certifired_img

Books and Documents

Debating Islam (30 Jun 2014 NewAgeIslam.Com)


Bringing Down The Institution Of Hadees From Its Pedestal, Equal To Quran: No Matter How Revered, Hadees Is Not Divine Islamic Scripture, Any Blind Faith Is Unwarranted








Sultan Shahin, Founding Editor, New Age Islam

1 July 2014


Note: I am shifting this debate from its present thread, as, it doesn't quite belong there and deserves a separate line of discussion.

-----

Dear Naseer Saheb (Observer), I know you are on Ramazan leave and I don't really want to bother you, and understand, that you may not even see it. But since I notice Muhammad Yunus saheb not responding to your observations on the issue of hadith regarding the relative purity of a male child's urine over that of a female child, perhaps for fear of being maligned further,  (I myself have that fear, as do many others who have stopped engaging with you, knowing your frustrations and how they come out,) it seems it is my duty to set the record straight, or at least to put on record my own thoughts on the issue.

When Syed Manzoor Alam brought out the urine-related hadees, to challenge Mr. Ghulam Ghouse's blind faith in hadees, he was, I think, not focusing on that particular hadees but the unreliability, absurdness of many so-called authentic (sahis) hadeeses. When some people arguing against blind belief in hadees quote pornographic material, their intention is not to either discuss that particular pornographic content, or even to disabuse us of the very institution of hadees but to attack the blind faith in hadees, putting it on a pedestal even above the holy Quran, as Tablighi Jamaat and ahl-e-hadees people and generally nearly all Muslims do.


As I understand, you too are against blind faith in all so-called authentic or sahih hadees. And so is Yunus Saheb. But, forgetting the larger picture, and rather than supporting Mr. Manzoor Alam, as would be expected from you, knowing your views, you started defending the relative purity of a male child's urine over that of a female child. You first went to the medical world for evidence, argued over it and wanted everyone to fall in line. When that did not happen and Yunus Saheb objected, you started calling him names and then went to the extent of scanning the discourse of three law schools to prove that the hadith Mr. Alam was discussing was not a weak hadith.


Yunus Saheb's view in the matter, if you have read his article the evolution of hadith sciences, is the same as that of Imam Muslim's who said that much of what is called authentic is really doubtful/ weak. So even if you prove that this hadees is sahih, he would still consider it weak as his mind does not accept it to be true. 


There can be several objections to this particular hadees from common sense. For instance, the youngest daughter of the Prophet, Hazrat Fatima was born in the first year of revelation when the Prophet was not even quite sure if he was receiving any message from God. How could he at that nascent stage advise Hazrat Khadija on the relative purity of a male baby's urine and greater impurity of the female baby's urine. Apparently there was such acute dearth of swathes of cloth and water in those days in the Arabian desert that the Prophet's wives faced great hardship during their periods and, in practice,  there was no question of changing clothes even if a baby soiled it.


Anyway, this whole discussion is basically taking us away from the point - the blind belief and inordinate reverence Muslims have for hadees. I do not attach much significance to, as Yunus Saheb does, the quotation from Imam Muslim who basically said that much of what is called authentic was really doubtful/ weak. The reason I don't, is that while this quotation may guide exegetes and scholars like Muhammad Yunus, no one in the community has so much as heard of it, much less would put any value to it. Muslims believe that sahih is sahih, authentic is authentic. They would consider any hadees weak only if it is not found in sihah-e-sitta (صحاح ستہ), the six authentic collections of hadees, particularly Bukhari and Muslim. And these authentic collections of ahadees are full of absurdities, misogynistic statements, inducement to violence, pornographic material, character assassination attempts on the prophet that today's Islamophobes quote and then we get angry.  


Even if Naseer Saheb, you think you have successfully established the relative purity of a male child's urine over that of his sister, you will not be able to stand up to all the absurd and plainly wrong and unbelievable ahadees that are put before you. So it would be best if you joined us in communicating to the masses of Islam that Islam was completed with Quran in the time of Prophet Mohammad (saw) and any other books that come later are not scripture of Islam. If someone wants to benefit from collections of ahadees, as they surely can, they are free to do so, but not free to consider Islamic scripture a collection that came 200 or 300 years after the demise of the Prophet.


Let us keep putting before our public the most absurd of the thousands of such ahadees from the sihah-e-sitta (صحاح ستہ) and ask Muslims to apply their minds and think if the prophet could have said things like that. This is a minimum test that the great imams of hadees should have necessarily applied. Had they done so, we would not be in such a sorry mess today or indeed in our history.


I think Yunus Saheb has said somewhere that in the prevailing milieu of the wide acceptability of these ahadees in their time, it was not possible for the imams to have rejected these ahadees. But if that is the case, why do these imams deserve our reverence. We revere people like Prophet Mohammad who stood up to the storms of protest at what must have been for Meccans his completely unacceptable and unpopular views. Anyway reverence for imams Bukhari, Muslim, etc. is not at all an issue today. The issue is how to bring down the institution of hadees from its pedestal higher than even Quran, how to convince them that hadees is not Islamic scripture and any blind faith in sihah-e-sitta (صحاح ستہ) 'authentic' hadees is unwarranted.


Sultan Shahin



----

Note: Some selected previous postings from the thread this issue was being discussed is given below. For a full review of the thread of discussion go to:

URL: http://www.newageislam.com/debating-islam/sultan-shahin/bringing--down-the-institution-of-hadees-from-its-pedestal,-equal-to-quran--no-matter-how-revered,-hadees-is-not-divine-islamic-scripture,-any-blind-faith-is-unwarranted/d/97819

-----------------------

Mr. Observer, You say to me in your last comment: “There is no objective analysis of the Hadith by you or anyone else despite the way shown by me.”

Here is my objective analysis of Hadith compilations (shown in blue) that appears in an article posted on this website more than two years ago:

Since the first compilations of the Hadith literature (by al-Bukhari, Muslim) was undertaken at least two centuries, or eight to nine generations after the Prophet’s death, they confronted the same inexorable challenge as al-Shafi‘i: It was humanly impossible for them to address all the local, personal, historical and obsolescence factors that had interacted during preceding eight to nine generations. The compilers could only verify the integrity of the narrators in the transmission chain (isnad) through the preceding generations stretching back to the Prophet’s era. This is the best they could do, as the state of knowledge of the era was not conducive to verifying:

Whether the narrators and transmitters of the Prophetic traditions (Hadiths) in each successive generation ever met in their lifetime or came to know of the Hadith in currency through intermediaries of questionable integrity.

 ·         Whether the substance of a given Hadith was revoked by a subsequent Qur'anic revelation - which had continued until a few months before the Prophet’s death, or had become obsolete with time.

·         Whether some vested interest had introduced some Hadith to serve their interest by forging an isnad.

·         the integrity of people whose example (sunna) was adopted by the next generation followers. 

As a result of these limitations, a large number of forged, spurious unsavory and fabricated accounts skipped the screening process and found their way into the authentic (Sahih) corpus, simply because they had gained popularity among the masses and had entered the Hadith chain. Many learned people of the era were aware of this, including the great Imams (al-Bukhari and Muslim) who compiled the Hadith (opening quotations) but religious passion was so intense that even the most learned and pious were afraid to question the truth of an apparently ‘questionable’ account, if it furnished a chain of reliable transmitters. Moreover, some Hadith that might have been authentic in isolation were context specific and lend themselves to contradictory propositions, [7] while some were specific to the era and suffered obsolescence with time as earlier mentioned [8].

Last but not least, the later rulers of Islam, notably the Tatars, actively popularized many weak Hadiths which in the words of Muhammad Abduh (1849-1905), who is regarded as one of the most learned Islamic scholars and one time Grand Mufti of al-Azhar al-Sharif, were no more than “lethal superstitions and fables”:

“(The Tatars) found many spurious and fabricated traditions which they were quick to exploit for their own purpose, interpreting them only in order to indoctrinate the people with their fictions and delusions… They misinterpreted the Islamic doctrine of divine decree so as to frustrate human will and to choke every striving for action. The people’s ignorance of the religion, their inclination to the path of least resistance, and their desire to satisfy their passions persuaded the Muslims to accept those lethal superstitions and fables.” [9]

In consideration of the foregoing factors, it will be simplistic and in many cases a grievous error to take the Hadith literature left by the early compilers and in currency to this day, on their face value, as the true representation the Prophet’s Sunna. The claim becomes all the more weak and porous if we remember that a rival School of Law (the Twelver Shi‘i) regard all Sunni collections as false and fabricated ((Mukhtalaq), though the case of the Sunni Hadith as divinely revealed corpus remains immensely weak on its own – given the plethora of arguments tabled above and the grave doubts of the pioneering compilers noted under the caption above. To quote Muhammad Abduh again: [10]:

“Most of what goes today under the name of Islam is not Islam at all. It may only have preserved the outer shell of the Islamic ritual of prayer, fasting and pilgrimage, as well as some sayings, which have been however perverted by allegorical interpretations. All these sinister accretions and superstitions that found their way into Islam brought about the stagnation that now pass under the name of religion.”

For further details please read:

Evolution of Hadith Sciences and Need for Major Paradigm Shift in Role of Hadith Corpus and Scope of Madrasa Education

http://newageislam.com/islamic-sharia-laws/evolution-of-hadith-sciences-and-need-for-major-paradigm-shift-in-role-of-hadith-corpus-and-scope-of-madrasa-education/d/6581

As regards your specific question about relative purity of a baby child’s urine, I will repeat the statement of Alisha Qalandar posted below:

“The Qur'an omits the theme like million other themes and any discerning Muslim who understands the era specificity of Hadith literature I will not take it as the fount of guidance.” The theme is merely a regional taboo like confining a widow to her house for four months and ten days or keeping a mistress, misinterpreting the Qur’anic.

Anyway, I have two grown up children of either sex both past 30 and we never made any distinction that is under debate. In fact all my life I never confronted this most trivial question. It  is trivial because the divine message encompasses the most important social issues and paradigms of life that are of immensely more importance than the theme that seems to stimulate your imagination. It is better we discuss those bigger issues rather than this Hadith rooted trivial issue. If we start discussing Hadith rooted issues, we will open a floodgate of themes that dominated Islamic thoughts in medieval ages in consonance with civilisational relativism but sound bizarre, unsavoury and outlandish this day and reduce Islam to a cult of ancient customs and taboos from a world religion.    

I have done an article supporting reform of Muslim Personal Law in India. This is immensely more important than the theme we are discussing. You may like to read it and support it.

By muhammad yunus - 6/28/2014 1:24:50 AM

-------------

  • Yunus sb. puts it succinctly and cogently when he says, "The Islamic scholarship may do better to allocating minimal time on probing what the Qur’an forbids it to probe – its ambiguous (mutashabihat) verses, and to actively probe and appropriate its definitive (muhkamat) commandments (3:7) – its social, moral and ethical paradigms, its functional and interpersonal tenets – good deeds, sharing of wealth with the poor, good neighborly and inter-faith relations, charity, generosity, justice and equity; mercy, compassion, patience and tolerance; peaceful conflict resolution, vying with each other in goodness and lawful pursuits, use of reason and discernment, repelling all negative thoughts, unremitting effort for improvement."By Ghulam Mohiyuddin - 6/26/2014 2:05:59 PM
  • Observer says, "The classification of hadiths as weak and strong based on the strength of the chain of transmission is a very unimaginative criteria used by the compilers. It should have been what makes sense. If the hadiths are categorized based on ‘what makes good sense’ then we would have had little problem with them." . . .

