Are the Prophet’s parents in Hell?

There are two Hadith cited to prove that the Prophet’s parents are in Hell. These Hadith can be found in Sahih Muslim 203 & 976a. The wording of the Hadith is:

عن أنس أنَّ رجلًا قال: يا رسول الله، أين أبي؟ قال: «في النَّار»، فلمَّا قَفَّى دعاه، فقال: «إنَّ أبي وأباك في النَّار

عَنْ أَبِي هُرَيْرَةَ، قَالَ قَالَ رَسُولُ اللَّهِ صلى الله عليه وسلم ‏ “‏ اسْتَأْذَنْتُ رَبِّي أَنْ أَسْتَغْفِرَ لأُمِّي فَلَمْ يَأْذَنْ لِي وَاسْتَأْذَنْتُهُ أَنْ أَزُورَ قَبْرَهَا فَأَذِنَ لِي ‏”‏

These Hadith contradict the Quran which establishes that Ahl al Fatrah are saved from punishment in the hereafter. The Prophet’s parents are from Ahl al Fatrah. These Quranic verses include [17:55] [20:134] [5:19] [36:6] [34:44]

وَمَا كُنَّا مُعَذِّبِينَ حَتَّى نَبْعَثَ رَسُولًا

وَلَوْ أَنَّا أَهْلَكْنَاهُم بِعَذَابٍ مِّن قَبْلِهِ لَقَالُوا رَبَّنَا لَوْلا أَرْسَلْتَ إِلَيْنَا رَسُولًا فَنَتَّبِعَ آيَاتِكَ مِن قَبْلِ أَن نَّذِلَّ وَنَخْزَى

أَن تَقُولُوا مَا جَاءَنَا مِن بَشِيرٍ وَلَا نَذِيرٍ فَقَدْ جَاءَكُم بَشِيرٌ وَنَذِيرٌ

لِتُنذِرَ قَوْمًا مَّا أُنذِرَ آبَاؤُهُمْ فَهُمْ غَافِلُونَ

وَمَا أَرْسَلْنَا إِلَيْهِمْ قَبْلَكَ مِن نَّذِيرٍ

First you must recognise that this issue is a subordinate aspect within a broader subject, namely, the issue of the “Hukm Ahl al Fatrah”

So, to effectively deal with this issue, we have to discuss the topic of “Hukm Ahl al Fatrah”.

We have on one hand an agreed upon principle:

“The worldly and afterlife punishment does not descend upon the servants except after the sending of messengers to them, and the establishment of the proof upon them.”

If we find the apparent wording of a Hadith that goes against this principle, we should NOT reject the Hadith. Rather, we should interpret in a way that does not contradict this principle.

This is what we can do with these reports.

Interpretation 1:

Some negated there being torment of ahl al fatrah in general, hence viewing them as being saved in the afterlife. This is the view of most Ash’arites.

Ibn Al Amir said in his gloss on Ithaaf al Mureed Sharh Jawharat al Tawheed p.59:

“والحق أن أهل الفترة ناجون”

Based on this, any of the reports that seemingly suggest that individuals from ahl al fatrah are punished are to be treated in one of two ways:

1. Limit the punishment to those mentioned in these reports only, and delegate the knowledge of the reason for their punishment to Allah (i.e., Tafweedh)

2. Treat these reports as inauthentic singular reports (آحاد) that contradict the definitive (قطعي) principle established that ahl al fatrah are saved.

Comment:

Regarding the first treatment: Applying Tafweedh here is not correct as Tafweedh is only legitimate in those matters that the Lawgiver intended to conceal its knowledge.

Tafweedh is out of the scope here since we are inquiring about the wisdom behind excluding some individuals from the generality of the divine verses, in order to reconcile between His words and His actions, and to refute any contradiction between them in minds.

Regarding the second treatment: The reports that mention specific figures from ahl al fatrah being punished in the hereafter are numerous, reaching a level of tawatur ma’nawi hence definitive. And so we can’t just reject them as inauthentic.

Interpretation 2:

Others affirmed there being torment of ahl al fatrah in general.

They attempted to marry the aforementioned principle with these individual reports in 3 ways:

1. Those individual reports that inform us of figures from ahl al fatrah being punished were aware of the Da’wah of the Messengers thus the hujjah was established on them.

