Umar ibn al-Khattab was among the most important early Muslims, one of Prophet Mumammad’s (pbuh) closest companions, a champion of Islam, and the second man to lead the Muslim community after Mumammad’s (pbuh) death. As the second of the four rightly guided Caliphs (al-khulafa’ al-rashidun), Umar’s reputation for piety and dedication to Islam has been both legendary and unquestioned among Sunni Muslims throughout history. His opinions on religious matters are also highly respected.
The book; “Hadith As Scripture: Discussions on the Authority of Prophetic Traditions in Islam” By Aisha Y. Musa, Phd is a great research work on the subject. According to a book review: This book treats the debate among Muslims over the authority of Hadith, which by the ninth century had been raised to the level of scripture. The author's main purpose is to show that modern Muslim thinkers who question its status as a source of law are not the first ones to do so and thus cannot be dismissed as inauthentic aberrations or the results of a western, colonialist plot to undermine Islam. The book, “Hadith as Scripture” provides an intriguing introduction to these debates." Many of today's Muslims view the hadith almost as sacrosanct and thus grant it the treatment of revealed scripture. The twin claims of Musa's historical argument are unimpeachable: the acceptance of hadith as a second source of scripture alongside the Qur'an was not a foregone conclusion and Imam Shafi'i's role in making it so was significant".
Umar ibn al-Khattab and the Question of Hadith
In her 1996 Harvard dissertation, Linda Kern has examined the figure of Umar in the Hadith of al-Bukhari, and some of her observations are of particular interest to the present study. First, Kern’s observation that
“[a]ccording to the common wisdom, Umar’s jealous protection of the divine message earned him his most popular laqab [honorific] of al-faruq, or the one who zealously ‘distinguished’ between God’s word and any potential alteration of it.”
This portrait of Umar, which Kern paints for us from al-Bukhari reveals why Umar is a lightening-rod figure in the controversies over Hadith.
Scattered throughout various genres of Islamic literature from the third/ninth century onward are reports that ascribe to this legendary figure strong objections to the writing and transmission of Hadith.
Taken together, the details of these stories make a powerful impression and corroborate Kern’s view that in these stories Umar “radically separated the authority of the Messenger from his Message . . . [and] distinguished the Book as an independent truth source to which no stipulations could be made.”
This is a particularly important aspect of the controversies over the Hadith as a source of scriptural authority because that authority rests on the belief in Prophetic authority and the duality of revelation.
The first story Ibn Sad narrates about Umar’s attitude toward the recording of the Hadith occurs in the section where he recounts his appointment as Caliph (Dhikr istikhlaf Umar). He cites a story from Sufyan ibn Uyayna (d. 198 AH), on the authority of al-Zuhri that
“Umar wanted (arada) to write the Traditions (al-sunan), so he spent a month praying for guidance; and afterward, he became determined to write them. But then he said: ‘I recalled a people who wrote a book, then they dedicated themselves to it (aqbalu alaihi) to it and neglected the Book of God (wa-taraku Kitab Allah).
The wording of this story is very direct and leaves no doubt as to what Umar feared might happen if he were to commit the Traditions (al-sunan) of the Prophet to writing: that, like people before them, Muslims might turn their attention to that book and neglect the Qur’an.
Who those people were is not specified in this story. However, the other stories found elsewhere in the Tabaqat are equally clear in wording and give additional detail.
Also read : Ahle Quran & Ahle Hadith Delusions ... [.......]
The Grandson of Abu Bakr
The next story that Ibn Saad recounts about the Commander of the Faithful and his attitude toward the Hadith is found in volume five of the Tabaqat. It is related to the authority of al-Qasim ibn Mumammad ibn Abi Bakr al-Siddiq (d. 106 AH)—the grandson of Abu Bakr, another of Mumammad’s (pbuh) closest companions and the first of the rightly guided Caliphs who led the Muslim community after his death. When al-Qasim was asked by his student Abd Allah ibn al-Ala’ (d. 164 AH) to dictate Hadith, he refused, saying;
“the Hadith multiplied during the time of Umar; then he called on the people to bring them to him, and when they brought them to him, he ordered them to be burned.” Afterward, he said, ‘a Mishna like the Mishna of the People of the Book,’ (mathna’a ka mathna’at ahl al-Kitab).”
