Firstly, the Prophet Muḥammad (peace be upon him) had various roles, including legislation, judiciary, issuing fatwas, preaching, guidance, political leadership, and his human nature. It is not appropriate to treat these roles equally in understanding and application.
Secondly, the Prophet (peace be upon him) established certain fixed principles that do not change with changing circumstances, such as beliefs, morals, general manners, and essential religious knowledge. He also made ᾽ijtihāī (interpretative) rulings that suited his time, leaving it to the scholars to make ijtihad on new issues based on general principles and the objectives of Sharia, according to need. Therefore, not everything the Prophet did is necessarily suitable in its exact form for our time. The context may be similar, but the method may differ. For example, the Prophet (peace be upon him) used and encouraged the use of the miswak (tooth-stick) not because of the miswak itself but for oral cleanliness. We imitate him in the purpose of cleaning our mouths but use toothbrushes.
In light of the above, the statement “If the Prophet were alive, he would do such and such” requires some detail:
- Regarding usage, similar statements have appeared in the Sunnah, such as the Prophet (peace be upon him) saying to ῾Umar: “If Mūsā ibn ῾Imrān were alive, he would have no choice but to follow me.” [Narrated by ᾽Aḥmad in his Musnad]. And ῾Aā᾽ishah (may Allāh be pleased with her) said: “If the Messenger of Allāh (peace be upon him) had seen what women have introduced, he would have forbidden them from the mosque, as the women of the Children of Israel were forbidden.” [Narrated by Bukhārī and Muslim].
- This statement can either align with one of the Prophet’s obligations, in which case it is correct, because the Prophet would not neglect an obligation. For example, one might say: “If the Prophet were alive, he would not abandon the defensive jihād in Palestine,” or “If the Prophet were alive, he would care for the poor and needy,” or “If the Prophet were alive, he would clarify what we should do in such and such matters.”
Alternatively, the statement can align with a recommended act, in which case it is permissible as a positive assumption about the Prophet (peace be upon him) being inclined towards recommended actions. For example: “If the Prophet were alive, he would honor the guest,” or “If the Prophet were alive, he would pave the roads,” or “If the Prophet were alive, he would collect donations,” and so on in recommended acts in the cause of Allāh.
However, if the statement pertains to permissible acts or worldly matters or involves issues of jurisprudential disagreement, it is prohibited because it infringes upon the Prophet’s right to choose and involves speaking without knowledge. For example, saying: “If the Prophet were alive, he would not listen to music,” when the issue is subject to scholarly debate, or “If the Prophet were alive, he would do this and that to those who shave their beards,” when the issue is controversial, or “If the Prophet were alive, he would not eat such and such,” or “would not buy a house for such and such an amount,” which some people say to show asceticism. All these statements are fabrications and presumptions about the noble Prophet without any supporting evidence, making them subject to the punishment mentioned by the Prophet (peace be upon him) in the ḥadīth: “Whoever lies about me intentionally, let him take his seat in the Fire.”
Fatwā issued by Dr. Khālid Naṣr
