them to commit small sins {inadvertently; this opinion is commonly agreed by all} This is the opinion of most Ashárīs and the majority of Mútazilites, as said in Sharĥ al-Mawāqif. Some scholars opine that it is not possible; therefore, the claim that it is ‘commonly agreed’ is moot.

Qāđī Íyāđ says:1063 A group of research scholars among jurists and theologians held the opinion that the Divine Protection accorded to Prophets from small sins is similar to protection from major sins – because of the difference of opinion concerning major sins1064 and the difficulty in distinguishing between small and big sins.

And the practice of our elders that they would follow every action of the Prophet and consider it proof for permissibility without exception.1065 [end of Qāđī Íyāđ’s statement]. {except that which implies meanness and vileness} That is: It is impossible for them to commit a small sin, which removes a person from the company of decent individuals and relegates him to the group of scoundrels and vile men.

It is impossible for a Prophet to commit such a sin [i.e. mean or wicked] either deliberately or inadvertently, because it causes people to dislike them. {such as stealing a little food} It is said: because stealing is a major sin. I [al-Farhārī] reply: Stealing is indeed a major sin when one steals as much as that which necessitates the statutory punishment of amputating the hand.

This is [equal to] ten pieces of silver1066 [dirham] according to Imām Aáżam and three pieces of silver according to Imām Mālik.

{short-weight} that is not weighing properly in giving and taking.1067 {as a grain} i.e., [cheating a customer] as much as a grain {however research scholars} among those who hold the position that it is possible for Prophets to commit small sins deliberately and inadvertently {stipulated that they would be made aware} that is, Allāh – Glory to Him – would inform them that it does not behoove their high station. {and they would refrain from it} i.e. they would refrain from it and would seek Allāh’s forgiveness from such an action. {this} pointing to his saying: “similarly, deliberately committing major sins” until here {all of this is after Revelation.

As for before Revelation, there is no proof that it is impossible for a major sin to occur} near majority of Ahl al-Sunnah and all the Mutazilites.

Thus it is in Sharĥ al-Mawāqif. {According to Mutazilites} and some Sunni scholars {it is impossible – because it would lead to people being disgusted at that and abhor following them} i.e. followers of the Prophet. {the objective of sending forth a Prophet would be lost} and that is for people to follow Prophets. {The accurate position} according to the exegete1068 concerning Divine Protection before Revelation {impossibility in such sins which cause revulsion and are despicable} even if it is committed by their parents {such as adultery of mothers} áhr means adultery. {and debauchery} i.e. adultery by Prophets based on the clause that follows;1069 according to Sharĥ al-Mawāqif: It means adultery by parents of Prophets; or it may mean, {debauchery} of mothers [of Prophets] which is repeated for emphasis.

However, it is better to take it as a single statement, than considering it as emphasis.1070 Also, it is clear that Taftāzānī’s explanation is probably an endorsement of the Mútazilī position, that it is absolutely impossible for Prophets to commit major sins.

{small sins that are indicative of meanness} this is the preferred position of most commentators1071 – but it is also possible that this is a separate discussion and the position of Taftāzānī, which, in Mawāqif is described as the position of some Mutazilites.

If you object: How is possible that Taftāzānī and some other Sunni scholars say that sins that are repugnant [are impossible to be committed by Prophets] based on the argument that it vitiates the wisdom of sending forth Prophets – because this is the concept of rationally ugly [qubĥ áqlī] – and Ashárīs reject this, and it is the Mútazilī doctrine?1072 I reply: These are points [of objection] after the occurrence – not before its occurrence, so that it can be deemed as evidence for its status to be known rationally. {The Shīáh claim that it is impossible for Prophets to commit small sins and major sins before Revelation and after;} whether in error [or forgetfulness] or deliberately. {however, they also claim that it is possible for them to pretend commiting disbelief} this is an indication towards their stupidity and holding on to both extremes.

On one hand, they say that even small sins cannot be committed before Revelation, even if it is in error or in forgetfulness, but they permit committing kufr in the state of Prophethood! {due to expediency – taqiyyah} that is, out of fear of enemies; taqiyyah is pronounced to rhyme with fa-ýi-lah.

