On the Science of Hadith
And how a more critical eye on hadith sciences could be necessary.
Thoughts after Qardawi’s words on the matter:
After reading a passage from Yusuf AL Qardawi’s great book Contemporary Fatwas, responding to a question about how we judge the authenticity of hadith, I wrote a few of my thoughts on the subject of hadith.
On the “unsuspectability” of the companions
A “companion” of the prophet is defined as anyone having been in the vicinity of the prophet for even a day, (being muslim of course)
Any companion is automatically judged as truthful, just, and unsuspectable
This is justified because the “Quran and the sunnah” apparently tells us that they are.
However an issue arises here:
That is a very wide definition of companion
The quran and sunnah also mention munafiqun
Indeed not only did the prophet not know all the munafiqun, but even those he knew, we not eradicated or excommunicated, rather they stayed within the ummah.
And we know they weren’t all perfect: There is a reason why we only speak of the four rightly guided caliphs, and Mu’awiyah is not considered one of them.
So what do we know then:
Companions are not infallible in akhlaq i.e. in justice, and truthfulness
We know of certain companions, from hadith narrations, and historical narrations that mocked the qur’an, that committed crimes (like mu’awiyah) and went against the sunnah of the prophet.
When people embraced Islam, they were still capable of holding onto vestiges of the past and act in accordance with the period of jahiliyah
The Qur’an and the sunnah, tell us that among the companions were munafiqun, some known by the prophet, some not, but none known directly. We know for example, at the battle of Uhud, those who diobeyed the prophet, left the mountain, and caused the failure of the operation as they were more interested in getting the riches and the spoils of war, than following the commands of the prophet (SA’AWS).
We have explicit, and authentic hadith narrations that make certain companions unworthy of being trusted as narrators
How can we then still implicitly accept all “companions”, as truthful, just, and how can we have the audacity to label them “unsuspectable”, when the only man that Allah (SWT) ever gave that title is the Messenger (SA’AWS)?
On the perfectness of the work of hadith compilers
Whether it be Al Bukhari or Muslim, both are considered to be on par with the Qur’an in terms of authenticity, and we must accept evetrything within them, because their ahadith have been meticulously chosen and filtered and studied.
While I would never question the sincerity, and the meticulousness of their work, we must remember certain things:
The only text that Allah ever swore to protect was the Qur’an, never the Sunnah
The Qur’an, unlike the hadith, was compiled during the prophet’s (SA’AWS) life, whereas the hadith were compiled a few generations later.
Humans are fallible, no matter how much effort they put in, they make mistakes: this goes for Al Bukhari, and Muslim
Their hadith contain contradictions, unlike the Qur’an, which states “surely you would have found within it many contradictions” had it been written by a man. (Note here the contradictions are not within ahadith, but rather for hadith that go against one another)
On the subject of the chains of transmission, there isn’t always consensus between ulama' on certain transmitter’s degree of authenitcity, especially in differing stages of life, like old age, so this inevitably came down to a judgement call by Bukhari or Muslim.
In many accounts it is said we must judge, by Allah’s book, then by the Sunnah, and finally using reason: Why then do some use ahadith to abrogate verses, when the veracity of the Qur’an is certain, but the hadith could be misinterpreted, misremembered, or worse, invented?
Some hadith exist in both compilations, and some aren’t shared, because Al Bukhari, and Muslim, or other compilators like Imam Malik disagreed on the authenticity of certain ahadith.
Needless to say they aren’t perfect texts, and can be disputed. Now as to disputing specific hadiths and narrations, I won’t venture into that which I am not qualified to do.
Final Thoughts
Beyond the question of elevating hadith to gospels, (if you’ll pardon the expression as in fact we know they are much more reliable than any gospel christians posess); there is a more problematic, behavioral flaw in the ‘Ummah, which pertains to hadith.
What I am speaking of is the many people whom hold a religious, or other point of view, often on a question of fiqh, and argue with others on these subjects, using as an argument that “the prophet said it in a hadith”. Often not knowing the hadith, the chain of transmitters, or the level of authenticity that is given to said hadith. Even for those whom say “it’s in Bukhari!”, or “it’s in Muslim!”. As we have seen, that for one, does not:
validate it as certain (although we can still separate it from the rest of the many many weak hadiths that are narrated day in and day out)
or validate the interpretation, or sanction you have extrapolated from it then.
In particular, if you have not gone through the effort of ijtihad needed on the question, (and this means more than a quick google search, or asking the sheikh at your mosque), don’t have the audacity, the takabur, to impose your view, on others, and to get angry when other members of the ‘Ummah disagree with you, or do something differently.
In the same vein, there is a bizzare tendency in Muslims, to have an a priori sense that Islam is a very homogenous religion, in terms of practice; and while it is, especially in ‘aqidah, unlike christians for example, it is not so much in temrs of fiqh. It is not because you have followed a ruling your entire life, and that everyone in your hometown follows the same madhhab as you, or that you have never seen the other side, that you can have the authority to judge as incorrect, or belittle the manner of practicing Islam of another member of the ‘Ummah. This goes for those whom refuse to pray together with Shi’a among the Sunni, or those who do not want to follow prayer behind an Imam because he says Bismillahi al rahmani alrahim before surat Al Fatiha.
May Allah help our ‘Ummah rise up from these sectarian, tribal tendencies, and may we have the intellectual rigor, and the courage, to accept that it is not because the work of previous scholars was good that it was perfect, and that we can still use our minds to decipher, even today, and to question the views of the tabi’in, or those thereafter.
Glossary
For those unfamiliar with certain terms, here is a small glossary:
Hadith / Ahadith : Narrations of the words and actions of the prophet Muhammad (SA’AWS) or of his companions
Munafiq / Munafiqun : “Hypocrites”, i.e. people who claim to follow Islam but in truth act against it and often seek to destroy it from within
Jahiliyah : Pre-Islamic period, literally “time of Ignorance”
Fiqh : Islamic Jurisprudence, science of Islamic law
‘Aqidah : What pertains to deity, the attributes of God, and the core beliefs of the religion
Ijtihad : The effort of analysis, research, and judgement done by a mujtahid to make a ruling or to choose a ruling on a matter of religion
Takabur : To agrandise oneself, arrogance
‘Ummah : Islamic community, the nation composed of all whom believe is Allah and his messenger
Madhhab : A School of Jurisprudence (There are 4 main ones in Sunni Islam)
Tabi’in : The generation that ‘followed’ the companions, i.e. the very next generation after the death of the prophet (SA’AWS)
Sunni / Shia : The two main branches of Islam