From “Taking Hold” to the Obligation to Follow the ʿItra: A Scholarly Analysis of the Sixth of Sixty-Six Grounds for the Significance of the Hadith al-Thaqalayn in ʿAbaqat al-Anwar and a Critique of ʿAbd al-ʿAziz Dihlawi
Author: Hamed Sarem
In the sixth argument, the dispute centers on a single verb: “akhdh” (taking hold). Mir Hamid Husayn asks: when the Noble Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him and his family) links freedom from misguidance to “taking hold” of the Book and the ʿitrah, and Sunni commentators themselves interpret this “taking hold” as “adherence in knowledge and practice,” “acting upon,” “following,” and even “reliance on the statements of the ʿitrah,” can the presence of the ʿitrah in the hadith be reduced to mere love and veneration? The value of this argument lies in its use of a brief verbal indication, together with a body of evidence drawn from within the Sunni tradition, to reveal the practical and epistemic standing of the ʿitrah.
Abstract
This study reexamines the sixth of the sixty-six arguments concerning the import of Hadith al-Thaqalayn in ʿAbaqat al-Anwar. In this argument, Mir Hamid Husayn Hindi draws on the word “akhdh” in the Prophetic statement, “I have left among you that which, if you take hold of it, you will never go astray: the Book of Allah and my ʿitrah, the people of my household” («إنّي تركت فيكم ما إن أخذتم به لن تضلّوا: كتاب الله وعترتي أهل بيتي»), to establish the obligation to follow the Ahl al-Bayt (peace be upon them). The central question is what relationship “akhdh” establishes between the Muslim community and the ʿitrah within the structure of the hadith, and whether it can be reduced to love and respect for their sanctity. The research method consists of an internal textual analysis of the reasoning in ʿAbaqat, a comparison with its abridgment in Nafahat al-Azhar, and an examination of the statements of the Sunni scholars whom Mir Hamid Husayn himself cites. The original text shows that, before explaining the meaning, the author assembles an impressive range of transmitters of the wording that includes “akhdh,” and then brings together three reports from Kanz al-ʿUmmal and the interpretations of Mulla ʿAli al-Qari, Shihab al-Khafaji, Siddiq Hasan Khan al-Qannawji, and Muhammad Muʿin al-Sindi. In this collection, “akhdh” is explained through “adherence,” “acting upon,” “following,” “adherence in knowledge and practice,” “acting upon the transmitted reports,” and “reliance on the statements.” The study concludes that the sixth argument, at a minimum, shows that the ʿitrah possesses a guiding role and practical and epistemic authority in Hadith al-Thaqalayn. Consequently, the categorical denial of any connection between the hadith and the question of religious leadership, as formulated by ʿAbd al-ʿAziz Dihlawi, does not account for all the verbal evidence in the hadith or the understanding of the commentators he cites.
Keywords: Hadith al-Thaqalayn; ʿAbaqat al-Anwar; Mir Hamid Husayn Hindi; ʿAbd al-ʿAziz Dihlawi; akhdh; obligation to follow; Ahl al-Bayt; religious authority; Nafahat al-Azhar; holding the opponent to the implications of his own premises.
1. Introduction: The Place of the Sixth Argument in the Structure of the Response in ʿAbaqat
The section on the import of Hadith al-Thaqalayn in ʿAbaqat al-Anwar should not be regarded as a collection of repetitive arguments. After assembling the transmission routes and wordings of the hadith on an extensive scale, Mir Hamid Husayn subjects ʿAbd al-ʿAziz Dihlawi’s claim to scrutiny, component by component. Each argument isolates one element of the hadith’s structure: sometimes “adherence,” sometimes the degree of obligation, sometimes the promise of freedom from misguidance, sometimes the designation “the Two Weighty Things” (al-Thaqalayn), and, in the sixth argument, the verb “akhdh” itself. The significance of this method is that the final conclusion does not depend on a single word or an isolated piece of evidence; rather, it emerges from the cumulative force of verbal, syntactic, hadith-based, and interpretive indications.
The sixth argument is close to the fourth in that both discuss “taking hold” (akhdh), but their starting points are not identical. In the fourth argument, the discussion concerned why the Quran and the Prophet’s progeny were called “the Two Weighty Things” (al-Thaqalayn), and how a number of commentators understood the reason for this designation to be the difficulty and importance of “taking hold of both and acting upon them.” In the sixth argument, the “reason for the designation al-Thaqalayn” is no longer the principal subject; here, one of the independent wordings of the hadith itself states directly: “ما إن أخذتم به لن تضلّوا” (“that which, if you take hold of it, you will never go astray”). Thus, the argument concerns the apparent meaning of the word “أخذ” (“taking hold”) and its shared object, namely the Book and the Prophet’s progeny.