Taqiyyah is among the most important principles of Shiýī belief – and they base every judgement, statement or action of Álī رضي الله عنه and his noble progeny on this concept.

Thus [according to the shīáh,] any praise of Abū Bakr and Úmar رضي الله عنهما or the acceptance of their khilāfah and the absence of any objection or criticism [by Mawlā Álī and his descendant imāms] is because of taqiyyah and to support this idea, they proffer the following Qur’ānic verse [and claim that it is proof of taqiyyah]:

Indeed, the most noble amongst you near Allāh, are the most pious.1073 They say that Imām Jaáfar al-Şādiq said: “Taqiyyah is my religion and the religion of my forefathers.” It is not difficult for any sane person to understand that a person’s word or action does not remain reliable or trustworthy if he deems it permissible to outwardly oppose truth and the right in a state of fear – rather, what is known from the character of Prophets and their true followers is that they would proclaim the truth and uphold what is right, even in opposition to kings and tyrants, even when they did not have many supporters and had numerous enemies.

Two important notes in this discussion remain:

FIRST NOTE Taftāzānī’s opinion is the position of theologians [mutakallimīn] in general and most scholars opposed them [in this issue]; they contend that “Prophets are immune from minor and major sins before Revelation and after.” This was preferred by Abu’l Muntahā1074 in his commentary of Al-Fiqh al-Akbar, and also Shaykh Ábdu’l Ĥaqq Muĥaddith Dihlawī1075 who said, quoting earlier scholars: “The lapses of Prophets are due to their immense nearness to Allāh.”1076 In Tafsīr Nasafī:1077 The imāms of Samarqand would not use the word ‘lapse’ [zallah] referring to Prophets, because it is a kind of sin; they would say: ‘a Prophet chose to do a good thing instead of a better thing and was admonished for this – because a Prophet choosing the lesser of two good things is similar to a common man forsaking a wājib action.1078 Shaykh Abū Manşūr al-Māturīdī said: “Prophets are more deserving to be protected from sin than Angels, because nations are commanded to follow the Prophets – not Angels.” The preferred opinion of Qāđī Íyāđ is that [the Prophets] are Divinely Protected from every minor and major sin after Revelation and he ascribed this to a group of research scholars and said: “There is a difference of opinion about their being Divinely Protected prior to Revelation [and Prophethood]” and the correct opinion is that they are absolved of every flaw.

The summary of their conclusions: If a Prophet prohibits something that he himself commits, he will be subject to criticism by the people; his action will be an excuse for the people [to commit it themselves]. If you say: But isn’t this “Divine Protection” the madh’hab of the Shīáh? I reply: Firstly, there is no harm in concurring with them on a commonly agreed upon1079 issue, as the objective of the sages was to follow the truth1080 and not seeking conformity with the Shīáh. Secondly: The difference between the two groups is as great as the distance between the east and the west, because the Shīáh claim that it is possible for [Prophets to] commit kufr due to expediency.1081 If you say: Some jurists have said that it is kufr to believe that Prophets are immune from sin, because this belief repudiates the scripture, such as the verse:

And Ādam made an error in following the Command of his Lord, and was amiss1082 [in attaining his objective]

Some scholars have excommunicated [takfīr] the Shīáh on this basis.1083 I reply: The Truthful Lord Almighty has described the choosing of a good instead of a superior option by Prophets as a ‘sin,’ because of their lofty status and high rank.

It is not permissible for others to use this word with Prophets – because if a king admonishes his minister and uses harsh words, it does not mean that a common man on the street can address the minister in the same words. Allāh táālā knows best.

