The First Case:
“The science of establishing the Hadith collection consists not only in putting the content of the Hadith at the disposal of believing readers, but also furnishing them with information about the informants. The principle of isnad (transmission chain) thus makes it necessary to give the biography of the person transmitting. The believing reader has the right to have all the pertinent information about the source of the Hadith and the chain of its transmitters, so he or she can continually judge whether they are worthy of credence or not. Islam was, at least during its first centuries, the religion of reasoning, responsible individuals capable of telling what was true from what was false as long as they were well equipped to do so, as long as they possessed the tools of knowledge—specifically the collections of Hadith. The fact that, over the course of centuries, we have seen believers who criticize and judge replaced by muzzled, censored, obedient, and grateful Muslims in no way detracts from this fundamental dimension of Islam.”
—Fatima Mernissi, The Veil and the Male Elite, pp. 35-36. NOTE: Whatever criticisms Mernissi is laying at some of her fellow Muslims are hers, and reflect her view. (Mernissi is a sociologist from Morocco; The Veil and the Male Elite reflects her study of Hadith and the Qur’an on the question of the place of women in Islam.)
_____________________________________
The Hadith in question:
“According to al-Bukhari, it is supposed to have been Abu Bakra who heard the Prophet say: ‘Those who entrust their affairs to a woman will never know prosperity.’ 1 Since this Hadith is included in the Sahih—those thousands of authentic Hadith accepted by the meticulous al-Bukhari—it is a priori considered true and therefore unassailable without proof to the contrary, since we are here in scientific terrain. So nothing bans me, as a Muslim woman, from making a double investigation—historical and methodological—of this Hadith and it s author, and especially of the conditions in which it was first put to use. Who uttered this Hadith, where, when, why, and to whom?”
1 Bukhari, Sahih, vol. 4, p. 226; as cited in Mernissi, p. 49.
Mernissi cites Malik Ibn Abbas in his caution about accepting Hadith:
“I [Malik] had the good fortune to be born at a time when 70 persons [Companions] who could recite Hadith were alive. They used to go to the mosque and start speaking: The Prophet has said so and so. I did not collect any of the Hadith that they recounted, not because these people were not trustworthy, but because I saw that they were dealing in matters for which they were not qualified.” (Mernissi, p. 59)
Among the people that Malik said should be excluded as authentic transmitters of Hadith were those who had been caught lying in other affairs:
“There are some people whom I [Malik] rejected as narrators of Hadith, not because they lied in their role as men of science by recounting false Hadith that the Prophet did not say, but just simply because I saw them lying in their relations with people, in their daily relationships that had nothing to do with religion.” (Mernissi, p. 60)
According to Mernissi, this rule would eliminate any Hadith ascribed to Abu Bakra, since one of the biographies of him tells that he was convicted and flogged by the caliph Umar for giving false testimony in a serious case involving zina (illegal fornication), in which Abu Bakra testified as one of the four required witnesses.* Mernissi concludes: “If one follows the principles of Malik for fiqh, Abu Bakra must be rejected as a source of Hadith by every good, well-informed Malikite Muslim.” (p.61)
* Noted source: Ibn l-Athir (died 630 H.), Usd al-ghaba, vol. 5, p. 38.
This principle may not apply vis-à-vis the other schools of jurisprudence; but it does show a basis for questioning a Hadith contained even in Bukhari.
Another reason for questioning this Hadith is the Prophet's first marriage to Khadija - a propertied businesswoman who was his employer.
The Second Case:
Excerpts from
Maulana Mohammad Akram Khan's
Mostafa Charit (in Bangla)
Source: Mostafa Charit (Biography of the Prophet), Dhaka, Jhinuk Pustika,
4th Edition, 1975, pp. 42-51.
—I have lost my internet citation for this essay, of which the following is one example.
About the author:
[Maulana Mohammad Akram Khan (1868-1969) was a journalist, politician, and Islamic scholar. He was editor of several Islamic publications during the British rule in India. His magazine Sebak supported the Non-cooperation and the Swadeshi Movements. Sebak was banned and he was arrested for his anti-government editorials. In October 1936, he published the Azad, the only Bengali daily of that time which contributed greatly to generating support for the muslim league in the pre-1947 days in Bengal. He was directly involved in the Khilafat Movement. He was a scholar of highest repute. He was closely associated with the Ahl-i-Hadith movement. For more information, please visit Banglapedia.]
New Method of Scrutiny:
Error at the root
From reading the books, pamphlets and other works of the earliest and the classic traditionists, the readers inevitably get the notion that the kind of attention and scrutiny those traditionist scholars have given to examining the Isnad (chains of narration) or "Textual Criticism," they have not had shown a similar level of attention to or interest in Higher Criticism. After examining the Isnad, if they were satisfied with it, they generally have embraced a hadith as completely authentic (sahih). Later, when others have taken up Higher Criticism, they have restricted themselves primarily to those ahadith [note: plural of hadith] that are relevant for ascertaining a law (hukm) or creed (aqeedah). They felt that it was only for these ahadith that they needed to be extra careful, but not in case of ahadith that are related to history, other-worldly rewards, etc. In the later cases, they were comfortable narrating or recording weak (daif) hadith. We often do register our concern about this matter. However, the fact is that many among our early generations of scholars have held the view that many unauthentic or weak narrations in the books of history and Qur'anic exegeses (tafsir) won't do any harm to religious rituals or creeds. This prevented them from applying due scrutiny to these ahadith. ...
Indispensable Method of Higher Criticism
The issue of Higher Criticism leads one to conclude: Even if a hadith is determined to be sahih (authentic) based on riwayah (reportage), if there is an incontrovertible fact in the isnad or text, which establishes unacceptability of a hadith as an authentic one, we can't accept such hadith without further scrutiny just because its isnad is valid. With compelling evidence, we have to ignore or even reject a hadith with isnad that is otherwise determined by the scholars as authentic.