This distinction is important from the standpoint of research methodology. If several transmission routes of the hadith, with differing wordings, all express the community’s relationship with the Prophet’s progeny in matters of guidance through terms such as holding fast, taking hold, and following, each expression comes to serve as an independent contextual indicator. Mir Hamid Husayn relies precisely on this relative independence and develops a separate case for the word “أخذ” (“taking hold”) as well.
2. Abd al-Aziz Dihlawi’s Statement and the Point of Departure for the Sixth Argument
In seeking to deny that the Hadith of al-Thaqalayn supports the Imami position, Abd al-Aziz Dihlawi writes:
“This hadith, too, like the preceding hadiths, has no bearing on the claim; for it is not necessary that the one to whom people hold fast should possess supreme leadership.”
ʿAbaqāt al-Anwār, vol. 20, p. 26; based on the quotation used in the preceding articles in this series.
The form of Dehlavi’s argument is that there is no general necessary connection between “being that to which one must hold fast” and “supreme leadership”; thus, the imamate cannot be inferred merely from the fact that the ʿitrah is that to which one must hold fast. If this statement is understood solely as a general and abstract proposition, the central dispute has not yet begun, since Mir Hamid Husayn likewise does not base his response on the claim that every entity to which one holds fast in some way is necessarily an imam. The dispute concerns the specific referent in the Hadith al-Thaqalayn: the ʿitrah that is mentioned alongside the Qur’an, holding fast to or taking hold of which is presented as a condition for not going astray, and whose relationship to believers Sunni hadith commentators have explained using the terms emulation, practice, and following.
Accordingly, the sixth argument is, in fact, a “return of the discussion from the general designation to the actual structure of the text.” The question is not what ruling applies to everything “to which one holds fast”; rather, it is what “taking hold of the ʿitrah” means in this particular hadith, with this particular consequence: “لن تضلوا” (“you will never go astray”). If it means following in practice and in matters of knowledge, Dehlavi’s response will not suffice to deny altogether the hadith’s connection with religious authority.
3. The Passage from the Author of ʿAbaqat and Its Readable Translation
3–1. Mir Hamid Husayn’s Central Claim
Mir Hamid Husayn begins the sixth argument with the following passage:
“The sixth argument is that His Excellency the Messenger—may Allah bless him and his family and grant them peace, and blessed be his resting place—has also established and confirmed, in this noble hadith, the obligation to follow the Ahl al-Bayt, peace be upon them, through his statement: ‘إنّى تركت فيكم ما إن أخذتم به لن تضلّوا: كتاب اللَّه و عترتى أهل بيتي’ (‘Indeed, I have left among you that which, if you take hold of it, you will never go astray: the Book of Allah and my ʿitrah, the people of my household’). Many eminent Sunni scholars and distinguished hadith masters have transmitted this noble hadith in a wording that includes the word ‘أخذ’ (‘taking hold’), and have recorded it in their religious books and volumes.”
ʿAbaqāt al-Anwār, vol. 20, pp. 52–53 (printed pagination).
Translation and fluent restatement: The sixth argument is that, in one of the formulations of the Hadith of the Two Weighty Things (ḥadīth al-thaqalayn), the Noble Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him and his family) also established the obligation to follow the Ahl al-Bayt (peace be upon them) by saying: “I have left among you that which, if you take hold of it, you will not go astray: the Book of God and my progeny, my household.” This version of the hadith, which contains the word “akhdh” (taking hold), has been transmitted in the works of a great many Sunni scholars and hadith masters.
At the outset, two components of the method of argumentation are clear: first, establishing that the version containing “akhdh” is not a marginal, isolated wording; second, moving from establishing this wording to analyzing its meaning. For this reason, before explaining the meaning of “akhdh,” Mīr Ḥāmid Ḥusayn presents a lengthy list of those who transmitted this version of the hadith.
3–2. The Explicit Statement in ʿAbaqāt Regarding the Meaning of “Akhdh”
“The indication of the word ‘akhdh’ in this noble hadith as denoting following and emulation, and its having the meaning of holding fast, is also clear and evident. Some of the statements of eminent Sunni scholars on this subject must also be heard.”
ʿAbaqāt al-Anwār, vol. 20, p. 54.
Fluent translation: It is clear that the word “akhdh” (أخذ) in this hadith denotes following and taking as an exemplar, and that “akhdh” here means holding fast; nevertheless, some statements by eminent Sunni scholars concerning this meaning should also be quoted.