SECOND NOTE Concerning Divine Immunity granted to Prophets, Imām Rāzī and his followers held that they are absolutely protected from major sins [kabīrah] and in case of minor sins, they are protected from committing them deliberately. The proof for their position is as follows: 1. Allāh táālā says:

My promise does not reach the transgressors, tyrants.1084

The sinner is a transgressor, an oppressor. One cannot say that promise [áhd] here means leadership, because we will reply: if so, it is more appropriate to apply to Prophethood.1085 2. It is obligatory for the followers to imitate and repeat the deeds and words of Prophets.1086 3. This would necessitate that they deserve multifold punishment:

O women of the Prophet! Whoever amongst you commits an openly indecent deed, [Allāh will] double her punishment.1087

4. The testimony of a profligate, sinner, transgressor [fāsiq] is rejected. 5. Enjoining the good and forbidding evil are obligatory or desirable [for even nonprophets]. And if Prophets could sin, then it would become lawful to admonish and rebuke them – but that is forbidden by consensus:

Indeed those who hurt Allāh and His Messenger, Allāh has damned them1088 6. The sinner deserves to be punished according to scripture; but the implication that a Prophet deserves to be punished is absurd. 7. Allāh táālā says:

And certainly, Iblīs vindicated his assumption about them;

so they followed him, except a group of Muslims.1089

If Prophets are removed from the group [of Muslims who did not obey the Devil] then it implies that other Muslims [in the group] are superior to Prophets1090 because Allāh has said:

Indeed, the most noble amongst you are the most pious.1091

8. Allāh táālā has denounced those who command people to do good and they forget their own selves [i.e. they commit sins] – and the implication that a Prophet is condemnable is invalid by consensus. 9. Allāh táālā has said describing the attributes of Prophets:

Indeed, they were the most hastening in all goodness1092

Here, the mention of good actions [khayrāt] along with the definite article means: “all kinds of actions – whether doing good deeds or refraining from bad and evil deeds”.1093 10. Allāh táālā has said citing the devil [Iblīs]:

And he said: By Your Majesty! I will mislead every one of them;

except Your chosen [sincere] slaves among them.1094

Indeed, We have blessed them with distinction due to sincerity1095

Indeed, he was among our sincere slaves1096

Even though some of the above verses are specific to certain Prophets and said in specific circumstances, they are still overall evidence for the Divine Immunity granted to Prophets; rather, these verses can also be cited to prove immunity from committing sins inadvertently or in forgetfulness. Ponder. {After having established this} that is, immunity from sins for Prophets after revelation.

In our opinion, this corollary requires further examination. Because the exegete [Taftāzānī] has previously mentioned a lenient opinion on Immunity so much that he even says that it is possible for Prophets to commit minor sins deliberately and gives preference to the opinion that Prophets can commit major sins inadvertently.

Then he describes a stringent corollary wherein he does not admit possibility of [any sin] except those actions where a Prophet abandoned a better option [tark al-awlā], which is neither a minor nor a major sin! This corollary is most suited for the position of those who insist that Prophets are protected from commiting even minor sins inadvertently or in forgetfulness.

There are two possible explanations for this [inconsistency] Firstly: He narrowed the definition of immunity to only tark al-awlā in the corollary, out of respect [for the Prophets]; it is the practice of scholars to present a favourable interpretation for the conflicts of Companions, even though it is not impossible for them to commit minor or major sins.

Secondly: The exegete’s own preference is as he has said: “The correct position is that they cannot commit something abominable..” which implies immunity of Prophets from every sin – minor or major – after prophethood; this is based on the premise that sins are abominable after [receiving] Prophethood according to some sages. {concerning narrations about Prophets, which appear to indicate falsehood [uttered] or a sin [committed] is as follows:} 1. { Lone-narrator reports [aāĥād] are rejected} Many leading scholars [imāms] have clarified that it is better to accuse a narrator of lying or committing an error compared to attributing sins to Prophets.

