Light On the Muhammadan Sunnah Or Defence of the Hadith

The Greatest Calamity Inflicted Islam:

Al-Ustadh Muhammad Abduh said: Islam was never inflicted with a calamity greater than the bida’ (heresies) ascribed to it by those pretending to be Muslims, and the fabrications invented by the Ghulat, which corrupted the minds of Muslims and made others mistrust the foundations of religion. Consequently falsification spread tremendously against the Muhammadan religion in its early centuries, continuing till the era of the Companions, and rather falsity was practised against the Prophet (S) during his lifetime. But the misfortune of falsification exacerbated and prevailed everywhere during the rule of the Umayyads, where the narrators increased in number and the truthful decreased, with many of the honourable Sahabah refraining from reporting the hadith, except from those whom they trusted to be truthful, for fear from the perversion that inflicted the narrations. In the introduction to his Sahih, Muslim said: “I have never seen the righteous people telling lies in anything more then in the hadith 742 and then evil of slandering spread, with fabrication and invention exacerbating and extending with passage of time.” Whoever going through the introduction of al-Imam Muslim, would verily realize how intense toil and fatigue he experienced in compiling his Sahih, and how much falsified traditions were foisted by fabricators into religion with

which it had nothing to do. And men of insight in history were fully aware of the fact that Islam has overshadowed sights of the world with brightness of might, rising above heads of nations with power of authority, inundating among people like rushing streams, with some of them covetting certain desires in it, and some imagining in it dreads, with manifest signs established for men of insight. Hence, those embracing this Din were of several divisions: Some people believed in it submissively to the need for it and for obtaining its light, and those were the truthful. Some others were of different cults who arrogated its title and began to be branded with its mark, either out of desire in its spoils, or out of fear from assaults of its followers, or priding themselves in belonging to it. So they covered themselves with it but couldn’t be conscious of its real slogan, covering their superficial conditions under the disguise of Islam, without sensing it by their hearts, following their religions inwardly while resembling the Muslims with their apparent aspects. Allah the Exalted said in regard of their equals: “The wandering Arabs say: We believe. Say (unto them, O Muhammad): Ye believe not, but rather say: “We submit,” for the faith hath not yet entered into your hearts.” Among these people there was someone exaggerating in riya’ (dissimulation) to the extent that people would start to count him among the pious. On seeing some people trusting and believing in his utterances, he would begin to relate them traditions from his old creed, ascribing them to the Prophet (S) or some of his Companions, as a result of which all the Jewish traditions (Israeliyyat) and whatever was contained in the expositions of the Torah were recorded in the Islamic books as being Prophetic traditions.

the Din and the world. All these traditions were fabricated by the fabricators on purpose with the aim of corrupting the Muslims and diverting them from the original rules of their religion, so as to disturb the order of their life and weaken their might.

Among the liars there were some believing that increasing in the akhbar and narrating abundant sayings would elevate the position of religion, so they babbled whatever they willed, seeking by this reward and thawab, while they would not gain but heavy burden and punishment. It is them in regard of whom Muslim in his Sahih said: I have not seen the righteous telling lies more than in the hadith. 744 He means by ‘the righteous’ those who used to prolong their sibal (beard), widen their trousers, bow down their heads, keep low their voices, frequent regularly to the mosques with their ghosts, while being the farthest among people from them with their spirits, move with remembrance their lips and follow them with moving their rosaries. But in fact they were as described by Amir al-Mu’minin Ali ibn Abi Talib who said in their regard: They made the Din one of the locks of insight and blockages of intellect. They are self-deceited and deluded, doing evil but thinking to do good. They imagine oppression to be justice, and treachery to be a virtue, so they believe that ascribing what they surmise to the Prophet’s Companions will increase in their honour and make others hold them in higher esteem, so as to be fit for what is said in their regard: “A wise enemy is much better than an ignorant lover, 745 (with some abbreviation).

When broaching to `ilm al-hadith in the bill he laid down for reforming the education, and what method should be followed, he (Muhammad Abduh) said: “Art of hadith is considered acceptable when it is viewed as interpreting the Qur’an and exposer for it, with deleting from it whatever contradicting the Quranic text, like the unauthentic traditions and exertion of opinion (ijtihad), so as to restore the correct traditions to it, if their outward appearance deludes of being contradictory (to the Qur’an). 746

In an address to one of brothers (in Din), counselling him to keep on reading the Qur’an and the Prophetic sirah (conduct), he said: “Keep on

reading the Qur’an and learn its imperatives, the forbidden things, counsels and lessons, as it used to be recited for the believers and disbelievers in the time of (coming of) revelation. Beware of going over the books of tafsir but only for understanding the meaning of some word that you could not realize what the Arabs intended by it, or connection between a word and another the conjunction of which was unknown for you. Then betake yourself to what the Qur’an designated for you, bear down upon what it assaults, and attach to this study of the Prophetic conduct, admitting the reasonable correct matters, keeping your eyes away from the weak and rejected things.

