The Fallacies of Anti Hadith Arguments

[Abdullah]

It has become the common practice in modern times for western educated people in Islamic countries to claim to be able to reinterpret Islam by reference to the Holy Qur'an only, disregarding entirely the Sunnah of the Holy Prophet on one pretext or another.

Unwittingly or wittingly by this means they strike at the very foundation of Islam on which it has been firmly based for the last fourteen centuries. The aim of these attempts is to reduce Islam to a set of general principles, many of which are of their own conception, or derived from their study of western literature, and so enable them to live a life patterned on western Europe while fixing the label of Islam to it.

This practice has become so common in its various form that it is time that the position of the Sunnah of the Prophet be made clear to those Muslims, who, for lack of essential knowledge of the structure of the religion of Islam may be enticed into this misguided way of thinking. The spread of these so-called "modern" ideas would have incalculably disastrous effects on the thought and practice, and collective life of the world of Islam.

It should be well understood that the exponents of this newfangled theory (new-fangled with relation to the original authorities of Islam, though it has been tried out on various occasions in Islamic history) are themselves entirely devoid of the essential knowledge required for expressing any opinion about Islam. The Qur'an has been studied in translation without any solid grounding in the Arabic language, the books of Hadith and the earliest sources of.

Islamic Law have not been studied at all, even Islamic history is only known at third or fourth hand. How anyone, with such hopelessly inadequate preparation can have the affrontery to pontificate about such a deep subject as Islam, is one of the tragedies of the modern era. In previous, more enlightened times he would have been dismissed as a mischievous ignoramus but today even the flimsiest superficiality passes for learning, and mere mental aberrations for thought.

History is blatantly contradicted, logic is flouted, as if these two essentials of intelligent human thinking are of no value. Indeed, they are of no value to those who wish to put forward pure fictions of their imagination as truth, for history and logic are their worst enemies.

We intend to show here that the Sunnah of the Prophet is an integral part of Islam in addition to the Qur'an. No one denies or can deny, that the Qur'an is the foundation of Islam, being the direct word of God to man. All principles of thought and action, spirituality and morality, private and social life in Islam are ultimately derived from the Holy Book.

But the Holy Book itself was sent through the Prophet in fact, the Prophet is the guarantee of the Holy Book. It is necessary, in order to be a messenger of God, to be free from any possibility of error and deviation, for any possibility of error would affect the reliability of the Holy Book. This is why the profession of faith of a Muslim consists of two fundamentals only, belief in the Divinity of Allah and the truth of the Prophethood of Muhammad. The truth of the Qur'an follows from these two basic postulates, and so it is not mentioned separately.

But perhaps our present day "reformers" do not accept the "Good Word" (Kalimah Tayyibah) which has from the beginning been the mark distinguishing the believer from the unbeliever, for it is only referred to and not spelled out in the Qur'an. To what depths of absurdity the misused logic of man can sink!

read on:

The Fallacies of Anti Hadith Arguments ... 

Peace to all

 

[iBrian]

But the Holy Book itself was sent through the Prophet in fact, the Prophet is the guarantee of the Holy Book. It is necessary, in order to be a messenger of God, to be free from any possibility of error and deviation, for any possibility of error would affect the reliability of the Holy Book. This is why the profession of faith of a Muslim consists of two fundamentals only, belief in the Divinity of Allah and the truth of the Prophethood of Muhammad. The truth of the Qur'an follows from these two basic postulates, and so it is not mentioned separately.

This strikes out as strange to me - on the one hand, you affirm that the essentials of Islam are the above - but all part of an argument stating that tradition must be taken in an equal measure when understanding the message.

Now, I'm probably going to have to start from a point of ignorance here, but where I've seen some parts of Islamic tradition posted on forums and the web, it's read as very rose-tinted in the extreme.

Islamic history tells of how the first Caliphs were murdered one after another, and without checking I'm given the impression Uthman was one of these, who then made a big point of burning anything that disagreed with his position.

And yet Islamic tradition seems to say "Inshallah!" - that we must not question the motives of Uthman, that anything that is called Islamic must be good, and therefore the early upheavals within Islam may not be judged, criticised, or disagreed with.

Which kind of flies in the face of critical thinking so far as Western education goes, so far as I understand it - that the ability to question is the root of all knowledge.

This is especially when the fundamentals of Islam is taking on an increasingly radicalised role - online at the very least. We are told by the Quran that learning is a virtue, we read from Muslim scholars that the Quran is scientific, then we read from Muslims demagogues that science is actually deeply flawed.