The Claim and the Proof
By advancing such statements, undoubtedly we have undertaken something quite audacious. However, after dedicating oneself for such a long period to the work of this biography (Mostafa Charit), it is simply impossible for this humble writer to shy away from such truth like a hypocrite. We hope that our esteemed reader will not judge hastily until after reading this entire chapter.
In our humble submission, the incontrovertible evidence of what we have offered here is present in rather large number in every authoritative hadith collections. However, for the sake of brevity, we have taken some illustrative narrations from the two highest regarded hadith collections, Sahih al-Bukhari and Sahih Muslim. There is no question about their Isnad, as these are from Bukhari and Muslim. Now, we want to demonstrate that even though the Isnad is valid, these ahadith cannot be acceptable as faultless, real and authentic hadith.
A hadith has been reported in both Bukhari and Muslim. (Since the narration in Muslim is somewhat clearer, we are providing the essential meaning here.) Anas narrated: When the verse- "O believers, don't raise your voices above the Prophet's" - was revealed, Thabit ibn Qais, a companion, became afraid, as his voice was quite loud. For that reason, instead of being in presence of the Prophet any longer, he started staying at home. After not seeing him for a few days, the Prophet asked Sa'd ibn Ma'az: "Why don't I see Thabit? Is he ill?" With permission from the Prophet, Sa'd then visited Thabit's home. They two met, conversed and Sa'd informed Thabit about the Prophet's inquiry. Thabit mentioned about his voice vis-a-vis the newly revealed verse: "I am afraid that I might be hell-bound." Upon hearing from Sa'd what Thabit has conveyed, the Prophet assured Thabit not to be afraid about this matter. [Bukhari; 14/318, 344; Muslim (Mishkat) 576.]
*****************************************************
Muslim; Book 001, Number 0214:
It is narrated on the authority of Anas b. Malik that when this verse:" O ye who believe I raise not your voices above the voice of the Prophet, nor shout loud unto him in discourse, as ye shout loud unto one another, lest your deeds should become null and void, while you perceive not" (xlix. 2-5), was revealed. Thabit b. Qais confined himself in his house and said: I am one of the denizens of Fire, and he deliberately avoided coming to the Apostle (may peace be upon him). The Apostle (may peace be upon him) asked Sa'd b, Mu'adh about him and said, Abu Amr, how is Thabit? Has he fallen sick? Sa'd said: He is my neighbour, but I do not know of his illness. Sa'd came to him (Thabit), and conveyed to him the message of the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him). Upon this Thabit said: This verse was revealed, and you are well aware of the fact that, amongst all of you, mine is the voice louder than that of the Messenger of Allah, and so I am one amongst the denizens of Fire, Sa'd Informed the Holy Prophet about it. Upon this the Messenger of Allah observed: (Nay, not so) but he (Thabit) is one of the dwellers of Paradise.
Bukhari: Volume 6, Book 60, Number 369:
Narrated Anas bin Malik:
The Prophet missed Thabit bin Qais for a period (So he inquired about him). A man said. "O Allah's Apostle! I will bring you his news." So he went to Thabit and found him sitting in his house and bowing his head. The man said to Thabit, " 'What is the matter with you?" Thabit replied that it was an evil affair, for he used to raise his voice above the voice of the Prophet and so all his good deeds had been annulled, and he considered himself as one of the people of the Fire. Then the man returned to the Prophet and told him that Thabit had said, so-and-so. (Musa bin Anas) said: The man returned to Thabit with great glad tidings. The Prophet said to the man. "Go back to him and say to him: "You are not from the people of the Hell Fire, but from the people of Paradise."
*****************************************************
This hadith can never be accepted as authentic for the following reasons.
a. This verse was revealed during 9th Hijri year, when deputations from various tribes visited the Prophet), in the context of Aqaba. Everyone agrees on this. [see Bukhari, Fat-hul Bari, Tafsir chapter, Vol. 20, 338]
b. Sa'd ibn Ma'az was wounded during the Battle of Trenches. A few days after the Campaign of Banu Quraizah, in ZulQida month of 5th Hijra yar, he died. This fact is undisputed. [see Bukhari, Muslim, Isaba, 3:197; Tajrid, 2: 185; Ikmal, etc.]
As we see, Sa'd was dead four years before this verse was revealed. Therefore, any meeting or conversation of Sa'd with the Prophet or Thabit is either false or erroneous. Thus, even though its isnad is valid, we humbly have to admit some kind of error or problem in regard to this hadith.
The Third Case (from the same source as the second one):
Anas, Ayesha and Ibn Abbas is narrating: "Allah sent him (as an Apostle) at the age of forty (and after that) he stayed for ten years in Mecca, and for ten more years in Medina." [Bukhari, 4:747-748; 7:787; Muslim #5794.]
Bukhari Volume 7, Book 72, Number 787:
Narrated Anas bin Malik:
The Prophet was neither conspicuously tall, nor short; neither, very white, nor tawny. His hair was neither much curled, nor very straight. Allah sent him (as an Apostle) at the age of forty (and after that) he stayed for ten years in Mecca, and for ten more years in Medina. Allah took him unto Him at the age of sixty, and he scarcely had ten white hairs on his head and in his beard.
Bukhari Volume 4, Book 56, Number 747:
Narrated Rabia bin Abi Abdur-Rahman:
I heard Anas bin Malik describing the Prophet saying, "He was of medium height amongst the people, neither tall nor short; he had a rosy color, neither absolutely white nor deep brown; his hair was neither completely curly nor quite lank. Divine Inspiration was revealed to him when he was forty years old. He stayed ten years in Mecca receiving the Divine Inspiration, and stayed in Medina for ten more years. When he expired, he had scarcely twenty white hairs in his head and beard." Rabi'a said, "I saw some of his hairs and it was red. When I asked about that, I was told that it turned red because of scent."