“From that day on,” Abd Allah ibn al-Ala’ continues, “Al-Qasim forbade me to write Hadith.”
As in the first story, what disturbs Umar is the writing of a book that will compete with the Book of God.
Hadith, Mishna & Talmud
He compares the written Hadith with the Mishna of the People of the Book. In Judaism, the Mishna serves much the same function that the Hadith have come to serve in Islam. It is a codification of the Oral Law and contains rulings related to the details of ritual purity, prayer, marriage, divorce, and so on. The Mishna and the Gemara together make up the Talmud, which is the most important book in Judaism besides the Torah.
Hadiths as Distraction from Quran
However, Umar is credited with objecting to not only the writing of the Hadith, but also to transmitting them. Perhaps the strongest and most compelling story about Umar’s attitude toward Prophetic traditions is found in volume six of the Tabaqat. Here, Ibn Saad relates the story of Umar’s instructions to a delegation of companions that he is sending to the region of Kufa to serve as administrators. He orders them not to distract the people from the Qur’an with the transmission of Hadith.
Again, the wording attributed to Umar is significant: “la tasadduhum bil-aHadith fa-tashghalunahum jarridu al-Qur’an wa-aqillu al-riwayat an rasul Allah” (Do not distract them with the Hadiths, and thus engage them! Bare the Qur’an and spare the narration from God’s Messenger!).
Several things are important about this particular story:
The first issue concerns the wording, and the second concerns one of the transmitters of the story. Umar is giving strong and direct commands in this story: “la tasadduhum bil-aHadith fa-tashghalunahum” (Do not distract them with the Hadiths, and thus engage them!). Umar follows this up with another equally direct order that deserves careful attention:
“Jarridu al-Qur’an.” The Arabic verb jarrid is the imperative of the second form of j-r-d, literally meaning to make something bare. According to Lisan al-Arab, when used with the Qur’an as its object, as it is in this story, it means not to clothe the Qur’an with anything. In the Lisan, Ibn Mannur specifically quotes Ibn Uyayna (d. 198 AH), from whom Ibn Saad relates this story, as saying that jarridu al-Qur’an means not to clothe the Qur’an with Hadiths (ahadith) of the People of the Book. However, in this case, Umar’s next words indicate the source of the stories (al-ahadith) with which the Qur’an should not be clothed—al-riwayat an rasul Allah—narration from God’s messenger. In reporting this story from Ibn Uyayna, Ibn Sa'd does not indicate that Ibn Uyayna offered other than a literal understanding of Umar’s words.
Yet Umar clearly has not strictly forbidden such narration: “jarridu al-Qur’an wa aqillu al-riwayatan rasul Allah” (Bare the Qur’an and be sparing with narration from God’s Messenger.). It is not talking about the Messenger or what the Messenger may have said that troubles Umar.
What troubles him is the possibility of generating something that would rival the Book of God. In the previous stories, Umar’s concern was that writing down the Traditions would do so. In this story it is clear that he fears any narration of Prophetic Traditions will do the same thing. [He was so right]
Taken together, these stories indicate that writing and transmitting the Hadith was a commonly accepted practice—it is only after careful consideration that Umar rejects the idea of putting the Hadith in writing, and then takes the drastic step of calling for and destroying what others had written of the Hadith.
This suggests that Umar’s actions represent a radical departure from the prevailing norm. In that case, Umar, in keeping with his image as the defender of God’s Book, is acting in response to something that is competing for status and authority with God’s Book.
According to these stories, Umar strongly opposed both the writing and the transmission of Hadith—not because he disapproved of writing or of sharing information, but because he feared that they would gain a status equal to or even greater than that of the Qur’an itself. Even if these stories do not truly represent the attitude, commands, and actions of Umar, they do represent him as the archetypal defender of God’s Book at a time when some people saw the Prophetic traditions as competing for status and authority with God’s Book.
The decision of Umar was accepted and adhered to by following rightly guided Caliphs, companions till over a century later when the Companions passed away .
Umar in the Hadith
The Tabaqat is not the only third-century source that portrays Umar as objecting to extra-Qur’anic materials. Several Hadith collections, both canonical and noncanonical, report Umar’s concern about extra Qur’anic materials from the Prophet. The collections of Hadith that eventually became canonized are not the earliest collections of Hadith that have come down to us. An important earlier work is the Musannaf of Abd al-Razzaq al-Sanani (d. 211/827).
