Light On the Muhammadan Sunnah Or Defence of the Hadith

A Meditative Pause:

I see it necessary here to make a short pause for making known the perplexity afflicting me while citing the reports about this collecting (of the Qur'an) and that much of contradiction they imply. One report says that it was Umar who resorted to Abu Bakr for collecting the Qur'an, and another one claims that: this collecting wasn't made during the reign of Abu Bakr at all, but it was Umar who had undertaken it. A third report indicates that Umar was killed before completing the task of collecting the Qur'an, and that it was Uthman who completed the work. There are many other narrations containing such contradiction and incompatibility, the citing of which is out of scope here.

We have to consider the widely-known reports cited by al-Bukhari, that Umar betook himself to Abu Bakr bringing to his attention the need to collect and compile the Qur'an, after observing that the Battle of Yamamah played much havoc with the qurra’, taking the lives of hundreds of companions who were the Qur'an-bearers (memorizers), and if such bloody encounters should recur, much of the Qur'an would be lost! Should we take all these reports into consideration, it would become clear for us that the Qur'an was preserved only through memorization in the hearts of the Companions in the first era of Islam, meaning that with their death or murder the Qur'an would be lost and forgotten. We come to know also that there was

no any source for preserving the Qur'an throughout all ages other than them as they were its material and scribes!

Whereas there were authentic and reasonable reports, indicating that the Prophet (S) used to write down whatever revealed to him of the Qur'an on palm branches, white stones and sheets of tanned sheepskin, and other things, appointing for this task several scribes whose names are recorded in history books, so what happened to that codex in which no one can ever doubt, or dispute in its regard? In fact through this copy Allah has safeguarded the holy Qur'an (against any alteration), as He said in the verse: "Verily We have sent down the Reminder (the Qur'an), and verily We (Ourself) unto it will certainly be the Guardian", (15.9) And also in the verse: "Verily, on Us is the collection of it and the recital of it." (75:17)

Had this unique copy, holding the veracious everlasting version of the Qur'an, been available (at that time), it would have sufficed them, rendering them in no need of all that toil they exerted for executing their task (collecting the Qur'an). Further, it would have become the main reference for the Qur'an, throughout every age and time, on the basis of which Uthman could have reviewed the codices (masahif) that he had written, before distributing them through the towns.

A Necessary Commentary:

If they — as claimed by them — have managed in the work of investigation in regard of writing of the Qur'an, and safeguarding it so as no one can dare to dispute or harbour any doubt regarding it, many things were raised about this critical issue, which they called problems. I find myself obliged to cast light on some of these problems so as not to blame for ignoring a part of what should the readers of my book know about riwayah and the

troubles it caused for hadith, which is relevant to the theme of my book "in every place there is a trace of Tha'labah."!

In his book al-Tibyan, 466  while discussing the necessity of the tawatur of the Qur’an and the ambiguities it encountered on this way, al-Allamah Tahir al-Jaza'iri writes.

There are several ambiguities raised against the very necessity of the tawatur of the Qur'an, we state herewith with their answers:

The First Ambiguity:

It is reported that Ibn Mas'ud used to deny presence of Surat al-Fatihah and al-Mu’awwidhatan in the Qur'an, and that is why a large number of `ulama disapproved the veracity of reporting from him. Al-Nawawi, in Sharh al-Muhadhdhab, said: All Muslims concur that the Mu'awwidhatan and al-Fatihah being among the Qur'anic chapters (surahs), and whoever denying even part of them is a disbeliever, besides whatever is reported from Ibn Mas'ud being false and incorrect. In his book al-Qadh al-mu’alla tatmim al-muhalla, Ibn Hazm writes: This is a lie fabricated against Ibn Mas'ud, but what can be correctly reported from him being the reading of `Asim from Zar'ah, containing the Mu’awwidhatan and (Surat) al-Fatihah.

Ibn Hajar, in Sharh al-Bukhari says: Not writing these surahs by Ibn Mas'ud was known by all, so Ahmad and Ibn Hibban reported about him that he would never write the Mu’awwidhatan in his mushaf. And after citing all the narrations indicating that Ibn Mas'ud used to erase the Mu’awwidhatan from the copies of his mushaf, Ibn Hajar said: So, the claim of those saying it was falsified against him is rejected, and vilifying the sahih traditions without presenting any document can never be accepted!!

In Mushkil al-Qur’an Ibn Qutaybah writes: Ibn Mas'ud used to

conjecture that the Mu’awwidhatan were never part of the Qur'an, since he saw the Prophet pronouncing them to seek God's protection for al-Hasan and al-Husayn, the fact upon which he based his conjecture. We never say that he was right in this and mistaken were the Muhajirun and Ansar. In regard of dropping them from his mushaf, it was not out of his surmise that they never belong to the Qur'an, I seek God's protection! but he was of the opinion that the writing and collecting of the Qur'an between the two covers, had been because of fearing from suspicion and oblivion, and addition and omission, thinking this to be found in Surat al-Hamd, due to its shortness and necessity of its being learnt by all.