Bukhari Volume 4, Book 56, Number 748:
Narrated Anas:
Allah's Apostle was neither very tall nor short, neither absolutely white nor deep brown. His hair was neither curly nor lank. Allah sent him (as an Apostle) when he was forty years old. Afterwards he resided in Mecca for ten years and in Medina for ten more years. When Allah took him unto Him, there was scarcely twenty white hairs in his head and beard.
Muslim Book 030, Number 5794:
Anas b. Malik reported that Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) was neither very conspicuously tall nor short-statured, and his color was neither glaringly white nor brown; his hair was neither very curly nor very straight; Allah commissioned him (as a Prophet) when he had reached the age of forty years, and he stayed in Mecca for ten years and for ten years in Medina; Allah took him away when he had just reached the age of sixty, and there had not been twenty white hair in his head and beard.
Muatta Book 49, Number 49.1.1:
Yahya related to me from Malik that Rabia ibn Abi Abd ar-Rahman heard Anas ibn Malik say, "The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, was not excessively tall or short. He was not very pallid nor dark. He did not have curly hair or lank hair. Allah commissioned him at the age of forty. He stayed in Makka ten years and at Madina for ten years and Allah the Mighty, the Majestic made him die when he was sixty. There were not twenty white hairs in his hair or beard, may Allah bless him and grant him peace."
20 years duration of his prophethood, 10 year residency in Makkah and death at 60 - all three of these information are erroneous. He migrated after residing in Makkah for 13 years, and after completing 23 years as a Prophet, he died at the age of 63. It is a historical fact; the narrators of Bukhari and Muslim themselves have reported it. There is no need for further evidence, because the two mutually contradictory narration from Bukhari and Muslim cannot be true at the same time. Therefore, one of the narration is wrong or unauthentic, everyone has to admit it.
So we see - Isnad, the chain of narration of the hadith is authentic (sahih), but the hadith is unacceptable. [Dr. Farooq's note: See the ahadith in the footnote#1 that mention that the Prophet stayed in Meccah for thirteen years and the ahadith that say even fifteen years.]
The Fourth Case:
This last one is again from Mernissi. It concerns the Hadith: “The Prophet said that the dog, the ass, and woman interrupt prayer if they pass in front of the believer, interposing themselves between him and the qibla”. (Bukhari, Sahih, vol 1, p.99; quoted in Mernissi, p. 64.) This Hadith was transmitted by one Abu Hurayra.
After an extended discussion of Islamic prayer practices, and the history of the qibla, Mernissi cites a comment by the Prophet’s wife, ‘A’isha, concerning this Hadith—
“”According to Ibn Marzuq, when someone invoked in front of ‘A’isha the Hadith that said that the three causes of interruption of prayer were dogs, asses, and women, she answered them: ‘You compare us now to asses and dogs. In the name of God, I have seen the Prophet saying his prayers while I was there, lying on the bed between him and the qibla. And in order not to disturb him, I didn’t move.’ b]11[/b]”
11 Bukhari, Sahih, vol. 1, p. 199.
Note that both the first Hadith, and ‘A’isha’s criticism are recorded in Bukhari for the reader to assess.
Mernissi continues with quotes of ‘A’isha criticizing Abu Hurayra for relating Hadith he never heard; a case in which Abu Hurayra related a Hadith, then had to admit that he had not heard it from the prophet, as he originally said, but from someone else; and a discussion about a dispute regarding ritual purification—these are cited from Imam Zarkashi’s Al Ijaba.
______________________________________
The Final Case:
The final example, from Mernissi, regards the following Hadith—
“Three things bring bad luck: house, woman, and horse.” (Bukhari, Sahih, vol. 3, p. 243)
Mernissi’s criticism: “Al-Bukhari did not include other versions of this Hadith, although the rule was to give one or more contradictory versions in order to show readers conflicting points of view, and thus to permit them to be sufficiently well informed to decide for themselves about practices that were the subject of dispute. However, there is no trace in al-Bukhari of ‘A’isha’s refutation of this Hadith:
“ ‘They told ‘A’isha that Abu Hurayra was asserting that the Messenger of God said: “Three things bring bad luck: house, woman, and horse.” ‘A’isha responded: “Abu Hurayra learned his lessons very badly. He came into our house when the Prophet was in the middle of a sentence. He only heard the end of it. What the Prophet said was: ‘May Allah refute the Jews; they say three things bring bad luck, house, woman, and horse.”’ [quoted from Imam Zarkashi, ibid.]
“Not only did al-Bukhari not include this correction but he treated the Hadith as if there was no question about it. He cited it three times, each time with a different transmission chain.” (Mernissi, pp. 75-76)
Mernissi’s conclusion:
“What conclusion must be drawn from this? That even authentic Hadith must be vigilantly examined with a magnifying glass? That is our right, Malik Ibn Anas tells us. Al-Bukhari, like all the fuqaha, began his work of collecting by asking for Allah’s help and acknowledging that only He is infallible. It is our tradition to question everything and everybody, especially the fuqaha and imams.” (Mernissi, p. 76)
_____________________________________
I close with the following quote from another companion of the Prophet, Umar Ibn Hasin:
“If I wanted to, I could recite traditions about the Prophet for two days without stopping. What keeps me from doing it is that I have seen some of the Companions of the Messenger of God who heard exactly what I myself heard, who saw what I saw, and those men recounted Hadith. Those traditions are not exactly what we heard. And I am afraid of hallucinating, as they hallucinate.” (Mernissi, p. 79; quote from Abu Zahra, Malik, p. 149)
All of the foregoing may be like the elephant who labored to bring forth a mouse. Again, it’s purpose is not to argue that Hadith all must be rejected—but that all Hadith ought to be read with care and caution, and not simply accepted, even if they are cited in collections such as Bukhari and Muslim.