It sets up all kinds of contradictions and raises questions. It is too easy to perceive that Islamic tradition insists that these questions may not be answered by any means other than already provided by apologists or otherwise, which is surely not going to satisfy a critical way of thinking?

Simply 2c.

 

[Abdullah]

This strikes out as strange to me - on the one hand, you affirm that the essentials of Islam are the above - but all part of an argument stating that tradition must be taken in an equal measure when understanding the message.

Hi Brian,

The interpretation of the Quran was revealed along iwth the verses of the Quran, thus all the above excerpt is saynig is that, the Quran cannot be understood in the way Allah intended it to be understood, unless we refer to the Prophetic explanations of the Quran; surley there is nothing contradictory in that?

Now, I'm probably going to have to start from a point of ignorance here, but where I've seen some parts of Islamic tradition posted on forums and the web, it's read as very rose-tinted in the extreme.

Unfortunately there are some extremists out there, but they're in the extreme minority

Islamic history tells of how the first Caliphs were murdered one after another, and without checking I'm given the impression Uthman was one of these, who then made a big point of burning anything that disagreed with his position.

I think three of the four Caliphs were murdered, so your right about that. Uthman [ra] burned off the various dialects of the Quran that were is use in Arabia, and which were causing confusion and problems. He burned all dialects except the Quraish one, in order to get rid of the confusion problem that was taking root amongst many Muslims [i think I heard something like that]. The Quran was revealed in 7 dialects and they are all valid; they differ in the pronounciations a bit, but there overall meaning is the same; the seven dialects are still around today and are in use; the burning of 6 dialects at that time was just a pre-emptive and a neccassary move in order to get rid of the problem of that time, and a Caliph like Uthman [ra] had the Prophetic authority to do such a thing.

And yet Islamic tradition seems to say "Inshallah!" - that we must not question the motives of Uthman, that anything that is called Islamic must be good, and therefore the early upheavals within Islam may not be judged, criticised, or disagreed with.

If the reason of why he burned six dialects and just left one to be used during his time, is understood, then it becomes clear that he done the right thing.

Which kind of flies in the face of critical thinking so far as Western education goes, so far as I understand it - that the ability to question is the root of all knowledge.

Thinking and learning is encouraged in Islam, but trying to alter the Prophetic meanings of the Quran, under the pretext of 'thinking' and 'questioning' is condemned.

We are told by the Quran that learning is a virtue, we read from Muslim scholars that the Quran is scientific, then we read from Muslims demagogues that science is actually deeply flawed.

There is much of science that is in accordance with Islam, but any science that does not accord with it is flawed. The higher levels of science goes into the 'theory' mode, and theories cannot be regarded as facts, esspecially if they do not accord with God's revelations.

It sets up all kinds of contradictions and raises questions. It is too easy to perceive that Islamic tradition insists that these questions may not be answered by any means other than already provided by apologists or otherwise, which is surely not going to satisfy a critical way of thinking?

The 'critical way of thinking' that challenges the religion of Islam that is protected by Allah from corruption [and a Quranic verse, and many hadiths confirms this], is ok for the non-beleivers, for they are wellcome to challenge to their hearts content, in order to scrutinise the teachings of Islam, in their road to verification, but Muslims who are given clear and decicive evidences that Islam is a divinley protected religion, and thereafter who challenge it's traditional authenticity and validity, are clearly on the wrong path, thus such dissension is flawed

For a better and comprehensive explanation of the role, importance and authority of the Sunnah [sayings, acts, and implicit consent of the Prophet Muhammad [saw] in Islam, here is an online book [just a few pages long] that also answers all the usual critical questions that are raised by the Sunnah critics:

The Authority of Sunnah - Chapter 1

And here are a few excerpts form that link:

The second type of authority given to the Holy Prophet [saw] is the authority to interpret and explain the Holy Book. He is the final authority in the interpretation of the Holy Qur’ân. The Holy Qur’ân says:

And We sent down towards you the Advice (i.e. the Qur’ân) so that you may explain to the people what has been sent down to them, and so that they may ponder. (16:44)