This is the view of the likes of Al Nawawi who chaptered the Hadith under scrutiny here under the title:

باب بَيَانِ أَنَّ مَنْ مَاتَ عَلَى الْكُفْرِ فَهُوَ فِي النَّارِ وَلاَ تَنَالُهُ شَفَاعَةٌ وَلاَ تَنْفَعُهُ قَرَابَةُ الْمُقَرَّبِينَ

He then comments saying [see Sharh Saheeh Muslim 3/79]:

إنَّ مَن مات في الفترة على ما كانت عليه العَرَب مِن عبادةِ الأوثانِ فهو مِن أهلِ النَّار، وليس هذا مُؤاخذةً قبل بلوغ الدَّعوة، فإنَّ هؤلاء كانت قد بلغتهم دعوة إبراهيم وغيره مِن الأنبياء صلوات الله تعالى وسلامه عليهم

Others said that Quraysh as a whole are not from ahl al fatrah as the hujjah had been established on them.

Ibn ‘Atiyyah Al Andalusi said [see Al Muharrar Al Wajeez 4/72]:

أمَّا صاحب الفترة فليس ككافر قريش قبل النَّبي ﷺ، لأنَّ كُفَّار قريش وغيرهم ممَّن عَلِم وسَمِع عن نبوَّةٍ ورسالةٍ في أقطار الأرض فليس بصاحب فترةٍ، والنَّبي ﷺ قد قال: أبي وأبوك في النَّار، ورأى عمرو بن لُحي في النَّار، إلى غير هذا ممَّا يطول ذكرُه، وأمَّا صاحب الفترةِ يُفرَض أنَّه آدميٌّ لم يَطرأ إليه أنَّ الله تعالى بعث رسولًا، ولا دعا إلى دين، وهذا قليل الوجود

Comment:

This notion that the hujjah was established on these people and that they had heard of the Da’wah of the Messengers requires proof!

It is not sufficient to take individuals ruled to be punished in these reports and generalise that ruling upon Quraysh as a whole as Ibn ‘Atiyyah did.

As were this the case, there would be no benefit in the companions asking the Prophet if their father/loved one is in the Fire.

Interpretation 3:

These people say that the reports that mention specific individuals being punished in the hereafter from ahl al fatrah deviated and committed Shirk and legislated for themselves a paganistic religion.

Comment:

However, this is not sound as we have individuals in these reports who it is not confirmed whether they did this or not. So this is a claim that is in need of evidence.

Interpretation 4:

These people say that the reports that mention the punishment of some individuals from ahl al fatrah is news about the outcome of their testing on the Day of Judgment.

The following Hadith are used:

عَنِ الْأَسْوَدِ بْنِ سَرِيعٍ، أَنَّ نَبِيَّ اللهِ ﷺ قَالَ: «أَرْبَعَةٌ يَوْمَ الْقِيَامَةِ: رَجُلٌ أَصَمُّ لَا يَسْمَعُ شَيْئًا، وَرَجُلٌ أَحْمَقُ، وَرَجُلٌ هَرَمٌ، وَرَجُلٌ مَاتَ فِي فَتْرَةٍ، فَأَمَّا الْأَصَمُّ فَيَقُولُ: رَبِّ، لَقَدْ جَاءَ الْإِسْلَامُ وَمَا أَسْمَعُ شَيْئًا، وَأَمَّا الْأَحْمَقُ فَيَقُولُ: رَبِّ، لَقَدْ جَاءَ الْإِسْلَامُ وَالصِّبْيَانُ يَحْذِفُونِي بِالْبَعْرِ، وَأَمَّا الْهَرَمُ فَيَقُولُ: رَبِّ، لَقَدْ جَاءَ الْإِسْلَامُ وَمَا أَعْقِلُ شَيْئًا، وَأَمَّا الَّذِي مَاتَ فِي الْفَتْرَةِ فَيَقُولُ: رَبِّ، مَا أَتَانِي لَكَ رَسُولٌ، فَيَأْخُذُ مَوَاثِيقَهُمْ لَيُطِيعُنَّهُ، فَيُرْسِلُ إِلَيْهِمْ أَنْ ادْخُلُوا النَّارَ، قَالَ: فَوَالَّذِي نَفْسُ مُحَمَّدٍ بِيَدِهِ، لَوْ دَخَلُوهَا لَكَانَتْ عَلَيْهِمْ بَرْدًا وَسَلَامًا»

عَنْ أَبِي هُرَيْرَةَ، مِثْلَ هَذَا غَيْرَ أَنَّهُ قَالَ فِي آخِرِهِ: «فَمَنْ دَخَلَهَا كَانَتْ عَلَيْهِ بَرْدًا وَسَلَامًا، وَمَنْ لَمْ يَدْخُلْهَا يُسْحَبُ إِلَيْهَا»

Comment:

This view is strongest and taken by a number of scholars such as Ibn Taymiyyah, Ibn al Qayyim, Ibn Kathir, Ibn Hazm, Ibn Hajar, Al Bayhaqi and others.

Responding to doubts against this view:

Doubt 1: Ibn Abdul Barr denied these Hadith as they’re weak hence not strong enough as proof + the hereafter is a place of reward/recompense not a place of examination and test so how can these people be tested and told to jump into the fire when this is something that they’re not able to do.