Well, I can hardly say it is an argument, since I don’t know that Ahosyney disagrees with any of it... Maybe it was just an opportunity for me to pull together some of the past study I had done, and dump it on someone...
Again, I thank Ahosyney for this thread, and the knowledge of Hadith he has shared.
_________________________________
When Muhammad died, Abu Bakr (the first Caliph) addressed the Muslim assembly—
"O Men, if you have been worshipping Muhammad, then know that Muhammad is dead. But if you have been worshipping God, then know that God is living and never dies."
Thank you Vistied for your contribution. It was very long to read, and it was hard for me to verify each reference you cited. It will take me a long time.
But in general I agree with you in the following:
What the Hadith scholar did in the collection of Hadith was never claimed to be a divin work. Yes I believe that they must have been helped by Allah to do their work. But also what they did is not creating an idole that we must accept without a question. What they did that they founded a science supported with the required tools and references that any individual who want to review their work can use to do sot. So, yes any Muslim can question any Hadith, and I myself used to do that. And Muslims in each generation used to do that.
There a great scholar called Al Albani died I think 10 years ago (or may be less) , did a great work to re-investigate large collections of Hadith and he wrote many books about that (I don't for sure if he did that for Bukhari and Muslim collections), but he did a lot of work in classifying accepted and non accepted hadith. And he has many students following his way. So the cycle of searching the authenticity of Hadith is not ended yet.
The only concern is who can take the job of critising Hadith. He should have enough knowladge of the science associated with it. I mean the science of Hadith. I can't say I will check the authenticity of a Hadith that many scholars have revisited before just after reading some books. That will not be a scientific work. It will be like a man read a book about cars , and then start to design his own car.
What the un-educated Muslim can do? he should trust some scholar or he will lose the trace?
I studied hadith during my High School and Undergrad (I'm an Engineer, but in my unversity we study Islamic sciense as well), but I didn't have a deep study in the science of Hadith, so I can't answer you four cases completely , and I don't think your purpose is to get an answer from me about them.
So my general comment about them, is that Hadith Science deals with the rules and foundation of classifying and accepting Hadith, it has nothing to do with laws (Shariha), creeds (Akeda).
There is another science deels with the Law called "Fekh", and this science give the rules and tools to use both Quran and Hadith to define a specific legislation. So even the text (matn) of a specific hadith appears not to be acceptable , but when it comes to the science of Fekh, the picture is more clearer, and so the connection between different Hadith could be made.
Another important point, yes there is a lot critising of some Hadith, but also there are a lot of answers, I think it is far to point out the other side and see if they make sense. I don't know who is the Minsiri who you did refere to many times, can you give me more information about it.
Also you gave some hadith which I didn't recognize the book they are includded in, as you said, I will not accept any hadith unless at least it found in a known hadith collection (Because I don't have the tools to check its Isnad and Matn myself).
Thank you again , for your contribution.
Originally posted by vistesdI have checked this one, the Hadith, is narrated from two other ways, which don't include the Name of Sa'd ibn Ma'az in them.
[b]The Second Case:
Excerpts from
Maulana Mohammad Akram Khan's
Mostafa Charit (in Bangla)
Source: Mostafa Charit (Biography of the Prophet), Dhaka, Jhinuk Pustika,
4th Edition, 1975, pp. 42-51.
—I have lost my internet citation for this essay, of which the following is one example.
About the author:
[Maulana Mohammad Akram Khan (18 ome kind of error or problem in regard to this hadith.[/b]
Book 001, Number 0214:
It is narrated on the authority of Anas b. Malik that when this verse:" O ye who believe I raise not your voices above the voice of the Prophet, nor shout loud unto him in discourse, as ye shout loud unto one another, lest your deeds should become null and void, while you perceive not" (xlix. 2-5), was revealed. Thabit b. Qais confined himself in his house and said: I am one of the denizens of Fire, and he deliberately avoided coming to the Apostle (may peace be upon him). The Apostle (may peace be upon him) asked Sa'd b, Mu'adh about him and said, Abu Amr, how is Thabit? Has he fallen sick? Sa'd said: He is my neighbour, but I do not know of his illness. Sa'd came to him (Thabit), and conveyed to him the message of the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him). Upon this Thabit said: This verse was revealed, and you are well aware of the fact that, amongst all of you, mine is the voice louder than that of the Messenger of Allah, and so I am one amongst the denizens of Fire, Sa'd Informed the Holy Prophet about it. Upon this the Messenger of Allah observed: (Nay, not so) but he (Thabit) is one of the dwellers of Paradise.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Book 001, Number 0215:
This hadith has been narrated on the authority of Anas b. Malik by another chain of transmitters in which these words are found: Thabit b. Qais was the orator of the Ansar, when this verse was revealed: the rest of the hadith is the same with the exception that there is no mention of Sa'd b. Mu'adh in it. This hadith is also transmitted by Ahmad b. Sa'id, Habban, Sulaiman b. Mughira on the authority of Anas who said: When the verse was revealed:" Do not raise your voice louder than the voice of the Apostle," no mention was made of Sa'd b, Mu'adh in it.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Book 001, Number 0216:
This hadith is narrated on the authority of Anas by another chain of transmitters in which there is no mention of Sa'd b. Mu'adh, but the following words are there: We observed a man, one of the dwellers of Paradise, walking about amongst us.
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/muslim/001.smt.html#001.0214
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/muslim/001.smt.html#001.0215
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/muslim/001.smt.html#001.0216
-----------------------
So from the three ways we can tell that the event itself happened. There might be a question about Sa'd b. Mu'adh, which I didn't verify.