This statement constitutes the explicit core of the sixth argument. The author of ʿAbaqāt announces his lexical and semantic conclusion at the outset: in this context, “akhdh” means neither “taking” in a physical sense nor merely emotional reverence, but rather holding fast, following, and taking as an exemplar. He then adduces evidence from Sunni commentators so that this meaning will not be regarded as the author’s personal interpretation.
4. The Breadth of Transmission of the Version Containing “Akhdh”: An Important Addition in ʿAbaqāt Compared with Nafaḥāt
One important difference between the original text and the abridgment Nafaḥāt al-Azhār is the scope of the survey of transmission sources. To establish the widespread currency of this wording, Nafaḥāt names a group of hadith scholars as examples; ʿAbaqāt, however, records a much more extensive list. The original text includes such names as Ibn Saʿd, Ibn Rāhawayh, Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal, al-Tirmidhī, al-Ḥakīm al-Tirmidhī, Ibn Abī ʿĀṣim, al-Nasāʾī, Abū Yaʿlā, al-Ṭabarī, al-Maḥāmilī, al-Ṭabarānī, al-Thaʿlabī, al-Baghawī, Qāḍī ʿIyāḍ, Ibn al-Athīr, al-Khaṭīb al-Tabrīzī, al-Mizzī, al-Khalkhālī, al-Zarandī, Ibn Kathīr, al-Taftāzānī, Khwāja Pārsā, al-Dawlatābādī, al-Sakhāwī, al-Suyūṭī, al-Samhūdī, ʿAlī al-Muttaqī, Mullā ʿAlī al-Qārī, al-Khafājī, al-Badakhshī, Sulaymān al-Balkhī, and Ṣiddīq Ḥasan Khān. Some of these scholars also transmitted this content in more than one work.
Within the reasoning of the sixth argument, the significance of this survey is not to establish that every individual transmission route possesses the same degree of authenticity; rather, it is to demonstrate that the wording “akhdh” occurs across a diverse network of works on hadith, commentary, Quranic exegesis, and virtues, and cannot be regarded as a rare reading without influence in the history of the hadith’s reception.
4.1. ʿAlī al-Muttaqī al-Hindī and Three Reports from Kanz al-ʿUmmāl
ʿAlī ibn Ḥusām al-Dīn al-Muttaqī al-Hindī, the renowned tenth-century AH hadith scholar and compiler and author of Kanz al-ʿUmmāl, died in 975 AH. His role in this aspect is less to interpret the meaning of the hadith than to document the transmitted formulations containing “taking hold” (akhdh). Mīr Ḥāmid Ḥusayn reproduces three reports from Kanz al-ʿUmmāl verbatim:
“On holding fast to the Book and the Sunnah: O people, I have left among you that which, if you take hold of it, you will never go astray: the Book of God and my progeny, the people of my household ... On the authority of Jābir: O people, I have left among you that which, if you take hold of it, you will never go astray: the Book of God and my progeny, the people of my household ...”
ʿAbaqāt al-Anwār, vol. 20, p. 54; quoted from Kanz al-ʿUmmāl.
Translation: In the chapter on holding fast to the Book and the Sunnah, it is stated: O people, I have left among you that which, if you take hold of it, you will not go astray: the Book of God and my progeny, the people of my household. It is also reported on the authority of Jābir: O people, I have left among you that which, if you take hold of it, you will never go astray: the Book of God and my progeny, the people of my household.
“On the authority of Muḥammad ibn ʿUmar ibn ʿAlī, from his father, from ʿAlī ibn Abī Ṭālib, that the Prophet, may God bless him and his family and grant them peace, said: I have left among you that which, if you take hold of it, you will never go astray: the Book of God, a cord in God’s hand and a cord in your hands, and the people of my household.—Ibn Jarīr, who authenticated it.”
ʿAbaqāt al-Anwār, vol. 20, p. 54; quoted from Kanz al-ʿUmmāl.
Translation: It is narrated from Muhammad ibn Umar ibn Ali, from his father, from Ali ibn Abi Talib (peace be upon him), that the Prophet (may God bless him and his family and grant them peace) said: “I have left among you something which, if you hold fast to it, you will not go astray: the Book of God, a cord with one end in God’s hand and the other in your hands, and my Household.” Ibn Jarir transmitted it and graded it authentic.
“From Abu Sa‘id, who said: The Messenger of God (may God bless him and his family and grant them peace) said: O people! I am leaving among you two things which, if you hold fast to them both, you will never go astray after me, and one of them is superior to the other: the Book of God, which is God’s cord extended from heaven to earth, and my Household, my progeny. Indeed, the two will never separate until they come to me at the Pool.—Ibn Jarir.”
