Did the Holy Prophet (PBUH) See Allah (SWT) on Isrâ’ and Mi‘râj ?

[PERILOUS]

The Companions differed whether the Prophet Allah bless and greet him – actually saw his Lord that night [of isrâ’ and mi‘râj] or not.

It is authentically narrated from Ibn ‘Abbas that the Prophet Allah bless and greet him – saw his Lord, and also authentically related that Ibn ‘Abbas said:

“He saw Him with his heart.” It is also authentically related from ‘A’isha and Ibn Mas‘ud that they denied such vision, saying that the words of Allah Most High (And verily he saw him, yet another time, at the Lote Tree of the Farthest Boundary) (53:13) refer to Gibrîl u.[33]

It is also authentically related from Abu Dharr that the latter asked the Prophet Allah bless and greet him –: “Did you see your Lord” and he replied: “[There was] a great light, how could I see Him” (nûrun annâ arâh).
That is: light came in between myself and His sight, as stated in the wording: “I saw light” (ra’aytu nûran).

‘Uthman ibn Sa‘id al-Darimi said that the Companions all agreed that the Prophet Allah bless and greet him – did not see Him.

Shaykh al-Islam Ibn Taymiyya – said: Ibn ‘Abbas’s statement that “He saw Him” does not contradict that claim, nor his statement that “He saw Him with his heart.”

Ibn Kathir cited it in his commentary on Sura al-Najm and declared its chain sound, but considered it part of the hadith of the dream.

Ibn al-Qayyim relates that Imam Ahmad considered such sight to be in the Prophets Allah bless and greet him sleep but remains a true sight as the dreams of Prophets are true and that some of the Imams companions mistakenly attributed to him the position that the Prophet Allah bless and greet him saw his Lord with the eyes of his head.

Now:
1. “did not see Him”?
2. “He saw Him with his heart.”?
3. “light came in between myself and His sight”: “I saw light”?
4. “[There was] a great light, how could I see Him”?
5. Were the Sahaba, commenting on physical or spiritual vision of the holy Prophet (PBUH)?
6. “‘A’isha and Ibn Mas‘ud that they denied such vision,” ?
7. isrâ’ and mi‘râj Saw Allah with or without Vail?
8. isrâ’ and mi‘râj Saw Allah with the Eyes of his Head?

9. Does it matter?
YES!

Narrated by Al-Bukhari and Ahmed:
"On the Day of Judgment, a prophet is brought forth with one man, or two, or more, and then his people are called forth and are asked 'Did this man inform you (of the Message of Allah)?' and they will reply 'No.'

(The prophet) will be asked 'Did you inform them (of the Message of Allah)?' and he will reply 'Yes.' He will be asked 'And who is your witness?' and he will reply 'Muhammed and his Ummah.' …

[The_Other_Admin]

9. Does it matter?

No.

But Quran seems clear that he did not literally see God.

[AbuBakr101]

He saw the Light of Allah Jalla Jalaluh.

[Truth_Teller]

No, he didn´t. Infact, to me, it was a spritual Mi´raj rather than a physical one. Holy Prophet Hazhrat Muhammad (may all the peace and blessings be upon him) didn´t fly off to heavens or anywhere to meet Allah or His Angels, he infact saw it all in a dream.

Anyway, that´s my view of it.

[PERILOUS]

No, he didn´t. Infact, to me, it was a spritual Mi´raj rather than a physical one. Holy Prophet Hazhrat Muhammad (may all the peace and blessings be upon him) didn´t fly off to heavens or anywhere to meet Allah or His Angels, he infact saw it all in a dream.

Anyway, that´s my view of it.

Truth Teller ?

Your view is incorrect, FALSE!

The overwhelming majority of muslims, jurists, scholars of Hadith, and Muslim philosophers agreed that it was in both body and soul for many reasons.


According to Almighty Allah's words:

(Glorified be He Who carried His servant by night from the Inviolable Place of Worship to the Far Distant Place of Worship.) (Al-Israa' 17: 1)

He Almighty has referred to the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) as " His servant."

The word "servant" does not refer to one's soul only; it refers to the servant as a whole, body and soul.

[Al-Boriqi]

No.