EDIT: There is a book called "Sharh Al Nawawi" which I don't know if it has an English translation for it or not. This book includes explainations and comments on each Hadith in Sahih Muslim. It is found on the web in Arabic. The auther mentioned some comments about this Hadith, that some scholars questions one of the reporters (Called Kotn ibn Naseer), but the other two ways there is no comments about them.
Also there is a book called "Sharh Al Bari", which do the same Job for Sahih Al Bukhari.
Originally posted by ahosyneySo the cycle of searching the authenticity of Hadith is not ended yet.
Thank you Vistied for your contribution. It was very long to read, and it was hard for me to verify each reference you cited. It will take me a long time.
But in general I agree with you in the following:
What the Hadith scholar did in the collection of Hadith was never claimed to be a divin work. Yes I believe that they must have been helped by Allah ...[text shortened]... ools to check its Isnad and Matn myself).
Thank you again , for your contribution.
Well, that answers a lot of my question (you should probably take my whole presentation here as a way of questioning).
What the un-educated Muslim can do? he should trust some scholar or he will lose the trace?
In any field, we may end up relying on the authority of someone who has done more study than we have, who has developed credentials of scholarship, etc.
But, I think the individual must also rely on his or her conscience in religious and moral questions. To put it another way, as I understand the basic principles of Islam, I might be more readily forgiven for honestly relying on my conscience—even as I continue to explore and study—than if I simply rely on an authority among imams or the ulama or fuqaha (if I have those words right).
Remember our story about Omar and the woman? Surely, he would’ve been viewed as having more authority than she, and yet she spoke up and challenged him.
I don't think your purpose is to get an answer from me about them.
You’re right. My point is simply that there can be grounds for challenging specific Hadith even in the most respected collections.
Another important point, yes there is a lot critising of some Hadith, but also there are a lot of answers, I think it is far to point out the other side and see if they make sense.
This is, of course, true. Again, however, part of my point is that caution is necessary. Trying, as I said, to put myself in the position as if I were a Muslim, I would not simply accept a Hadith that offends my conscience just because it is well-attested. I would not treat the Hadith as authoritative as the Qur’an—I might reject a Hadith from Bukhari, I would not reject a Surah from the Qur’an (though I might look for alternative readings if it doesn’t make sense to me, including allegorical ones).
Here is a saying I found: “The Qur’an was sent down in seven dialects; and in every one of its sentences, there is an external and internal meaning.”
I found it here: http://www.themodernreligion.com/prophet/prophet_Sayings.htm#The%20Kuran.
There is no further citation, so I don’t know if its authentic or not.
Here is another from the same site: “God hath not created anything better than Reason, or anything more perfect, or more beautiful than Reason; the benefits which God giveth are on its account; and understanding is by it, and God's wrath is caused by disregard of it.”
Clearly, I would not consider the doors of ijtihad to be closed.
I don't know who is the Minsiri who you did refere to many times, can you give me more information about it.
Fatima Mernissi is a Professor of Sociology (retired, I think) from Morocco. She began a thorough study of the Hadith when a man tried to put her “in her place” by throwing the Hadith in my first case at her. She had help in her studies from colleagues at the Universite Mohammed V in Morocco, especially a teacher of Islamic law and member of the ulama named Alem Moulay Ahmed al-Khamlichi.
Also you gave some hadith which I didn't recognize the book they are includded in, as you said, I will not accept any hadith unless at least it found in a known hadith collection (Because I don't have the tools to check its Isnad and Matn myself).
You certainly can’t accept them if you can’t find them! 🙂 I simply gave the citations from the books I have; perhaps different editions of the Hadith collections have different page numbers? I could give you the editions she used (they also had commentaries), but if they’re not the ones you have, that wouldn’t help.
__________________________________________
As I said in my opening post, I have found among the Muslims I have read a range of viewpoints regarding Hadith. I find that to be a good thing.
With the exception of shirk, I don’t find honest error in belief much condemned in the Qur’an. If I remember rightly, the story of the Red Heifer is intended to illustrate the mistake of worrying about every little detail. Hypocrisy is condemned, and there are repeated warnings about thinking that the individual can avoid responsibility for themselves by relying on what others say.
By the way, I recall reading a story (which I cannot find) about someone who came to the Prophet, worrying about “not getting it right,” keeping all the commands correctly, etc. He asked what he should do, and the prophet replied: “Keep your lips moist with the name of God.” Have you heard that story? Do you know where it might have come from?
Originally posted by ahosyneyThanks. I’ll look at those sites.
I have checked this one, the Hadith, is narrated from two other ways, which don't include the Name of Sa'd ibn Ma'az in them.
[i]
Book 001, Number 0214:
It is narrated on the authority of Anas b. Malik that when this verse:" O ye who believe I raise not your voices above the voice of the Prophet, nor shout loud unto him in discourse, as ye shout loud ...[text shortened]... k called "Sharh Al Bari", which do the same Job for Sahih Al Bukhari.
Originally posted by vistesdI forgot to talk about one point you raised in your post:
Ahosyney has been gracious in past debate with me about Hadith, though I am not a Muslim, do not have his knowledge, and tend to come at Islam from a decidedly Sufi perspective. As before, for purposes of discussion, I will adopt a position as if I were a Muslim who agreed with the (modernist?) sources that I will argue from.
I hope that, ...[text shortened]... art, all of those shall be questioned.” (17:36, Yusuf Ali’s translation).
The relation between Quran and Hadith, and the case of contradiction or missmatch between them.
As I pointed before, Quran points out in several places to follow the prophet teachings, the same way we do with Allah.
You mentioned two Hadith talking about the agreement between Quran and Hadith should be the rule to accept Hadith. The two Hadith you gave me one of them you said yourself was rejected, and the other one in a book I don't know. So I don't know how authentic they are.