It is unequivocally established here that the basic function of the Holy Prophet (saw] is to explain the Holy Book and to interpret the revelation sent down to him. It is obvious that the Arabs of Makkah, who were directly addressed by the Holy Prophet (saw] did not need any translation of the Qur’ânic text. The Holy Qur’ân was revealed in their own mother tongue. Despite that they were mostly illiterate, they had a command on their language and literature. Their beautiful poetry, their eloquent speeches and their impressive dialogues are the basic sources of richness in the Arabic literature. They needed no one to teach them the literal meaning of the Qur’ânic text. That they understood the textual meaning is beyond any doubt.
It is thus obvious that the explanation entrusted to the Holy Prophet (saw) was something more than the literal meaning of the Book. It was an explanation of what Allâh Almighty intended, including all the implications involved and the details needed. These details are also received by the Holy Prophet (saw) through the unrecited revelation. As discussed earlier, the Holy Qur’ân has clearly said,

Then, it is on Us to explain it. (75:19)

This verse is self-explanatory on the subject. Allâh Almighty has Himself assured the Holy Prophet (saw) that He shall explain the Book to him. So, whatever explanation the Holy Prophet (saw) gives to the Book is based on the explanation of Allâh Himself. So, his interpretation of the Holy Qur’ân overrides all the possible interpretations. Hence, he is the final authority in the exegesis and interpretation of the Holy Qur’ân. His word is the last word in this behalf.


Hope that helps

peace

 

[Friend]

useful and informative thread

Br/ Abdullah


Thanks a lot

 

[iBrian]

Thanks for the replies, Abdullah - those explanations make a lot of sense. So interpreting the Quran using the Sunnah is very much like Jews using the Talmud to interpret the Torah? Ie, a body of authoritative commentary to explain explain the message in the Holy book?

Also, the suggestion of Uthman keeping the books to s single dialect makes a lot of sense - I hadn't heard that suggested as the reason before. Normally in the West when people burn books, it is to hide things that challenges a certain organised viewpoint and hence can undermine the authority of such an organisation, even if justified. That kind of set up a cynical view in myself of Uthman's motives - however, somehow the suggestion of the corruption via dialects doesn't so easily fit with such a cynical view.

 

[Abdullah]

Thanks for the replies, Abdullah - those explanations make a lot of sense. So interpreting the Quran using the Sunnah is very much like Jews using the Talmud to interpret the Torah? Ie, a body of authoritative commentary to explain explain the message in the Holy book?

Yes you can compare it to that I suppose, but the difference will be that the Sunnah [the Prophetic interpretation of the Quran] is a revelation from God, in the sense that God inspired the Prophet [saw] with it, and God confirmed it's acuracy, iether directly by speech, or by an angel, or by remaining silent, which indicates Gods condonement...

peace

 

[Tao_Equus]

Are there any phalussies regarding the Hadith? Well if you are not a brainwashed mohamedijan then there may be 1 or 3. Lets be honest now, the whole Islamic written tradition is plaguery. 2nd or third hand writing adapted to suit the needs of a frankly bloodthirsty ruling elite. I fail to see why we try to even pretend it is anything different.

Tao

 

[Friend]

May be this thread give more ideas about Hadith in Islam


http://www.comparative-religion.com/forum/the-science-of-hadith-2021.html

 

[Abdullah]

Are there any phalussies regarding the Hadith?

We have undoubtedly sent down the Reminder, and We will truly preserve it. (Al-Qur'an, Surah al-Hijr, 15:9)

The above promise made by Allah is obviously fulfilled in the undisputed purity of the Qur'anic text throughout the fourteen centuries since its revelation. However, what is often forgotten by many Muslims is that the above divine promise also includes, by necessity, the Sunnah of the Prophet Muhammad (may Allah bless him and grant him peace), for it is the practical example of the implementation of the Qur'anic guidance, the Wisdom taught to the Prophet (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) along with the Scripture, and neither the Qur'an nor the Sunnah can be understood correctly without recourse to the other.

Hence, Allah preserved the Qur'an from being initially lost by the martyrdom of its memorisers, by guiding the Rightly-Guided Caliphs, endorsed by the consensus of the Messenger's Companions (may Allah bless him and grant him peace and may He be pleased with them), to compile the ayat (signs, miracles, "verses") of the Qur'an into one volume, after these had been scattered in writing on various materials and in memory amongst many faithful hearts. He safeguarded it from corruption by its enemies: disbelievers, heretics, and false prophets, by enabling millions of believers to commit it to memory with ease. He protected its teachings by causing thousands of people of knowledge to learn from its deep treasures and convey them to the masses, and by sending renewers of His Deen at the beginning of every century.