    This is an excellent point. After it is determined whether a Hadith is "authentic" or "inauthentic", there are two more points to remember. (1) Is it a good Hadith? Does it say something that is wise, sensible and useful? (2) Even if a Hadith is authentic and good, it does not have a divine status, it is not comparable to the Quran and it is not binding. It cannot be cited to resolve any issues. It has the status of folklore.

    By Ghulam Mohiyuddin - 6/26/2014 1:54:24 PM
  • -----------
  • Ghulam Gaus Saheb,, You have kept repeating that "without Hadith a believer can never understand the overall meaning of the Quran.... I am sure they can never understand those issues from only Quran without Hadith. " You are unable to see that after God and Prophet declare Islam to be complete in the lifetime of the Prophet itself, saying that it cannot be understood without the help of something that came 300 years later amounts to blasphemy. It certainly belittles Quran, that is supposed to be our only scripture as far as God and Prophet (saw) are concerned.

    Hadees is pure and simple bida'at created primarily to justify the un-Islamic dynastic, corrupt, dictatorial, imperialistic,  khilafat of the people who were offspring of the inveterate enemies of Islam, the family of Abu Sufian who did everything in his power to stop Mohammad (saw) and Islam from taking root. The monarchical, dynastic khilafats that took hold after killing every member of the Prophet's family, including infants, needed justification to call itself Islamic which it could not find in the Quran. Quran was calling for total equality among all humans before God.

     I know that this generalisation is not entirely correct and that there is much in Hadees that we can relate to and learn from, that is in consonance with the spirit of Islam too. But since the enemies of Islam had to rule a Muslim population in the name of Islam, they just had to create a parallel scripture as Quran was by and large known to everyone and memorised by many. They created two institutions - Hadees and ulema - to create a distance between Muslims and the Islam brought to the world by the Prophet (saw). The idea that we need to consult ulema and that an alim can do ijtihad is as much a bida'at and blasphemy as is blind faith in Hadees.

    I must hasten to add that any wholesale condemnation of either of these institutions will be wrong, that there are hadeeses and there are hadeeses, that there are ulema and there are ulema. But the Muslims will have to start exercising  their discretion in accepting which alim to listen to  and which hadees to accept as correct. We simply cannot go by the choices made by Imam Bukhari or Muslim or any other ulema even in the so-called sihah-e-sitta (صحاح ستہ), the so-called six authentic books of hadees, full as they are of idiotic, un-Islamic, pornographic, violent, supremacist material. There can be nothing authentic about anything written from memories of ancestors 100 to 300 years after the demise of the Prophet. 

    By Sultan Shahin - 6/24/2014 8:50:26 AM


    ------------

    ·        This is what I call blind belief. Dear Ghaus, you have not commented on that hadith about the difference in urine between a boy and a girl. You said that you would, but you did not. If you wish to ignore then I have no problem. But your statement that you will never deter in following the Quran and the Hadith worries me, because one of the  hadiths also say "I (Prophet Muhammad, pbuh, is saying) gained victory by inflicting terror into the hearts of the people". This is in absolute opposition to what the Quran says about him as "a mercy to all the worlds and all the creatures". Why can't people like you (pardon me for using this phrase, I can't put it in another way) understand this simple concept that Hadith can never stand in equal footing with the Quran, it comes a distant second and that too only Bukhari, I am sorry I am not using "Sahi" Bukhari.

    The other thing is that these sayings of the Prophet were written almost 200 years after his demise and many hadiths follow a really long chain of narrations, that just can't be trusted. I believe most of these contradictory things emerge in Islam because of these Hadiths, one group of scholar says, that say, one hadith is authentic, while the other group of scholar says that it is dwaeef, weak. A common Muslim, who has little knowledge on these issues does not know what to do, what to follow and whom to listen. 

    But you know what, I am sure you will not change your belief in hadith, you will either ignore me, or beat about the bush or come up with some outlanding interpretation that will "prove" the authenticity of the hadiths from the quran. You tell the readers to listen to 100- 45 minute long videos to get convinced that hadith is authentic, well why can't you do it on this forum. You come up with your best arguments for hadiths and let he readers decide for themselves. I am copy- pasting from wikipedia, read just this

    "Do not write anything from me except the Qur'an. Whoever wrote, must destroy it."

    Muhammad, as narrated by Abu Sa'eed al-Khudri

    By Syed Manzoor Alam - 6/24/2014 8:46:35 AM

    ----


    ·        Mr Alam, Mr Ghaus can only confirm whether the Hadith is saheeh or not. In the meantime, why don't you find out and tell us what is the difference between the urine of a baby boy and baby girl as regards the constituents? From my lay person's knowledge what I know is that:

     

    1. Urine tests can confirm gender of the person (presence of hormones)

    2. Females are more prone to UTI

    3. A baby girl has vaginal discharge for a few days to several months.

    Any of these reasons may render her urine more napak than that of a boy's.

    I think GM Sb is a medical doctor and he can tell us more.

    If there is no significant difference, then you can tell Ghaus Sb that Hadeeths are unreliable. There is no point badgering the gentleman unnecessarily without full knowledge that the hadith is actually ridiculous or not

    By Observer - 6/24/2014 11:05:00 AM


    -------------

    ·        Sultan Shahin sb. says, "we should concentrate on the message revealed to him." . . .

    Words to remember! Instead of spending our time on the Hadiths and Sunnah, let us concentrate on what the Quran is trying to tell us. If overinclusive compiling by non-professional compilers makes some verses unclear or confusing, let us follow a simple rule. If a verse does not pass all of the following five tests, let us skip it and move to the next verse:

    (1) It must support peace and reconciliation and oppose violence and hatred. (2) It must affirm that all men and women are equal in the eyes of God. (3) It should demand that we be just and fair. (4) It should be consistent with rationality, reasonableness and commonsense. (5) It should favour compassion and forgiveness.


    By Ghulam Mohiyuddin - 6/26/2014 12:58:34 AM


    ---------------------

    ·        @muhammad yunus - 6/25/2014 8:50:38 AM


    Dear Yunus Saheb, you start with denouncing those who quote the weakest of Hadeeses (difficult to understand how you characterise any one hadees as weakest, as there are thousands like that even in authoritative Bukhari and Muslims and the other four "authentic" hadees books), and then go on to quote renowned non-Muslim authors praising Mohammad (saw).

    Are you implying that Hadees and Mohammad (saw) are one and the same? That pointing out the weakness of some hadees, any single hadees, amounts to denigrating Prophet Mohammad (saw).  

    The thousands of manifestly concocted ahadees in the authoritative books of collections by Bukhari and Muslim, etc are quoted to attack the inordinate reverence that most Muslims reserve for Hadees, putting it practically on a pedestal higher than Quran.  

    With so much work of refutation of violent radical Islamist ideologies behind you, no one is aware more than you of the use to which "authoritative," "authentic" hadeeses of Imam Bukhari and Imam Muslim, etc. are put to.

    If we are to fight Jihadism, we must bring the institution of hadees down from its present high pedestal.

    It's extreme naiveté to think that hadeeses represent words and sayings of the prophet. Can you write down word for word something somebody told you a minute ago. And what of one of you grandson's friend's grandson's grandson reporting 300 years from now that this is what Yunus sahib had told my grandfather's friend's grandfather's grandfather, etc. 

    At the very most, if there is a headees that we find elevating in spirit, we can say that the prophet may have said something like this, though, of course, he must have put this in his own words.

    Let us not equate hadees with the prophet. Even if sayings of the prophet have to be put above the Quran, or at least treated as equal to Quran, as most Muslims believe today, we should at least be sure that this is what the Prophet (saw) did actually said and there is no way of finding that out today, as there was no way of finding that out in the times of Bukhari and Muslim or Tirmidhi, abu Dawood, etc. The one thing we can do is to apply our minds and search our hearts if we find some of the content of the ahadees acceptable.  But this is a recipe for Mohammedans; as for Muslims, they should focus on understanding the message of the holy Quran, which is difficult enough due to problems in its compilation  by seventh century Arab Bedouins unfamiliar with books.

    Yunus Saheb, The best biography of the Prophet that I have come across is in the first chapter of your book. Why? Because you have based it entirely on what we learn about him in the Quran. As believers, we don't need to know about him, we should concentrate on the message revealed to him. It's God we worship, not Mohammad. Does this mean we should consider him a man of no account. How can it? The very fact that we believe that the God we worship chose him to be his messenger for the world is enough to establish his place in our hearts. Mohammad asked us to worship God, not him.

    Do please forgive me for any inadvertent transgressions.


    By Sultan Shahin - 6/25/2014 9:28:28 PM

    ----------


    ·        @Those Commentators who quote the weakest Ahadith, as currently under debate on this forum and any other radical Muslim / unsympathetic non-Muslim commentator who demonizes the Prophet Muhammad by drawing on Islamic / oriental sources or forming an opinion about him from the horrendous un-Islamic deeds of the terror outfits of this era who falsely claim to be following his example. 


    This is what some of the greatest scholars of Islam whose name will shine like beacons in the domain of knowledge wrote about the Prophet Muhammad:

    “No great religious leader has been so maligned as Muhammad. Attacked in the past as a heretic, an impostor, or a sensualist, it is still possible to find him referred to as ‘the false Prophet.’” - Geoffery Parrinder1

    “It seems incredible now that so much of what was said of Muhammad was believed in good faith. But not only audiences, but authors believed whatever tended to show that Muhammad could not really have been the Messenger of God.” Norman Daniel2

    “Part of the Western problem is that for centuries Muhammad has been seen as the antithesis of the religious spirit and the enemy of the decent civilization. Instead perhaps we should try to see him as a man of the spirit, who managed to bring peace and civilization to his people.” - Karen Armstrong3

    “Even in the height of his glory Muhammad led, as in his days of obscurity, an unpretentious life in one of those clay houses consisting, as do all old-fashioned houses of present day Arabia and Syria, of a few rooms opening into a courtyard and accessible only from there. He was often seen mending his own clothes and was all times within the reach of his people.” - Philip Hitti4

    “Philosopher, orator, apostle, legislator, warrior, conqueror of ideas, restorer of rational dogmas, of a cult without images, the founder of twenty terrestrial empires and of one spiritual empire: that is MUHAMMAD. As regards all the standards by which human greatness may be measured, we may well ask IS THERE ANY MAN GREATER THAN HE?” - Alphonse de LaMartaine5

    “A poor shepherd people, roaming unnoticed in its deserts since the creation of the world: a Hero-Prophet was sent down to them with a word they could believe ...  as if a spark had fallen, one spark, on a world of what seemed black unnoticeable sand; but lo, the sand proves explosive powder, blazes heaven-high from Delhi to Grenada! I said, the Great Man was always as lightning out of Heaven; the rest of men waited for him like fuel, and then they too would flame.” – Thomas Carlyle6

    “My choice of Muhammad to lead the world’s most influential persons may surprise some readers, but he was the only man in history who was supremely successful on both the religious and secular level” -Michael Harts [7].