But Quran seems clear that he did not literally see God.

what quran, surely not the quran of Allah

it shows no clearness to anything except the fact of this ayaah

(Glorified be He Who carried His servant by night from the Inviolable Place of Worship to the Far Distant Place of Worship.) (Al-Israa' 17: 1)

at any rate

Qadi 'Ayyad said
From Ash-Shifa, Volume 1, page 172
The truth regarding this (i.e., the nature of Israa) and the correct view, insha'Allah, is that Israa was with body and spirit during the whole event; this is indicated by the verse and authentic reports and consideration. The explicit meaning is not shifted to interpretation except in case of impossibility and there is no impossibility in the Israa with body during awakening.

There are 3 opinions:

1) The Prophet [Peace be upon him] saw the attributes of Allah
2) The Prophet saw Allah with eyes of the heart
3) The Prophet [Peace be upon him] saw Allah with the eyes of the head

and while i do aknowldged an ikhtilaaf in this matter, the one that is rooted more so than the other opinion in the textual sources, along with the logical deductions produced by the logicians and theologians is the following

Imam al-Bajuri al-Ash'ari said that the preferred position according to the Ulama is that the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him & give him peace) did see his Lord in the night of al-Isra' and al-Me'raj with the eyes of his head. The Hadith of Sayyiduna Ibn Abbas (Allah be pleased with him) will be given preference over the position of Sayyida A'isha (Allah be pleased with her), as the principle states "Affirmation (ithbat) takes precedence over the negation (nafi)". Hence, the position of Ibn Abbas and others (Allah be pleased with them all) will be given preference and it will be said that the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him & give him peace) was blessed with the vision of his Lord in the night of al-Isra' and al-Me'raj. (Bajuri, Tuhfat al-Murid, P: 117-118)

[ihsan]

Truth Teller ?

Your view is incorrect, FALSE!

The overwhelming majority of muslims, jurists, scholars of Hadith, and Muslim philosophers agreed that it was in both body and soul for many reasons.


According to Almighty Allah's words:

(Glorified be He Who carried His servant by night from the Inviolable Place of Worship to the Far Distant Place of Worship.) (Al-Israa' 17: 1)

He Almighty has referred to the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) as " His servant."

The word "servant" does not refer to one's soul only; it refers to the servant as a whole, body and soul.

Wa salaam

That is not the linguistic meaning of the word 'abd'. Allah calls the angels 'abd' and they are made of light. Whether is was body or soul, or both body and soul, the fact is, it happened.

he Hadith of Sayyiduna Ibn Abbas (Allah be pleased with him) will be given preference over the position of Sayyida A'isha (Allah be pleased with her), as the principle states "Affirmation (ithbat) takes precedence over the negation (nafi)". Hence, the position of Ibn Abbas and others (Allah be pleased with them all) will be given preference and it will be said that the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him & give him peace) was blessed with the vision of his Lord in the night of al-Isra' and al-Me'raj. (Bajuri, Tuhfat al-Murid, P: 117-118)

Interesting that a Companion, who was most probably 13 years old by the death of the Prophet (S) is given more precedence with Aisha (R), who personally lived with the Prophet (S) and more likely than not, asked the Prophet (S) his experiences on the ascension. Interesting that a methodology, and 'artificial construct' of the human mind, is given way more preference than common sense by certain people.

One more thing:

I believe the wife of the Prophet (S) herself rejected such a claim based upon the Quran, which means that isnad had no bearing on her opinion of such claims.

[Al-Boriqi]

Interesting that a Companion, who was most probably 13 years old by the death of the Prophet (S) is given more precedence with Aisha (R), who personally lived with the Prophet (S) and more likely than not, asked the Prophet (S) his experiences on the ascension. Interesting that a methodology, and 'artificial construct' of the human mind, is given way more preference than common sense by certain people.

One more thing:

I believe the wife of the Prophet (S) herself rejected such a claim based upon the Quran, which means that isnad had no bearing on her opinion of such claims.