Abu Yusuf [d. 183] records in al-Radd ‘ala Siyar al-Awza‘i: "The Prophet said: 'The Hadith about me will spread. So what comes to you about me and is in agreement with the Qur’an is from me and what comes to you about me and is in conflict with the Qur’an is not from me.'"
Shafi‘i in his al-Risalah records the following Hadith: "The Prophet said: 'After my death you will split up on the basis of different opinions. When something reaches you which is attributed to me, compare it with the Qur’an; when it corresponds with the Book, it is from me; that which is at variance with it is not from me.'"
Abu Yusuf [d. 183] accepted this Hadith as authentic but Shafi‘i [d. 204] rejected it, calling it weak.
What I know for sure that Quran doesn't include all the details about the Islamic law and worship. Sunna is the details of the Quran. So you find something in Sunna that is not in Quran, will you call this disagreement. You gave an example about stoning for adultry of Married man or women. Yes it is not found in Quran, but it is found in Hadith. And it is very strong in Hadith that it could be denied by any mean.
In Sahih Muslim:
Book 017, Number 4191:
'Ubada b. as-Samit reported: Allah's Messenger (may peace be upon him) as saying: Receive (teaching) from me, receive (teaching) from me. Allah has ordained a way for those (women). When an unmarried male commits adultery with an unmarried female (they should receive) one hundred lashes and banishment for one year. And in case of married male committing adultery with a married female, they shall receive one hundred lashes and be stoned to death.
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/muslim/017.smt.html#017,4191
So both married and non married who commited adultry will rescive the same punishment found in Quran (hundred lashes). But the hadith gives more details about the difference.
The real problem will be when there is contradiction: Quran say something, and Hadith say the opposite. That is why the text of Hadith (Matn) is investigated.
Originally posted by ahosyneyYes, but I would charge that accepting that Hadith is an attempt to abrogate the Qur’an and return to pre-Qur’anic punishment. I could not accept that Hadith on the basis of conscience—aside from the challenges to it that I cited before (one of them quite lengthy and detailed). I would say that, despite isnad, it makes no sense for the Prophet to have said that—a basic rule of Islamic law—and not have it be revealed in the Qur’an. The Qur’an is quite specific, and does not make the distinction.
I forgot to talk about one point you raised in your post:
The relation between Quran and Hadith, and the case of contradiction or missmatch between them.
As I pointed before, Quran points out in several places to follow the prophet teachings, the same way we do with Allah.
You mentioned two Hadith talking about the agreement between Quran and Had and Hadith say the opposite. That is why the text of Hadith (Matn) is investigated.
It makes no more sense than if the Prophet said that, although the Qur’an says that a man can have up to four wives (under certain conditions), that a really wealthy man can have as many more as he likes, based on the distinction (not in the Qur’an) that he is super-wealthy.
I think that Hadith need be judged also on whether they make sense. To make distinctions where the Qur’an does not, I think would make any Hadith at least questionable.
Now, one could say that those who challenge that Hadith are just trying to make Islam fit what they want; but I could lay the counter-charge, and say the same for those who prefer harsher punishment. That is, I suspect that some untrue Hadith found their way in because they fit the vision of stricter Islam that those people preferred.
_______________________________________
Again, I quote these from my first post:
Abu Yusuf [d. 183] records in al-Radd ‘ala Siyar al-Awza‘i: The Prophet said: The Hadith about me will spread. So what comes to you about me and is in agreement with the Qur’an is from me and what comes to you about me and is in conflict with the Qur’an is not from me.
Shafi‘i in his al-Risalah records the following Hadith: The Prophet said: After my death you will split up on the basis of different opinions. When something reaches you which is attributed to me, compare it with the Qur’an; when it corresponds with the Book, it is from me; that which is at variance with it is not from me.
Abu Yusuf [d. 183] accepted this Hadith as authentic but Shafi‘i [d. 204] rejected it, calling it weak.
(I will try to find better citations for these.)
_______________________________________
A thought experiment: Suppose someone who lives in a place where there is no Islamic ummah finds a copy of the Qur’an, reads it, believes it (some of it allegorically, as the Qur’an allows) and declares himself a Muslim. Thereafter, he lives quietly following his new-found faith (suppose, like me, he lives in the remote countryside with few neighbors); he talks to his few neighbors about Islam, but does not pressure them (there being no compulsion in matters of faith). Etc., etc. He is neither Sunni nor Shia (nor Sufi), nor any other particular “kind” of Muslim.
He has access to no imam or ‘alim, nor commentaries, or anything like that. He prays, for example, according to his understanding from the Qur’an itself. He has no other guidance.
Is such a person a Muslim, or not?
Should he be more afraid that he is a “bad” Muslim, than of not being a Muslim at all?
Surely such a person’s Islam is not going to be rejected by God?
Now, suppose a few of this man’s neighbors also convert, so that they now have a small community. Still, they have no Sunnah, only the Qur’an. Are they Muslims? Will God regard them as Muslims?
___________________________________
I wanted to add: One of the problems with saying (as some I have been do) that one must have a vast body of knowledge to understand for oneself the Qur’an (and the Sunnah), is that it forces people to submit to the dictates of the ulama out of fear of error. There is no priesthood in Islam, and I would think it a mistake to treat imams or members of the ulama or the fuqaha as if they were like such a priesthood.
This is not a defense for assuming what one does not know, or for not continuing one’s study. It is to suggest that it is better to submit only to Allah in good conscience, than to submit to anyone else.
Originally posted by vistesdI'm somehow visited untill Friday, so I want you to check the following links:
Yes, but I would charge that accepting that Hadith is an attempt to abrogate the Qur’an and return to pre-Qur’anic punishment. I could not accept that Hadith on the basis of conscience—aside from the challenges to it that I cited before (one of them quite lengthy and detailed). I would say that, despite isnad, it makes no sense for the Prophet to h ...[text shortened]... est that it is better to submit only to Allah in good conscience, than to submit to anyone else.