Abaqat al-Anwar, vol. 20, p. 54; quoted from Kanz al-Ummal. In the text version, a textual corruption involving “لم/لن” is recorded, and the editor himself has proposed “لن”.
Translation: Abu Sa‘id relates that the Messenger of God (may God bless him and his family and grant them peace) said: “O people, I am leaving among you two things which, if you hold fast to them both, you will never go astray after me; one is superior to the other: the Book of God, which is God’s cord extended from heaven to earth, and my Household, my progeny. Be aware that the two will not separate from one another until they come to me at the Pool.”
These three reports serve two functions in Mir Hamid Husayn’s argument. First, the recurrence of the verb “أخذ” (“to take hold of”) across different chains of transmission strengthens the evidence that this usage is established. Second, in Abu Sa‘id’s narration, the dual pronoun in “بهما” (“to them both”) removes any ambiguity regarding the objects of the verb: “أخذ” explicitly applies to both, namely the Book and the progeny. This very syntactic structure assumes a fundamental role at the stage of semantic analysis.
5. Logical Formulation of the Argument in the Sixth Approach
The argument of the author of ʿAbaqāt can be reconstructed in a series of ordered premises without adding any claim external to the text:
- 1. In one of the authoritative and widely transmitted versions of the Hadith of the Two Weighty Things (ḥadīth al-thaqalayn), the Prophet (peace and blessings be upon him) states: «ما إن أخذتم به لن تضلوا» (“that which, if you hold fast to it, you will never go astray”), and then identifies the object of this “holding fast” (akhdh) as «کتاب الله و عترتی أهل بیتی» (“the Book of God and my progeny, the people of my household”).
- 2. In some transmission routes, particularly the report of Abū Saʿīd, the dual pronoun in «إن أخذتم بهما» (“if you hold fast to them both”) explicitly indicates that the act of holding fast applies to both weighty things. Thus, from the standpoint of sentence structure, the default is that the community’s relationship with both objects is of the same kind, unless there is contextual evidence warranting a distinction.
- 3. The consequence of this holding fast is «لن تضلوا» (“you will never go astray”); that is, holding fast to the two weighty things is linked to protection from religious misguidance. Such an outcome requires a relationship involving guidance and knowledge, and is incompatible with interpreting the presence of the Prophet’s progeny as merely ceremonial.
- 4. The Sunni commentators quoted by the author of ʿAbaqāt interpret “holding fast” (akhdh) using terms such as adhering, acting upon, following, and taking as an exemplar; Mullā ʿAlī al-Qārī even uses the expression «علماً وعملاً» (“in knowledge and practice”).
- 5. In explaining what holding fast entails with respect to the Prophet’s progeny, reference is also made to «العمل بروايتهم» (“acting upon their transmitted reports”), «الاعتماد على مقالتهم» (“relying on their statements”), «الاعتداد بأقوالهم ... وفتياهم» (“giving weight to their statements ... and their legal opinions”), and «الأخذ بمذهبهم» (“adopting their school of thought”); thus, the matter concerns more than mere affection or respect for the Prophet’s family.
6. Thus, at a minimum, the hadith assigns the Prophet’s progeny a practical and epistemic role in guiding the community, and the obligation of some form of following them and receiving guidance from them is supported by the wording of the hadith and the understanding of the commentators cited.
The immediate conclusion of this chain of reasoning is “authoritative guidance and the obligation to follow.” Moving from this conclusion to all the details of the Imami theory of the imamate—such as the exclusivity of this authority, the identification of all the Imams, and other theological implications—requires additional premises and lines of argument. This delimitation neither diminishes the strength of the sixth argument nor conflicts with the purpose of ʿAbaqāt, for Mir Hamid Husayn himself regards this argument as one of sixty-six arguments, rather than the entire case concerning the hadith’s implications condensed into a single sentence.
6. Statements by Sunni Scholars Cited in ʿAbaqāt
After setting out the meaning of “taking” (akhdh), Mir Hamid Husayn cites statements by scholars belonging to his interlocutor’s scholarly tradition in order to “establish the proof conclusively.” The significance of these statements lies not in their authors’ acceptance of all Imami conclusions, but in the fact that the practical and guiding sense of “taking” cannot be regarded merely as a construction of an internal Shiʿi reading. In what follows, each piece of supporting evidence is examined through a brief introduction, the exact wording, a translation, and a discussion of its implications.
