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

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 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

https://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

-----------

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

----

·        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

https://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.

----

·        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.

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

------

“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)

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

---

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 AM

Ghulam 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

------

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

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.

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

-----

 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.

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

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!

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.

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."

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.

·        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.

·        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!

·        “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.

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.

·        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.