1. Ibn Abass was merely 1 of the narrators to have opined to this among 45, a majority of whom opined different than aisha. does that mean aisha is wrong. no. it means other contexts have to be factored in.
2. qadhi iyaad mentioned one of the reasons being

Fourthly, how could it have been a test of people’s faith it was a mere dream ?
This is why the great Hanafi scholar, Imam Nasafi mentioned in his classical work “Aqaid
an Nasafi”. “In the Miraj, he was taken to Masjid al-Aqsa and then to Sidrat-ul-Muntaha,
and wherever Allah wished.”
All this took place in a state of wakefulness and with the body

in other words, Allah in the quran made this incident a hujjah, a test to people's faith. It is known by necessity of the deen that Something that is made a test for us is a physical reality. mankind in totality, their faith is not held accountable as a test, based on a dream. dreams, act in the realm of Islam as a ziyada, a secondary extra credit so to speak. Yet Allah made this event a trial and a test of one's faith. why?

now, this issue is not srt in stone. I want to make that clear because perilous here has made it so, and i say those over him have opined otherwise. what i am saying is that muhammad actually seeing Alah, even though the sight of Allah was light upon light, it being a factual reality holds a more stronger sense within the texts of both the quraan and the aathaar than the opposite and holding the opinion that he didn't see Him in reality actually undermines other realities, for example, the fact that Allah made this issue a test to faith. And Allah would not test our faith over a dream.

i am open for any other opinion provided i am given workable evidence, as well as the fact that they must make sense.

[Truth_Teller]

Truth Teller ?

Your view is incorrect, FALSE!

The overwhelming majority of muslims, jurists, scholars of Hadith, and Muslim philosophers agreed that it was in both body and soul for many reasons.


According to Almighty Allah's words:

(Glorified be He Who carried His servant by night from the Inviolable Place of Worship to the Far Distant Place of Worship.) (Al-Israa' 17: 1)

He Almighty has referred to the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) as " His servant."

The word "servant" does not refer to one's soul only; it refers to the servant as a whole, body and soul.

"He saw Him with his heart."

Are physical seen with one´s heart??? No - but with eyes.

[Ron]

Salam All,

I'm not sure how this matter of the Israa' to be a test of faith.

what i am saying is that muhammad actually seeing Alah, even though the sight of Allah was light upon light, it being a factual reality holds a more stronger sense within the texts of both the quraan and the aathaar than the opposite and holding the opinion that he didn't see Him in reality actually undermines other realities, for example, the fact that Allah made this issue a test to faith.

How does this stand in light of this verse:

No vision can grasp Him, but His grasp is over all vision: He is above all comprehension, yet is acquainted with all things. - Al An'aam 6:103

Also, consider Surah Al A'raf 7:143 when the Prophet Moses (pbuh) asks to see God. He is told that he will not see Him.

In addition, take this hadith from Sahih Muslim:

Book 001, Number 0341:

It is narrated on the authority of Abu Dharr: I asked the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him): Did you see thy Lord? He said: He is a Light;. how could I see Him?

With all that in mind I think the emphatic claims of whose view is wrong should stop. Also, let's not say that the "majority" of this or that has been agreed to when no proof was given for the agreement. Lastly, and most importantly, we should be a little more careful in using verses from the Qur'an.

Regards

[Al-Boriqi]

Salam All,

I'm not sure how this matter of the Israa' to be a test of faith.

How does this stand in light of this verse:

No vision can grasp Him, but His grasp is over all vision: He is above all comprehension, yet is acquainted with all things. - Al An'aam 6:103

Also, consider Surah Al A'raf 7:143 when the Prophet Moses (pbuh) asks to see God. He is told that he will not see Him.

In addition, take this hadith from Sahih Muslim:

Book 001, Number 0341:

It is narrated on the authority of Abu Dharr: I asked the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him): Did you see thy Lord? He said: He is a Light;. how could I see Him?

With all that in mind I think the emphatic claims of whose view is wrong should stop. Also, let's not say that the "majority" of this or that has been agreed to when no proof was given for the agreement. Lastly, and most importantly, we should be a little more careful in using verses from the Qur'an.

