Chapter 3: Fundamental Principles of Understanding Aḥādīth
We
study and ponder over aḥādīth to fully benefit from the prophetic
knowledge transmitted to the ummah in the form of traditions. Proper
investigation in and contemplation on aḥādīth requires that the
researchers in this discipline follow certain fundamental principles. If a
researcher attempts studying aḥādīth ignoring these principles he will
face perplexing questions at every step in this exercise. He would, very
likely, lose the straight path. Those intending to steer clear of the danger of
losing the true prophetic knowledge will find the following principles helpful
in avoiding these dangers. Those taking help from these principles will find
the road to understanding aḥādīth quite easy.
There
are five fundamental principles of understanding aḥādīth. A detailed
discussion on each follows.
3.1 The Qur’ān is the Measure of Truth
The first and the foremost principle is
that the Qur’ān is the real measure of truth regarding aḥādīth. In
fact, it is the only criterion of truth in all religious matters. While
discussing the interrelationship between the Ḥadīth, the Sunnah and the
Qur’ān, I have explained that the Qur’ān and Ḥadīth are interrelated as the root
is related to its branches or a text is to its explanation. The Qur’ān gives the
core guidance forming the religion and the sharī‘ah. This Qur’ānic
guidance is the basis and foundation of the religion while aḥādīth explain
and detail it.
The Qur’ān has many characteristics. It
has many names and attributes of which one name, given to it by the Almighty Himself,
is mīzān (the criterion/measure). The Qur’ān is the measure of judgment.
This means that it works as a judgment over the differences and disputes
between the people. It establishes the truth firm and makes it distinct from
the untruth. This is the greatest purpose the Qur’ān was revealed to fulfil. It
is only the Qur’ān which measures the ideas and views in the divine scale and
decides over the validity of what people ascribe to God. It determines what
part of the current religious ideas is the truth from God and what part of
these is a human addition mixed with the pure divine guidance. The Qur’ān says:
It is God Who has revealed the Book with decisive truth, and the balance (al-mīzān). (Q 42:17)
Certainly We sent our messengers with clear arguments, and sent down with them the Book and the balance (mīzān) that men may conduct themselves with equity. (Q 57:25)
Considering this very quality of the Qur’ān, it has been given the name muhaymin (guardian/criterion). In order to establish justice and equity, we need a balance and a criterion. Almighty God has referred to these two qualities of the Qur’ān in the following verse as well:
And to you we have revealed the Book with the truth, in confirmation of the [prophesies of] the earlier Scriptures, and a criterion (muhayman) over it. So judge between them by that which God has revealed, and do not follow their desires setting aside the truth which has come to you. (Q 5:48)
Everything concerning the religion and the sharī‘ah has to be measured by this criterion. This is a general principle which covers all the religious matters and sources. When we find a ḥadīth which goes against the religion and admits of doubt we have to measure it by the Qur’ān, for the Book rules over it.
Someone
may consider aḥādīth independent of the measure of the Qur’ān. He may
posit that it is not subject to the Qur’ān and it is a judge for itself. He
would, however, be forced to adopt as the part of the religion even the
narratives which clearly contradict the Qur’ānic teachings. He would be
including in the religion that which does not belong to it.
I believe that every such ḥadīth
as is proved unsound when measured on the scale of the Qur’ān, is either a
fabrication or a distortion. It is, therefore, incumbent upon us to keep the
religion of God safe from the onslaught of such narratives. It is unperceivable,
on the scale of reason as well as revelation, that the Messenger (sws) negates
or contradicts the commands of the Almighty God. The scholars of the religious
sciences unanimously hold that any ḥadīth that contradicts the Qur’ān
is a munkar narrative. It has to be rejected. I quote the leader of the muḥaddithūn
and the greatest servant of the Prophetic tradition, Imām Aḥmad b. Ḥanbal in
this regard. Faḍl b. Ziyād reports:
I heard Aḥmad b. Ḥanbal respond to a question regarding the traditions which say that the Sunnah overrules the Qur’ān (qāḍiyatan ‘alā al-Qur’ān) in the following words: “I do not dare say that. However, the Sunnah explicates the Book, defines and explains it.[1]
This means that, according to him, no ḥadīth can abrogate the Qur’ān. We acknowledge the status of aḥādīth. We do not deny it. However, we hold that the claim that it overrules the Qur’ān is baseless.
3.2 Collating the Narratives on a Single Topic
Just like the Qur’ān, aḥādīth too
have an overall order and arrangement. We cannot properly understand and
interpret a ḥadīth without considering the overall structure of aḥādīth.
The second most important principle of understanding aḥādīth is that
every ḥadīth has to be considered a part of the collective system of
the narratives. A part, it is clear, has to be in accord with the overall
structure of the whole. Every ḥadīth that is not in assonance with the
overall structure of aḥādīth should be rejected. In solving the
problems of opposing and mutually contradicting aḥādīth, the collective
order of aḥādīth will be of immense help to us.
