Al-Ṭaḥāwī states in his book “Mushkil al-Ḥadīth,” citing ʿAlī ibn ʿAbd al-Raḥmān from Aḥmad ibn Ṣāliḥ al-Miṣrī, that the latter used to say: “Anyone whose occupation is knowledge should not fail to commit to memory the ḥadīth of Asmāʾ concerning the sun’s return, for it is among the signs of prophethood.” It is also reported that Abū Jaʿfar al-Ṭaḥāwī himself inclined to this view.
Abū al-Qāsim al-Ḥasakānī relates from the Muʿtazilite theologian Abū ʿAbd Allāh al-Baṣrī that he said: “The sun’s coming back after having set is even more deserving of widespread transmission; for although it is a virtue of the Commander of the Believers, it is one of the evidences of prophethood, and he shares in many such prophetic signs with others.”
The upshot of these remarks is that the incident ought to have been transmitted by recurrent mass narration. That would indeed be the case were the ḥadīth authentic; but since it has not been so transmitted, this itself shows that it is not sound in reality. God knows best.
I say: The leading scholars in every age have rejected the soundness of this report, refuted it, and castigated its transmitters, as we have already quoted from a number of ḥadīth masters: Muḥammad and Yaʿlā, the sons of ʿUbayd al-Ṭanafīsī, Ibrāhīm ibn Yaʿqūb al-Jūzajānī, the preacher of Damascus, Abū Bakr Muḥammad ibn Ḥātim al-Bukhārī—known as Ibn Zanjawayh— the ḥāfiẓ Abū al-Qāsim ibn ʿAsākir, Shaykh Abū al-Faraj ibn al-Jawzī, and many others, ancient and recent.
Among those who explicitly declared it fabricated are our teacher, the ḥāfiẓ Abū al-Ḥajjāj al-Mizzī, and the eminent scholar Abū al-ʿAbbās Ibn Taymiyyah. Al-Ḥākim Abū ʿAbd Allāh al-Nīsābūrī said: “I read to the Chief Judge Abū al-Ḥasan Muḥammad ibn Ṣāliḥ al-Hāshimī—ʿAbd Allāh ibn al-Ḥusayn ibn Mūsā narrated to us; ʿAbd Allāh ibn ʿAlī ibn al-Madanī narrated to us; I heard my father say: ‘There are five ḥadīths people circulate which have no basis from the Messenger of God, may God bless him and grant him peace:
- “If the beggar speaks the truth, the one who turns him away will never prosper”;
- “No pain is like the pain of the eye, and no anxiety is like the anxiety of debt”;
- “The sun was returned for ʿAlī ibn Abī Ṭālib”;
- “I am too honored by God for Him to leave me under the earth for two hundred years”;
- “The one who performs cupping and the one who is cupped have broken the fast—for they were backbiting.”’”
Although al-Ṭaḥāwī—may God have mercy on him—was confused about the matter, he nonetheless transmitted from Abū Ḥanīfah—may God have mercy on him—his rejection of the report and his derision of anyone who narrated it. Abū al-ʿAbbās ibn ʿUqdah said: “Jaʿfar ibn Muḥammad ibn ʿUmayr narrated to us; Sulaymān ibn ʿAbbād narrated to us; I heard Bishr ibn Dirāʿ say: Abū Ḥanīfah met Muḥammad ibn al-Nuʿmān and asked, ‘From whom did you transmit the ḥadīth of the sun’s return?’ He replied, ‘From someone other than the one from whom you transmitted, “O Sāriyah, the mountain!”’”
Thus Abū Ḥanīfah—may God have mercy on him—one of the accredited imams, a Kufan whose love for ʿAlī ibn Abī Ṭālib and acknowledgment of his God-given virtues is beyond suspicion, nevertheless censured the man who reported the narration. Muḥammad ibn al-Nuʿmān’s reply is no answer at all, merely a counter-remark of no benefit—namely: “I have related this ḥadīth concerning ʿAlī’s merit; though it is unfamiliar, its strangeness is on a par with what you yourself narrated about ʿUmar ibn al-Khaṭṭāb’s saying, ‘O Sāriyah, the mountain!’”