Salamun Alaikum (Peace be upon you)
Printer Friendly Version
Many worshippers utter words in a language with which they have no understanding or familiarity with. As many of us inherit our beliefs, we also inherit our rituals and sayings.
With regards the term ‘Radhi Allah Anho’, it has three main forms:
Radhi Allah AnHO (to a male)
Radhi Allah AnHA (to a female)
Radhi Allah AnHUM (To them) - The only term used in the Quran.
"Radhi Allah anho" is used as a suffix by the majority of Muslims after the name of a companion or a revered personality. (Shia sentiments withstanding with regards certain companions)
Where many Muslims believe the term means 'May God be pleased with him/her', this is not always the case in Arabic.
It is used to mean either:
(i) May God be pleased with him/her/them (When used in prayer) - This is used in common Arabic parlance, but is not supported by the Quran or
(ii) Allah is pleased with him/her/them (when used in news) - This form is found in the Quran.
Please note the crucial difference between 'may' and 'is'. The latter form has an unwarranted implication that all the Wives and companions of the Prophet are or were automatically righteous and confirmed by God. There is no warrant for such a claim in the Quran. This knowledge is only with God.
Where peace and blessings for the Prophets and Messengers can be readily attested and supported by the Quran, it is clear that no such inference or any sort of confirmation is given to any of the companions of the Prophet by name. The obligation to assign such attributes and titles to the contemporaries or companions of the Prophet is not supported by the Quran. These are post Quranic developments in Islamic history.
In fact, God does indeed inform believers that both He and his angels send blessings on the believers (33:43), but apart from the generic statement, there are no mention of specific identities. There is also a mention of those companions that took allegiance with the Prophet under the tree (48:18) and God was pleased with them and rewarded them immediately with a speedy victory. However there is no mention of identities here either. This is discussed later in more detail in the section entitled INCOHERENT ARGUMENTS.
The identities of these individuals with all their details are only furnished by Islamic secondary sources by later historians and Ahadith compilers.
In fact, no names of either the companions nor the wives of the Prophet are mentioned in the Quran. The exception is the name of Zayd (33:37 - adopted son) in the matter of marriage and to underscore the point that elective / adoptive relations cannot replace blood relationships and should not be viewed as such and the possible mention of Abu Lahab (111.1).
Abu Lahab merely translates to ‘Father of Flame’, so whether this refers to a person whose real name is not revealed given the mention of his wife or whether it refers to a ‘generic’ type of person has been debated. Abu Lahab’s real identity from the Quran’s perspective is not important for mankind’s guidance other than the wisdom readily imparted by the verses.
NO OTHER COMPANION OF THE PROPHET IS MENTIONED BY NAME IN THE QURAN.
One significant question is apt here to ask. If the Quran deems it important enough to mention Zayd by name for a relatively simple matter of adoption, then why is Ali not mentioned for the very serious matter of Shia Imamat? Especially when Imamat is a matter of fundamental belief for the Shia? Why is Abu Bakr, Umar, Uthman, not mentioned or any of the Prophet’s wives including Ayesha for Sunni source support? Why has the Quran not deemed it appropriate to confirm to the reader their names or the state of their hearts when much secondary source literature is based on a premise of their righteousness?
It is useful to remember, the Quran does mention names when it deems it necessary. As mentioned, both Zayd and a reference to a ‘Abu Lahab’ have been captured with regards the Prophet Muhammad’s (pbuh) contemporaries.
Even Jesus’s (pbuh) companions are not mentioned by name, they are only mentioned by the reference ‘White robed / garments’
This point is often missed in English translations as one reads the word ‘Disciples’ which is commonly substituted for the Arabic word.
But when Jesus became conscious of their disbelief, he cried: Who will be my helpers in the cause of God? The disciples (Arabic: Al-Hawariyun) said: We will be God's helpers. We believe in God, and bear thou witness that we have surrendered (unto Him).
‘Al-Hawariyyun' has the singular form ‘hawari’ and is derived from 'hawar' (whiteness) and is generally taken to mean 'one who wears white garments' or 'one whose heart is white' (i.e. pure). There are no ‘disciples / followers’ mentioned. The word ‘Bitabi’in’ is known to the Quran such as in 2:145 to denote a follower. This is not the term used here.
The identity of the ‘white robed ones’ and who they were have not been revealed by the Quran as there remains a possibility that one / some of them may not have remained righteous, though may have shared companionship with Jesus (pbuh). Judas Iscariot is possibly one (or the only) example.
The same is true of the companions of the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh). Whether they remained righteous or not is unimportant from a Quran’s perspective to guide mankind. This is important to note as the Quran refers to itself as a scripture for mankind’s guidance, fully detailed (6:114) and the BEST TAFSIR (25:33 Explanation of all things)
HOW IS 'RADHI ALLAH ANHUM' USED IN THE QURAN?
“Their reward with their Lord is gardens of perpetuity beneath which rivers flow, abiding therein for ever; God is well pleased with them (Arabic: Radhi Allah Anhum) and they are well pleased with Him; that is for him who fears his Lord”
Illustration - Joseph Islam
The term used above clearly confirms the notion that God is pleased with them once they have entered the garden on the Day of Judgment. This knowledge is only with God and remains an expression only He can use in this context.
This can also be seen in 58:22
"...these are they into whose hearts He has impressed faith, and whom He has strengthened with an inspiration from Him: and He will cause them to enter gardens beneath which rivers flow, abiding therein; God is well-pleased with them (Arabic: Radhi Allah Anhum) and they are well-pleased with Him these are God's party: now surely the party of God are the successful ones"
Illustration - Joseph Islam
Other references are also present such as those who left their homes for the sake of God and of those that aided them (Muhajirs and Ansars) with whom God is pleased with.