    "Head of the State as well as the Church, he was Caesar and Pope in one; but he was Pope without the Pope's pretensions, and Caesar without the legions of Caesar, without a standing army, without a bodyguard, without a police force, without a fixed revenue. If ever a man ruled by a right divine, it was Muhammad, for he had all the powers without their supports. He cared not for the dressings of power. The simplicity of his private life was in keeping with his public life." Reverend Bosworth Smith [8]

    “Four years after the death of Justinian in A.D. 569, was born at Mecca, in Arabia, the man (Muhammad) who, of all men, exercised the greatest influence on world history….” [9] – John William Draper.

    “I have studied him - the wonderful man, and in my opinion – far from being an antichrist, he must be called the savior of humanity.” [10] – George Bernard Shaw.

    “It is not belittling Muhammad to see him as a political figure – but to see him as no more than that would be a mutilation. And anyone who thus mutilates Muhammad is in fact mutilating himself in the domain of knowledge.” [11]

    Notes:

    1.  John L. Esposito, Islam the Straight Path, New York 1994, p. 18.

    2.  Norman Daniel, Islam and the West, The Making of an Image, London 1992.

    3.  Karen Armstrong, Muhammad, London 1991, p. 44.

    4.  Philip K. Hitty, History of the Arabs, 1937, 10th edition; London 1993, p. 120.

    5. Alphonse de LaMartaine in 'History of Turkey, extracted from the Intenet:

     http://www.goodreads.com/author/quotes/693415.Alphonse_de_Lamartine

    6.        http://www.scribd.com/doc/12685866/Hero-as-a-Prophet-by-Thomas-Carlyle  

    7.        Michael H. Hart, The 100. A Ranking of the Most Influential Persons in History, Hart Publishing Company Inc. New York, USA 1978, p. 33.

    8.        Reverend Bosworth Smith in 'Muhammad and Muhammadanism,' London, 1874

    9.        John William Draper, A history of the intellectual development of Europe, London 1875.

    10.     George Bernard Shaw, Genius Islam: Vol. 1, No. 81936.

    11. Maxime Rodinson, Muhammad, English translation, 2nd edition, London 1996, p. xviii

    I will also draw the attention of the commentators to the following concluding remark of my researched article referenced below: 

    To sum up, let this write up shed light on the noble persona of the Prophet and reassure the readers in general that no matter what the propagandist literature contrives, the Islam.crtical and revisionist politicians claim, the cartoonists draw, or the film makers produce, Muhammad was indeed a noble man, even if he is not given the credit of being God’s messenger. As for the Muslims exposed to any unsympathetic account of the Prophet or his wives or marriages, they must understand that these are invariably extracted from the Prophet’s early biographic accounts which are largely embellished and speculative, verging at times on the fantabulous, the grotesque and the bizarre [4].

    As for the cunning and malicious provocateurs and Islam critical Muslims as well as non-Muslims, assassinating the character of the Prophet or spinning colourful stories about his wives by drawing on his highly embellished biographic accounts, the Muslims must ignore their machinations in the spirit of the following Qur’anic pronouncements.

    ·         “Thus we made for every messenger an enemy - Satans from among men and jinn, some of them inspiring others with seductive talk (in order to) deceive (them), and had your Lord pleased, they would not have done it. Therefore, leave them and what they forge” (6:112)

    “Thus we made for every messenger an enemy among the criminals - but enough is your Lord (O Muhammad,) as a Guide and Helper” (25:31)

    The Noble Persona of Prophet Muhammad (Pbuh) As Mirrored In the Qur’an

    http://www.newageislam.com/islamic-personalities/the-noble-persona-of-prophet-muhammad-(pbuh)-as-mirrored-in-the-qur’an/d/8657

    By muhammad yunus - 6/25/2014 8:50:38 AM

    ------------


    ·        First of all, let us put the record straight. I am not the one who is a believer in the hadiths nor will you find me quoting or relying on hadiths in any of my comments or articles. I am on record that my knowledge of religious books outside the Quran is close to zero and Shahin sb has confirmed that it is so. I could have rebutted Ghaus Sb assertion that the Quran cannot be understood without the hadiths with the very example he gave to prove why he thought so but did not wish to butt in.

    It is Alam who has brought  up the subject of girls urine vis-a-vis boys urine and was badgering Ghaus with it. If he accuses Ghaus of blind belief, his attack is based on blind disbelief. If it were not so, he would have posed his question with proof that there is no material difference and the hadith is nonsensical.

    Is anyone else even capable of an objective rebuttal?  I have shown the way for proceeding in an objective manner but no one seems to have the stomach for it or the brains for it. This is the age of political correctness and political correctness dictates that we make no difference and the facts are of no consequence!

    Abuse is no substitute for reason. It is the height of idiocy to equate defence of a hadith on the impurity of urine with support of extremism!

    Mr Yunus dare not even respond to my comment on his stupid advise on dietary restrictions in Islam. His works are based on uncritical and blind Taqlid of Asad who I have shown with clear proof that he has erred in several places. He is a scholar of political correctness playing to the  gallery. Look at the viciousness with which he attacks!

    If one is right, then there is no need for such vicious and concerted attacks in a pack like hyenas or wolves. It is the lesser animals that abound on this website.

    By Observer - 6/24/2014 11:36:28 PM

    ------------


    ·        Excessive dependence on written words has been our curse. We have become kitaab-parast instead of garnering what is best in the kitaab. We are bombarded with a plethora of rules, commands, prohibitions, interpretations, bidats, shirks and a lot of useless information. We would be better off if we concentrated on just the fundamentals of Islam namely peace, nonviolence, righteousness, equality, justice, prudence, moderation and compassion. Pursuit of knowledge and respect for the beliefs of others are also very important to us. While religion is an important part of our lives, it should not become an obsession. And we must reject extremism.

    By Ghulam Mohiyuddin - 6/24/2014 1:47:27 PM

    ------------------

    Dear Yunus Saheb, you start with denouncing those who quote the weakest of Hadeeses (difficult to understand how you characterise any one hadees as weakest, as there are thousands alike that even in authoritative Bukhari and Muslims and the other four "authentic" hades books), and then go on to quote renowned non-Muslim authors praising Mohammad.

    Are you implying that Hadees and Mohammad (saw) are one and the same? That pointing out the weakness of some hadees, any single hadees, amounts to denigrating Mohammad (saw).  

    The thousands of manifestly concocted ahadees in the authoritative books of collections by Bukhari and Muslim, etc are quoted to attack the inordinate reverence that most Muslims reserve for Hadees, putting it practically on a pedestal higher than Quran.  

    With so much work of refutation of violent radical Islamist ideologies behind you, no one is aware more than you of the use to which "authoritative," "authentic" hadeeses of Imam Bukhari and Imam Muslim, etc. are put to.

    If we are to fight Jihadism, we must bring the institution of hadees down from its present high pedestal.

    It's extreme naiveté to think that hadeeses represent words and sayings of the prophet. Can you write down word for word something somebody told you a minute ago. And what of one of you grandson's friend's grandson's grandson reporting 300 years from now that this is what Yunus sahib had told my grandfather's friend's grandfather's grandfather, etc. 

    At the very most, if there is a headees that we find elevating in spirit, we can say that the prophet may have said something like this, though, of course, he must have put this in his own words.

    Let us not equate hadees with the prophet. Even if sayings of the prophet have to be put above the Quran, or at least treated as equal to Quran, as most Muslims believe today, we should at least be sure that this is what the Prophet (saw) did actually said and there is no way of finding that out today, as there was no way of finding that out in the times of Bukhari and Muslim or Tirmidhi, abu Dawood, etc. The one thing we can do is to apply our minds and search our hearts if we find some of the content of the ahadees acceptable.  But this is a recipe for Mohammedans; as for Muslims, they should focus on understanding the message of the holy Quran, which is difficult enough due to problems in its compilation  by seventh century Arab Bedouins unfamiliar with books.

    Yunus Saheb, The best biography of the Prophet that I have come across is in the first chapter of your book. Why? Because you have based it entirely on what we learn about him in the Quran. As believers, we don't need to know about him, we should concentrate on the message revealed to him. It's God we worship, not Mohammad. Does this mean we should consider him a man of no account. How can it? The very fact that we believe that the God we worship chose him to be his messenger for the world is enough to establish his place in our hearts. Mohammad asked us to worship God, not him.

    Do please forgive me for any inadvertent transgressions.

    By Sultan Shahin - 6/25/2014 9:28:28 PM

    ----

    ·        Dear Mr. Ghulam Mohiyuddin,

    Being a student of Hadith i have come to know that Hadith itself allows flexibility in each and every age. Quran and Hadith have given us principles on the basis of which we can deal with every issue in a just manner in every age.

    I see the overall problem with even many Muslim thinkers is that they have not yet understood hadith as much as they should do.

    There is a verse in the holy Quran:

    “And We have revealed to you that Glorious Book which is a clear exposition of everything and is guidance, mercy and glad tidings for the believers” (16:89)

    In this verse the holy Quran says this glorious book is “a clear exposition of everything”. No Muslim can deny this Quranic commandment. If we fail to find the exposition of everything in the holy Quran, whose problem is this? I believe this is our problem; Almighty God’s words are true and believable for us Muslims. If any word or order of God is not understood by us, it is our responsibility to go through the Hadith. After all, if we are unable to find a solution in the Quran and Hadith, we should go through Consensus and Qiyas based upon deep knowledge of Quran and Hadith; which is a teaching of Quran and Hadith. This way everything is result of Quran and Hadith.

    A general principle in Islamic jurisprudence on which all Imams unanimously agree that whatever is not forbidden by Almighty God and his prophet Muhammad peace be upon him is allowed (Halal) for Muslims. This principle is known for providing flexibility for Muslims. The term ‘Mubah’ for such flexibility is used in Islamic jurisprudence.  But dear, it is unfortunate that Tableeghi Jamat, Wahhabi/Salafi/ and so-called Muslims have described this kind of flexibility as bidah and misleading.  Their rise is across the world; therefore, many Muslims have failed to adopt this kind of flexibility.

    Looking into the passage of time, if you adopt something which is not forbidden by Almighty God and his holy prophet Muhammad peace be upon him, you will face the harsh comment of Tableeghi Jamat and Wahhabi ideologues/Mullahs.

    Where is the problem? The problem is still with Muslims who follow such Mullahs and Tableeghi Jamat ideologues so blindly that they are never able to find flexibility in Islam; Quran and Hadith.
    By Ghulam Ghaus غلام غوث - 6/23/2014 5:30:08 AM

    ------

    ·        Dear Ghulam Mohiyuddin sahib, the Hadith you quoted tells us not to believe the Prophet Muhammad peace be upon him as son of God Almighty. This kind of exaggeration is prohibited in this hadith. However, we should also consider the following Qur'anic verses (I am quoting only two verses, though there are scores of verses in this regard) as always when talking about Islamic law:  

    “O believers! Obey Allah and obey the Messenger (blessings and peace be upon him) and those (men of truth) who hold command amongst you. Then if you disagree amongst yourselves over any issue, refer it to Allah and the Messenger ([blessings and peace be upon him] for final judgment), if you believe in Allah and the Last Day. That is best (for you) and best for the end result” (4:59)

    “And neither a believing man nor a believing woman has (this) right that, when Allah and His Messenger (blessings and peace be upon him) have given judgment (or a command) about an affair, they should exercise their own choice in (doing or not doing that) work of theirs. And whoever disobeys Allah and His Messenger (blessings and peace be upon him) certainly loses his way into open error” (33:36)

    In these two verses God Almighty has called believers first to obey God Almighty and then obey the prophet Muhammad peace be upon him. Here is the matter of first and second and third in obedience.     

