In the Name of Allaah, the Most Compassionate, the Most Merciful…
I have recently heard someone quoting the following statement as a hadeeth of the Messenger of Allaah (may Allaah raise his rank and grant him peace):
من تعلم لغة قوم أمن مكرهم
“Whoever learns a people’s language shall be safe from their plots”
I would like to offer some important points regarding this so-called “hadeeth”:
[1] It is NOT a hadeeth, rather it is considered “laa asla lahu” (baseless).
After careful research, I could not find any basis for this statement as a hadeeth, nor as a statement of a Companion or early scholar. After exhausting the usual source books of hadeeth, I searched in the books of “Ahaadeeth Mushtaharah” which discuss claimed hadeeths that are commonly quoted by people, and in the books of “Mowdhoo’aat” (fabricated and baseless hadeeths), and I again did not find a trace.
The only reference to it I could find from a trusted scholar was something mentioned by Shaykh Muqbil ibn Haadee al-Waadi’ee (may Allaah have Mercy on him) who listed it among some fabricated and baseless hadeeths, and said, “Researchers have tried to find it and they have not found any basis for it.” (al-Muqtarih, p.11)
[2] Lying on the Messenger is a huge major sin.
The Messenger of Allaah (may Allaah raise his rank and grant him peace) warned his nation against lying on him by attributing things to him that he never said. The severe threat of a confirmed seat in the Hellfire faces those who ascribe things to him he never said. In the mutawaatir (overwhelmingly authentic) hadeeth narrated by as many as 80 Companions or more, the Prophet (may Allaah raise his rank and grant him peace) said:
من كذب علي متعمدًا فليتبوأ مقعده من النار
“Whoever lies on me intentionally, let him take his seat in the Hellfire.”
The grave crime of attributing things to the Messenger of Allaah (may Allaah raise his rank and grant him peace) must be taken seriously. Something understood to be from the Messenger of Allaah (may Allaah raise his rank and grant him peace) is taken as part of the Religion of Islaam by all Muslims. Thus, attributing things to him he did not say is something that changes the perfect Religion of Allaah, and it is absolutely impermissible and unacceptable in any situation, no matter who does it.
Think about how the Christians and other nations before us allowed their religions to change by not tenaciously observing this essential stance.
[3] “But I didn’t lie on him intentionally…”
While this may be true, someone who has narrated this hadeeth to people needs to ask himself how it became so easy for him to pass on narrations about the Messenger of Allaah (may Allaah raise his rank and grant him peace) without careful verification. With a threat so severe, the Companions themselves used to admonish each other regularly about narrating hadeeths without being 100% sure of their precise accuracy!
Does a Muslim carelessly pass on everything he hears attributed to the Messenger of Allaah (may Allaah raise his rank and grant him peace), or does he refrain from narrating except what he is absolutely sure about?
IMPORTANT: If you are someone who has helped to spread this false hadeeth in any way, then do your best to repent to Allaah earnestly, and try to correct your wrong by sending this article to everyone you spread the false hadeeth to. May Allaah accept your repentance and give you success.
[4] “But scholars say we can use weak hadeeths sometimes…”
Some scholars allow the mention of slightly weak (dha’eef) narrations under some conditions, however, we need to be perfectly clear: No scholar EVER allowed the mention of fabricated or baseless narrations (like this one), except to warn against them.
[5] “But the meaning is correct…”
Firstly, if the meaning were correct, it doesn’t become a hadeeth because its meaning is correct. Bakkah.net has beneficial articles, but we cannot say the Messenger of Allaah said that (may Allaah raise his rank and grant him peace).
Secondly, while the meaning may have some correctness to it, I would ask you to reflect over this question: “Has the dedication of many Arab lands to the English language protected them from the plots of the people of that language, or has something else happened…?”
[6] “So we are not allowed to learn a foreign language now?!”
Identifying this baseless narration for what it is, warning the Muslims from it, and even pointing out flaws in its meaning is not meant to be a warning against learning a foreign language for an intended justifiable benefit, like to convey Islam to the people of that language, or to learn something of scientific or academic benefits when they possess them. In such cases, I know of no differing over the permissibility of learning a foreign language.
[7] “Learning foreign languages causes hypocrisy…” (Hadeeth?)
It should be noted that another false hadeeth is commonly quoted on this topic. Al-Haakim reported in his Mustadrak (4/87) that Ibn ‘Umar allegedly narrated from the Messenger of Allaah (may Allaah raise his rank and grant him peace):
من أحسن منكم أن يتكلم بالعربية فلا يتكلمن بالفارسية، فإنه يورث النفاق
“Those of you who speak Arabic proficiently must not speak in Persian, since it causes hypocrisy.”
This hadeeth has been idenitified as mowdhoo’ (fabricated), since the early criticism of ath-Thahabee for al-Haakim’s book when he identified ‘Umar ibn Haaroon the liar in the chain, to the later scholars of hadeeth like Al-Albaanee in Silsilat al-Ahaadeeth ad-Dha’eefah (#523).
And Allaah knows best.
Written by: Moosaa Richardson
Is it true that umar ibn khattab forbade people from learning other languages?
Jazakallah khair for the clarification on this hadith. What I have gained from reading is that learning a language is a halal means to accomplishing a different Sunnah such as conveying Islam, but learning a language in and of itself is not a direct form of ibaadah. I am a new Muslim so please notify me if I am wrong.