Response: Ibn Kathir responded to these points made by Ibn Abdul Barr saying that the ahadith are sound for the most part and those weak ones are strengthened by the sound reports on this.

As for the hereafter being a place of reward/recompense, this is true, But that doesn’t negate there being elements of examination and testing happening before people are rewarded with Jannah or recompensed with Hell.

E.g., the famous Ayah يوم يكشف عن ساق ويدعون إلى السجود or the last person to be taken out from the Fire being tested by Allah and covenant taken from him that he will not ask for more but he still does. > Aal Moalim Answers: As for them not being able to jump into the fire, then this doesn’t prevent the authenticity of the Hadith as we all know mankind will be commanded to run along the Sirat which is a bridge over Jahannam which is sharper than a sword and thinner than a piece of hair.

This is extremely difficult for a person to cross on yet mankind will be commanded to. If that’s then possible, then it’s also possible that these people will be commanded to jump into the Fire as their test.

Similarly, the Dajjal will have Fire and Heaven with him and the Muslims of that time are commanded to jump into the Fire. So this here is like that.

Doubt 2: But we have Hadith that affirm punishment in the grave for ahl al fatrah prior to their testing in the hereafter on the Day of Judgement.

The Hadith of Jabir:

دخل النَّبي ﷺ يومًا نخلًا لبني النَّجار، فسمِع أصوات رجالٍ مِن بني النَّجار ماتوا في الجاهليَّة يُعذَّبون في قبورِهم، فخرج النَّبي ﷺ فزِعًا، فأمَرَ أصحابَه أن يتعوَّذوا مِن عذاب القبر

Response: Yes but this does not negate their testing in the hereafter on the Day of Judgement as the punishment in the Grave isn’t solely for contravening the Principles of Aqeedah.

But for also actions committed in the Dunya that are known by the mind to be evil such as injustice, oppressing the people and taking their rights etc.,

And we see this in Hadith such as the Hadith of the woman who mistreated her cat.

And so the incident of the Prophet hearing some Jahili men of Bani Najjar being punished in their grave is possible to be due to acts like we mentioned and not necessarily for their kufr.

That’s one response.

Another response is to assume that they were being punished for their Kufr and then to say that ahl al fatrah are of two types:

Type 1: Those who are ahl al fatrah due to only being cut off from the prophets, such that they did not encounter any prophet.

Yet they had knowledge of the prophets’ warnings and proofs of tawheed and the evil of shirk – these people are reproached by such warnings, they have no excuse for their ignorance and turning away from them.

Regarding the likes of these people, some of the texts refer to the punishment of the people of fatrah, such as what was mentioned regarding the punishment of one of the most generous of Arabs, Abdullah bin Jad’an.

Or what was mentioned regarding the punishment of Amr bin Luhayy because of his changing the religion of Abraham as mentioned in the Hadith.

Rather, some verses of the Quran itself prove that many of the Arabs had knowledge of the call to monotheism. Among them is Allah’s saying, addressing the Companions of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم and reminding them of their state before the advent of prophethood:

“And you were on the edge of a pit of the Fire, and He saved you from it” [Quran 3:103]

Ibn Jarir al Tabari said:

وكنتم على طَرَف جهنَّم بكفرِكم الَّذي كنتم عليه، قبل أن يُنعِم الله عليكم بالإسلام، فتصِيروا بائتلافِكم عليه إخوانًا، ليس بينكم وبين الوقوع فيها إلَّا أن تموتوا على ذلك مِن كفركِم، فتكونوا مِن الخالدين فيها

The point here being that those addressed with this divine favor from the Muhajireen and the Ansar of Aws and Khazraj – if they had died in their Jahiliyyah upon what they were upon of idol worship – they would have been punished without excuse. This is by the text of the verse, and in this is the clearest evidence that the proof of Tawheed had been established within themselves before the prophetic mission.

Indeed the people of Yathrib were mixed with the People of the Book, hearing news of their scriptures and messages of their prophets. And among the Arabs were those who adhered to Tawheed, arguing for it against their people, like Qiss bin Sa’ida Al-Iyadi, Waraqa bin Nawfal, and Zaid bin ‘Amr bin Nufail. > Aal Moalim Answers: Type 2: Those whose period of Fatrah consisted of being cut off from the prophets’ warnings. So these people, in addition to not encountering a prophet, did not receive the call of any of them, or it reached them in a manner of ambiguity and confusion that required further clarification.

These are the ones who are excused for their ignorance in this worldly life, and will be tested on the plains of the Day of Resurrection, as has been narrated in the previous reports.

