Is it correct for one to say: It is narrated from the Messenger of Allah (peace and blessings be upon him) that he said: (O Allah, we are Your slaves and the sons of Your slaves . . . )
Machine translationRead the Arabic original
The questioner : One of the brothers asked about a hadith. They mentioned the Shaykh ... al-Saqr in the book *Tajwid and the Sciences of the Qur'an* mentioned that in the supplication for completing the recitation of the Qur'an ... it is narrated that the Messenger of Allah - (peace and blessings be upon him) - used to supplicate with this supplication: O Allah, we are Your slaves and the sons of Your slaves ... within ... .
The Shaykh : Your slave and the son of Your slave and the son of Your female slave. This is an authentic hadith.
The questioner : The wording mentioned is: Your slaves and the sons of Your slaves and the sons of ... .
The Shaykh : No, this is an apparent typographical error.
The questioner : Continue.
Another questioner : It appears to be the pluralization of the singular term, so it is pluralized as if they are supplicating as a group, meaning.
The Shaykh : It is possible to say that this action is permissible, but he attributes it to a hadith.
The questioner : He mentioned the wording ... the Messenger of Allah - (peace and blessings be upon him) - .
Another questioner : The plural form, like this in the plural form in "O Allah, I am Your slave" or otherwise "O Allah, we are Your slaves".
Another questioner : O Allah, we are Your slaves and the sons of Your slaves.
The Shaykh : So I hope you understand my answer. My answer is that as a hadith, there is no plural "slaves" in it, but rather "I am Your slave, the son of Your slave, and the son of Your female slave." So mentioning the hadith in the plural form has no basis in the hadith. The professor, may Allah preserve him, has a perspective that he presented the supplication in the plural form considering the completion of the Qur'an, but at that time, he should not have led the reader to think that this is how the hadith is, because he said "It is narrated from the Messenger of Allah - (peace and blessings be upon him) -" and then the expression says "It is narrated".
The questioner : Like this, in the text, "It is narrated".
The Shaykh : This is another error, because it is not permissible to prefix an authentic hadith with the word "It is narrated".
The questioner : ...
The Shaykh : Because it is narrated, yes.
The questioner : ... Listen, the Shaykh, I did not understand the Shaykh's words.
The Shaykh : It is not permissible to prefix an authentic hadith with "It is narrated" because it is in the passive voice, as if he is saying that someone we do not know narrated this hadith. Therefore, the scholars agreed that prefixing an authentic hadith with "It is narrated" is an error. Instead, one should say: "It came from the Messenger of Allah - (peace and blessings be upon him) -" or "The Messenger of Allah - (peace and blessings be upon him) - said," when the statement attributed to the Messenger - (may Allah's prayer and peace be upon him) - is established as being attributed to him. But if the opposite is the case, meaning this hadith is not established as being attributed to the Messenger - (peace and blessings be upon him) - according to the method of the hadith scholars, then at that time, it is not permissible to be definitive about the attribution, but one must indicate the weakness in it, and it is said "It is narrated." People make many mistakes; we see in books, in an authentic hadith, it is said "It is narrated." And the wonder of that is the conflict and contradiction in the expression: at first, some say "It is narrated from the Messenger of Allah - (peace and blessings be upon him) - that he said such and such," and then "Muslim narrated it in his Sahih." This is an error. And the authentic hadith, as we said, is prefixed with "He said" - (peace be upon him) - unlike the weak one.
The questioner : Shaykh, does this count as altering the text of the hadith ... it was not authenticated ...
The Shaykh : What does it count as?
The questioner : Altering the hadith, because the hadith ...
The Shaykh : Distortion, meaning.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : Yes, but perhaps his intention was good, so O Allah, by his intention, not by his wording.
The Shaykh : Your slave and the son of Your slave and the son of Your female slave. This is an authentic hadith.
The questioner : The wording mentioned is: Your slaves and the sons of Your slaves and the sons of ... .
The Shaykh : No, this is an apparent typographical error.
The questioner : Continue.
Another questioner : It appears to be the pluralization of the singular term, so it is pluralized as if they are supplicating as a group, meaning.
The Shaykh : It is possible to say that this action is permissible, but he attributes it to a hadith.
The questioner : He mentioned the wording ... the Messenger of Allah - (peace and blessings be upon him) - .
Another questioner : The plural form, like this in the plural form in "O Allah, I am Your slave" or otherwise "O Allah, we are Your slaves".
Another questioner : O Allah, we are Your slaves and the sons of Your slaves.
The Shaykh : So I hope you understand my answer. My answer is that as a hadith, there is no plural "slaves" in it, but rather "I am Your slave, the son of Your slave, and the son of Your female slave." So mentioning the hadith in the plural form has no basis in the hadith. The professor, may Allah preserve him, has a perspective that he presented the supplication in the plural form considering the completion of the Qur'an, but at that time, he should not have led the reader to think that this is how the hadith is, because he said "It is narrated from the Messenger of Allah - (peace and blessings be upon him) -" and then the expression says "It is narrated".
The questioner : Like this, in the text, "It is narrated".
The Shaykh : This is another error, because it is not permissible to prefix an authentic hadith with the word "It is narrated".
The questioner : ...
The Shaykh : Because it is narrated, yes.
The questioner : ... Listen, the Shaykh, I did not understand the Shaykh's words.
The Shaykh : It is not permissible to prefix an authentic hadith with "It is narrated" because it is in the passive voice, as if he is saying that someone we do not know narrated this hadith. Therefore, the scholars agreed that prefixing an authentic hadith with "It is narrated" is an error. Instead, one should say: "It came from the Messenger of Allah - (peace and blessings be upon him) -" or "The Messenger of Allah - (peace and blessings be upon him) - said," when the statement attributed to the Messenger - (may Allah's prayer and peace be upon him) - is established as being attributed to him. But if the opposite is the case, meaning this hadith is not established as being attributed to the Messenger - (peace and blessings be upon him) - according to the method of the hadith scholars, then at that time, it is not permissible to be definitive about the attribution, but one must indicate the weakness in it, and it is said "It is narrated." People make many mistakes; we see in books, in an authentic hadith, it is said "It is narrated." And the wonder of that is the conflict and contradiction in the expression: at first, some say "It is narrated from the Messenger of Allah - (peace and blessings be upon him) - that he said such and such," and then "Muslim narrated it in his Sahih." This is an error. And the authentic hadith, as we said, is prefixed with "He said" - (peace be upon him) - unlike the weak one.
The questioner : Shaykh, does this count as altering the text of the hadith ... it was not authenticated ...
The Shaykh : What does it count as?
The questioner : Altering the hadith, because the hadith ...
The Shaykh : Distortion, meaning.
The questioner: Yes.
The Shaykh : Yes, but perhaps his intention was good, so O Allah, by his intention, not by his wording.
Source
www.al-albany.com
The Arabic text is copied verbatim from the original source, without any edits.