“And (as for) the foremost, the first of the Muhajirs and the Ansars, and those who followed them in goodness, God is well pleased with them (Arabic: Radhi Allah Anhum) and they are well pleased with Him, and He has prepared for them gardens beneath which rivers flow, to abide in them forever; that is the mighty achievement”
Again, the identities of these individuals are not given by the Quran but imparted by later historians centuries removed from the event.
No one apart from God can make such a confirmation. It is extremely dangerous from a Quran's point of view to suggest or attribute matters to God of which one has no explicit knowledge from Him. This can be seen in verse 2:169.
GOD'S WARNING - DO NOT ASSIGN PIETY TO YOURSELVES - ONLY GOD KNOWS WHO IS PURE
“Those who avoid enormities of sin and abominations, save the unwilled offences - (for them) lo! thy Lord is of vast mercy. He is best aware of you (from the time) when He created you from the earth, and when ye were hidden in the bellies of your mothers. Therefore do not ascribe purity / piety to yourselves. He is best aware of him who wards off (evil)”
Many Muslim academics claim that the phrase ‘Radhi Allah Unho’ has two renderings:
(1) In a form of a supplication in which the phrase can be interpreted as ‘May God be pleased with him/her’ albeit there is no support for this interpretation from the Quran.
(2) In a form of imparting news which then takes the meaning ‘God is pleased with them’
However, there remains an understanding that both forms are correct for ‘companions’. The following verse is often cited and used for support for the righteousness of all companions.
“Certainly God was well pleased with the believers when they swore allegiance to you under the tree, and He knew what was in their hearts, so He sent down tranquillity on them and rewarded them with a near victory”
The reader will note that the above verse does not inform us as to:
(a) ‘Who’ the believers were that took the oath or their names.
(b) Whether it was some of them or all of them when we know from (48.16) that not all of the believers were present to take the oath.
(c) Whether their reward will be any more than what has been stated (near victory of war). This is certainly true when there is no mention in the verse that their reward will be eternal.
Furthermore, one has no knowledge whether they will continue to remain on the straight path, continue to remain believers and true to their allegiance (Consider from the Quran’s narratives how many Israelites broke their covenants with God after ratifying them) and / or what their plight will be on the Day of Judgment. This knowledge remains solely with God. This point is underscored if read with verse 48:10, where it is clearly implied that the possibility of violation of allegiance remained a distinct possibility, hence the mention of 'harm to their own soul'.
PROPHET WAS ALSO UNAWARE
It is crucial to note that even the prophet had no knowledge of who was right or wrong unless God informed him.
Some of the companions of the Prophet even stood up to prayer in communion with worshippers but were actually ‘hypocrites’.
“Indeed The Hypocrites - they think they are over-reaching God, but He will over-reach them: When they stand up to prayer, they stand without earnestness, to be seen of men, but little do they hold God in remembrance; (They are) distracted in mind even in the midst of it,- being (sincerely) for neither one group nor for another whom God leaves straying,- never will you find for him the way”
The identity of certain hypocrites was even unknown to the Prophet.
“And from among those who are round about you of the dwellers of the desert there are hypocrites, and from among the people of Medina (also); they are stubborn in hypocrisy; you do not know them; We know them; We will chastise them twice then shall they be turned back to a grievous chastisement”
This point is underscored even more forcefully by the following verse:
“Say: I am not the first of the messengers, and I do not know what will be done with me or with you: I do not follow anything but that which is revealed to me, and I am nothing but a plain warner”
Also we have no knowledge how the believers / companions would conduct themselves after the Prophet died or whether they would turn back on their heels.
“Muhammad is no more than a messenger: many Were the messenger that passed away before him. If he died or were slain, will ye then turn back on your heels? If any did turn back on his heels, not the least harm will he do to God; but God (on the other hand) will swiftly reward those who (serve Him) with gratitude”
Therefore to use verses (such as 48:18 in the last section), to extend and interpret them as support for the notion that all companions were righteous is neither warranted by context nor is it correct from a Quranic perspective.
It is extremely important that one is aware of what they utter. This is even true of prayer (4:43). It is dangerous to attribute matters to God of which one has no specific knowledge. It would be far better to use phrases that (a) one understands (e.g. In English, May God be pleased with him / them, if He wills) and (b) only appeal to our Lord’s mercy and are in no way instructive or insinuative about what the Lord will or will not do for which we have no knowledge.
We do not know which of the wives of the Prophet would remain righteous, which of the companions would remain righteous or any matter with regards the judgment of any of their souls, deeds or affairs. This information is not revealed to us by the Quran (bar the 'possible' inferences noted in 24:55 above). So one must remain very careful with regards what one utters, understands and what one attributes to God.
These people and all those before them, including previous prophets and messengers are a people that have passed away.
“That was a people that have passed away. They shall reap the fruit of what they did, and ye of what ye do! Of their merits there is no question in your case”
The fact that no certainty is given with regards the Prophet’s contemporaries is reinforced in no other than the verse dealing with the wives of the Prophet. There would be no point in narrating the following verse and its warning if their acceptance into God’s grace was confirmed.
“O wives of the Prophet! If any of you were guilty of evident unseemly conduct, the punishment would be doubled to her, and that is easy for God”
There is no directive, inference, or obligation in the Quran to make use of such suffixes such as ‘Radhi Allah Anho’ for prophetic contemporaries. It is a choice, if used and understood correctly. Belief in the automatic righteousness of all the Prophet’s companions is also not supported by the Quran.
© 2010 Quransmessage.com All Rights Reserved