Abd al-Razzaq reports both Umar’s decision not to commit the Sunna to writing for fear that it will lead to a book to which people turn and leave the Book of God, and also a story in which Umar gives this order to those he is sending out to govern. The details of the former story are nearly identical with minor but notable additions. However, the details of the latter differ more dramatically between the version reported by Abd al-Razzaq and the version reported some two decades later by Ibn Sad. The story about Umar abandoning the idea of committing the Sunna to writing recorded by Abd al-Razzaq adds the statement that Umar consulted the Prophet’s companions on the issue and that they encouraged him to do so. Abd al-Razzaq’s version also ends with a dramatic statement attributed to Umar. After recalling a previous people who wrote a book to which they dedicated themselves and for which they “left the Book of God,” Umar is reported as saying, “wa-inni wallahi la ulabbis Kitab Allah bi-shayy’in abadan” (By God! I will never clothe the Qur’an with anything).
Looking back at the entry in Lisan al-Arab noted earlier in the discussion of the story related in the Tabaqat, Ibn Mannur specifies that jarridu al-Qur’an means not to clothe it with anything (la tulabbisu bihi shayyan).
This addition suggests that the Hadith will not only cause people to desert the Qur’an, but that they may also somehow conceal it from them.
The details differ even more in the stories in which Umar is quoted as ordering his provincial governors to “bare the Qur’an.” In order to appreciate the differences, let us compare both stories in their entirety.
First, Ibn Sad’s version:
We were headed toward Kufa and Umar accompanied us as far as Sirar. Then he made ablutions, washing twice, and said: “Do you know why I have accompanied you?” We said: “Yes, we are companions of God’s messenger (peace and blessings be upon him).”
Then, he said: “You will be coming to the people of a town for whom the buzzing of the Qur’an is as the buzzing of bees. Therefore, do not distract them with the Hadiths, and thus engage them. Bare the Qur’an and spare the narration from God’s Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him)! Go and I am your partner.”
The story as reported by Abd al-Razzaq:
When Umar ibn al-Khattab dispatched his provincial governors he stipulated: “Do not ride a workhorse; do not eat marrow; do not wear delicate clothing; do not bolt your doors against the needs of the people; and if you do any of these things, punishment will unquestionably befall you.”
Then he accompanied them, and when he intended to return, he said:
“I have not given you authority over the blood of Muslims, nor over their reputations, nor over their property; but I have sent you to establish Salat with them, and to divide their booty and judge among them fairly. Then, if anything is unclear to them, refer them to me. Indeed, do not beat the Arabs, so as to humiliate them, and do not detain them [the army at the frontier] so as to cause them strife, and do not exalt yourselves over them so as to dispossess them; bare the Qur’an and spare the narration from the God’s Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him)! Go and I am your partner.”
The earlier story related by Abd al-Razzaq is somewhat longer than the later story, containing a broad variety of orders. It is a list of commands and prohibitions that includes the command to “bare the Qur’an and spare the narration from God’s Messenger.” However, the later story recorded by Ibn Sad does not contain any of the other orders found in the early version. Instead, it focuses on this particular order and includes detailed reasoning, in lyrical wording, on Umar’s part: “You will be coming to the people of a town for whom the buzzing of the Qur’an is as the buzzing of bees. Therefore, do not distract them with the Hadith . . .” The comparison of the recitation of the Qur’an to the buzzing of bees suggests that the people are constantly occupied with the Qur’an. The Hadith are portrayed as something that may take their attention away from the Qur’an.
Central Argument: Hadiths as Distraction to Quran
The idea that the Hadith will distract people from the Qur’an is central to the arguments against the Hadith that we will see later in Al-Khatib al-Baghdadi’s Taqyid al-Ilm, and in the modern arguments.
The increasing detail and elaboration that are evident in the stories reported about Umar from Abd al-Razzaq’s Musannaf and Ibn Sad’s Tabaqat in the early and mid-third century AH, to al-Baghdadi’s Taqyid al-Ilm in the mid-fifth century AH suggests that as the Hadith gained greater authority and attention, those who opposed that authority developed and refined their own arguments.