Similarly, Allah preserved the Sunnah by enabling the Companions and those after them (may Allah be pleased with them) to memorise, write down and pass on the statements of the Messenger (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) and the descriptions of his Way, as well as to continue the blessings of practising the Sunnah. Later, as the purity of the knowledge of the Sunnah became threatened, Allah caused the Muslim nation to produce outstanding individuals of incredible memory-skills and analytical expertise, who journeyed tirelessly to collect hundreds of thousands of narrations and distinguish the true words of precious wisdom of their Messenger (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) from those corrupted by weak memories, from forgeries by unscrupulous liars, and from the statements of the enormous number of 'ulama', the Companions and those who followed their way, who had taught in various centres of learning and helped to transmit the legacy of Muhammad (may Allah bless him and grant him peace) - all of this achieved through precise attention to the words narrated and detailed familiarity with the biographies of the thousands of reporters of Hadith. Action being the best way to preserve teachings, the renewers of Islam also revived the practice of the blessed authentic Sunnah.

read on:

USC-MSA Compendium of Muslim Texts

Peace.

 

[Abdullah]

Are there any phalussies regarding the Hadith?

Faced with the overwhelming arguments in favour of the authority of sunnah, some people resort to another way of suspecting its credibility, that is, to suspect its historical authenticity.

According to them, the sunnah of the Holy Prophet (

) though having a binding authority for all times to come, has not been preserved in a trustworthy manner. Unlike the Holy Qur’ân, they say, there is no single book containing reliable reports about the sunnah. There are too many works having a large number of traditions sometimes conflicting each other. And these books, too, were compiled in the third century of Hijrah. So, we cannot place our trust in the reports which have not even been reduced to writing during the first three centuries.

This argument is based on a number of misstatements and misconceptions. As we shall see in this chapter, inshâ-Allâh, it is totally wrong to claim that the traditions of the sunnah have been compiled in the third century. But, before approaching this historical aspect of the sunnah, let us examine the argument in its logical perspective.

This argument accepts that the Holy Prophet (

) has a prophetic authority for all times to come, and that his obedience is mandatory for all Muslims of whatever age, but in the same breath it claims that the reports of the sunnah being unreliable, we cannot carry out this obedience. Does it not logically conclude that Allâh has enjoined upon us to obey the Messenger, but did not make this obedience practicable. The question is whether Allâh Almighty may give us a positive command to do something which is beyond our ability and means. The answer is certainly “no.” The Holy Qur’ân itself says,

Allâh does not task anybody except to his ability.​

It cannot be envisaged that Allâh will bind all the people with something which does not exist or cannot be ascertained. Accepting that Allâh has enjoined upon us to follow the sunnah of the Holy Prophet (

), it certainly implies that the sunnah is not undiscoverable. If Allâh has made it obligatory to follow the sunnah, He has certainly preserved it for us, in a reliable form.

The following aspect also merits consideration. Allâh Almighty has given us a promise in the Holy Qur’ân:

Indeed We have revealed the Zikr (ie. the Qur’ân) and surely We will preserve it. (15:9)​

In this verse, Allâh Almighty has assured the preservation of the Holy Qur’ân. This implies that the Qur’ân will remain uninterpolated and that it shall always be transferred from one generation to the other in its real and original form, undistorted by any foreign element. The question now is whether this divine protection is restricted only to the words of the Holy Qur’ân or does it extend to its real meanings as well. If the prophetic explanation is necessary to understand the Holy Qur’ân correctly, as proved in the first chapter, then the preservation of the Qur’ânic words alone cannot serve the purpose unless the prophetic explanations are also preserved. As quoted earlier, the Holy Book says,

We have revealed to you the Zikr (Qur’ân) so that you may explain to the people what has been sent down for them.​

The word “Zikr” has been used here for the Holy Qur’ân as has been used in the verse 15:9 and it has been made clear that the people can only benefit from its guidance when they are led by the explanations of the Holy Prophet (

).

Again, the words “for the people” indicate (especially in the original Arabic context), that the Holy Prophet’s (

) explanation is always needed by “everyone.”

Now, if everyone, in every age is in need of the prophetic explanation, without which they cannot fully benefit from the Holy Book, how would it be useful for them to preserve the Qur’ânic text and leave its prophetic explanation at the mercy of distorters, extending to it no type of protection whatsoever.

Therefore, once the necessity of the prophetic explanations of the Holy Qur’ân is accepted, it will be self-contradictory to claim that these explanations are unavailable today. It will amount to negating the divine wisdom, because it is in no way a wise policy to establish the necessity of the sunnah on the one hand and to make its discovery impossible on the other. Such a policy cannot be attributed to Allâh, the All-Mighty, the All-Wise.