    But those who think that they will understand the whole Quran without Hadith is at wrong. There are thousands of issues that can be given to them for understanding on their own. I am sure they can never understand those issues from the only Quran without Hadith. In those cases they will be staunch rejecters of the true meaning of the Quran. Unfortunately, they will not be able to estimate their own rejection of Quran.

    I am giving just one example to make my point clear. The holy Quran says, “Forbidden to you (for food) are: dead meat, blood, the flesh of swine…..” (Surah al-Ma’idah: 53)  

    Here God Almighty has forbidden the meat of all dead animals without differentiating between sea-animals and land-animals. There was general prohibition in this Quranic verse, but the prophet Muhamamd peace be upon him has made an exception to this issue. We know from the following Hadith that fish has been exempted from this general ruling due to explicit mention of permissibility by the prophet Muhammad peace be upon him.  

    “Hazrat Abd Allah ibn Umar (Allah be pleased with him) narrates that the Messenger of Allah (Allah bless him & give him eternal peace) said: “Two types of dead meat and two types of blood have been made lawful for our consumption: The two dead meats are: fish and locust, and the two types of blood are: liver and spleen.” (Sunan Abu Dawud, Musnad Ahmad and Sunan Ibn Majah)

    According to Islamic jurisprudence, in Islamic law God Almighty has ultimate sovereignty (Haqeeqi Hakmiyat), but he has endowed the prophet Muhammad peace be upon him with manifestative sovereignty (Niyabati Hakmiyat). Thus God Almighty has also given the prophet Muhammad peace be upon him the authority of ‘Specification of General’ (Takhseesul Aam), Qualification of Absolute (Taqeedul Mutlaq), Explanation of Implicit (Bayanul Mujmal) and Exemption (Istithna), Addition (Azziyada) and Explanation of Ambiguous (Tawzeehul Mushkil) in matter of Quranic verses and rulings.  

    In the above mentioned hadith, the prophet Muhammad peace be upon him has used the authority of Exemption (Istithna). He has exempted fish and locust from the general ruling of Quran regarding the meat of dead animals. Consequently, almost all Muslims purchase dead fish from the market and eat them. So, this is the part of Exemption that the prophet Muhammad peace be upon him has given to us Muslims. In other words, this is flexibility that our beloved prophet peace be upon him has given to us.

    What I want to say from the above that without Hadith a believer can never understand the overall meaning of the Quran. If he negates Hadith, he will be against the Quran itself. Would then be it the matter of compatibility with Quran? I believe ‘No’.
    By Ghulam Ghaus غلام غوث - 6/23/2014 2:57:15 AM

    -----------------

    What I want to say from the above that without Hadith a believer can never understand the overall meaning of the Quran. If he negates Hadith, he will be against the Quran itself. Would then be it the matter of compatibility with Quran? I believe ‘No’.
    By Ghulam Ghaus غلام غوث - 6/23/2014 2:57:15 AM

    ---

    Dear Mr. Observer, I have been following your and Yunus Saheb's arguments with great interest. May I say a few words too. The Qur'an omits the theme of the relative purity of urine like million other themes and any discerning Muslim who understands the era specificity of hadith literature I will not take it as the fount of guidance for then he will have to relieve himself on the roof of his house under the sky, use stones for cleaning the soiled part of his body, milk his own cow, drink the milk of his female colleague to render her mahram and so forth. A Muslim, I think, must be proactive in good deeds, excel in lawful pursuits, uphold justice, share his wealth with the poor, not call non-Muslims kafir, vie with all humanity in goodness, forgive past enemies, use intellect, shun foul talk and trivialities (laghu) and and follow the ahkamat of the Qur'an which together constitute the steep path rather than bother about the 'purity' of the urine of a child - what a trivial theme (laghu) you raise putting some of us to shame and giving a totally false impression of the universal religion of Islam.  

    By Alishah Qalander - 6/26/2014 9:46:01 AM

    --------------

    My take on the Hadiths

    The Quran was revealed in the context of the people of Mecca in their language. So when the verse was revealed to the effect that “We have this day completed the religion …..”, the people had no doubt that it was indeed completed in all respects.

    The prohibitions are clearly spelt out but what is not prohibited is not spelt out in detail. The Quraish had no doubt as to what was permissible. What they were accustomed to and was not prohibited was clearly permissible. Else it would certainly have been included in the list of prohibitions. The Quran also mentions what people had prohibited for themselves but was permissible. So the complete set of what is permissible and not permissible was clear to the people.

     The Quran prohibits the flesh of swine and alcohol but makes permissible the food of Jews and the Christians. Therefore, whatever is permissible to them is permissible to us except for the prohibitions. There are therefore multiple ways in which the Quran guides us to what is right. The Quran is very economical with words where it is possible for intelligent humans to figure out every detail logically and accurately. Indeed we have little problem doing that.

     The Quran is at the same time repetitive about correct beliefs and behavior in order to complete the argument so that man is left with no excuse for wavering from the straight path. Initially my reaction to the repetition was why is this necessary? However, going by the questions asked by the non-believers, I realize that the Quran covers every such question asked. For a believer, the coverage looks excessive and repetitive but is carefully measured to cover every kind of doubt and argument.

    Ghaus Sb has said in one of his comments that whatever is not prohibited is permitted. This is not correct. Whatever was held impermissible and not made permissible by the Quran remained impermissible. Going by what is propagated by some Islamophobic sites, it would appear that there are fatwas emanating from Iran which make bestiality and necrophilia (sex with animals and dead spouse) permissible. Hopefully this is just a canard being spread. However, if it is true, then perhaps the same is justified by the wrong principle that “whatever is not made explicitly unlawful is lawful” and an incorrect interpretation of the hadith cited. The hadith cited is therefore incomplete and leads to such gross distortions.

    The Quran and our powers of reasoning are the criterion to decide what is right and what is wrong. The classification of hadiths as weak and strong based on the strength of the chain of transmission is a very unimaginative criteria used by the compilers. It should have been what makes sense. If the hadiths are categorized based on ‘what makes good sense’ then we would have had little problem with them. Even if someone has fabricated a hadith but the same makes excellent sense, how does it matter? If I come across any hadith or someone quotes a hadith to me, the only criteria I apply is whether it makes good sense. I will trash anything that makes little sense and pay heed to what makes good sense.

    Transmission from person to person over the centuries can be very accurate if it is in poetry form. The Quran is a good example of how the same can be accurately reproduced and independently validated without resorting to a recorded copy 1400 years after its revelation. Are the hadiths in poetry form? Reverence to the exact words of the Prophet (pbuh) is another good reason why distortions could have been minimal. Without doubt, there must be good hadiths mixed with the unreliable ones. So while I have never felt the necessity to refer to the hadiths, when somebody narrates or quotes a hadith, I don’t reject it mindlessly either.

    Also, I do not think that the Prophet (pbuh) had the knowledge of the unknown besides what was revealed to him, was fallible, and his personal opinions may at times have been erroneous.  

    Every great business or corporation has stories that are often narrated. These stories define the ideals that the employees live by. Are the stories true in every detail? Perhaps not. Embellishments are common.  Everyone is aware that the stories told about them are also never accurate. Either the stories make one out to be a hero or a villain. The point is never how accurate the stories are which we tell each other. The stories define what we would like to believe is true and live by. The stories should not be seen as accurate historical records but a reflection of the beliefs of the people who love these stories about their past and heroes. Historical accuracy is also therefore unimportant. Whether Lord Krishna or Lord Rama are real figures or mythical figures is totally irrelevant. To understand the people we only need to know what they believe to be true and in the stories of their past they believe to be true. You can know a people by their fairy tales which everyone knows to be pure fiction. Your favourite fairy tales also define the kind of person you are or would like to be. So when somebody tells me a story, what is important is only what that person believes to be true unless the story itself is important to me and I have my own version of the same story which I feel compelled to defend. Otherwise, what is true to you is true to me about your beliefs. The Mahabharata and the Ramayana are great epics and all-time favourites of all Indians because these are stories more about us and less about our past. It does not matter whether these stories are an accurate record of history or not. What is important is that these stories accurately reflect what we would like to believe to be true even if we do not really believe that these are true.

    The hadiths therefore have their niche but should be read and understood with circumspection and without attributing infallibility to them.

    By Observer - 6/26/2014 9:17:21 AM

  • 6/26/2014 1:06:34 AMGhulam Mohiyuddin

    "If the Quran leaves some questions unanswered, we have to find the answers ourselves. Don't look to Bukhari!"

    ---

    Let us make this our motto. If God left some issues untouched, there must be a reason for it. Since Prophet Mohammad's Islam did not create the institution of ulema or that of Hadees, we have Quran and our own reason and intuition to guide us. Let us disregard institutions created by monarchs who had usurped the Islamic institution of Khilafat and needed ways to justify their misrule.


    By Sultan Shahin - 6/26/2014 8:37:46 AM
  • ------

  • ·        There are scores of Quranic verses that prove authenticity of Hadiees. There are also sciences of Hadeeth which check the authenticity of Hadeeth. I am quoting just one verse here.

    “پس (اے حبیب!) آپ کے رب کی قسم یہ لوگ مسلمان نہیں ہوسکتے یہاں تک کہ وہ اپنے درمیان واقع ہونے والے ہر

    اختلاف میں آپ کو حاکم بنالیں پھر اس فیصلہ سے جو آپ صادر فرما دیں اپنے دلوں میں کوئی تنگی نہ پائیں اور (آپ کے حکم کو) بخوشی پوری فرمانبرداری کے ساتھ قبول کر لیں”

     

    (4:65). “So, (O Beloved,) by your Lord, they cannot become true believers until they make you a judge in every dispute that arises amongst them, and thereafter they do not feel any resentment in their hearts against the judgment that you make, and submit (to your decision) gladly, with total submission”.   

    Those who negate importance of Hadeeth must listen to this speech given by Dr Tahirul Qadri on “Maqam-e-Risalat awr Hujiyyat-e- Hadith o Sunnat”. This speech includes 100 episodes. Every episode takes approximately 45 minutes. He has given scores of Quranic references to prove this fact.

    I humbly request all commentators who reject authenticity of Hadees (hujjiyate Hadees) to listen to all episodes of this speech which will indeed benefit us.  

    As for me I have faith in Quran and Hadees. Some of you may disagree with me on my having faith in hadees. I will never go against this faith; rather I will support, favour, and base my points on both Quran and Hadith. In any case, if you have problem with my idea, you can prevent me from writing comments, articles on this website.