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/muslim/017.smt.html
Read the Hadith from 4191 to 4225, from Sahih Muslim regarding the stoning. My point here that it is not a single hadith , but almost 30 in Sahih Muslim alone.
I didn't get what doesn't make sense in this matter, but think about it and I will be back to you.
Abu Yusuf [d. 183] records in al-Radd ‘ala Siyar al-Awza‘i: The Prophet said: The Hadith about me will spread. So what comes to you about me and is in agreement with the Qur’an is from me and what comes to you about me and is in conflict with the Qur’an is not from me.
You mentioned this hadith , but I don't know the book, and I don't know who is abo yousef, so I can't tell if it is true or not.
Shafi‘i in his al-Risalah records the following Hadith: The Prophet said: After my death you will split up on the basis of different opinions. When something reaches you which is attributed to me, compare it with the Qur’an; when it corresponds with the Book, it is from me; that which is at variance with it is not from me.
Abu Yusuf [d. 183] accepted this Hadith as authentic but Shafi‘i [d. 204] rejected it, calling it weak.
As you can see , weak Hadith means there is a problem in its narration chain. Of course the chain is not hear, so I can't tell.
Shafii is a great Fiqh (law) scholar who lived in Iraq and Egypt. While living in Iraq he made what we call the Old Shafi Madhab (set of opinions and laws he said for different cases). When he moved to Egypt, he found a lot of Hadith that he had no chance to see while living in Iraq. That leads him to change a lot of his opinions. The result was the New Shafi Madhab which is the last one adopted by him.
I read in one of his books that if someone at any time find an accepted Hadith that contradict one of his opinions in Fiqh, then his opinion should be rejected, and the hadith will be accepted. I gave you this story to answer the questions in your examples. Muslims who followed al Shafi in his Old Madhab are good Muslims as long as they didn't know the New one. If they new the changes in the New Madhab that results from a new Hadith that was not known, but refused it, it will be a problem.
I hope that you got my idea.
---------------
By the way, I recall reading a story (which I cannot find) about someone who came to the Prophet, worrying about “not getting it right,” keeping all the commands correctly, etc. He asked what he should do, and the prophet replied: “Keep your lips moist with the name of God.” Have you heard that story? Do you know where it might have come from?
I searched the for the Hadith you asked about and I found in three Hadith collections,
1- In Sunan Al Termizy , No. 3375, and it says it is a good Hadith by his a single way (a way is path of narration chain).
2- Sunan Ibn Maga, No. 3793, and in this collection in general is not fully trusted. It might include false hadith. But there is no comment about this specific one.
3- Mosnad Ahmed, this collection is larger one, the Hadith is found from two differnt ways, one is the same as the one found in the previous collections, and another one.
The first way is No. 17245
and the second way is No. 17227
So in general it looks like it is accepted, but I have to do some more search. All these information I got from an Arabic Hadith site, which include over 21 Hadith collection with multiple collection search.
http://www.islamweb.net/ver2/archive/showhsmainbook.php
There is no English translation of the three collections include the hadith but I will search for it.
----------------
I wanted to add: One of the problems with saying (as some I have been do) that one must have a vast body of knowledge to understand for oneself the Qur’an (and the Sunnah), is that it forces people to submit to the dictates of the ulama out of fear of error. There is no priesthood in Islam, and I would think it a mistake to treat imams or members of the ulama or the fuqaha as if they were like such a priesthood.
I agree, but I want you to look at this Hadith form Sahih Al Bukhari:
Volume 1, Book 3, Number 100:
Narrated 'Abdullah bin 'Amr bin Al' As:
I heard Allah's Apostle saying, "Allah does not take away the knowledge, by taking it away from (the hearts of) the people, but takes it away by the death of the religious learned men till when none of the (religious learned men) remains, people will take as their leaders ignorant persons who when consulted will give their verdict without knowledge. So they will go astray and will lead the people astray."
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/bukhari/003.sbt.html#001.003.100
I think this hadith is a good prophecy of what happens today. Many gives verdicts today without any knowladge. Don't you agree?
-------------------
You raised a lot of point requires more time, I wil be back to you soon.
Originally posted by ahosyneyThere is no English translation of the three collections include the hadith but I will search for it.
I'm somehow visited untill Friday, so I want you to check the following links:
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/muslim/017.smt.html
Read the Hadith from 4191 to 4225, from Sahih Muslim regarding the stoning. My point here that it is not a single hadith , but almost 30 in Sahih Muslim alone.
I didn't get what doesn't make sense -----
You raised a lot of point requires more time, I wil be back to you soon.
Thank you for searching that out for me. Perhaps you could translate just one of them for me? If I find where I read it, I will be sure to post it.
____________________________________
It was not my intention to raise the stoning issue again, per se. But look at all the effort you put forth to search out Hadith, and determine for yourself authenticity. Now, I will say that I can see where Hadith could sometimes clarify what’s in the Qur’an, in difficult cases.
Now, here is the Qur’an—which specifies 100 strikes for adultery, and does not differentiate between zinah for unmarried, and zinah for married. There is no question of authentic versus inauthentic.
So—if one person is wrongly executed for adultery because the Hadith are wrong, who is to blame? The Qur’an says 100 strikes, and no one needs to check the isnad or matn.
There is a story in which a servant girl for the Prophet did not do her errands correctly (I’m doing this from memory, so maybe I will get the details a little wrong). When she returned to the Prophet’s household, he waved his napkin at her and said: “If I did not fear God, I might beat you with this!” (That is, with the napkin!)
So, I would say that one who is willing to stone, may fear God less than did the Prophet who would not strike a servant girl with a napkin.