Umar also figures prominently in a story found in the canonical collections of the Hadith. That story relates an incident that took place during the Prophet Mumammad’s final illness. Several versions are recorded in the Samims of al-Bukhari and Muslim, as well as in the Musnad of Ammad. In each version the central details of the story are the same:
During Prophet Mumammad’s (pbuh) final illness, he requests writing materials so that he can write something for the people to ensure that they will not go astray. Seeing that fever had overcome the Prophet, Umar is quoted as saying:
“They have the Qur’an, and the Book of God is enough for us.”
These stories reinforce the idea that the Qur’an is enough to keep the people from going astray. [It is sufficient to negate the later presumption by Shafii , that; Hadith is Revelation equal to Quran].
Furthermore, they move Umar’s reported opposition to a written source other than the Qur’an—even from the hand of the Prophet (pbuh) himself—back to the lifetime of the Prophet (pbuh).
Attributing the Prophet’s desire to write something (presumably other than the Qur’an) that would keep people from going astray to his being overcome by fever implies that if he had been in control of his faculties, he would not have wanted to do this. As with the stories reported by Ibn Sad, it can be argued that these stories represent Umar’s personal opinion, particularly since they also state that there was strong disagreement among the companions who were present at the time. However, here too, even if this is understood as Umar’s personal opinion, the primary concern attributed to him is clear. He feels so strongly that the Qur’an is sufficient as an authoritative source of guidance that he refuses the Prophet’s request for writing materials, reminding the Prophet (pbuh) that the people have the Qur’an and that it is enough.
Probing the stories of Umar’s response to the Prophet’s request, Kern says:
With Umar’s declaration that the Book of God was “sufficient,” however, not only was Muhammad’s importance for interpreting the revelation lessened, but the notion of his superiority in religious matters was also set aside henceforth, according to Umar’s interpretation, the Book of God in itself would be entirely adequate . . .
Umar’s declaration that the Book of God was sufficient changed the conception of what the revelation was, however, just as much as it altered the conception of the Prophet’s role. The change to which Kern is referring is a shift from “on-going, unpredictable, situation-specific revelation” to “a totality of eternally perfect revelation, or more precisely, the Revelation.” Once again, Kern’s assessment helps to make clear why Umar is the ideal figure to find at the center of the disputes over the authority of the Hadith. The nature of revelation and the role of the Prophet are at the heart of those disputes.
Imam Shafii’s Error - No Response to Umer Decision
However, stories of Umar’s objection to transmitting and writing down the Hadith, and the ideas that transmission of Hadith would distract people from the Qur’an and that written Hadith would cause people to abandon the Qur’an are noticeably absent in al-Shafii’s discussions with his archetypal opponents of Prophetic reports.
[P.S. It is enough to negate the later presumption by Imam Shafii , that; Hadith is Revelation equal to Quran].
Khatib al-Baghdadi, writing more than two-and-a-half centuries after al-Shafii cites the fear that Hadith would come to be a book other than the Book of God, as the primary basis for the opposition to recording the Hadith in writing. As discussed earlier, most often the protagonist who is credited with leading such opposition is Umar ibn al-Khattab.
The absence of any mention by (Imam) al-Shafii of the Umar stories is significant.
The Musannaf of Abd al-Razzaq shows that similar stories were in circulation during al-Shafii’s lifetime, and Ibn Sad’s Tabaqat shows that the stories were reasonably well-developed not long after al-Shafii’s death.
Did al-Shafii not address them because they would have weakened his case for the authority of the Hadith as a source of divinely inspired guidance?
Or did the opponents of the Hadith incorporate them into their arguments only after the successful articulation of the concept of duality of revelation?
A definitive answer to this question cannot be given based on available evidence. Nevertheless, the evidence does suggest that the opposition to the Hadith evolved in response to the increasing authority and status that they were being granted by many Muslims. [against policy of Umar and Rightly Guided Caliphs]
However, they took on a new direction after the appearance of the major Hadith collections in the middle of the third century after the Hijra. This direction is seen in the works of Ibn Qutayba and later authors who accepted and built upon the arguments of al-Shafi.
From the time of Ibn Qutayba onward through the time of al-Baghdadi, we see the opponents of the Hadith using the Hadith themselves as weapons either through criticism of problematic content, or as objections to Hadith attributed to Mumammad (pbuh) and his companions.