    Thanks & Regards 

    By Ghulam Ghaus غلام غوث - 6/24/2014 2:02:45 AM

    -----

    Dear Sultan Shahin Sahab,

    One can say exactly the same thing in different ways:

    I wrote this in my last comment: "There can be no denying that the authenticated (Sahih) Hadith compilations contain some accounts that sound most bizarre and purport to provoke sexuality, induce terrorism, foment inter-faith hatred, and stand deeply misogynist, scientifically untenable, self contradictory and Qur’an-incompatible [2]"

    Now do you, by any conjecture, want me to say that all the or a large proportion of the accounts in the authentic (Sahih) compilation or a large part of Sahih (that of Imam Bukhari and Muslim) belong to that category. I am afraid I cannot say this for this will tantamount to belie truth. Besides, the Terror outfits hardly quote from authentic (Bukhari and Muslim) ahadith. I found only seven references to Bukhari in TTP’s exhaustive fatwa in which four are generic and three can be construed today as militant but none even obliquely advocated or condoned killing of innocent civilians or the present version of Islam.

    2. I have said in my last comment: "Furthermore, as the literary style, setting, paradigms, and dialectical constructions of the Hadith literature date back to the early medieval era “their continued teaching and propagation, such as in traditional religious schools (madrassas), can adversely impact the mental development of the students, shackling their power of reasoning and virtually freezing their intellect into the early medieval era” [1]

    What more can I say?. Do you, by any chance, expect me to say that we should destroy all ahadith?? Can you deny that in civilizaitonal relativism the ahadith represented a valuable source of knowledge. Don't they preserve the legacy of the Prophet and his companions if you look for the best in them and not cherry pick the worst. 

    3. Do you know that in his muqaddama Imam Muslim acknowledges that the 'matn' of great many ahadith can be refuted as there was no proof that the narrators of ahadith in each generation down to the Prophet's era ever met with each other.

    4. Do you know that the passion of faith blocks the mind and people of all religion in early medieval ages were profoundly religious and did not dare challenge any tenet of religion. Even the pagan Arabs were as scared of the Prophet as a donkey dreaded a lion. When a hadith account that sounds filthy, cruel and bizarre to us, (and the compilers recorded as they conformed to the prevalent methodology and scholasticism), the simple audience of the era listened to them solemnly without bothering to think how unrealistic or absurd it was.

    Finally, I must say and advise to you not to judge the great Imams of Islam or of any other religion. Leave it on God. There is gulf of almost a thousand years between them and us and them. As the Qur'an says, 'laha ma kasabat wa lakum ma kasabtum.' Their affair is with them, ours with us.  We are not at all bound to take guidance from them. Our fount of guidance is the Qur'an which was completed before the Hadith literature evolved, and we have to probe the Qur'an's clear verses with faith seeking its best and universal meaning and leapfrog the era of theological development. If we do that we will enter into a great deal of controversy as you see on this website and our focus on the Qur'an and in future will be lost.

    Finally, to spell out my considered view on the theme, I copy below an extract from “Final Note of Appeal for Muslims” (p.362/363) – this is also to share my views with all commentators:    

    It has been long overdue for Muslims to make an objective and honest assessment of their secondary theological literature, notably the Hadith sciences. There can be no doubt that they are essential to understanding how the Prophet and early Muslims complied with various Islamic rites and rituals, including Salat, Zakat and hajj. But the truth remains, their evolution is purely a construct of history, and accordingly they are conditioned and corrupted by a wide array of factors impacting across some two to three hundred years as analyzed earlier (Enc.4). Considering the canonized Hadith as we have in our hands today, on their face value as truths supplementing and complementing the Qur’an as many orthodox scholars advocate, or indirect inspiration as the classical theory of Islamic law suggests,5  may lead to the following, to the great detriment of the Muslim community:

    ·         The vast majority of Muslims, lay or educated, will have neither time, nor the necessary books, nor the scholarship to explore their expansive domains.

    ·         Different individuals, agencies, groups and states, will be able to pick conveniently from their theological sources to legitimize their views and deeds in the whole range of matters concerning their societies. Such matters could be of social, political or theological nature, or pertain to statecraft, educational curriculum and women’s status, for example. Likewise, they will be able to enter into polemics, and have their clerics pass fatwas against conflicting views on all such matters.

    ·         They will be questioning the completeness of the Qur’an as a font of guidance and divine criteria of right and wrong, despite its claim to be a book of wisdom that makes things clear with all kinds of illustrations and elaboration (Notes 7-10/Preface).

    ·         Their theologians will continue to nurture and perpetuate the thought process, scholastic disposition, and paradigms that were normative in the early centuries of Islam and characterize the Hadith literature, that is revered and taught by them, and thus keep those Muslims under their direct influence, intellectually rooted in that era, with grave consequences.

    ·         The modern Kharijites6 and Qaramites7 of Islam – the violent extremists, active in many countries of the world, will reduce Islam, in the eyes of the non-Muslims exposed to a patently biased media,8 to a cult of terrorism and suicide bombing, creating enormous difficulties for the common peace loving and law abiding Muslims settled in predominantly secular and non-Muslim societies.     

    Therefore, as suggested by some of the eminent Muslim scholars, Muslims must endeavor to take guidance directly from the Qur’an.9 The best way to accomplish this, as the Qur’an advocates, is to probe into it,10 and seek the best meaning,11 as attempted in this work.

    Furthermore, Muslims must endeavor to cultivate an exemplary moral conduct and behavior (uswatun hasana) to do full justice to the heritage of their Prophet (33:21/Ch. 15), and to excel in all good things (that includes lawful pursuits) as enjoined by the Qur’an (2:148/Ch. 16; 5:48/Ch. 9.4).

    There is also a pressing need to substitute the predominantly theological content of the curriculum of traditional religious schools (madrassas) with a focused study of the Qur’an and a comprehensive study of the ever expanding fields of universal sciences and diverse faculties of knowledge that are nothing but the manifestations of the Words (kalimat) of God (18:109, 31:27/Ch. 2.1), that cannot be divided between Islamic and non-Islamic domains (Concluding paragraph, Ch. 10.2).

    As for the theological discourses, notably the Hadith literature, Muslims must not accept them blindly, and cite them freely, without knowing their background and the classification.12 The Hadith remains a critical part of Islamic religion, in so much as it preserves the legacy of the Prophet, no less his companions. However, since this is a very technical field, it should be reserved for enlightened specialists who have attained sufficient maturity, knowledge, and training to distinguish between weak and reliable Hadith, and not to confuse them with the Word of God.

    Normal 0 false false false EN-IN X-NONE X-NONE /* Style Definitions */ table.MsoNormalTable {mso-style-name:"Table Normal"; mso-tstyle-rowband-size:0; mso-tstyle-colband-size:0; mso-style-noshow:yes; mso-style-priority:99; mso-style-parent:""; mso-padding-alt:0in 5.4pt 0in 5.4pt; mso-para-margin-top:0in; mso-para-margin-right:0in; mso-para-margin-bottom:10.0pt; mso-para-margin-left:0in; line-height:115%; mso-pagination:widow-orphan; font-size:11.0pt; font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif"; mso-ascii-font-family:Calibri; mso-ascii-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-hansi-font-family:Calibri; mso-hansi-theme-font:minor-latin; mso-bidi-font-family:"Times New Roman"; mso-bidi-theme-font:minor-bidi;}


    To wind up this long commentary I must remind you that Hadith is so deeply entrenched in Muslim psyche that the moment you want to discard them as rubbish, no one will take you seriously, And this is the problem with many radical intellectual some you have on this forum who cherry pick the most atrocious in Sahih (Imam Bukhari and Muslim) compilations and widen your distance from the Ulama whom you have to win and enlighten and not antagonize and keep in darkness for you can never correct people by demonizing and ridiculing them as some people on this forum do in the name of progressiveness.

    By muhammad yunus - 6/26/2014 1:24:21 AM

    -----


    ·        Nothing in the Quran can possibly ask us to follow the Hadees. Hadeeses started being collected scores of years after the demise of the prophet, written down nearly 100 years after his demise and the process continued up to 300 years. You have to be very naive to consider them as depicting sayings of the prophet.

     There are plenty of hadeeses which give excellent lessons, great explanations of Qur'anic verses, beautiful stories. If we like them, the most we can say about them is that the prophet may have said something like this in his own words. The hadeeses that are out of character of Quran or amount to character of assassination of the prophet, or downright pornography, and there are many like this in the so-called most  authoritative of the books are obvious concoctions. We should treat them as such.

     

    As most of the justification for the worst practices of Muslims including the present-day violence in the name of Islam comes from Hadees, - see refutations by New Age Islam writers of Taliban ideologue Sheikh Yousuf Al-Abeeri's fatwa supporting wanton killing of innocent civilians thus justifying the 9/11 attacks - it is essential that we bring down Hadees from its present pedestal slightly above the Quran where we have put them.

     

    There must be a reason why Imam Abu Hanifa, to whose school of thought most Muslims in the sub-continent claimed to belong to, until the present prevalence of Wahhabism, accepted only 17 hadeeses as genuine, while Imam Bukhari selected something like 2,602 as authentic, out of the nearly 3,00, 000 hadeeses that he had collected travelling "widely throughout the Abbasid empire from the age of 16, collecting those traditions he thought trustworthy" (Wikipedia).

    A belief in authenticity of all Hadees is a kind of madness that we Muslims will have to cure ourselves of if we want to survive in the present-day and age.

     

     

    References:

     

    Wrongs From The “Right” Bukhari

    The Hadith Collection by “Imam” Abu Abdullah Muhammad bin Ismail Bukhari is considered by Mullahs and their blind followers as the most authentic book on earth after the Quran. Let’s examine it. .... Please know that an outstanding scholar of Islam, Ubaidullah Sindhi concedes, "I cannot teach Bukhari Hadith to any youngster, or to a non-Muslim because of shame." (Preface to his Tafseer, Ilham-ur-Rahman). Let’s explore why he said this …

    The Messenger (S) used to visit all nine of his wives every night. [Vol 3 Pg 52 Book of Nikah, #34].  On the other hand, Bukhari repeatedly narrates that the Prophet used to stand at prayers all night, so much so that his feet used to swell. 

    The Messenger (S) used to have intercourse with all of his wives in one hour of the day and night (without taking a bath) and these (wives) were eleven. The narrator tries to pre-empt an objection by stating that he had the (sexual) power of 30 men. [Vol 1 Pg 189, Book of Bath #266].

    The Mullah mind has so terribly affected our masses that even derogatory statements such as this become praiseworthy. The exalted Prophet was a perfect guide to humanity. He was not a man of unbridled desire. The women who lived in his household were primarily there for shelter. Only a contemptuous mind can perceive the Mothers of Believers as objects of pleasure for the Prophet. Bukhari highlights the above Hadith by putting a special heading:  “To have sex with many women with only one bath..” That stifles any apologetic defences of this Hadith by the Mullahs.

    The Prophet said that the best man amongst his followers is the one who has the greatest number of wives. [Vol 3:52 Book of Nikah #62]. Many Mullahs offer an apology here that the Prophet (S) is referring to himself. Well, that only compounds the insult. There have been ‘Muslim’ kings who had harems of hundreds of women. The Quran (49:13) tells us that the best person is the one who is best in conduct. ...

    Ayesha said to the Prophet, “Won’t you rather graze your camel onto a tree whose leaves have not yet been grazed?” ‘Arwa bin Zubair said that Ayesha meant she was the only virgin the Prophet had married. [Vol 3 Book of Nikah Pg 55 #71]

    The Prophet disapproved of his companion Jabir’s plan to marry a widow and asked, "Why did you not marry a virgin so that you played with her and she played with you?" [Same Volume, same page]. The Prophet (S) was extremely compassionate to widows and divorced women.  --- Dr. Shabbir Ahmed

    http://www.newageislam.com/islamic-ideology/wrongs-from-the-“right”-bukhari-/d/2749

    ------------------

     

    The Hadith Conspiracy and the Distortion of Islam

    The Koran's Verdict: " And the messenger says of Judgment Day, "O my Lord! My own people took this Koran as a thing to be shunned (KORAN 25:30)."