In interpreting the Qur’an and comprehending the religion, he said: In this regard that which should be followed is only the decisive proof, since this issue comes under bab al-aqa’id (doctrines), and it is dependable upon certainty that can’t be taken through conjecture and imagination. 748

Believing in Message of Muhammad (S): 749

Al-Ustadh Muhammad Abduh says:

It should be believed in what he (S) reported and had faith in whatever he brought, with which I mean what is expressed clearly in the holy Book, and what was successively narrated (mutawatir) through an authentic chain of transmitters that having all the necessary conditions. That is the khabar that is reported by a group of people against whom charge of collaboration on falsity can never be levelled by anyone, as is usual in the case of sensible matters, such as the conditions after death like resurrection (ba’th) and bliss in the paradise, or torment in the hell, reckoning for the merits (hasanat) and guilts, beside other known alike issues. But when it is related to belief and faith, we should depend only upon what is plain in the khabar, and it is impermissible to annex the conjectural to the decisive. The provision for soundness of belief lies in its devoidness of anything spoiling the probity and highness of the Deity above being resembled to the creatures.

But in case of akhbar al-ahad, believing in whatever is cited in them is obligatory upon whoever heard them and trusted the veracity of their narration. Whereas that who has not received the khabar, or it reached him with a suspicion seeming to him in its veracity, while it being not mutawatir, entailing that non-believing it would not slander his faith. The basis to be followed in all that being: Whoever denies anything 750 while knowing that it was disclosed or acknowledged by the Prophet (S), he has in fact confuted the truthfulness of the message and negated it. The same is true in regard of that who neglected the successively narrated (mutawatir) knowledge, though being aware of its being necessarily of the religion and found in the Book, and little of the Sunnah is got from the acts.

Can Anyone Authenticated by Earliers be Deemed Thiqah?

One of al-Azhar shaykhs was displeased with the behaviour of al-Sayyid Rashid Rida, when he criticized Ka’b al-Ahbar and Wahb ibn Munabbih, and declared distrust in their narrations. This was responded with a long, interesting and dumbfounding reply, of which I quote the following:

“If we admit that whoever is authenticated by the antecedent Jumhur to be thiqah — even if the opposite proved true by evidence — we will open the door wide for defamation against ourselves due to abandoning the proof, adopting its preludes through imitation, and contradicting the guidance of the holy Qur’an.”

And after stating the fact that criticizing the narrators of hadith was a subject of debate among men of jarh and ta’dil, he said: In regard of verification of the texts of narrations and their consistency or inconsistency with truth, matter of fact, the decisive or preponderant usul (foundations) or furu’ (branches) of the Din or other than this, being not of their (men of hadith) profession, and it was rarely practised by the researchers among them. And if any of them — like al-Imam Ahmad or al-Bukhari —practised it, he would not fulfill it as is due, as was stated by al-Hafiz Ibn Hajar when

talking about the contradiction among the correct narrations for him and others. Besides, it was inaccessible for men of hadith to recognize congruity or contradiction of some traditions to the truth, like the outward of hadith of Abu Dharr in view of al-Bukhari and Muslim and others: 752 Where will be the sun after it sets? As what was thought by the predecessors being that the sun sets away from the earth as a whole, with its light being stopped from shining over it during the night! resting under the Throne waiting for permission to rise again!! But it has become decisively known for hundreds of millions of people that the sun never sets from the earth during the night, but it sets from some countries and rises over others. So when it be day here, it will be night in the other hemisphere and vice versa, as is understood from the holy verse: “He maketh night to succeed day, and He maketh day to succeed night”. And also the verse: He covereth the night with the day, which is in haste to follow it.

So we — after coming to know for certain this established fact and decision in its regard — will have to choose one of the two alternatives left before us: Either impeaching the chain of transmission (sanad) of the hadith, even if it be rectified, as narrating what contradicting the decisively confirmed (hadith) was one of indications of fabrication in the eyes of the narrators themselves. And the least cause impelling to doubt veracity of the hadith whose narrators were known of truthfulness and precision, lies in the fact that the Companion or Follower heard it from Ka’b al-Ahbar or his likes. And it is known for all that Abu Hurayrah used to report from Ka’b al-Ahbar abundantly and trust him, the reason why we see many of his traditions appearing mu’an’anah, that he couldn’t declare to have heard them from the Prophet (may God’s peace and benediction be upon him and his Progeny). The indisputable fact being that he hasn’t heard so many of them directly from the mouth of the Prophet (S) due to embracing Islam so lately, and he most likely heard them from Ka’b al-Ahbar. And the Companion’s mursal tradition (one reported with no chain of transmitters) would be hujjah when

being heard from another Compaion, 753 the fact that can be said in regard of Ibn Abbas and others who used to report from Ka’b al-Ahbar and trust him.