By the way, 30 times does not make truth. A story repeated a hundred times does not make it true. An isnad that makes it possible does not make it true.
____________________________________
I will be interested in your response to my thought experiment...
____________________________________
EDIT: It just seems to me that there is always some risk involved with relying on the Hadith, especially where they might contradict the Qur’an. Especially when so much of the Qur’an moves people away from the harsher decrees of pre-Islamic Arabia (the treatment of women, for example).
A Hadith with different isnads in different collections, and different versions—surely the differences ought to raise questions about that Hadith, not confirm it? Have you not made similar arguments with respect to variations among Biblical writers?
The Hadiths are hearsay, regardless of the isnad. Hearsay might be accurate, but one can never be sure.
The point is: if the Qur'an can't be wrong, and if the Hadith can be, even if it seems unlikely in a given case, isn't the safest course to rely on the Qur'an?
________________________________________
I hope your visit is an enjoyable one.
Originally posted by vistesdHi my friend,
[b]There is no English translation of the three collections include the hadith but I will search for it.
Thank you for searching that out for me. Perhaps you could translate just one of them for me? If I find where I read it, I will be sure to post it.
____________________________________
It was not my intention to raise the stoning issue again ur'an?
________________________________________
I hope your visit is an enjoyable one.[/b]
It doesn't seem that there is something you are missing here. So to start, can you tell me what a good Isnad means for you?
----------------
I will be interested in your response to my thought experiment...
I think I did , didn't you read my talk about al Shafi'i and his opinion change after moving to Egypt.
-----------------
EDIT: It just seems to me that there is always some risk involved with relying on the Hadith, especially where they might contradict the Qur’an. Especially when so much of the Qur’an moves people away from the harsher decrees of pre-Islamic Arabia (the treatment of women, for example).
A Hadith with different isnads in different collections, and different versions—surely the differences ought to raise questions about that Hadith, not confirm it? Have you not made similar arguments with respect to variations among Biblical writers?
I think the comparision can't take place, you are comparing between a Hadith of two lines which we know everything about its history with a complete book that we don't any thing about the authers.
Every person that reported any Hadith should be know, not only by name but also his biography.
And Hadith is not accepted unless it has a continuous Isnad.
But in the case of the Bible, or at least the NT , there is no such a thing. And even if you know the name , there is no Isnad.
The Hadiths are hearsay, regardless of the isnad. Hearsay might be accurate, but one can never be sure.
The point is: if the Qur'an can't be wrong, and if the Hadith can be, even if it seems unlikely in a given case, isn't the safest course to rely on the Qur'an?
To answer your questions I will ask a simple question:
Every Muslim prays Five times a day,
The units of prayer is called "Rakaa",
The first prayer has 2 Rakaa's
The second one is 4
The third one is 4
The fourth one is 3
And the fifth one is 4
And each prayer has specific timing. And Each Rakaa has a specific practice.
Where in Quran you will find all of this?
Originally posted by ahosyneyIt doesn't seem that there is something you are missing here. So to start, can you tell me what a good Isnad means for you?
Hi my friend,
It doesn't seem that there is something you are missing here. So to start, can you tell me what a good Isnad means for you?
----------------
[b]I will be interested in your response to my thought experiment...
I think I did , didn't you read my talk about al Shafi'i and his opinion change after moving to Egypt.
---------------- ...[text shortened]... And Each Rakaa has a specific practice.
Where in Quran you will find all of this?[/b]
Basically, one in which the chain is possible (person X was really still alive when he spoke to person Y, for example; or that Z really could’ve heard the prophet say so and so); and that the chain consist of persons who are reputable. The point is that even reputable people can get it wrong, and it is still hearsay evidence. What if Bukhari, for example, did not catch all of the conflicting statements, as he apparently did with my Fourth Case?
I think I did , didn't you read my talk about al Shafi'i and his opinion change after moving to Egypt.
Ooops!
Now, suppose I learn about Hadith, but I cannot in my own mind (in good conscience) accept them—especially if I think that they contradict the Qur’an. Suppose I honestly think that, if I submit to the ulama on a particular point, that I am not properly submitting to God?
And Hadith is not accepted unless it has a continuous Isnad.
Yes, but unless I am the one who decides whether or not the Hadith should be accepted, then I am putting someone else between my conscience and God.
My criteria for accepting a Hadith would include the following:
(1) proper isnad
(2) whether or not I think the Hadith contradicts the Qur’an
(3) whether or not I think the Hadith goes contrary to reason
(3) whether or not the Hadith violates my moral conscience.
The fact that the compilers used these same criteria (and others) means that they weeded out those that they thought could not be authentic; it is no guarantee of the authenticity of those that were not rejected.
In the end, it is my conscience that stands before God, not Bukhari’s (although I am sure he was a man of good conscience). As I understand a basic principle of Islam presented in the Qur’an, it is no excuse for me to stand before God and say, “You know, I thought that was wrong. It bothered me. But Imam Shafi’i said it was right.”
With regard to the prayers, I would say that this is a good thing. I may well accept the Hadith on prayer—but even if I did not accept the Hadith, I might still consider it a good thing. (I would no more disrupt the prayers of others by deliberately doing it differently in their presence, than I would deliberately disrupt a Christian liturgy by loudly changing the words.)
But which is the better Muslim? One who properly goes about the externals of prayer, but without focusing inwardly on God? Or one who only prays three times a day, but focuses all his attention on God and the meaning of the prayers? (Okay, I can hear you saying what the best would be. 😉 )
Your point about the Hadith and the Gospels is well-taken.
There is a statement by Rumi that I like, that goes something like, “Cherish the pitcher less and the water more.” The pitcher can certainly help you carry the water; but it is the water that is important, regardless of which pitcher one is using, or how one pours from it. The pitcher is for the water, not the other way around.