    The Koran says in well over 15 places that it is "explained in detail (6:114 etc)." One word used is Tafseel which means a detailed explanation. It further says that it contains a Biyan or clear exposition of everything (16:89). God says in the Koran that He neglected nothing in the Book (6:38). The Koran talks about Moses' Book being Tamam (which means complete), and that the Koran is in no way less than that. The Koran also suggests that it should be Kaafi meaning "enough" for guidance by itself (29:51).

    The Koran states explicitly that the messenger's duty was only "to convey the message (29:18)," and he said nothing on his own as his own sayings (69:44). It states that the message that the messenger conveyed was the Koran only (42:52 & 14:52 & 69:44). Therefore, to follow God's words in the Koran would be to follow the messenger, (4:80), as the words of the Koran is the messenger's speech (69:40). It also claims to be the Qawl or the speech of the messenger (69:40).

     The Koran claims that it contains answers to ALL relevant questions (25:33) and contains the best explanation (Tafseer) of itself (25:33 & 2:159). The Koran claims to be the Hukm or commandments of God, according to which humankind is to be judged (5:48). It also states that it is the Shariah or law/way with which God sent the messenger (45:18 & 42:13).

     Who would know best on how to talk to humankind but their creator? Therefore, it makes no sense to say that outside sources better explain God's word. The Koran claims that it is explained fully in detail and lacks nothing. Therefore it must, according to its claim, contain a full explanation of everything in Islam, including Salaah (prayer). It surely does, we just need to study it. A careful reading of the Koran reveals that we are to get our Salaah from the Masjid-el Haraam [the continuous practice at Mecca since the time of Abraham], specifically the "place of Abraham (moqaam e Ibraheem)." The Koran tells us that the purpose of Hajj is to educate Muslims in Islam (Koran 22:27-28) and that the Masjid-el-Haraam is "guidance for all the worlds (3:96)." -- M. Asadi


    http://www.newageislam.com/islamic-ideology/the-hadith-conspiracy-and-the-distortion-of-islam-/d/2711


    By Sultan Shahin - 6/23/2014 5:33:34 PM

    --------

    ·        Ghaus sb., . . . If you find some good advice in a Hadith or in any other book, do follow it. It is our need for authorised answers to every question that is a problem. Do we need a system that gives us rules on everything, on how to live, how to behave, how to pray, how to relate to each other, what to eat, what not to eat, how to punish sinners etc etc. If we had to live by such an all-encompassing system of rules,  our spontaneity, creativity and spirit of enterprise would be extinguished and we would lag behind as a society. In fact we do lag behind as a society. We as Muslims are number one only in one thing and that is in killing other Muslims!

    We need mazhab, not deen. Leave the Hadiths aside, even from the Quran we should derive only our devotion to one true God and His expectation of us that we shall be peaceful, just and righteous. The rest of the message in the Quran is time bound and place bound. We should cherish our freedom, not our chains.

    If you consider the Hadiths to be holy books, I respect your right to do so. If you consider those who disagree with you to be not true Muslims, I am not sure whether you have the right to do so.

    By Ghulam Mohiyuddin - 6/23/2014 1:30:58 PM

    ----------

    ·        Salman al-Farsi reported that when the Messenger of Allah (peace be on him) was asked about animal fat, cheese, and fur, he replied, "The halal is that which Allah has made lawful in His Book and the haram is that which He has forbidden, and that concerning which He is silent He has permitted as a favor to you." (Reported by al-Tirmidhi and Ibn Majah.)

    I have quoted just one hadith, though there are scores of hadiths.

    As for Ijtihad, it is still open. But this should not be misused; rather it should be used with the ways that the holy Quran and hadith have prescribed. Every Muslim cannot do Ijtihad, for Ijtihad one needs to have deep knowledge of Quran and Hadith. Even every Aalim or every Mufti in our age cannot do Ijtihad due to not having the required knowledge of Quran and hadith. He may tell us terms and conditions for Ijtihad but if you call him to do Ijtihad, he will not be able to do that. This is a major problem in our community. Even Madarsa students are not reaching out to this ability. Our Muslim community needs a great Aalim who can have ability of Ijtihad and serve Muslim society in a manner that suits majority Muslims and not in a manner that creates more and more differences among Muslims.         

    By Ghulam Ghaus غلام غوث - 6/23/2014 7:29:29 AM

    --------

     ·        Ghaus sb., Sultan Shahin sb. has already answered you when he said, "Apparently the Quran is addressing the then Muslims and asking them to follow the Prophet and why not; what else would God say when the Prophet was alive and had to conduct the affairs of Muslims."

    God gave us the Glorious Quran and yet we felt incapable of taking it from there and using our judgement and moral sense to build a complete edifice. We had to depend on the collected quotations of the Prophet gathered from diverse sources. The Prophet's annotation and exegesis were good for his times. We too should have  annotation and exegesis suitable to our times.

    I realize that your opinion agrees with the majority Muslim opinion. My view is that we should be able to figure out most things ourselves and should not depend too much on either the Hadiths or the Sunnah, although they are of interest for students of the Prophet's biography. 

    By Ghulam Mohiyuddin - 6/23/2014 3:52:58 AM

    -------

    ·        Dear Mr. Sultan Shahin, Your comment to Mr Sadaf is like a light in darkness. At a time when Muslims are confronted with ideologies of extremism and terrorism being produced by Wahhabis/Salafists using Islamic terms like Jihad, Sharia etc, your suggesting us Muslims to refute terror ideologies is of course a way to the right path صراط مستقيم. 

    According to my Islamic knowledge based on Quran and Hadith, i have come to know that committing acts of terrorism, killing innocent lives including Muslims and non-Muslims is forbidden and sometimes an act of kufr. Those who legalize these acts of terrorism and violence with the use of Quran and Hadith and do not believe the Quranic verses that call for peace and brotherhood as a part of faith will be considered kaafir. This is not me who says so, rather the holy Quran and Hadith themselves say so. Those who reject any teaching of Quran and any Hadith (whether it is of moderation, peace, love or brotherhood) will be considered the rejecters of Quran and Hadith. Thus they will be Kaafir, because according to Quran, those who are rejecters of Quran and hadith are kaafir. There are scores of Quranic verses and Haidths, for proof.

    We also know that describing their ideologies of terrorism as kufr will not totally end acts of terrorism from the globe. However, the refutation of their ideologies is only possible when we describe their acts as kufr. Their having faith in terror ideologies is based on negation of Quran and Hadith; which is kufr, according to Quran and Hadith.

    Doing evil acts is forbidden, but when the perpetrators give quranic permissibility to these evil acts as a result of their ignorance or whatever reason, and have faith in such evil acts, these mere evil acts will reach out to the acts of kufr.

    How can be it possible for us to refute the terror ideologies unless we believe that their having faith in terror ideologies is an act of kufr?      

    By Ghulam Ghaus غلام غوث - 6/23/2014 1:49:34 AM

    ---

    ·        One more point, Sadaf Saheb: Those of us who have been gifted by God the ability to think, we have no option but to think deeply on these questions, take a look at our entire history and come up with some ideas. There should be deep thought behind the actions we initiate. Actions like having more people use social media to promote Islam as a religion of peace is most welcome. But much more is apparently required.

    You ask me for answers. We follow at New Age Islam of presenting a moderate, progressive narrative of Islam and seek to refute the radical ideas and Jihadi fatwas of Salafi-Wahhabi-Takfiri ideologues emanating mostly from Saudi Arabia and Pakistan.

    But as I have said again and again, I don't have all the answers. I may have some ideas and I will be prepared to share them with those who are willing to listen, but I must have evidence that some thinking is going on within the community. My first task at this level is to convince the community that there is need for some fresh thinking. Our community is now at the level where our intellectuals dismiss today's Jihadism as mere law and order problem for the law and order authorities of those countries to deal with. They don't even notice the irony of this proposition:  this means practically the law and order authorities of the whole world. There is hardly any country with any significant Muslim population where Jihadism or radiccalism does not exist. This may not have led to violence yet in some places yet, but the problem is there.

    By Sultan Shahin - 6/22/2014 6:29:28 AM

     

    --

    ·        Ghaus sb. and Rashid sb., . . .

    My humble knowledge tells me that Salafis/Wahhabis are the staunchest upholders of Sunnah and Hadiths, so I was surprised at your comparing me to Salafis!

    'True Islam' website says, "The Quran establishes the fact that no genuine messenger will ever command his people to glorify him or idolize him: “No human being whom God gave the scripture, authority and prophethood is then to say to the people, "Worship me beside God." But instead, "Devote yourselves to your Lord according to the scripture you have been teaching and to what you have been studying.  Nor would he command you to take the angels and the prophets as lords. Would he command you to disbelieve after becoming submitters?” 3:79-80.

    I should not be the one quoting Hadiths, but  Sahih Bukhari Volume 4, Book 55, Number 654: Narrated 'Umar: "I heard the Prophet saying, "Do not exaggerate in praising me as the Christians praised the son of Mary, for I am only a Slave. So, call me the Slave of Allah and His Apostle."

    Excessive dependence on wisdom handed down to us in the form of written words may be harmful to us. It snuffs out our critical faculties and makes us zombies. We have the Quran to give us basic principles and general guidance. As I said before, it should be read with the aid of our innate God-given intelligence and moral sense.

    I cannot compete with you in scholarship but I consider the right to question, to doubt and to criticize to be an important part of any belief system.

    By Ghulam Mohiyuddin - 6/21/2014 1:58:05 PM

    ---

    ·        “O believers! Obey Allah and obey the Messenger (blessings and peace be upon him) and those (men of truth) who hold command amongst you. Then if you disagree amongst yourselves over any issue, refer it to Allah and the Messenger ([blessings and peace be upon him] for final judgment), if you believe in Allah and the Last Day. That is best (for you) and best for the end result” (4:59)

    How does this verse ask Muslims to follow Hadees? Where was Hadees then? Why did Quran  or Prophet Mohammad (saw) not instruct Muslims to start collecting his sayings in his lifetime, so that he could verify them. He must have known that Quran is not enough by itself. Why did God or Prophet say that Islam was being completed this day, a little before the demise of the Prophet (saw)? Why did Muslims start collecting the so-called sayings a hundred years after the passing away of the prophet, a prophet that continued for 300 years after the demise. According to any objective criterion these so called sayings of the prophet cannot be attributed to the Prophet (saw). At the most, some one can say the prophet said something like this as I heard from my grandfather's uncle or grandfather or something like that. Apparently the Quran is addressing the then Muslims and asking them to follow the Prophet and why not; what else would God say when the Prophet was alive and had to conduct the affairs of Muslims.

    Let us not belittle the Quran.