Interpreting the hadith narrated on basis of meaning and which some of its narrators couldn’t comprehend what is intended by it, led them to express what they could conceive of it, as in the case of not comprehending of the narrator of this hadith – which I referred to as an example – what is denoted by the Prophet’s saying: “The sun will be prostrating under the Throne ... etc.”, about which he said what indicated that it sets of the earth as a whole. Till he said: The hadith was interpreted by the exposers of the two Sahihs in a way agreeing with the opinion of the precedent astronomers, whose ta’wil came to be feigned, that would be refuted by the outward aspect of the hadith, especially the prolonged narration by Muslim.

Like that is the relation of some of the narrators for Ka’b and Wahb from the books of the Children of Israel. Yahya ibn Mu’in, Ahmad, Abu Hatam and his son and their likes, 754 were unable to discern which ones were correct and which ones were incorrect among these traditions due to their not being acquainted with those books, and non-availability of an evidence proving the falsity of the narrators well-versed in fabricating narrations which they ascribed to these books. If it appeared for those succeeding them during that age or before it or after it, what was not discovered by them in regard of non-truthfulness of two or more of these narrators, can he then argue pertinaciously or deny the truth and believe them falsely and hypocritically? Or can he hide the truth from the Muslims so as not to be disagreeing with those who were before him, in respect of whatever became known for him but not for them! Hence the critic,

way of performing prayers and other rituals, beside the oral traditions which were adopted by the antecedent Jumhur. All other than these sunan and traditions, such as ahadith al-ahad which being not decisively proved and confirmed, are liable to exertion of opinion (ijtihad). And it is known that some of the leading mujtahids have not approved of many sahih traditions, even those reported by the two Shaykhs (al-Bukhari and Muslim), the practice that is still followed by millions of people, for which other Muslims can never consider them as perverts. Al-Muhaqqiq Ibn al-Qayyim has cited more than a hundred excerpts of these sahih traditions that were opposed by the Hanafis and others, who constitute the majority of Muslims of present time.

So what value would be for the narrations of this Israeli man (Ka’b al-Ahbar) and this Persian (Wahb ibn Munabbih), the most of which are only Jewish superstitions, that distorted the books of exegesis (tafsir) of the Book of Allah and other books, and raised doubts against Islam that were misused by its atheist enemies to charge it with being religion of superstitions and suspicions. And other than the superstitions may contain bigger doubts, like the one stated by Ka’b about the description of the Prophet in the Torah,

He continued by saying: The sarcasm we raise against them both (Ka’b and Wahb) was only for some defect that was unknown for earlier men of jarh and ta’dil, which being a reasonable and acceptable cause. And the narrations that were known to be authentic and correct are sufficient to prove their falsity.

After all that I would say: If through what I stated I could prove the falsity of these two men, out of what they mentioned, there will be no room for doubting that they used to cheat the Muslims, foisting into their religious books and narrations things entailing slander against their Din. Consequently no one would wonder to see them affiliating themselves with Jewish and Magian societies, which used to conspire against Islam and Arabs. 757

Criticism by Ulama’ of Fiqh al-Hadith:

He (Muhammad Abduh) said also: Beside the criticism of the ulama’ of fiqh al-hadith against the asanid (chains of transmission) of reports and works, there was another criticism to the texts in respect of their meanings and expressions, and how viewed by reason and Islamic law (Shar’) and their contradiction with others. In this kind of criticism they were shared by men of philosophy, literature and history, and it is called in the present age the analytical criticism (al-naqd al-tahlili). Afterwards, they began to doubt and impeach many traditions, even the ones of the authentic asanid, speaking against their expositions, with some of them compiling books dedicated for this purpose, the most famous of which being: Mushkil al-athar of al-Tahawi.

On the whole, the concern of men of jarh and ta’dil was concentrated on verifying the narrators of the traditions, in respect of goodness of memorization and precision, and non-oddity as far as possible. They were rarely charging the hadith to be confused, if the disagreement occurring in the text, but verifying the texts of narrations or their contradiction to the truth, and to the preponderant decisive religious usul and furu’ was not their profession, and practised by very few of the researchers among them. There were so many traditions, in the chain of transmitters of which only one trustworthy narrator can be found, while they be defective and weak, as the sahih one cannot be known only through its narrators but through comprehension and committing to memory.