Among such [spurious narrations] is the report that the Prophet ﷺ would be present with the idolators when they would kiss their idols;1097 Imām Aĥmad said: It is a fabrication. Another: The report that the Prophet ﷺ saw Zaynab and liked her; Zayd came to know and divorced her, and then the Prophet ﷺmarried her. Another: The report that the Prophet ﷺ recited Sūrah al-Najm and when he reached the mention of Lāt, Úzzā and Manāt – the idols of the pagans – their praise issued from his tongue, upon which the [pagan] Quraysh were pleased.1098 Another: The report that the Prophet ﷺ was still doubtful of the chastity of Sayyidah Áayishah رضي الله عنها and was not convinced until he saw that Şafwān was castrated, as one day he was climbing a tree and a strong gust of wind blew and stripped his lower garment [izār]. Another: The report that Sayyidunā Yūsuf عليه السلام was also tempted to commit adultery and even sat between the two legs of Zulaykhā.1099 Actually the correct version is: He saw the Manifest Proof [burhān] and was not tempted or seduced.

The author of Futūĥāt al-Makkiyyah1100 has narrated this from Sayyidunā Yūsuf عليه السلام, who told him thus in a dream.

Another: The report that Sayyidunā Dāwūd عليه السلام found the wife of one of his ministers beautiful and liked her, so he sent him on battles one after another until he was killed. After he was killed, he married that lady.

Here it should be clarified that such reports are not absolutely rejected; rather, they are rejected if the chains are not proper, or if such reports cannot be explained favourably – because some reports are through reliable narrators along with favourable interpretations; so undue haste in repudiation [of such reports] is not desirable.1101 Shaykh Jalāluddīn Suyūţī has said:1102 Imām Rāzī, Qāđī Abū Bakr al-Baqillānī, Imām alĤaramayn, Imām Ibn Fūrak, Qāđī Íyāđ, Imām Ghazālī and other prominent sages have rejected even şaĥīĥ narrations – including a few from Bukhārī and Muslim – much to the chagrin of ĥadīth scholars, based on the difficulties presented by their apparent meanings, even though such reports can be interpreted favourably.

An example of such a [şaĥīĥ] narration is: The Prophet ﷺ said: “Ibrāhīm did not lie, except for three falsehoods”:1103

So he said: I [shall be] unwell1104

Rather, it was done by the biggest among them1105

And when he was asked about his wife, he said: “She is my sister.” This ĥadīth is reported via trustworthy narrators. Ĥadīth masters explain that these are “falsehood” only in name as they merely resemble falsehoods, and technically, they were not lies.

{Those which are reported by Multiple-Narrators [mutawātir] will be turned away from their literal meaning} Such as the statement of Sayyidunā Ibrāhīm when he said pointing to the stars:

He said: This is my Lord.1106

The explanation: Here the interrogative ĥamzah1107 is implicit and not expressed.

Its meaning is: “Is this my Lord as you claim?” Similar to his statement when he broke the idols: “Rather, it was done by the biggest among them”1108 is explained as: The veneration shown by the disbelievers to the largest idol infuriated him, and he therefore broke them; or he referred to himself as “bigger” as he was bigger in size than the idols.1109 {and explained favourably if possible} averting the literal meaning. {and if not} i.e., if it is not possible to interpret it favourably {then it would mean that it means abandoning the better among two good actions, i.e. tark al-awlā} such as:

And Ādam made an error in following the Command of his Lord, and was amiss1110 [in attaining his desired objective]

And the saying of Mūsā عليه السلام.

He said: O my Lord, I have indeed oppressed my soul; so forgive me1111 Many leading scholars [imāms] have said that Allāh táālā has termed forgoing a better option [tark al-awlā] as a sin because of their exalted station. As the proverb goes: The good deeds of the righteous are like the ‘sins’ of the closest ones.

The Prophets therefore seek forgiveness for the act of omitting the better option, humbling their selves in the Presence of Allāh; otherwise, there is no sin in this case, nor punishment.

{or that such a thing occurred prior to their being sent forth [biýthah] as prophets} As it is said about Sayyidunā Ādam that he ate from the forbidden tree [before Prophethood], and the brothers of Sayyidunā Yūsuf عليه السلام on the assumption that they were prophets; but some scholars have said that they were not prophets.

And Allāh ta’álā knows best. {Detailed examination of specific cases is found in treatises dedicated to the subject.} Such as Sharĥ al-Mawāqif, Sharĥ al-Maqāşid, Shifā of Qāđī Íyāđ –the relevant parts of which have been mentioned here.1112