By 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
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
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,  while some were specific to the era and suffered obsolescence with time as earlier mentioned .
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.” 
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: :
“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
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.
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
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.
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
Syed Manzoor Alam - 6/24/2014 8:46:35 AM
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:
Urine tests can confirm gender of the person (presence of hormones)
Females are more prone to UTI
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
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
By Ghulam Mohiyuddin - 6/26/2014 12:58:34 AM
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
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
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
If we are to fight
Jihadism, we must bring the institution of hadees down from its present high
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
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.
Sultan Shahin - 6/25/2014 9:28:28 PM
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
“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 .
"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
“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….”  – 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.”  – 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.” 
John L. Esposito, Islam the Straight Path, New York 1994, p. 18.
Norman Daniel, Islam and the West, The Making of an Image, London 1992.
Karen Armstrong, Muhammad, London 1991, p. 44.
Philip K. Hitty, History of the Arabs, 1937, 10th edition; London 1993,
5. Alphonse de LaMartaine in 'History of
Turkey, extracted from the Intenet:
Michael H. Hart, The 100. A Ranking of the Most Influential Persons in
History, Hart Publishing Company Inc. New York, USA 1978, p. 33.
Reverend Bosworth Smith in 'Muhammad and Muhammadanism,' London, 1874
John William Draper, A history of the intellectual development of
Europe, London 1875.
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
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 .
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
By muhammad yunus - 6/25/2014
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
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,
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.
see the overall problem with even many Muslim thinkers is that they have not
yet understood hadith as much as they should do.
is a verse in the holy Quran:
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)
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.
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.
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:
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)
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”
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.
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.
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)
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.
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)
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.
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 AMBy 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
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.
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
By Ghulam Ghaus غلام غوث - 6/24/2014
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 "
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” 
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.
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.
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.
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.
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).
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.
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
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
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
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
By Sultan Shahin -
6/23/2014 5:33:34 PM
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
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.)
have quoted just one hadith, though there are scores of hadiths.
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
By Ghulam Ghaus غلام غوث - 6/23/2014
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.
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.
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.
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
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
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
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.
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
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
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
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
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