6–1. Mulla ʿAli al-Qari al-Harawi (d. 1014 AH): “Adherence in Knowledge and Practice”
Nur al-Din ʿAli ibn Sultan Muhammad al-Harawi, known as Mulla ʿAli al-Qari, was a prominent Hanafi jurist and hadith scholar of the tenth and early eleventh centuries AH. A native of Herat, he spent a substantial part of his scholarly life in Mecca, where he died in 1014 AH. His numerous works on hadith, jurisprudence, Qurʾanic recitation, and textual commentary—particularly Mirqāt al-mafātīḥ sharḥ Mishkāt al-maṣābīḥ and his commentary on Qadi ʿIyad’s al-Shifāʾ—occupy an important place in the Sunni tradition of hadith commentary.
The author of ʿAbaqāt first quotes the syntactic and semantic portion of his commentary:
“Then I heard him say: O people! I have left among you that which—‘mā’ is a relative pronoun whose relative clause is ‘if you hold fast to it’—that is, adhere to it in knowledge and practice—you will not go astray after it—that is, after holding fast to that thing—the Book of Allah ... and my progeny ...”
ʿAbaqāt al-Anwār, vol. 20, p. 55; quoting Mirqāt al-Mafātīḥ.
Translation: I heard the Prophet say: O people, I have left among you “something”; “mā” is a relative pronoun, and its relative clause is “if you hold fast to it”; that is, if you adhere to it in knowledge and practice, you will not go astray thereafter; that is, after holding fast to that thing; [and that thing] is the Book of Allah ... and my progeny.
The expression “in knowledge and practice” is one of the most important additions in the original text of ʿAbaqāt. These two qualifications make the scope of “holding fast” simultaneously epistemic and practical: adherence is not merely knowing the merit of the Prophet’s progeny or expressing love for them; it is a form of holding fast in both understanding and conduct.
Mīr Ḥāmid Ḥusayn then quotes another sentence from Mullā ʿAlī al-Qārī:
“What is meant by taking hold of them is adhering to love for them, safeguarding their sanctity, acting upon their narrations, and relying upon their statements.”
ʿAbaqāt al-anwār, vol. 20, p. 55; Mirqāt al-mafātīḥ; Nafaḥāt al-azhār, vol. 2, p. 256.
Translation: What is meant by taking hold of them is adhering to love for them, safeguarding their sanctity, acting upon their narrations, and relying upon their words.
The semantic significance of this statement lies in its combination of four elements. Mullā ʿAlī al-Qārī does not exclude love and reverence, but neither does he restrict the meaning of “taking hold” to them; “acting upon their narrations” and “relying upon their statements” explicitly add an epistemic dimension and a dimension of authoritative probative force to the relationship with the Ahl al-Bayt.
6–2. Shihāb al-Dīn al-Khafājī (977–1069 AH): “Adherence, Practice, and Following”
Aḥmad ibn Muḥammad ibn ʿUmar al-Khafājī al-Miṣrī, known as Shihāb al-Dīn al-Khafājī, was an Egyptian Hanafi jurist, judge, man of letters, and lexicographer. He was born in 977 AH and died in 1069 AH, and also held positions in the Ottoman judiciary. His work Nasīm al-riyāḍ fī sharḥ Shifāʾ al-Qāḍī ʿIyāḍ is a well-known commentary on al-Shifāʾ, and it is this work that ʿAbaqāt cites.
“And he, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said in a hadith narrated by al-Tirmidhī from Zayd ibn Arqam and Jābir, which he graded as ḥasan: ‘I am leaving among you’—an indication that his death, may Allah Most High bless him and grant him peace, was approaching and that this was a testament to his community—‘that which, if you take hold of it,’ meaning: hold fast to it, act upon it, and follow it.”
ʿAbaqāt al-anwār, vol. 20, p. 55, citing Nasīm al-riyāḍ; Nafaḥāt al-azhār, vol. 2, p. 256.
Translation: In a hadith that al-Tirmidhī narrated from Zayd ibn Arqam and Jābir and graded as ḥasan, the Prophet (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) said: “I am leaving among you…” This expression indicates the imminence of the Prophet’s death and his testament to his community. “That which, if you take hold of it” means: if you hold fast to it, act upon it, and follow it.
Here, the textual indication goes beyond mere semantic approximation: al-Khafājī presents three explanatory verbs in succession: “hold fast,” “act upon,” and “follow it.” For the argument advanced in the sixth line of reasoning, this explicit statement alone is sufficient to show that, in an authoritative Sunni commentary, “taking hold” is understood as synonymous with a relationship involving practice and adherence. Moreover, al-Khafājī calls the hadith a “testament to the community”; thus, we are dealing with a directive for the period after the Prophet, rather than a neutral historical report.