    By Sultan Shahin - 6/21/2014 4:36:07 AM

    ------

    ·        Instead of supplementing the Quran with the Hadiths we should supplement Quran with our own innate God-given instincts of what is right and what is wrong, what is good and what is bad and what is just and what is unjust. Before we even open the Holy Book we should be firm in our conviction that peace, nonviolence, reconciliation, co-existence, brotherhood of mankind, justice, equality, mercy and respect for the beliefs of others are essential in order for us to be good human beings and good Muslims. It is only when we approach the Quran with such  a conviction in our hearts that we can see the true wisdom in it and not fall in the trap of getting a totally erroneous message out of it. The Quran is God's confirmation of what He Himself put in our hearts.

    When people forget their own true natures  they are liable to get the wrong message from the Quran. That is probably why it is difficult for us to believe that the Talibans, Al Shababs and Boko Harams read the same Quran that we read.

    By Ghulam Mohiyuddin - 6/20/2014 1:58:27 PM

    -----

    ·        Ghaus sahib,. . . Exaltation of Sunnah and Hadiths is tantamount to Muhammmad parasti which the Prophet himself told us is not permitted. Later chapters of the Quran do recommend the Prophet as a model of behavior and also advise us to honor his family. The question of over-inclusion during the compilation of Quran will for ever nag us. Our habit of not thinking for ourselves and needing authoritative written words to answer all questions do make the Hadiths seem indispensable but wise men deliberating issues, consulting with each other and reaching consensus might have been a better alternative. Some Hadiths are of interest as sources of wisdom or wit, but they should not be considered as binding.

    By Ghulam Mohiyuddin - 6/21/2014 2:13:56 AM

    -----

    ·        Mr Ghulam Mohiyuddin,

    “Exaltation of Sunnah and Hadiths is tantamount to Muhammmad parasti” it reflects your own thought while the Quran (dear Ghulam Mohiyuddin) itself exalts Sunnah and Hadiths without which one cannot be a true believer or a muslim, according to Quran and Hadiths.

    This is also a kind of extremism that you have crossed when you called it Muhammad prasti (Mazallah and Astagfirullah). Actually the problem with you is that you have not read Islam through its original sources that is why (i should tell you) your views seem to be greatly influenced by orientalises’ or salafists’ views. Before I go into details, let me please quote a Quranic verse;

    “O believers! Obey Allah and obey the Messenger (blessings and peace be upon him) and those (men of truth) who hold command amongst you. Then if you disagree amongst yourselves over any issue, refer it to Allah and the Messenger ([blessings and peace be upon him] for final judgment), if you believe in Allah and the Last Day. That is best (for you) and best for the end result” (4:59)

    In this Quranic verse the word اطيعوا   meaning ‘obey’ is repeated twice. One for Almighty Allah and second for the prophet Muhammad peace be upon him. Obeying Allah means to obey Quran and obeying the prophet Muahammd peace be upon him means to obey Hadiths and Sunnah. If someone disobeys prophet Muhammad peace be upon him, he will be tantamount to disobey Almighty God.

    There are hundreds of verses in the holy Quran which are enough for us to exalt the prophet Muhammad peace be upon him.

    Dear Ghulam Mohiyuddin sahib, I thought you were a very moderate and peaceful but I am amazed with your comment how you have got to say it “Muhammad parasti”. This view has been generated by Salafists or ahle-hadiths or ahle quran.    

    By Ghulam Ghaus غلام غوث - 6/21/2014 3:20:00 AM

     

     URL: http://www.newageislam.com/debating-islam/sultan-shahin/bringing--down-the-institution-of-hadees-from-its-pedestal,-equal-to-quran--no-matter-how-revered,-hadees-is-not-divine-islamic-scripture,-any-blind-faith-is-unwarranted/d/97819





    TOTAL COMMENTS:-   403


    • Salam

      It is an arduous task to read the entire article, here are my two cents on some issues raised. On the lawfulness of Sea Animals, dead or alive, there is a clear quranic injunction that they are halaal.

      The other issue is about prohibition of blood. This too has been qualified by quran as the 'flowing blood'. In both above matters the narration reported from the Prophet can be considered as what this general prohibition and permission mean.

      For those who say that Salah is not detailed in quran and that the one already was in practice shall be followed will have to prove how what was being done in a salah. And it is ironic that they are willing to extract something from the era of Ibrahim but not willing to follow what is the invariable practice of Salah. Earliest people, for instance in India, came to Kerala. And people in Kerala offer salah as many times as any of us and exactly same way (now don't catch my word 'exact').

      The people who say that everybody should read and understand quran go against the quran which clearly instructs the prophets to teach. With a book, you need a teacher. Only few extremely talented can say tehy don't need a teacher. The Prophet is a teacher.

      The correct attitude is not to discard the whole reports in the books from scholars but to sort good from bad and while doing so one must not be biased and pick, as has been stated by many in the discussion in this thread, but to discern. 

      If there is no book from the past then all history from anyone should be rejected not only Islamic but other. As has been said by someone, the history is written by the victorious. Every book of history available is open to question even if it relates to event of recent past.

      Wassalaam

      Khalid

      By Khalid Faridi - 10/20/2014 4:49:49 AM



    • Ghulam Ghaus sahebغلام غوث - 8/12/2014 11:16:54 PM
      my previous comment was not proper.
      it should be does the violent verses in the Bible old or new justify the violent verses in the Quran and violent sayings in Hadith books.
      First you will not agree that there is something violent in the Quran and hadith though there are. that is why those verses need to get contextualize which all moderates are doing.
      another point anything done by the prophet will not be considered violent even if it is, because you believe whatever he did was right. It is a matter of your faith. you will not put it on stake at the cost of honesty and critical analysis because these two things are not known to belivers.
      1. Do you agree the bile contains violent verses?
      2. if yes, why?
      3. The Quran is uncreated and undistorted as it is preserved in the Loh e mehfooz. why the Bible was not protected? was it not the word of God? Why Allah allowed it to get distorted? Does Allah discriminate his words?
      If the Quran is uncreated, where the question of context arise?
      i hope you will give answers to these questions leaving none as you are an Alim Fadhil and i am not.





      By rational moahmmed yunus - 8/13/2014 12:47:53 AM



    • No, Mr Rational. In fact, there is no violent verse in the Quran and Hadith..
      By Ghulam Ghaus غلام غوث - 8/12/2014 11:16:54 PM



    • Ghulam Ghaus غلام غوث - 8/12/2014 saheb7:48:29 AM
      do the violent verses justify violence in the Quran and hadith?


      By rational mohammed yunus - 8/12/2014 9:13:17 AM



    • No offense no defence and when no defence no question no doubt and no confusion. We should not let the former take place.

      Allah Almighty knows the best. Even if we apply our mind and thus we find a principle of Jurists that when two Ahadith are different in meaning we should follow the one which is according to the nature of the Quran and Hadith, that is undoubtedly peace and leave the other if its meaning or context is different and unclear.    

      May Allah Almighty save the entire Ummah from the agenda of Terrorists who through their actions and some enemies of Islam who by their theory are burning midnight oil to discredit sometimes the holy Quran and sometimes the holy Hadith.
      By Ghulam Ghaus غلام غوث - 8/12/2014 8:08:11 AM



    • Terrorists have no basis to wage what is termed as “offensive Jihad”. There is no concept of offensive Jihad in Islam. Offensive attitudes cannot and should not be called Jihad. Jihad was and is only for defence. Great Jurists unanimously prohibit offensive attitudes during Jihad. Jihad cannot be done by any organization or any group of individuals, rather it is done on a state level, but only when there is no chance left for saving the country except for fighting for defence and fighting for restoring peace and security in the country.  

      But as far as criteria of defensive war is concerned, an Islamic country should not kill women, children, priests etc. To prove this point, there is a special chapter including many Hadees from Saheeh Bukhari and Saheeh Muslim given below. But what about the Hadees that makes some exceptions to killing women and children in the state of defensive war, provided it is not deliberate, the very idea has been discussed in the following article:

      The Prophet Prohibited the Killing of Women and Children

      By Bassam Zawadi

      There are so much hadith where the Prophet condemned the killing of innocent women and children during time of war that it is impossible to deny them.

      Saheeh Bukhari

      Volume 004, Book 052, Hadith Number 257.

      Narrated By 'Abdullah : During some of the Ghazawat of the Prophet a woman was found killed. Allah's Apostle disapproved the killing of women and children.

      Volume 004, Book 052, Hadith Number 258.

      Narrated By Ibn 'Umar : During some of the Ghazawat of Allah's Apostle a woman was found killed, so Allah's Apostle forbade the killing of women and children.

      Saheeh Muslim

      Book 019, Hadith Number 4319.

      Chapter : Prohibition of killing women and children in war.

      It is narrated on the authority of 'Abdullah that a woman was found killed in one of the battles fought by the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him). He disapproved of the killing of women and children.

      Book 019, Hadith Number 4320.

      Chapter : Prohibition of killing women and children in war.

      It is narrated by Ibn 'Umar that a woman was found killed in one of these battles; so the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him) forbade the killing of women and children.

      Sunan Abu Dawood

      Book 008, Hadith Number 2663.-----------------------------

      Chapter : Not known.

      Narated By Rabah ibn Rabi' : When we were with the Apostle of Allah (pbuh) on an expedition, he saw some people collected together over something and sent a man and said: See, what are these people collected around? He then came and said: They are round a woman who has been killed. He said: This is not one with whom fighting should have taken place. Khalid ibn al-Walid was in charge of the van; so he sent a man and said: Tell Khalid not to kill a woman or a hired servant.

      Maliks Muwatta

      Book 021, Hadith Number 008.

      Section : Prohibition against Killing Women and Children in Military Expeditions.

      Yahya related to me from Malik from Ibn Shihab that a son of Kab ibn Malik (Malik believed that ibn Shihab said it was Abd ar-Rahman ibn Kab) said, "The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, forbade those who fought ibn Abi Huqayq (a treacherous jew from Madina) to kill women and children. He said that one of the men fighting had said, 'The wife of ibn Abi Huqayq began screaming and I repeatedly raised my sword against her. Then I would remember the prohibition of the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, so I would stop. Had it not been for that, we would have been rid of her.'"

      Book 021, Hadith Number 009.

      Section : Prohibition against Killing Women and Children in Military Expeditions.

      Yahya related to me from Malik from Nafi from Ibn Umar that the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, saw the corpse of a woman who had been slain in one of the raids, and he disapproved of it and forbade the killing of women and children.

      Book 021, Hadith Number 010.

      Section : Prohibition against Killing Women and Children in Military Expeditions.

      Yahya related to me from Malik from Yahya ibn Said that Abu Bakr as-Siddiq was sending armies to ash-Sham. He went for a walk with Yazid ibn Abi Sufyan who was the commander of one of the battalions. It is claimed that Yazid said to Abu Bakr, "Will you ride or shall I get down?" Abu Bakrsaid, "I will not ride and you will not get down. I intend these steps of mine to be in the way of Allah."

      Then Abu Bakr advised Yazid, "You will find a people who claim to have totally given themselves to Allah. Leave them to what they claim to have given themselves. You will find a people who have shaved the middle of their heads, strike what they have shaved with the sword.

      "I advise you ten things| Do not kill women or children or an aged, infirm person. Do not cut down fruit-bearing trees. Do not destroy an inhabited place. Do not slaughter sheep or camels except for food. Do not burn bees and do not scatter them. Do not steal from the booty, and do not be cowardly."

      The Prophet made some exceptions to the Killing of Women and Children

      Saheeh Bukhari

      Volumn 004, Book 052, Hadith Number 256.