Examples of such isolated inordinations
are abundant in the statements of the Sufis. They present their statements as aḥādīth
and ascribe them to the Prophet (sws) even though these statements neither
correspond to the fundamental teachings of the Qur’ān nor accord with the
general prophetic teachings. Such baseless traditions, though limited in
number, have found their way into the major ḥadīth works. It is
extremely necessary to analyse and separate them from the true prophetic
knowledge.
3.3 Language of Aḥādīth
The
original language of the ḥadīth literature is the standard Classical
Arabic even though, unlike the Qur’ān, most of aḥādīth have not been
transmitted verbatim; ideas have been transmitted rather than words.
Nonetheless, the language of aḥādīth maintains a high standard. The
quality of the language of aḥādīth is superior to many other earlier
sources. It is extremely important to consider this aspect of the language of
the prophetic sayings while pondering over them. By the grace of God, there are
many ḥadīth collections. Recorded in an early period of oral tradition,
the language of aḥādīth is nearer to that of the prophetic times. Having
acknowledged that language keeps changing and evolving, we need to prefer the
traditions whose language is more approximate to that of the time of the
Prophet (sws) and the Companions (rta).
In the
syntactic and morphological analysis of aḥādīth, the judgments of the
expert grammarians, lexicographers and acknowledged authorities in the field
always prevail. Therefore, while deciding on meanings of difficult words and
explaining the complex sentence structures, their interpretations and views
have to be preferred over one’s personal understanding.
For the
serious student of the ḥadīth literature, expertise and competence in
the language spoken during the time of the Prophet (sws) and the Companions
(rta) as well as a taste and flavour for this language are crucial. This can
help him differentiate the language of the prophetic time from that of the
later times. If a person, engaged in the ḥadīth study, fails to
understand this difference, it is very likely that he confuses non-prophetic
statements with aḥādīth of the Prophet (sws). He can even be led to accept
the non-Qur’ānic words as the part of the Book of God. A famous ḥadīth
ascribed to ‘Umar (rta) claims that the Qur’ān once included the verse al-shaykh
wa al-shaykhatu idhā zanayā farjumūhumā al-battata (When an old man
and old woman commit extramarital sex, stone them to death). The truth of the
matter is that, far from being part of a verse of the Qur’ān, these words do
not even match the prophetic language. It is, at best, the language of a non-Arab
jurist of the later times.
3.4 Specification and Generalization, Situation and Context, and Nature of Address
Understanding
aḥādīth requires proper understanding of the instances of specification
and generalization, situation and context, and the nature of address. A proper
understanding of the instances of specification and generalization requires
that, while explaining the ḥadīth narratives, one appreciates
where an apparently general statement, actually, deals with a specific case.
Similarly, one has to appreciate the points in the text where a seemingly
specific command is used in a general sense. Muḥaddithūn have discussed
these questions in detail. However, this issue is very delicate and one has to
remain alive to these facts.
Likewise,
understanding the ḥadīth literature requires that the student is able
to fully appreciate the implications of the textual context as well as context
of situation. This is extremely important to understand. Failure to appreciate
the proper textual context as well as context of situation gives rise to grave
and complex questions leading to unending disputes. Take, for example, the
famous ḥadīth which says:
Leaders shall be from among the Quraysh. (Musnad Aḥmad, No: 19792)
The majority of the scholars of the third and the later generations committed serious errors in determining the true context of this ḥadīth. Literal interpretation of the narrative led them to believe that only the Quraysh could validly rule the Muslims. Evidently, this view puts Islam and Brahmanism on equal ground as far as the political system is concerned. This view clearly ignores that Islam is the first religion aiming to purify the political systems from the evil of Brahmanism.
The primary cause of this error is that
the scholars failed to understand the proper context of this prophetic
statement. This ḥadīth does not give a universal directive governing
the political system of Islam. It does not establish the political superiority
of the Quraysh for all times. It is, on the contrary, a prophetic judgment on a
political dispute that was buried in the minds of a group of the Anṣār
(helpers) of Madīnah. This group expected that, after the Prophet’s (sws)
demise, it was they, not the Quraysh, who truly deserved to be the leaders of
the Muslim ummah. They based this view on their services to the religion
of God. This dispute remained latent in the minds of only a group among the Anṣār
during the lifetime of the Prophet (sws). Yet it found expressions in various
ways even during his lifetime. The Prophet (sws) feared that, after his demise,
the dispute might cause a great divide within the ummah. Sensing this
danger, the Prophet (sws) decided to settle the issue during his lifetime. Seen
in this light, the prophetic statement means that at that time the people of
True nature of the words of the Prophet
(sws), therefore, is that it was a decision on an implicit dispute on the
question of leadership of the Muslims. The Prophet (sws) gave his verdict
before the dispute clearly manifested itself. He based his decision on the
established political superiority of the Quraysh. He did not adduce eternal
racial superiority of the Quraysh over the other nations of the world as is
entailed by the usual interpretations of the narrative.