Ibn Qutayba
Ibn Qutayba and the Hadith After al-Shafii the next champion of the Hadith whose work has reached us is Abu Mumammad Abd Allah ibn Muslim Ibn Qutayba (d. 276 AH).
This idea led Ibn Qutayba to accept and defend whatever might be attributed to the Prophet, even if the content seemed contradictory or irrational.
Whereas al-Shafii argued issues of doctrine, Ibn Qutayba argued issues of content.
Instead, they challenged those Hadith
1.Whose content contradicted other Hadith, or
2.Contradicted the Qur’an, or
3 Whose content was irrational and made the religion an object of ridicule.
Sectarian Conflicts through Hadith - Arguments for Different Hadith (Ta’wil Mukhtalif al-Hadith)
Ibn Qutayba addresses the unidentified individual as follows:
You have written to inform me of what you have encountered of ahl al-kalam’s contemptuous criticism of ahl al-Hadith, their long winded diatribes in books criticizing them and their hurling of so many accusations of deceit and contradictory narratives that disagreement has occurred, sects have multiplied, ties have been severed and Muslims have become enemies, accusing each other of disbelief, each group basing its opinion on a particular type of Hadith.
This statement is followed by a description of various sectarian factions, along with examples of Hadith on which they base their beliefs, or to which they object. Some groups are mentioned by names such as al-Khawarij (the Schismatics), al-Qadariya (the advocates of free-will), and al-Rafida (the Shia), while others are mentioned by what was seen as their primary position on particular ethical and religious issues, such as “those who prefer wealth” and “those who prefer poverty.
But in these discussions, He does not address the concerns raised about the Hadith; instead, he continues with his own criticisms of what he sees as their positions on specific religious issues. What Ibn Qutayba presents as a defense of the Hadith against the criticisms of their opponents is actually a series of attacks against the adherents of kalam. The overall effect of Ibn Qutayba’s arguments is to turn attention away from criticisms of Hadith.
Conclusion
A thorough examination of texts ranging from works of Imam al-Shafii, Ibn Sad, Ibn Qutayba, and the Hadith collections in the third/ninth century to Al-Khatib al-Baghdadi’s Taqyid al-Ilm in the fifth/eleventh century clearly demonstrates that the primary reason for objections to the transmission and recording of the Hadith was concern about the writing down of materials that might be vested with sacred authority and rival the Qur’an as an authoritative source of religious law and guidance; at the same time, the stories of approval and permission, together with the common existence of books since at least the second and third century AH, indicate that the reported disapproval was an objection to the practice of writing itself oral transmission was permitted, the practice followed till beginning / middle of 2nd century.
This was due to the decision of Umer, also consented by other Rightly Guided Caliphs, also honoured and implemented by majority Companions till they passed away after the first century Hijra, when Hadith writing started.
Although reports that contain a prohibition of writing together with permission to transmit Hadith orally do suggest a distinction between oral and written narrations that could be considered similar to the Rabbanite concept of the Written and Oral Laws, the arguments of al-Shafii that were introduced in support of the duality of divine revelation contain no suggestion that the distinction between the two types is a matter of one being written and the other oral, nor do the concerns he and Ibn Qutayba attribute to the opponents of the Hadith suggest this.
The specific terminology used in the reports of disapproval and prohibition, together with references to previous communities that followed a book or books along with the Book of God leave no doubt that this is the overriding concern fueling the opposition to the disapproval or prohibition of writing the Hadith, which is attributed to the Prophet and some of his most prominent companions.
The success of the doctrine of duality of revelation in overcoming the objections to Hadith as an authoritative source of religious law and guidance in mainstream Islam further confirms the view that the objection to Hadith was about using something other than divine revelation as an authoritative source of religious law and guidance. [Another book / books with Divine book like Jews and Chrsitians].
So strange that the four closest companions of the Prophet (pbuh) were unaware of “Duality of Revelations” instead of preserving it, they opposed its writing. Who would know it after 150 years?