6–3. Ṣiddīq Ḥasan Khān al-Qannawjī (1248–1307 AH): “It Is Essential to Take Hold of Both”
Muḥammad Ṣiddīq Ḥasan Khān al-Qannawjī, an Indian author and hadith scholar of the thirteenth century AH, was born in Qannawj in 1248 AH and died in 1307 AH. After studying in India, he settled in Bhopal and, through his connection with the court of Bhopal and his extensive writings in Arabic, Persian, and Urdu, became an influential scholarly figure in the subcontinent. Al-Sirāj al-wahhāj min kashf maṭālib Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim ibn al-Ḥajjāj is among his works commenting on Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim.
Mir Hamid Husayn quotes the following from his commentary on the hadith of Zayd ibn Arqam:
“The question of the prohibition of zakat for the Ahl al-Bayt has its place elsewhere. The purpose here is to explain their excellence, and that they are the counterpart of the Book of God in veneration and honor and in being designated a ‘weighty thing’ (thaqal), and that one must adhere to both, for they will not separate until they come to the Messenger of God, may God bless him and his family and grant them peace, at the Pool.”
ʿAbaqat al-Anwar, vol. 20, p. 55, quoting al-Siraj al-Wahhaj; Nafahat al-Azhar, vol. 2, p. 256.
Translation: The question of the prohibition of zakat for the Ahl al-Bayt belongs elsewhere; the purpose here is to explain their excellence and that they are the equal of the Book of God in veneration and honor and in being called a ‘weighty thing’ (thaqal). One must adhere to both, because the two will not separate until they come to the Messenger of God (may God bless him and his family and grant them peace) at the Pool.
Two expressions in this quotation are decisive: “the counterpart of the Book of God” and “one must adhere to both.” Siddiq Hasan Khan retains the Qur’an and the Ahl al-Bayt within the hadith’s shared structure and, through the dual pronoun, attributes the necessity of adherence to both. In the full text of his commentary, adherence to the Book is also explained in terms of recitation, reflection, and practice, while following the example of the Ahl al-Bayt is discussed with regard to them; he understands this following, however, within the framework of conformity with the Book and the Sunnah. This qualification is important from a scholarly perspective: al-Qannawji’s testimony affirms the principle that adherence and following are necessary.
6–4. Muhammad Muʿin al-Sindi (d. 1161 AH): From the “Statements and Fatwas” to the “School of Thought” of the Ahl al-Bayt
Muḥammad Muʿīn ibn Muḥammad Amīn al-Sindī al-Tattawī was a twelfth-century AH Hanafi scholar in the Indian subcontinent who died in 1161 AH. He was connected with the scholarly milieu of Sindh and India, and Dirāsāt al-labīb fī al-uswa al-ḥasana bi-l-ḥabīb is among his well-known works. In its discussion of the hadith of Zayd ibn Arqam, ʿAbaqāt quotes a passage from this work that extends the scope of holding fast to the Ahl al-Bayt to their statements, conduct, fatwas, and school of thought.
“We therefore understood his statement, ‘I remind you of Allah,’ with its emphatic threefold repetition, as a reminder to hold fast to them and a deterrent against disregarding their statements, actions, states, and fatwas, and against failing to adopt their school of thought.”
ʿAbaqāt al-anwār, vol. 20, p. 55; Dirāsāt al-labīb, p. 232; Nafaḥāt al-azhār, vol. 2, p. 256. The reading “فتياهم” follows Nafaḥāt and is the correct form of the word.
Translation: We understood the Prophet’s statement, repeated three times, “I remind you of Allah concerning my Ahl al-Bayt,” as placing great emphasis on reminding people to hold fast to them and deterring them from disregarding their statements, actions, states, and fatwas, as well as from failing to adopt their school of thought.
This passage is particularly explicit on the question of religious authority. “Fatwa” and “school of thought” are not merely affective terms; they concern legal judgments and the path of religious understanding and practice. Al-Sindī does not say that one should merely love the Ahl al-Bayt; rather, he prohibits disregarding their statements and fatwas and neglecting to adopt their school of thought. Within the argumentative logic of ʿAbaqāt, such an interpretation is precisely the point at which the meaning of “taking” (akhdh) moves from mere veneration into the sphere of taking religious guidance.
7. Five Decisive Points Concerning the Meaning of the Sixth Argument
7.1. One Verb and Two Objects: The Book and the ʿItra under a Single Act of “Taking Hold”
In the construction “إن أخذتم به ... كتاب الله وعترتي” (“if you take hold of it ... the Book of God and my ʿitra [family]”), or the more explicit wording “إن أخذتم بهما” (“if you take hold of them both”), a single verb is used in relation to two objects. The linguistic principle requires that, unless an indication to the contrary is present, the semantic core of the verb be preserved in relation to both. Thus, if “taking hold of the Book” denotes a relationship of guidance and practice, reducing “taking hold of the ʿitra” to mere respect requires a separate contextual indication. Al-Qārī’s wording “علماً وعملاً” (“in knowledge and practice”) and al-Khafājī’s wording “عملتم ... واتبعتموه” (“you act ... and follow it”) reinforce this semantic unity.