Hadith number 187 in al-Albani’s Sahihah, in it he declared the hadith with the wording, “Learn the written language of the Jews…” to be hasan and said its meaning supported the hadith you mentioned (although with the wording “lisan” instead of “lughah”) even though he also said that hadith had no basis. During the course of his takhrij, he referred to the mu’allaq narration that Bukhari mentioned which can be found at 13/186 in al-Fath. (Sent in by a student of hadeeth)
Bismillahir Rahmaanir Raheem
AsSalaamu alaykum wa rahmatullah wa barakaatuhu
I came across the following regarding the language of the people of Jannah, it has apparently been graded as Hasan by Shaykh Al Albaani; I Say apparently as I dont have the silsilah to check the grading.
If it is incorrect or wrongly quoted as being Hasan then I would greatly appreciate you informing me of that.
روى ابن أبي الدنيا بإسناده عن أنس بن مالك رضي الله عنه قال: قال رسول الله صلى الله عليه وسلم: (يدخل أهل الجنة الجنة على طول آدم ستين ذراعاً بذراع الملك, على حسن يوسف, وعلى ميلاد عيسى ثلاث وثلاثون سنة, وعلى لسان محمد صلى الله عليه وسلم..). [حسنه الألباني في السلسلة الصحيحة 6/43] .
baarakAllaahu feekum
was salaamu alaykum wa rahmatullaah wa barakaatuhu
wa ‘alaykas-salaamu wa rahmatullaahi wa barakaatuh. Akhee six months after you posted your question here, I respond firstly by apologizing for the extremely late answer.
Secondly, the hadeeth was indeed collected by Ibn Abid-Dunyaa, in his book Sifat al-Jannah (#210) with his chain to Haaroon ibn Rabbaab [or Ri’aab], who narrated it from Anas. The problem is that the Imaam Ibn Hibbaan said explicitly that Haaroon did not hear from Anas. No one else refuted this or clearly affirmed that he did hear from Anas. Bottom line: the chain is munqati’ (broken) because of this defect, and thus dha’eef (unauthentic), and Allaah knows best.
‘Allaamah Al-Albaanee called the chain saheeh (not hasan) in the Saheehah (6/46).
Salaam! excuse me for my random question
Is every kafir mushrik?
“Every mushrik (polytheist) is a kaafir (disbeliever), but not every disbeliever is a polytheist.” -Shaykh Saalih al-Fowzaan, Silsilat Sharh ar-Rasaa’il (p.239), as found in “Things that Nullify One’s Islaam” (p.81, TROID, 2nd ed., 1429, see also: p.92).
That is because someone could be a kaafir because he arrogantly rejects Allaah’s right to be worshipped (kufr), yet he does not worship other than Allaah (shirk). And Allaah knows best.
I am a scholar of linguistics and I have studied the science of foreign language learning in quite a detail. Simply “knowing” a language for the sake of language does not provide what we call “protection from plot.” It is always the PURPOSE, as in case of each and every human action, that determines the outcomes of language learning. If we learn a language simply because it is fashionable or considered more artistic, we are not going to get the benefit mentioned in the statement under question. What matters is the motive, the objective, the PURPOSEFULNESS of language learning. If you begin with the purpose of using your knowledge of English to understand what the speakers are planning against or at least about your country, community, etc., it os definitely going to help you out. But if you simply find it impressive to learn the language, you won’t get the same outcomes. In other cases, speaking other languages may without the least doubt cause hypocrisy. It all depends on the context, the situation. So, the key words are PURPOSE and CONTEXT.
السلام عليكم و رحمة الله و بركاته
I have a few questions in regards to this hadeeth:
من بدأ بالكلام قبل السلام فلا تجيبوه
Sheikh Al-Albani rahimahullah graded it as hasan in صحيح و ضعيف الجامع الصغير و زيادته.
1. Is this mutlaq and do we take it at the apparent meaning? Meaning that anyone, Muslim or kaafir, who comes to us and does not say salaam that we cannot respond to them or engage them in any sort of conversation? If it is, then what seems to be the correct application is that we would have walk away and ignore many people that start talking to us and do not do open with salaam, because most people in the west do not begin with Salaam.
2. What is the principle on interacting with Hasan ahadeeth such as this one or any others, particularly when it comes to ahkaam and not necessarily akhbaar or fadhaa’il. do we implement them or not? I am fearful that if I do not implement this hadeeth in the manner described in my first question, it is opposing the command of the Messenger of Allah sallAllahu alaihi wa salaam.
3. no doubt I love the scholars and always look for their explanation. But after reading the above hadeeth, a point of confusion has come to me, that if there are ahadeeth where the Messenger sallaAllahu alaihi wa salam commands or prohibits something and the scholars say the meaning behind it is that it is recommended/disliked or He sallAllahu alaihi wa salam, is guiding to what’s better, not an outright command/prohibition, and they don’t list other evidences to support that interpretation. For example ahadeeth that prohibit traveling alone and Albaani and Uthaymeen explain it to mean traveling the wilderness/not well traveled routes: On the surface is that not obeying the ulama and preferring their statement over the Messenger sallAllahu alaihi wa salam ? Because many times I see ulama say “what is dhaahir from the text” but at other times they don’t take the dhaahir and offer a more nuanced explanation.
JazakAllahu khayra
وعليكم السلام ورحمة الله وبركاته
Early imaams, from the specialists among the Hadeeth critics, have considered that narration: baatil, munkar, and laa asla lahu, and rejected it. Shaykh Al-Albaanee’s argument to strengthen it is not a strong one, may Allah have Mercy on him. And Allah knows best.
Based on this, what is correct to do when someone initiates a discussion with you without first giving you salaams, if you have just now come together, is to simply give salaams when you begin speaking. As for not responding to your Muslim brother, not even advising him with salaams if he has forgotten, then I do not know any authentic basis for this. And Allah knows best.