Imam Shafii extracted his desired meanings through distortion and deductions, of 2:62, Hikmah (Wisdom, as Sunnah, thus Divine Revelation , 33:34 , 59:7 checkout 8:41) in clear violation of Quran 3:7 , to use clear commands , the essence (mother) of Book:
It is He who sent down upon thee the Book, wherein are verses clear that are the Essence of the Book, and others ambiguous. As for those in whose hearts is swerving, they follow the ambiguous part, desiring dissension, and desiring its interpretation; and none knows its interpretation, save only God. And those firmly rooted in knowledge say, 'We believe in it; all is from our Lord'; yet none remembers, but men possessed of minds." (Quran 3:7, Arberry translation)
Singularity of Revelations is clear, the Concocted Doctrine of Duality of Revelations is a fundamental issue , which cannot be established through distorted interpretation of ambitious words with multiple meanings.
Imam Shafi'i ignored Umer's ban on Hadith writing, as if Umer was unaware of the duality of Revelations like Abu Bakr Suddique, Usman and Ali ( Allah may be pleased with them) , who did not make arrangements for preservation of Hadiths rather opposed it following Quran (6:19, 38, & 114-116, 39:23, 45:6, 77:50 , 7:185) and Propeht Muhammad (pbuh), who is reproted to have said: Do not take down anything from me, and he who took down anything from me except the Qur'an, he should efface that and narrate from me, for there is no harm in it and he who attributed any falsehood to me-and Hammam said: I think he also said: "deliberately" he should in fact find his abode in the Hell-Fire.[Sahih Muslim Book 042, Hadith Number 7147]; "Do not write anything I say but the Quran and whoever writes anything but the Quran should delete it." [Musnad Ahmad: 10713, 10715, 10781,10966, 11160]
Hence according to Quran, Prophet Muhammd (pbuh), Four Rightly Guided Caliphs and companions; there is no place for any other Book or Scripture except Quran. The books written in the 2nd and 3rd century Hijrah disregard the Quran, Prophet Muhammd (pbuh), Four Rightly Guided Caliphs and companions. There is a need to rectify this error through consensus , debate and discussions. It must be kept in view that:
- The Quran does not permit to believe in any book /Hadith except the Quran.
- Prophet Muhammad (pbuh), prohibited writing of his speech (Hadith). If someone wrote, it was for memorization and then deleted.
- The Prophet (pbuh) left written Quran (unbounded) also memorized by companions.
- The Holy Quran was thoroughly rechecked by a special committee and eye witnesses, bound in the form of Book under special arrangements by the first two Caliphs and distributed by 3rd Caliph.
- The issue of Hadith collection did not arise with the first caliph, it was considered by 2nd Caliph and rejected to avoid any book besides Quran, which is complete, detailed and comprehensive (moreover the policy enunciated by Quran and Messenger must also have been kept in view). The previous communities went astray by neglecting and mixing up the Book of God with other books.
- The decision of the 2nd Caliph Umer (R).A) was also endorsed by other Rightly Guided Caliphs (who were commanded by the Prophet (pbuh) to be followed by the Muslims). This policy/ practice remained in force till the second century Hijra when all Companions had passed away.
- The Sunnah (practice) of the Prophet (pbuh) being of practical nature (offering prayer etc), continues to be practiced/ followed by Muslims and passed on from generation to generation. It is not dependent upon Hadith books or writings and is fully secure.
- The famous Hadith books compiled / written in the 3rd century Hijrah apart from benefits have been used to reinvent religion , sects (with distortion due to difference in transmission, understanding and interpretations) as if nothing existed during the first two centuries. Quran and Sunnah through historic continuity always existed without any break). Islam, was declared as the “Perfected Deen”, on 10 th of Dul-Hajj, 10 Hijrah.(Quran;5:3).