7.2. “You Will Never Go Astray”: An Epistemic Outcome, Rather Than a Merely Honorific One
The consequent of the conditional in the hadith is “لن تضلوا” (“you will never go astray”). Going astray in this context concerns the path of religious guidance. If taking hold of the Two Weighty Things prevents going astray, the objects of that act must play a real role in generating, preserving, or transmitting guidance. Love for the Ahl al-Bayt is a virtue in its own right, but it does not, by itself, explain how “taking hold” of them, like taking hold of the Book, is linked in the structure of the hadith to the negation of going astray. It is for this reason that commentators have turned to the vocabulary of acting, following, taking as an exemplar, and relying on their words.
7.3. “In Knowledge and Practice”: Two Dimensions of Authority
Mullā ʿAlī al-Qārī’s qualification is particularly significant. “Knowledge” concerns reception, understanding, and epistemic reliance, while “practice” concerns conduct and practical commitment. When both are brought together in the definition of “taking hold,” the community’s relationship with the Two Weighty Things extends beyond affection or social courtesy. In the scholarly formulation of the sixth line of argument, this expression is one of the strongest links in explaining the meaning of “authority in guidance.”
7.4. “There is no alternative but to adhere to both”; the expression of necessity and the dual pronoun
In the words of Siddiq Hasan Khan, “there is no alternative” conveys necessity, while “to both” brings the Book and the Ahl al-Bayt together within the scope of this necessity. Even if the schools of thought differ over the limits of this necessity, the wording itself clearly indicates the basic point that the Ahl al-Bayt are not merely objects of veneration, but, alongside the Book, are also “that which must be adhered to.”
7.5. “Fatwa” and “school of thought”; moving from virtue to religious authority
In al-Sindi’s words, the discussion extends to “statements,” “actions,” “states,” “fatwa,” and “school of thought.” These terms belong to the discourse of jurisprudence and religious guidance. For this reason, this evidence is particularly important in responding to a reading that confines the hadith exclusively to virtues and love. Even if al-Sindi and Mir Hamid Husayn do not agree on the ultimate theological conclusion, their common ground is that the hadith’s message concerning the Ahl al-Bayt creates an epistemic and practical obligation.
8. Assessing the Response of ‘Abaqat to al-Dihlawi: What Is Established, and What Is Not?
It is now possible to assess more precisely how the sixth argument relates to al-Dihlawi’s statement. Al-Dihlawi employs a general proposition: not every object of adherence possesses supreme leadership. Mir Hamid Husayn’s response is not that this proposition is false in every case; rather, his response is to demonstrate the characteristics of “this particular object of adherence.” The Prophet’s progeny appears in a hadith in which adherence to it alongside the Book is identified as a means of avoiding misguidance; “adherence” is interpreted in the cited commentaries as holding fast, acting, following, and taking as an exemplar; and, in explaining the relationship with the Ahl al-Bayt, reference is made to acting upon their narrations and relying upon their statements, fatwas, and school of thought. Taken together, these considerations transform the Prophet’s progeny from a merely revered object into an authority for guidance.
Accordingly, what the sixth argument directly establishes against Dihlawī is the inadequacy of a “categorical denial of any bearing.” When the hadith assigns such a function to the Prophet’s progeny (ʿitra), one can no longer maintain that there is no relationship whatsoever between the hadith and the question of religious authority or leadership. At a minimum, to sustain his denial, Dihlawī must explain why “the obligation to adhere and follow” and “protection from going astray” have no part in the concept of religious leadership.
Within the overall architecture of ʿAbaqāt, the other arguments undertake the task of completing this line of reasoning: the enduring conjunction of the Qur’an and the Prophet’s progeny, their non-separation, protection from going astray, the necessity of following, superior knowledge, infallibility, and other indications. The strength of Mīr Ḥāmid Ḥusayn’s method thus lies in “cumulative argumentation”: each argument bears part of the burden of proof, and it is their combination that establishes the broader theological claim.
9. Conclusion
The sixth argument of ʿAbaqāt al-Anwār is centered on wording, but is not confined to lexicography. Mīr Ḥāmid Ḥusayn first demonstrates that the wording containing “أخذ” (“taking” or “adhering”) has been transmitted in a large body of Sunni works. He then presents three reports from Kanz al-ʿUmmāl in which the Book and the Prophet’s progeny are the objects of this taking, with an explicit dual pronoun in one transmission route. In the next stage, drawing on Sunni commentators, he interprets the meaning of this verb as holding fast, acting, following, and taking as an example.