One example of errors resulting from
incorrect identification of the context of this prophetic saying follows. The
leader of a contemporary Islamic movement, on the basis of this ḥadīth,
issued a legal opinion (fatwā) to the effect that a sharī‘ah
directive can be altered and suspended. In the support of this view he cited
the ḥadīth above mentioned. He held that though Islam affirms equality
as an established moral principle, yet, in the case of the candidacy for
caliphate, the Prophet (sws) found this principle inexpedient. He cancelled
this principle and declared that leaders shall be from among the Quraysh.[2]
Take still another example. Some tradition
contain following words of the Prophet (sws):
I have been commanded to fight the people until they profess there is no God but Allah. (Bukhārī, No: 385)
Apparent and literal meaning of the narrative, disregarding its true context, validates the Orientalists’ view that Islam was spread by the sword. It also entails that the war against unbelief that the Prophet (sws) started has to go on till the whole mankind embraces Islam and declares Allah to be the only deity. This is plainly wrong. History falsifies this interpretation. We know that the Prophet (sws) accepted jizyah from the People of the Book as well as the Magians (al-majūs). He did not force them to say that there is no God but Allah. Similarly all such people who contracted treaties with Muslims, before their subjugation (mu‘āhid/ahl al-ṣulḥ), were allowed to follow their religion. They too were not forced to convert. We must, therefore, try to discover the true meaning of this narrative. If we consider the word “the people” in the narrative specifically referring to the children of Ismā‘īl, based on obvious textual indications, the ḥadīth narrative conforms to the teachings of the Qur’ān.
I have
explained in my commentary on the Qur’ān the Divine law regarding the
Messengers (rusul) and their direct addressees. I have explained that sometimes
God sends a Prophet (nabī) as a Messenger
(rasūl) to a nation. The Messenger makes his message plain. He
establishes his claim by a number of portents and removes all possible doubts
on his claim to be a Divine Messenger. If his addressees reject him and his
message even after the itmām-i ḥujjah (making the truth obvious in a
conclusive manner), the rejecters are either struck by God’s cosmic punishment
and destroyed or, otherwise, punished at the hands of the believers.
It is
this way (sunnah) of God which this ḥadīth explains. It is a
historical fact that the Prophet (sws) was primarily sent to the Children of
Ismā‘īl, who were his direct addressees. Therefore, after itmām-i ḥujjah
was accomplished by the Prophet (sws), they were left to choose between death and
faith. They were not held in bondage nor were they offered to pay jizyah
and follow their religion.
Similar
problematic narratives bearing upon issues of great importance abound in the ḥadīth
literature. It is, therefore, very important to learn the context of situation of
the reported acts and statements of the Prophet (sws). Failure to understand
the true context of such narratives has perplexed most of our renowned scholars
who badly failed to explain such problematic narratives. They either adopted
apologetic attitude with regard to these narratives or came to hold clearly
unfounded views.
3.5 Mutual Harmony of Religion, Human Nature and Reason
The
fifth and the last guiding principle in this regard is that the religion does
not contradict the dictates of reason and fiṭrah (human nature). God
has indeed based the teachings of religion on the dictates of fiṭrah.
Fiṭrah of God upon which He has modelled the humans. (Q 30:30)
The religion highlights the dictates of reason and fiṭrah, shapes them in the form of principles and bases the entire system of human life on it. Hence, it cannot contradict fiṭrah. It follows from this that everything that is against reason and fiṭrah would definitely contradict the religion.
The
entire call of the Qur’ān is based on reason and intellect. The Book pleads to it in the support of its
claims. Similarly, aḥādīth penetrate our hearts through reason and fiṭrah.
It does not contain something opposed to reason and fiṭrah. If we find
any such ḥadīth we must investigate and ponder over it in more depth. We
shall either appreciate that, previously, we were misinterpreting the ḥadīth
or learn that the narrative is not sound.
We
must also appreciate that, at times, we fail to grasp all aspects of a stated
fact. If we fail to fully understand a prophetic statement and we realise that
the reason of our failure lies in the limitations of human intellect, we should
not hastily brand the narrative as against reason and fiṭrah. It
entails that if we see that a statement contradicts reason and fiṭrah,
we should continue contemplating on it till we are able to grasp its meaning or
conclude that it lies out of the scope of human mind. If, however, repeated
investigation proves that the narrative contradicts reason and fiṭrah
and there is no way we can reconcile between the two then it must be boldly
rejected.
I also
want to emphasize that, in this discussion, I do not mean to refer to the
understanding and reasoning of those who do not use intellect and reason
properly. Nor do I refer to those who make their reason hostage to the desires
of their flesh. Their issue should be referred to God for judgment.
3.6 Conclusion
The
religion and the sharī‘ah are not trivial affairs. They command serious
consideration. The prophetic sayings form part of the religion of God. To
declare that a particular statement is a genuine prophetic saying is a grave
judgment. It is a matter of great responsibility. Not everyone is able to
discharge this duty. There are no doubt other principles of ḥadīth investigation.
They too are important for us. However, the ones which I have mentioned above
are fundamental. They provide firm and foundational rules to guide the student.
It is not possible for one to properly understand and explain aḥādīth
without taking them into consideration.
_____________
Comments
Post a Comment