Most of Ahadith al-Ahad Weren’t Abundant in First Age:

In the introduction to the book al-Mughni wa al-Sharh al-kabir, the following statement is cited:

“Out of proofs of the madhahib it can be deduced that most of the traditions that are used by men of hadith to argue men of opinion

so abundant in the first stage of Islam, or nothing was reported from the Sahabah and Tabi’un contravening to their theme. Thus it became known for all that they couldn’t be counted of the universal legislation, according to which the Prophet and his Companions used to act, not among the precepts recommended by the Prophet, but were among the judicial questions the solutions of which people used to ask and get answers (verdicts). If he did not ask, he would be free to exert his opinion in its regard, and it would be better for him and people, as had it been among necessities of the Din that Allah wanted to impose upon His bondmen as duties, He would have manifested them without questioning, since Allah the Exalted knows better what benefits people more. 760

The Prophet (S) was averse to asking abundant questions, forbidding from this habit so as not to be a cause to multiplying the obligations, the undertaking of which the Ummah will fail to do. Therefore the Messenger of Allah (S) said: “Let me alone as long as I leave you. Surely it was this asking abundantly and difference concerning the prophets which caused those who have gone before you to perish. When I forbid you from anything, you should refrain from (doing) it. And when I command you to do a thing you have to perform as much as you can of it.” This hadith was reported by al-Bukhari, and Muslim, but narrated by al-Daraqutin in another version. Thereat the following verse was revealed: “O ye who believe! Ask not of things which, if they were made known unto you, would trouble you...”

He (S) said also: “Allah has imposed upon you obligations, which you should not transgress, and laid down limits that you should not approach. He has prohibited things that you should not violate, and kept silent of (left) things out of mercy for you, not out of forgetfulness, so you should never inquire about them.” It is reported by al-Daraqutni and al-Nawawi in the book al-Arba’in.

On top of all this, comes the Almighty’s saying: “This day have I perfected your religion for you and completed My favour unto you, and have chosen for you as religion, al-Islam.” It would be verily glaring ignorance and

an offence against the Din to demolish these great foundations and principles with comparisons taken from conjectures of opinion and analogy (qiyas).

It is proven that the Prophet used to answer every questioner about any judicial issue in a way appropriate to his condition and level, and some of his fatawa were general or special permissions. For example he granted license to Aqabah ibn ‘Amir and Abu Burdah to sacrifice the jidh’ (trunk) or atud of the goat, which meant that one which used to pasture (of grass) and became strong, with completing one full year. Al-Jawhari said: The best of it is that which reached the age of one year. This hadith is unanimously concurred, while Ahl al-Sunnah, including the four imams (of the schools) prohibited sacrifice of the trunk and goats. 761

Can Traditions be Counted a General Law?

Al-Sayyid Rashid Rida says: Can the traditions – which they call oral sunan – be considered a general Din and Shari’ah, though they weren’t followed sunan in practice (acts) with no dispute or controversy, particularly during the first era of Islam?

If we say yes, we will be faced with the biggest suspicion, as the Prophet (S) forbade from writing anything other than the Qur’an, and the Sahabah’s not committing the hadith to writing! Beside ignorance of their ulama’ and leaders, like the caliphs to reporting of traditions! It is reported rather, that they were disdaining from the hadith.

What is Refuting Khabar al-Wahid:

In his book al-Luma’, under the bab: “Bayan ma yuradd bihi khabar al-wahid”, al-Shirazi writes: If the khabar be related by a thiqah, it can be refuted by several things:

First: If it be contradictory to the necessities of minds, when its falsehood would be known since the shar’ can be approved by permissibilities of minds, 762 not the contrary way.

Second: If it be contradictory to a text of the Book or successive (mutawatir) Sunnah, when it will be recognized to be of no origin or abrogated.

Third: If it disagrees with the unanimity (ijma’), the fact indicating its being abrogated, or baseless, as it can’t be correct and not abrogated while the Ummah is unanimously concurring on its contrary.

Fourth: If a single (wahid) narrates alone that which should be known by all people, the fact indicating its being of no root, as it is unreasonable that it has an origin but he alone be aware of it from among all people.

Fifth: If a single narrator narrates individually the tradition that is usually known to be reported by men of tawatur, as a result of which it can’t be accepted since he is unallowed to singly narrate such a tradition. If it came to be contradictory to qiyas, or the single narrator reports alone a tradition with which the calamity prevails everywhere, it would not be refuted. I have discussed the controversy regarding this elaborately in another book (Tawjih al-nazar, p. 82), so no need is there for reiteration.