That which raises doubt about what is reported from Ibn Mas'ud, being his reporting that Ubayy ibn Ka'b has written in his mushaf two surahs called Surat al-Khal’ and Surat al-Hafd, which he used to recite in his qunut (in prayers) as follows:

اللهم انانستعينک و نستغفرک و نثني عليک الخير و لا تکفرک . و تخلع و نترک من يفجرک. اللهم اياک نعبد و لک تصلي و نسجد. و اليک نسعي و تحفد. تخشي عقابک و نرجو رحمتک . ان عذابک بالکفار ملحق. {dir="rtl"}

To this a reference was made by al-Qadi in al-Intisar, when he said: The words of qunut reported to be recorded by Ubayy ibn Ka'b in his mushaf, could never be proved to be revealed Qur'anic verses but they were only some mode of supplication... as had they been of the Qur'an they would have been reported in the same way as a Qur'an whose veracity was established for all. Also they might have contained some of the Qur'anic words that were

abrogated afterwards but permitted to be used as supplication with being mixed then with non-Qur'anic words. All this was never confirmed to be narrated by him, but it was reported to be recorded in his mushaf. He is known to have recorded in his mushaf other than the Qur'an such as supplication and interpretation (ta’wil).

The Second Ambiguity:

Zayd ibn Thabit, when referring to the hadith on collecting the Qur'an in a mushaf which was the first collecting during the reign of Abu Bakr, is reported to have said: Then I sought for the Qur'an, and collected it from pieces of palm branches, scapulae, white stones and the breasts of men, till I found the last part of the Surat al-Tawbah with Abu Khuzaymah al-Ansari and with no other person, from: "Indeed hath come unto you an apostle from among your selves; grievous to him is your falling into distress, (he is) solicitous regarding your welfare..." till the end of the surah. He is also reported to have said: While preparing the codices of the Qur'an, one verse of the Surat al-Ahzab, which I had heard from the Messenger of Allah (S), could not be found. When searched, we found it with Khuzaymah ibn Thabit al-Ansari whose testimony was considered by the Prophet to be equivalent to that of two men: "Of the believers are the men who are true to what they covenanted with God; That was during the second collecting, which was in the time of Uthman. There was disagreement among the theologians regarding this, some of whom said: This khabar (report), though being recorded in both the Sahihs, is incorrect, due to its necessitating that the above-mentioned three verses had been recorded through other than means of tawatur, which being incompatible with what the said evidence requiring. Some others said: Nothing is there in this khabar requiring establishment of the mentioned

verses through other than tawatur, as Zayd might have intended through his saying: I haven't found with other than so and so; I haven't found them written with anybody else, which never necessitates that he had not found them preserved with anybody else. Some others said: The aforementioned evidence verily necessitates the Qur'an’s being conveyed in a way indicating knowledge, which can be through other than means of tawatur, as is known that knowledge indicating signs might be implied in the akhbar al-ahad, which are accompanied with evidences necessitating this fact. Hence, we never regard it as improbable the Qur'an being conveyed to us in this way, as in the case of the three mentioned verses, since acquiring knowledge at any cost is the quest, which was attained through this means.

This utterance is highly eloquent and firm, with no room for being disputed or refuted by anyone going to excess or exaggerating in this respect.

The Third Ambiguity:

Al-Bukhari reported from Qatadah as saying: I asked Anas ibn Malik as to who collected the Qur'an during the days of the Messenger of Allah (S)? He said: They were four individuals, and all of them belonged to the Ansar (Helpers): Ubayy ibn Ka'b, Mu`adh ibn Jabal, Zayd ibn Thabit and Abu Zayd. I said: Who is that Abu Zayd? He replied: One of my uncles. Through another authentic chain he reported that Anas said: The Prophet (S) passed away and none collected the Qur'an except four individuals: Abu al-Darda', Mu'adh ibn Jabal, Zayd ibn Thabit and Abu Zayd. This hadith contradicts that one reported through Qatadah in two aspects: Using the form (sighah) of restriction in four individuals, and bringing the name of Abu al-Darda' instead of Ubayy ibn Ka'b. Some of the leaders (imams) have disapproved of limiting the number in four. Al-Mazari said: It is not concluded from the utterance of

Anas 'other than those four hadn't collected the Qur'an' that it was true so, as it should be held that he was unaware of other than those persons to have collected it. Otherwise, how was it possible to have full knowledge of all the names with the multiplicity of the Sahabah and their dispersion here and there, unless in case he had met each one of them separately, and he informing him that he had not completed the collecting of the Qur'an in the Prophet's lifetime. That was usually a far-reaching aim, and had the reference been made to what is within his knowledge, the truth would not have necessarily been so.