Regards

uh, you forgot the fact that i said this in that very quote and i'll highlight it for you

what i am saying is that muhammad actually seeing Alah, even though the sight of Allah was light upon light, it being a factual reality holds a more stronger sense within the texts of both the quraan and the aathaar than the opposite and holding the opinion that he didn't see Him in reality actually undermines other realities, for example, the fact that Allah made this issue a test to faith.

meaning while he saw Allah, that was all He saw for Allah has a veil and He mentions light is His veil.

So while I am of the opinion that Allah physically took him in this journey and was not some figment of his imagination or dream, and that he literally saw Allah, what he saw was light for the text indicate that when speaking of its literal happening. I think that should clear it up

[lumumba_s]

No vision can grasp Him, but His grasp is over all vision: He is above all comprehension, yet is acquainted with all things. - Al An'aam 6:103

Yet the Sunni Orthodoxy - in its widest ramifications - affirms that Allah will be seen in the Hereafter. What the verse says is that vision does not encompass Him, not that it is impossible for Him to be seen in anyway whatsoever.

Also, consider Surah Al A'raf 7:143 when the Prophet Moses (pbuh) asks to see God. He is told that he will not see Him.

And Qadi `Iyad mentions this verse as proof that vision is intrinsically possible, since prophets have the utmost ma`rifa of their Lord and would not ask for something that is absolutely impossible. And Allah responded "you will not see Me", not "you cannot see Me".

Book 001, Number 0341:

It is narrated on the authority of Abu Dharr: I asked the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him): Did you see thy Lord? He said: He is a Light;. how could I see Him?

And if one were to take this literally, it would be problematic. One of the fairest and most comprehensive discussions of this issue was by Qadi `Iyad in his Shifa' that al-Boriqi mentioned. There is evidence for both sides and there is no agreement amongst any group on this matter. Indeed, we all should be more careful.

"He saw Him with his heart."

Are physical seen with one´s heart??? No - but with eyes.

There is strong evidence to suggest that the Prophet's (Allah bless him and give him peace) vision is different from ordinary human beings vision. And everyone whose opinion is worthy of being considered believes that the heart vision of the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) was just as real and just as strong, if not more so, than his physical eyesight. As al-Boriqi said, the position that the `isra and mi`raj is anything but physical is weak.

Rationally, when the Prophet (Allah bless him and give him peace) announced what had happened to him after he returned, whole groups of Muslims apostate because their faith was already shakey and it was something that they could not comprehend. Likewise, his enemies made a point of critique for him. If it was only a spiritual, dream-like occurrence, why would it have tested anyone's faith?

Textually, `abd may not technically mean body and soul, but is a direct reference to an entity. Therefore, if one interprets it as meaning soul alone, it goes against what is apparent of the verse, and for that, there would have to be a diverting indication and such a thing does not exist. The ahadith which describe the incident mention details like his bed still being warm when he returned, and if it was only a spiritual mi`raj, such a statement is out of place.

I personally lean towards Qadi `Iyad's opinion, meaning that he saw him with his basirah and his basirah was realer and truer than that of his physical eyesight. And in description of the purity of the manifestation that he bore witness to, the best way that he (Allah bless him and give him peace) could convey what he was was light:

Allah is the light of the heavens and the earth... (24:35)

Al-Nur being one of His 99 names. And Allah knows best.

[hasan]

wouldn't the Heart vision be similiar in meaning and something like that of Hasret Ibrahims heart wanting to view how life returns from the dead?

[lumumba_s]

No, not really. The Prophet's (Allah bless him and give him peace) basirah as an actual mode of perception - a perceptive faculty - by which he experienced the world around him. The incident that you refer to with Sayyidina Ibrahim (peace be upon him) was a single experience. All the prophets have basirah. Actually, all people have basirah, some just have stronger faculties than others and for the prophets, it is the belief of many that their basirah was so profound that it was just as immediate, real and intense as their sense of touch and vision.

[vinod]

is the belief of many that their basirah was so profound that it was just as immediate, real and intense as their sense of touch and vision.

Isn't that an opinion about the Basirah of a Prophet that is being injected into the text? What is the basis of that opinion? Isn't there room for disagreeing with that opinion?

By the way, I couldn't help contrast the way you present the traditional understanding and the way Boriqi does. Yours is a whole other experience of scholarliness. His...I'd rather not say.

Regards