The Hadith Must Be Re-Examined
By
Fawad Ahmed
16 March 2015
On February 3, 2015, the world was horrified when the
criminals known as Isis burned alive Jordanian pilot, Moaz al-Kasasbeh in a
cage. My horror was doubled when I learned that this heinous act has its
counterpart in the narrations attributed to Prophet Muhammad (S) and His
Companions, known as the Hadith:
'Abu al-Nu‘man Muhammad ibn al-Fadl related to us:
Hammad ibn Zayd related to us from Ayyub from Ikrimah who said: “Ali burnt some
people (apostates) and this news reached Ibn 'Abbas, who said, "Had I been
in his place I would not have burnt them, as the Prophet said, 'Don't punish
(anybody) with Allah's Punishment.' No doubt, I would have killed them, for the
Prophet said, 'If somebody (a Muslim) discards his religion, kill him"'
(Sahih Bukhari Vol 4, Book 52, No. 260).
How could one of the most righteous companions of
Prophet Muhammad (S), Ali (RA), have burnt alive apostates? The other companion, Ibn Abbas, was
apparently not much better. He would have "killed them" as well, if
not burned them!
How do we reconcile this narration with the benevolent
injunction of the Quran, "Let there be no compulsion in religion"
(2:256)? How are we Muslims to be taken seriously on any human rights platform
if narrations such as these taint our belief system?
Before proceeding further, let us examine the history
of the Hadith. Traditionally, Muslim historians claim that shortly after
Prophet Muhammad's death, hundreds of thousands of narrations attributed to him
and his companions began to circulate in the Islamic world causing mass
confusion as to how to follow the Prophet's example.
Enter the six most prominent Hadith scholars 200-300
years after the Prophet's death: Imams Bukhari, Muslim, Abu Dawood, ibn Majah,
Tirmizi, and Nisai. (These are Sunni hadith scholars. Please note the Shias
have their own separate scholars and books.)
They independently sifted through tens of thousands of reports. In the
case of Bukhari, we are told he sifted through 600,000 (!) narrations, settling
on a little over 7,000 as "sahih" or authentic.
The methodology used by these scholars to authenticate
Hadith was "isnad", or chain of narration of the reports, from
generation to generation. The isnad
methodology emphasized verification of the character and memory of the
narrator, rather than using the Quran or reason as guides. Can Chinese
whispering be taken as solid evidence for any serious belief system?
In any case, the six Sunni Hadith collections, as they
stand today, are considered unquestionable by traditional religious authorities
and have become the basis of Islamic jurisprudence.
But recently, bold Malaysian scholar Kassim Ahmad was
met with controversy and some scholars declared him an apostate for suggesting
that "the Hadith are sectarian, anti-science, anti-reason and anti-women."
Indeed, what are we to do with Hadith that prescribe
death for blasphemy and apostasy? Should we stone adulterers as numerous
"sahih" narrations mention or choose the Quranic path of forgiveness
for the repentant adulterer (26:68-71) and decidedly non-lethal punishment for
the habitual adulterer (24:2)? Should we marry off a nine-year old to a
53-year-old man according to the Bukhari tradition, or wait until the poor
child is of sufficient age to sign a legal contract, consent and to handle
finances (4:6, 4:19, 4:21). Are not thousands of innocent lives being destroyed
in these unholy unions every year? Others such as this justify Isis sex slavery
and "sexual jihad":
Narrated Abdullah, "We used to participate in the
holy wars carried on by the Prophet and we had no women (wives) with us. So we
said (to the Prophet ). "Shall we castrate ourselves?" But the
Prophet forbade us to do that and thenceforth he allowed us to marry a woman
(temporarily) by giving her even a piece of cloth, and then he recited: "O
you who believe! Do not make unlawful the good things which Allah has made
lawful for you" (Sahih Bukhari Book 60, No. 139)
Aside from these human rights violations, some sahih
narrations are so pornographic in nature that one is left bewildered as to what
guidance is intended and who was the voyeur behind the narration. See for
yourself but please be forewarned.
Traditionalists argue that without the narrations, our
religion is not complete. They frequently cite verses such as this: 33:21:
"Verily, in the Messenger of Allah you have an excellent example, for
everyone who looks unto Allah and the Last Day, and remembers Allah much."
But, which Hadith books should I use to understand the
Prophet's example, the Sunni or Shia ones? Does not the Quran compare sectarians
to idolaters 30:31-32? Did the Prophet
(S) judge other than with the Quran? Was his character anything but the Quran?
History is witness that the most luminous period of
Islamic history was the first 200 or so years after the Prophet (S). Were these
early Muslims lost, awash in hundreds of thousands of false reports, waiting
for Hadith scholars to rescue them from the abyss three centuries later? Did
the Quran state that such authorities would arise and be unchallengeable? Quite
the contrary, the Quran forbids blind following even in itself:
25:73: "And who, whenever they are reminded of
even the Revelations of their Lord, do not fall at them deaf and blind (with
deaf and blind acceptance)."
So who concocted the narrations that violate human
rights, contradict Quranic injunctions, violate reason, and slander the Prophet
and his companions?
If we piece together the evidence, the Hadith
collections served the purpose of the corrupt Abbassid caliphs, the elite rich,
and the priest class. The liberating and versatile Quran, meant for all times,
had to be chained down with man-made dogmas to meet the needs of this evil
trio. In those times when religion and state were one and the same, anyone who
converted was akin to a traitor and harsh penalties had to be justified.
Harems needed to be stocked, with age no bar, so child
marriage and sex slavery were promoted. To keep women in line, their rights had
to be degraded and stoning was introduced from the Bible (how conspicuously
rare is the male stoning victim in the Muslim world?).
Free minds threatened priesthood and hence the Arts
and Sciences had to be disparaged and superstitions promoted. The remaining
herd of Muslims, following like sheep, did not pay heed to the warning of the
Quran:
9:31: "They take their rabbis, priests and monks
to be their Lords besides Allah."
In conclusion, there are traditions that do reflect
the Divine Light of the Quran. Those should be respected.
But those which promote human rights violations,
contradict the Quran, slander the Prophet and his companions, or are
anti-reason, are fuel for the likes of Isis and a source of shame in front of
non-Muslims and our children. God calls the Quran the best hadith repeatedly
(4:87, 7:185, 39:23, 56:81, and 77:50, many more) and has guaranteed the
preservation of only one Book:
15:9 "Behold, it is We Ourselves Who have sent
down this Reminder (the Quran), and behold, it is We Who shall truly guard
it."
There is no such guarantee for man-made books. The hadith must be reexamined!
Fawad Ahmed, MD, is the
blogger/founder of Quranaissance.com.
Source:
http://www.themalaysianinsider.com/sideviews/article/the-hadith-must-be-re-examined-fawad-ahmed#sthash.JQt73X0e.dpuf
URL: https://newageislam.com/islamic-ideology/the-hadith-be-re-examined/d/102156