In al-Mustasfa, al-Ghazali says: The second division of akhbar, the falsity of which is known, are confined in four kinds as follows:

First: That which can be known to be contrary to truth either by reason necessity, or view, or sense, or sighting, or akhbar al-tawatur. On the whole, whatever contradicted the commonly known rules through the six faculties (madarik).

Second: That which disagrees with the decisive confirmed text of the Book (Qur’an) and the mutawatir Prophetic Tradition (Sunnah), and unanimity of the Ummah, since it came to be contradicting Allah the Exalted and His Messenger and the Ummah.

Third: That khabar, the falsity of which is declared by a large number of traditionists who can never be generally collaborating on telling lies when saying: We were present with him at that time (at the meeting) and we haven’t found any root for the event he related.

Fourth: That which the majority of narrators refrained from reporting and relating, though attending and witnessing the happenings of the episode, and despite the impossibility of refraining from citing it due to availability of motives encouraging to report it.

Al-Qarrafi is reported to have said: Five things indicate the falsity of any khabar: Its contradiction to what is necessarily known by all, or to consideration, or decisive evidence, or what was fit to be mutawatir but hasn’t come so, and the legal rules, or its contradiction to all of these things in a whole, like the miracles or that which was sought to obtain from the memories or books of the narrators after searching into the traditions, but could not be found.

State of People during First Era and After It:

Al-Imam Abu Zayd al-Dabbusi, in his book Taqwim al-adillah, says: People of the first era (of Islam), i.e. the Sahabah and Tabi’un and Righteous (Salihun), used to base their affairs on the hujjah (proof). So they used to act according to the Book, then to the Sunnah of the Messenger, 764 and after him to the utterances of those who succeeded him, particularly those which can be proved right through proof. Thus someone may act according to utterance of Umar in a certain issue, but then he may contradict it with a saying of Ali in another question. It is known about the companions of Abu Hanifah that they once agreed with him and disagreed another, in accordance with what be made clear to them through the hujjah. The legal madhhab was neither Umari nor Alawi but the ascription was in origin to the Messenger of Allah, as he was the source of ahadith, so he (S) extolled those people who used to depend on the proof not their ulama’ or own selves. But when people kept far from God-fearing during the 4th century, and lazied themselves from seeking the proofs, they turned to acknowledge their ulama’ as hujjah (authority), following and imitating them. As a result of this, some of hem became Hanafis, some Malikis, and some others Shafi’is, reinforcing the hujjah with

the rijal, believing the veracity to lie in being born on that madhhab. Then, every community coming after them embarked on following the guide of their leader, whomsoever, without any consideration to qualifications, the fact led to substituting the sunan with the bida’ (innovations) and making the truth lost among desires.

Fiqh during the Prophet’s Lifetime:

Wali Allah al-Dihlawi, in his treatise ‘al-Insaf fi bayan sabab al-ikhtilaf, wrote:

During his (S) lifetime fiqh was not written down, and searching for the rules then was not like the searching made nowadays by the fuqaha’, who do their utmost to manifest the arkan (cornerstones), provisions and norms, portray the images from their own invention, embarking then on talking about these imposed images, laying down limits for what is fit for being limited, confining what can be confined, and so on.

During his lifetime, the Messenger of Allah (S) used to perform ablution and the Companions would learn from him and imitate him, without his embarking on clarifying which part being rukn and which are being recommended. Also when he was performing prayers, they would observe his way of praying and follow his example in prayers,

Ibn Abbas is reported to have said: I have never encountered people better than the Companions of the Messenger of Allah (may God’s peace and benediction be upon him and his Progeny) ... they have not asked about anything except thirteen issues till he passed away, all of which being stated

in the Qur’an. Among them the following: “They question thee (O Muhammad) with regard to warfare in the sacred month,” and the verse: “They question thee (O Muhammad) concerning menstruation).” Then he (Ibn Abbas) said: They were not questioning but about things that avail them. Al-Qasim said: You are questioning with regard to things about which we never used to inquire, and searching for things that we were not seeking for ... I have never met people of easier conduct (sirah), or less strictness than the Sahabah. 768

On the whole, such was his (S) noble habit, so each one of the Sahabah would take whatever he found easy to apply of his worship, verdicts (fatawa) and rules, which he learned by heart and comprehended, realizing for every one of them a certain aspect according to the evidences indicating it. Their main dependable criterion in this regard was only the inner consciousness and confidence,