This deductive argument is, in my view, sufficient to establish that comprehending the sunnah of the Holy Prophet (

), which is necessary for the correct understanding of the divine guidance, shall as a whole remain available in a reliable manner forever. All objections raised against the authenticity of the sunnah as a whole can be repudiated on this score alone. But in order to study the actual facts, we are giving here a brief account of the measures taken by the ummah to preserve the sunnah of the Holy Prophet (

). It is a brief and introductive study of the subject, for which the comprehensive and voluminous books are available in Arabic and other languages. The brief account we intend to give here is not comprehensive. The only purpose is to highlight some basic facts which, if studied objectively, are well enough to support the deductive inference about the authenticity of the sunnah.

read on:

http://ccm-inc.org/oldsite/iqra/articles/authsun/chap3.html

Peace

 

[iBrian]

Are there any phalussies regarding the Hadith? Well if you are not a brainwashed mohamedijan then there may be 1 or 3. Lets be honest now, the whole Islamic written tradition is plaguery. 2nd or third hand writing adapted to suit the needs of a frankly bloodthirsty ruling elite. I fail to see why we try to even pretend it is anything different.

Tao

Tao, I'm not sure what's rocking your boat, but this post would have been removed for its sheer offence if not already referenced by replies after.

 

[Muslimwoman]

Yes you can compare it to that I suppose, but the difference will be that the Sunnah [the Prophetic interpretation of the Quran] is a revelation from God, in the sense that God inspired the Prophet [saw] with it, and God confirmed it's acuracy, iether directly by speech, or by an angel, or by remaining silent, which indicates Gods condonement...

peace

Are you suggesting that the scholars are wrong and there are no weak or fabricated hadiths?

I have to agree strongly with this:

No Muslim should accept everything and anything presented as the Messenger of Allah’s word.I do not reject an utterance of the Messenger of Allah. If I do it, I will not remain a Muslim. All I say is that a given report is not acceptable as the Messenger of Allah’s utterance, because the Qur’an testifies that he never followed anything but the Qur’an. This is not Rejection of Hadith. However, to attribute something anti-Qur’anic to the Messenger of Allah is a grave offense.

52 Weak Ahadith

 

[Muslimwoman]

Say: "Shall I seek for judge other than Allah? - when He it is Who hath sent unto you the Book, explained in detail." They know full well, to whom We have given the Book, that it hath been sent down from thy Lord in truth. Never be then of those who doubt. (6:114)

In their history verily there is a lesson for men of understanding. It is no invented story but a confirmation of the existing (Scripture) and a detailed explanation of everything, and a guidance and a mercy for folk who believe. (12:111)

These are the portents of Allah which We recite unto thee (Muhammad) with truth. Then in what fact, after Allah and His portents, will they believe? (45:6)

 

[Amica]

Salaam,

Sometimes Muslims are praising Hadiths equal to the Holy Qur'an. The Holy Qur'an must be our only Hadith to live by. I personally try to chek a hadith with the Qur'an. If I cannot find the explanation of it in the Qur'an, I dismiss it--unless it is a useful, honest, advice.

Like the Holy Book states, Allah Allmighty made it detailed. This means to me that all of life's challenges are explained to me in the Book. When I read my Qur'an (the translation of It), I find that one of the main messages it contains is to use one's faculty of reason. We have been greately blessed (all of us) to had had Revelations which taught us all to diffrentiate good from evil. The Holy Books have presented us with many scenarios to learn this, and all that is 'unsaid' or 'not mentioned' directly in the Holy Books--in this case the Holy Qur'an, should be evaluated in a reasonable manner.

I read that Prophet savs did not allow anything but the Holy Qur'an to be written down during his life time (during the Revelation). Obviously, he tried to avoid any human corruptions of the Message. The hadiths were compiled much later after his death. They are reports from various individuals who supposedly heard him say certain things. Reason calls on us to pay attention that many hadiths that have come to us today actually contradict Qur'an or state something that is not supported by the Qur'an at all (i.e. stoning as punishment).

I personally feel that we Muslims must be cautious about Hadiths. They have caused us much pain and many anti-Islam propagandists often use it against Muslims and Islaam. Perhaps those people who invented the idea of compiling hadiths had good in mind, but eventually this was obviously bad idea. It caused many misunderstandings among Muslims and non-Muslims about Islaam, and urged many to do things that hurt Muslims and portray Islaam, the holy Prophet pbuh and our history as awful.