      Narated By As-Sab bin Jaththama : The Prophet passed by me at a place called Al-Abwa or Waddan, and was asked whether it was permissible to attack the pagan warriors at night with the probability of exposing their women and children to danger. The Prophet replied, "They (i.e. women and children) are from them (i.e. pagans)." I also heard the Prophet saying, "The institution of Hima is invalid except for Allah and His Apostle."

      Saheeh Muslim

      Book 019, Hadith Number 4321.

      Chapter: Permissibility of killing women and children in the night raids, provided it is not deliberate.

      It is reported on the authority of Sa'b b. Jaththama that the Prophet of Allah (may peace be upon him), when asked about the women and children of the polytheists being killed during the night raid, said: They are from them.

      There are many possible meanings for these Hadith. I was kind of surprised when I read it at first. But we don’t know the EXACT situation or what the Prophet truly meant. Maybe, maybe THOSE particular women and children were planning to fight against the Muslims with the enemy.

      Maybe the Muslim army just could not have blown this chance to attack the enemy that they still had to attack them no matter at what cost in order to stop the risk of more bloodshed (do a little bad for the greater good).

      The very fact that the companions of the Prophet asked the Prophet's permission shows that the Prophet used to be strict regarding his prohibition on the killing of women and children. However, when a situation arises and there is no choice, things could get ugly. The Prophet even forbade the cutting down of palm trees in war, however during the siege of Banu Nadir the Prophet had to make an exception. So exceptions do arise unfortunately.

      Imam Ibn Hajar Al Asaqalani says in Fath Al- Baari that the point is not to target the women and children intentionally but if there is absolutely no other way to kill the enemy than by injuring the women and children because they are mixed with the men then there is no other choice. (Source: http://hadith.al-islam.com/Display/Display.asp?Doc=0&Rec=4747)

      Another possibility is that the hadith has been abrogated and that even if women and children accompany the enemy during war then they still should not be killed. (See http://hadith.al-islam.com/Display/Display.asp?Doc=0&Rec=4747 for the evidence)

      Imam Nawawi says in his tafseer of Saheeh Muslim that women and children are only killed only if they cannot be distinguished. But because it was so dark and they could not be distinguished, the Muslims had not choice. (Source: http://hadith.al-islam.com/Display/Display.asp?Doc=1&Rec=4215)

      The tafseer of Abu Dawud says the same thing here (Source: http://hadith.al-islam.com/Display/Display.asp?Doc=4&Rec=3291)

      Killing of Women and Children According to the Bible

      If Muslims ever get any trouble from a Christian that says Islam advocates for the killing of innocent women and children then give him a taste of his own Bible.

      1 Samuel 15:2,3

      2 This is what the LORD Almighty says: 'I will punish the Amalekites for what they did to Israel when they waylaid them as they came up from Egypt.3 Now go, attack the Amalekites and totally destroy [a] everything that belongs to them. Do not spare them; put to death men and women, children and infants, cattle and sheep, camels and donkeys.' "

      Numbers 31:17,18

      17 Now kill all the boys. And kill every woman who has slept with a man,18 but save for yourselves every girl who has never slept with a man.

      Deuteronomy 20:16

      16 However, in the cities of the nations the LORD your God is giving you as an inheritance, do not leave alive anything that breathes.

      URL for this article: http://www.answering-christianity.com/bassam_zawadi/did_prophet_muhammad_kill_innocents.htm


      By Ghulam Ghaus غلام غوث - 8/12/2014 7:48:29 AM



    • Ghulam Ghaus غلام غوث - saheb 8/12/2014 12:27:58 AM

      Is every Hadith (not fabricated) worth to practice irrespective of time and place?

      By rational moahammed yunus - 8/12/2014 2:16:30 AM



    • Dear Jonathan,

      After mentioning the hadith texts taken out of context, why not to discuss passages from the Bible:

       

      Now therefore kill every male among the little ones, and kill every woman that hath known man by lying with him. But all the women children, that have not known a man by lying with him, keep alive for yourselves.

      [Numbers 31:17-18]

       

      And to the others he said in mine hearing, Go ye after him through the city, and smite: let not your eye spare, neither have ye pity: Slay utterly old and young, both maids, and little children, and women: but come not near any man upon whom is the mark; and begin at my sanctuary. Then they began at the ancient men which were before the house.

      [Ezekiel 9:5-6]

       

      And the city shall be accursed, even it, and all that are therein, to the LORD: only Rahab the harlot shall live, she and all that are with her in the house, because she hid the messengers that we sent. And ye, in any wise keep yourselves from the accursed thing, lest ye make yourselves accursed, when ye take of the accursed thing, and make the camp of Israel a curse, and trouble it. But all the silver, and gold, and vessels of brass and iron, are consecrated unto the LORD: they shall come into the treasury of the LORD.So the people shouted when the priests blew with the trumpets: and it came to pass, when the people heard the sound of the trumpet, and the people shouted with a great shout, that the wall fell down flat, so that the people went up into the city, every man straight before him, and they took the city. And they utterly destroyed all that was in the city, both man and woman, young and old, and ox, and sheep, and ass, with the edge of the sword.

      [Joshua 6:17-21]

       

      Now go and smite Amalek, and utterly destroy all that they have, and spare them not; but slay both man and woman, infant and suckling, ox and sheep, camel and ass.

      [1 Samuel 15:3]

       

      Samaria shall become desolate; for she hath rebelled against her God: they shall fall by the sword: their infants shall be dashed in pieces, and their women with child shall be ripped up.

      [Hosea 13:16]

       

      Alhamdulillah, Islaam truly is a religion of mercy!!! Many "Judeo-Christian" countries of the West are meting out these acts of pure savagery and then covering their deeds and then put the spot-light on a few bands of wrong-doers in the Muslim world. We won't forget Iraq, Palestine, Afghanistan, Bosnia or anywhere else where such Biblical verses wereimplemented, and the UN just sat there and watched.

       

      Look at Islaam however. We're totally prohibited from these heinous crimes, yet we are told that in an event that there happens to be women and children in a place under attack, that it doesn't need to be held back because of their presence. On the other hand, in the Bible we read that infants should be diced and slashed?


      By Vijay Khanna - 8/12/2014 2:13:07 AM



    • Can this hadith narrated by Imam Bukhari be a saying attributed to the Prophet of peace, Muhammad (peace be upon him)?

       

      Narrated Anas bin Malik:


      Allah's Apostle said, "I have been ordered to fight the people till they say: 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah.' And if they say so, pray like our prayers, face our Qibla and slaughter as we slaughter, then their blood and property will be sacred to us and we will not interfere with them except legally and their reckoning will be with Allah." Narrated Maimun ibn Siyah that he asked Anas bin Malik,

      "O Abu Hamza! What makes the life and property of a person sacred?" He replied, "Whoever says, 'None has the right to be worshipped but Allah', faces our Qibla during the prayers, prays like us and eats our slaughtered animal, then he is a Muslim, and has got the same rights and obligations as other Muslims have."

      Sahih Bukhari 1:8:387, See also: Sahih Bukhari 1:2:24



      By Shahul Hameed - 8/12/2014 2:02:15 AM




    • Please see below the hadith texts which are the root of today's Jihadist terrorists:


      “The Prophet was asked whether it was permissible to attack the pagan warriors at night with the probability of exposing their women and children to danger. The Prophet replied, "They (i.e. women and children) are from them (i.e. pagans)." Bukhari (52:256)

      In this hadith, Prophet is seen as the one who establishes that it is permissible to kill non-combatants in the process of killing a perceived enemy. This provides justification for the many Jihadist terror bombings.

       

      Similarly, one more hadith reported by Imam Bukhari says: “The Prophet said, 'He who fights that Allah's Word, Islam, should be superior, fights in Allah's Cause.” Bukhari (52:65)

       

      These hadith words are the basis for offensive Jihad, spreading Islam by force. This is how it is understood by the jihadist terrorists of today.


      By Jonathan



      By Jonathan - 8/12/2014 1:45:19 AM



    • I will discuss the role of Mutazila, early Kharijites and modern orientalists in discrediting the institution of Hadees, but in free time. Today a few people who call themselves Muslims have not applied their own minds, following in the footsteps of Mutazila, early Kharijites and some of modern orientalists in order to discredit the authoritativeness of Hadees. 


      By Ghulam Ghaus غلام غوث - 8/12/2014 12:40:07 AM



    • I must defend every Hadees, if it is. I never call the fabricated one “Hadees”. Actually you are still confused at the definition of Hadees. Let me tell you that fabricated sayings are never Hadees among the scholars of Hadith. They say it just metaphorically.

      Let me also tell you that I believe in every Hadees of our holy prophet Muhammad peace be upon him and not the fabricated Hadees. Like many so-called Muslims, I do not discredit Hadees just for whims and the so-called desires of the world. I fear I have to be accountable to Allah Almighty.

      I believe in every Hadees if it is not fabricated, but you seem to disbelieve in every hadees even if it is not fabricated.


      By Ghulam Ghaus غلام غوث - 8/12/2014 12:27:58 AM



    • Ramesh,

      My question is quite pertinent. I need  to understand on what basis you are asking such a question which appears preposterous to me. 



      By Observer - 8/11/2014 5:50:41 AM



    • Secular Logic,

       

      You are missing the point and the woods for the trees. Let me repeat what I said:

        

      The problem with revisionist history is that it focuses entirely on the negatives completely ignoring the positives. While such listing of all the negatives may be factual and accurate, it does not present a complete and holistic picture. In a thousand year history, one can collect an impressive list of all the negatives to fill tomes.

      There are two periods – pre 1967 and post 1967. The Jews before 1967 saw no wrong. The revisionists after 1967 see nothing right. I could have quoted the pre 1967 historians who saw no wrong but I chose Cohen because he is consciously trying to reconcile between the ‘romantics’ and the `revisionists’. The two paras that you quoted from Cohen is the most he could do to justify what the revisionists say. The rest of the article is a negation of the two paras that you quoted. The revisionists even when they are 100% right, represent only 1% of the truth, if you take the cumulative experience  of the Jews as the base. For example, number of Jews who faced persecution multiplied by period in years  vs aggregate of the lifespan of each Jew for the Islamic period. If this is 0.2%, then the fact that the Jews were persecuted cannot be denied but the fact is also that in totality, this was insignificant. For this reason, Jews in Islamic areas do not have a collective memory of persecution whereas they have it as far as Christendom is concerned.

      Bernard Lewis book is post 1967 and also Cohen’s book. Lewis may have taken a balanced view like Cohen or could be a revisionist or you may be selectively reading the few paras that make you happy. It is easier to deal with a complete book or article or a summary of the book. Summary statements are easily recognizable for example those that I quoted from Cohen’s book. Cohen’s article is a complete article which contains both the negatives and the positives.

       


      By Observer - 8/11/2014 5:41:55 AM



    • Observer,
       Pl answer my question. Instead you are raising another question to evade answering my question. 

      By ramesh - 8/11/2014 5:16:19 AM



    Compose Your Comments here:
    Name
    Email (Not to be published)
    Comments
    Fill the text
     
    Disclaimer: The opinions expressed in the articles and comments are the opinions of the authors and do not necessarily reflect that of NewAgeIslam.com.

    Content