Al-Nasa'i, through a sahih chain, reported that Abd Allah ibn 'Amr said: I have collected the Qur’an and used to read it wholly every night. 467  When this news reached the Prophet (S), he said to him: Read it through a month (the hadith).

Ibn Abi Dawud, through a hasan chain, reported that Muhammad ibn Ka'b al-Qurazi had said: the Qur'an was collected during the lifetime of the Messenger of Allah (S) by five individuals, all belonged to the Ansar: Mu'adh ibn Jabal, Ubadah ibn al-Samit, Ubayy ibn Ka'b, Abu al-Darda' and Abu Ayyub al-Ansari.

Al-Isma`ili had objected against the reporting of both the traditions of Anas together in the Sahih despite their incongruity, saying: These two hadiths differ from each other, and no room is there that they both appear in al-Sahih despite their incongruity, rather only one of them is sahih. Al-Bayhaqi said with certainty that mention of Abu al-Darda' was a fancy, and Ubayy ibn Ka`b was right. Al-Dawudi says: I never believe the mention of Abu al-Darda` to be authentic, and the former narration is correct. And regarding the latter one, it seems that some of the narrators have narrated it on the basis of meaning, adding to it the limitation, out of his fancying it to be

the sought object, overlooking the mention of the names, substituting the name of Ubayy ibn Ka'b with that of Abu al-Darda'! Whoever ponders deliberately upon this riwayah through meaning would verily have this impression. That was the end of the statement we quoted from the book al-Tibyan.

The detrimental effects of riwayah did not stop at this extent but exceeded the bounds to a more perilous stage, when claiming that there was deletion and lahn (solecism), and other things reported in the Sunnah's books. Should I intend to cite all the examples the discussion would be too long, but I suffice with citing only two examples of their utterances regarding the presence of naqs (omission) in the Qur'an. These examples are not taken from common books of the Sunnah, but they are recorded in the two Sahihs, and reported by the two Shaykhs: al-Bukhari and Muslim.

It is reported by al-Bukhari and others that Umar ibn al-Khattab said, from over the minbar (pulpit): Allah has verily delegated Muhammad a prophet with truth, sending down upon him the Book, in which ayat al-rajm (verse of stoning) was revealed. We read, comprehended and received it into our minds. The Messenger of Allah stoned and so did we after him. I am afraid that if time extends longer someone would say: we never find ayat al-rajm in the Book of Allah, as a result of which he may go astray through abandoning an obligation (faridah) prescribed by Allah. And rajm is a determined punishment in the Book of Allah against whoever perpetrating adultery from among married men and women. We used to recite in our reading of the Book of Allah:

(الا ترغبوا عن آبائکم فانه کفر بکم ان ترغبوا عن آبائکم). {dir="rtl"}

Muslim reported on the authority of Abu al-Aswad, from his father,

as saying: Abu Musa al-Ash'ari sent for the qurra’ of Basrah. Three hundred qurra` of the Qur'an came to him. He told them: "You are the elect of the people of Basrah." He asked them to recite, which they did. (He told them): Do not remain long without reciting the Qur'an, lest your hearts, like those who went before you, should harden. Indeed, we used to recite a surah similar in length and power to the Surat al-Bara’ah, which I forgot except for a single verse:

(لوکان لا بن آدم و اديان من مال لابتغي و اديا ثالثا و لا يملا جوف ابن آدم الا التراب). {dir="rtl"}

(Had son of Adam owned two valleys of wealth he would have asked for a third one. And nothing can fill the belly of the son of Adam except the earth (turab). We would also read a surah like one of the al-Musabbihat, which I forgot all except this:

(يا ايها الذين آمنو الم تقولون ما لا تفعلون * فتکتب شهادة في اعناقکم فتُسالون عنها يوم القيامة). {dir="rtl"}

(O you who believe, why do you utter that which you never do, and then it would be recorded as a witness against you, for which you will be answerable on the Day of Resurrection).

I suffice with whatever is already cited, which is enough for manifesting the damages caused by the riwayah to even the Muslims' first book, the holy Qur’an! We know not how would this riwayah dare to express that there being deletion (naqs) in the Qur'an, or other defects despite Allah's determined words: "Verily We have sent down the Reminder (the Qur'an), and

verily We (Ourself) unto it will certainly be the Guardian", so in which of them should we believe?!

O God, this is verily an amazing and perplexing thing upon which men endowed with wisdom should ponder and meditate.

  1. Al-Tibyan, pp. 96-101, which was the revised and rectified form of al-Itqan of al-Suyuti.

  2. Is that possible? This report is suspected.