Mullā ʿAlī al-Qārī, through the expression “تمسّكتم به علماً وعملاً” (“you hold fast to it in knowledge and practice”) and the addition “العمل بروايتهم والاعتماد على مقالتهم” (“acting upon their narrations and relying upon their statements”), brings out the epistemic and practical dimensions of taking. Al-Khafājī interprets “أخذ” (“taking”) as “holding fast, acting, and following.” Ṣiddīq Ḥasan Khān states, “لا بدّ من الأخذ بهما” (“one must adhere to both”), using the dual pronoun to relate the necessity of taking to the Book and the Ahl al-Bayt. Muḥammad Muʿīn al-Sindī likewise regards disregard for the statements, actions, states, fatwas, and school of the Ahl al-Bayt as contrary to the thrust of the Prophet’s emphasis. Taken together, these pieces of evidence clarify the core of Mīr Ḥāmid Ḥusayn’s argument: in the Hadith of the Two Weighty Things (Ḥadīth al-Thaqalayn), the Prophet’s progeny are not merely the objects of love and respect; in the relationship through which the community receives guidance, they are those to whom one must adhere and whom one must follow.
Ultimately, the sixth argument poses a serious challenge to ʿAbd al-ʿAzīz Dihlawī’s claim that the Hadith of the Two Weighty Things “has no bearing” on the claim of imamate. If the Prophet’s progeny, alongside the Qur’an, are the objects of a taking upon which freedom from going astray is made conditional, and if “أخذ” (“taking”) is interpreted in Sunni commentaries as following in knowledge and practice, then the hadith’s relationship to religious authority cannot be ruled out in advance. The discussion of the degree, limits, and exclusivity of this authority belongs to the next stage; the existence of a relationship of guidance itself is precisely what the sixth argument establishes by relying on the wording of the hadith and the testimony of its commentators.
References
• Mir Hamid Husayn al-Hindi, ʿAbaqāt al-Anwār fī Imāmat al-Aʾimmat al-Aṭhār, vol. 20, the section on the indication of Ḥadīth al-Thaqalayn, sixth aspect, pp. 52–55 (printed numbering; corresponding to the referenced PDF range in the project).
• Sayyid ʿAlī al-Ḥusaynī al-Mīlānī, Nafahāt al-Azhār fī Khulāṣat ʿAbaqāt al-Anwār, vol. 2, sixth aspect: “The wording al-akhdh in the hadith indicates the obligation to follow,” pp. 255–256.
• ʿAlī ibn Sulṭān Muḥammad al-Qārī al-Harawī, Mirqāt al-Mafātīḥ Sharḥ Mishkāt al-Maṣābīḥ, under Jābir’s hadith in the chapter on the virtues of the Ahl al-Bayt; also Sharḥ al-Shifāʾ.
• Shihāb al-Dīn Aḥmad al-Khafājī, Nasīm al-Riyāḍ fī Sharḥ Shifāʾ al-Qāḍī ʿIyāḍ, vol. 3, p. 410, under Ḥadīth al-Thaqalayn.
• ʿAlī al-Muttaqī al-Hindī, Kanz al-ʿUmmāl fī Sunan al-Aqwāl wa-l-Afʿāl, Book of Faith, chapter on holding fast to the Book and the Sunnah, narrations of Ḥadīth al-Thaqalayn with the wording “akhadha” («أخذ»).
• Muhammad Siddiq Hasan Khan Qannouji, al-Siraj al-Wahhaj min Kashf Matālib Sahih Muslim ibn al-Hajjaj, under the hadith of Zayd ibn Arqam and the virtues of Ahl al-Bayt.
• Muhammad Mu'in Sindhi, Dirasat al-Labib fi al-Uswa al-Hasana bi al-Habib, p. 232, discussion of the Hadith al-Thaqalayn.
• Khayr al-Din al-Zirikli, al-A'lam, entries on Ali al-Qari, Shihab al-Din al-Khafaji, Siddiq Hasan Khan, and other notable figures used in biographical introductions.
Editorial note: In Arabic quotations, the original wording cited in “Abaqat” has been preserved; only in clear cases of digital text-recognition error, such as “فيتاهم,” has the correct reading, “فتياهم,” been supplied with an explicit clarification in the article.
Author: Hamed Sarem
Related articles
Ordibehesht 31, 1405 AP
Mir Hamid Husayn’s Masterpiece in Establishing the Mass Transmission of the Hadith al-Thaqalayn: A Biographical Evaluation of the Narrators’ GenerationsAuthor: Hamed Sarem
Comments
No comments yet.