Ibn Al Qayyim said (see Tareeq al Hijratayn p.414):

إنَّ العذاب يُستحَق بسَبَبين:

أحدهما: الإعراض عن الحجَّة، وعدم إرادة العلمِ بها وبمُوجبِها.

الثَّاني: العِناد لها بعد قيامها، وترك إرادةِ موجبها.

فالأوَّل: كفر إعراض، والثَّاني: كفر عناد.

وأمَّا كفر الجهل، مع عدم قيام الحُجَّة، وعدم التَّمكُّن مِن معرفتها: فهذا الَّذي نفى الله التَّعذيب عنه حتَّى تقوم حجَّة الرُّسل

punishment is deserved for two reasons:

One: Turning away from the proof, and not wanting to know it and its implication.

Two: Stubborn opposition to it after it has been established, and abandoning the will to follow its implication.

The first is disbelief of turning away, and the second is disbelief of stubbornness.

As for the disbelief of ignorance, along with the proof not being established and the inability to know it, this is what Allah has negated punishment for until the proof of the messengers is established.”

Through this categorization, we ascertain that delving into specifying individuals as being from the excused people of Fatrah is from the unseen that one should not venture into without a clear text.

This is the first methodological slip that those who affirmed the salvation of the Prophet’s parents fell into!

We also know through this that the people of Fatrah among the Arabs are not all at the same level.

For among them are those whose excuse in their ignorance is established with Allah, and among them are those who are reproached for their polytheism, for refusing after knowing.

If what has preceded regarding the detailed rulings on the people of Fatrah is established, then what has been transmitted in the Prophetic texts regarding the parents of our Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم cannot be devoid of one of two conditions:

The first is that the warning and proof of Tawheed reached the Prophet’s father.

The second is that the warning and proof of Tawheed did not reach him.

If the first case is true, then his disbelief at that point would be disbelief of refusal and turning away, where he refused to submit to Tawheed just like those Arabs who received call but persisted upon what they were upon of idol worship.

Based on this case: the proof would have been established against the Prophet’s parents, and what shows that it reached him is this authentic hadith in Saheeh Muslim, where we have established that his admission into the Fire cannot be except after the proof has been conveyed.

So had it not been for this hadith, we would have withheld judgement regarding his case.

If the second case is true: then the hadith would be a report from the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم about the outcome of his parents after the test on the Day of Resurrection, and that they will not respond to Allah’s command at that time!

Ibn Kathir summarises this point saying:

إخبارُه ﷺ عن أَبَويه وجدِّه عبد المطَّلِب بأنَّهم مِن أهل النَّار، لا ينافي الحديثَ الوارد عنه مِن طُرق متعدِّدة: أنَّ أهل الفترة، والأطفال، والمجانين، والصُّم، يُمتحنون في العَرصات يوم القيامة، .. فيكون مِنهم مَن يجيب، ومنهم مَن لا يجيب، فيكون هؤلاء مِن جملة مَن لا يجيب، فلا منافاة ولله الحمد والمنَّة

Conclusion:

The early Salaf al Saalih did not embroil themselves in the issue of the fate of the Prophet’s صلى الله عليه وسلم parents as much as some of these latecomers who delved deeply into it and disputed greatly over it.

What afforded ease to the Salaf of silence and abstention from disputing over such issues is safer for one concerned about their religion.

One is to stand with the scriptural text without twisting its meaning or attacking its wording in pursuit of some whim that one imagines to be defense of the Prophet صلى الله عليه وسلم and his lineage.

What harm could come to him (the Prophet) if we were to follow his own words صلى الله عليه وسلم?!

Will we be more caring about his parents than him?!

What deficiency could possibly afflict the master of creation صلى الله عليه وسلم due to his parent’s disbelief?!

Allah relates to us the disbelief of Ibrahim’s father, and the father of Ibrahim is an ancestor of the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم through distant lineage.

 Al Bayhaqi said:

وأمرُهم لا يَقدحُ في نَسَبِ رسول الله ﷺ، لأنَّ أنكحة الكُفَّار صحيحة، أَلَا تراهم يُسلِمون مع زوجاتِهم، فلا يلزمهم تجديد العَقد، ولا مُفارقتهنَّ إذا كان مثله يجوز في الإسلام

Their status does not detract from the lineage of the Messenger of Allah صلى الله عليه وسلم, because the marriages of disbelievers are valid. Do you not see them entering Islam along with their wives, without needing to redo their marriage contracts or separate from them if the like of it is permitted in Islam?

True veneration of Muhammad – may my father and mother be sacrificed for him – is in following his way, being guided by his guidance, avoiding his prohibitions, and preferring his Sunnah over all the desires of creation. Love of him is greater than any other love, and I will not be more beloved to him than the righteous friends of Allah from the early generations of this nation who accepted the hadith and submitted to its ruling.

And Allah knows best!