- Muslims deviated from the right path, once they practically abandoned the Quran. While following their selfish desires adopted the path and practice of Jewish and Christian to create more books to undermine the Book of God despite clear warning by Allah, that: “They have taken their rabbis and their monks as lords apart from God”(9:31)
It is very important :
Those who deny the revelations, will suffer a dreadful doom.(Quran;45:11)
Woe unto every fabricating impostor, the one who hears GOD’s revelations but ignores arrogantly, Grievous punishment awaits (Quran;45:7-8)
Those who dispute Ayas have turned away from the right path (Quran;40:69)
Who disbelieved in Quran, are doomed (Quran;90:19)
And none but the Zalimun (polytheists, wrongdoers) deny Ayat (Quran;29:49)
And be not like those who said, We hear, and they did not obey (Quran;8:21)
The Messenger will say, "Lord, my people did indeed discard the Quran," (25:30)
Do not mix truth with falsehood, or hide the truth when you know it. (2:42)
Who, then, is more unjust than he who lies about God and rejects the truth when it comes to him? Is not Hell an abode for those who deny the truth? (39:32)
They have taken their scholars and monks as lords besides Allah, and [also] the Messiah, the son of Mary. And they were not commanded except to worship one God; there is no deity except Him. Exalted is He above whatever they associate with Him. (9:31)
And whoever disobeys Allah and His Messenger and transgresses His limits - He will put him into the Fire to abide eternally therein, and he will have a humiliating punishment. (4:14)
And do not be like those who say, "We have heard," while they do not hear. (8:21)
Indeed, the worst of living creatures in the sight of Allah are the deaf and dumb who do not use reason. (8:22)
Unanswered Questions
The still unanswered question, even if we were to accept the claim, is this: [1]
- "Why was the official compilation not made earlier, especially during the time of the righteous caliphs when the first reporters, i.e., the eye witnesses, were still alive and could be examined?"
- When we remember that there was an alleged statement by the Prophet, made at his final Pilgrimage Oration and heard by tens of thousands, exhorting his followers to hold on to the Quran and his sunna, [three versions in 3 different Hadiths; i) Quran, ii) Quran and Ahle Bayt /family iii) Quran & Sunna ] is most unreasonable not to expect the great early caliphs to order the writing down and compiling of the Prophet's sayings.
- {Extra Note: Prophet in his farewell sermon said : “... I have left among you the Book of Allah,[21] and if you hold fast to it, you would never go astray ,..”| Reference: Sahih Muslim 1218 a, In-book reference: Book 15, Hadith 159, USC-MSA web (English) reference : Book 7, Hadith 2803 (deprecated numbering scheme) https://sunnah.com/muslim/15/159 }
- That none of them did so could only mean that the Prophet never made the statement, and that it was a later invention attributed to him.
- The answer given by the Traditionalists that the hadith was not written down during the time of the Prophet to avoid confusing them with the Quran is not satisfactory.
- Not only did it contradict their own claim that the hadith were already being recorded during the lifetime of the Prophet; several documents of the Prophet, such as the Medina Charter, his treaties and letters, had been written on his orders.
- The hadith too could similarly be written down by indicating that they were hadith, and not the Quran.
- However, this constraint no longer apply when the Quran was completed, written down and compiled into a book, and the fear of mixing the Quran with the hadith was no longer a valid concern.
- Yet the hadith was not immediately compiled. (Umer forbade it, others followed for next century )
- The only conceivable reason why they were not compiled was precisely the Prophet's standing order prohibiting it. It is apparent that later generations ignored this order.
We also have later historical sources which say that the Caliph Abu Bakr burnt his notes of hadith (said to be 500 in all) for fear that they might be false, and that Caliph Omar ibn Khattab cancelled his plan to compile the hadith because he did not want to divert the attention of the Muslims from the Quran to the hadith.
References:
- [1] Hadith A Re-Evaluation, By Kassim Ahmad, Translated from the Malay original, by Syed Akbar Ali 1997 : http://bit.ly/3cjhSjH
- http://salaamone.com/why-hadees-not-compiled-by-caliphs/
- Hadith Writing History: Nakhbat-ul-fikr by Ibn Hajr Al Asqelani: http://salaamone.com/kitabat-hadis-writing-history/
- https://islam.stackexchange.com/questions/35476/do-these-hadith-discredit-all-other-hadiths
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ibn_Qutaybah
- Hadith As Scripture :Discussions on the Authority of Prophetic Traditions in Islam By Aisha Y. Musa, Phd https://www.amazon.com/Scripture-Discussions-Authority-Prophetic-Traditions/dp/1137491094
- https://QuranSubjects.wordpress.com/last-book
- https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Hadith_of_Umar%27s_ban_on_hadith
- https://www.arabnews.com/node/270520
- The Last Book or Books [Wordpress] : https://bit.ly/3cwG4if
- The Last Book or Books- A Study of The Sacred History- Eng [G Doc]: https://bit.ly/3fM75jH
- https://Quran1Book.blogspot.com
- Complete References: ......[......]
