|
HADITHS AND SCHOOLS OF THOUGHT
HADITHS AND SCHOOLS OF THOUGHT
"Ye have indeed in the Apostle of God a beautiful pattern (of conduct) for any one whose hope is God and the final day" (XXXIII : 21). Prophet Mohammad (PBUH) the Apostle of God was born in 570 AD in the city of Mecca in the Arabian peninsular. In 610 AD when he was forty years of age, he received his first revelation from Allah through Angel Gabriel, who conveyed to the Prophet (PBUH) the first verses of the Holy Qur'an and which continued to be received by the Holy Prophet (PBUH) in stages for twenty three years, i.e. until his death at the age of sixty three. Thus there are two main sources for an understanding of Islam. The Holy Qur'an which consist of the revelations of Allah and the collections of the recorded WORDS, ACTIONS and SANCTIONS of the Prophet (PBUH) which make up the SUNNAH and which are referred to as HADITH. As the Holy Qur'an is the word of Allah, it must be strictly followed, in the same way the teachings contained in the Prophet's SUNNAH must be observed by all who prefers to be Muslims. Thus the Sunnah in the form of Hadith is supplementary to the Holy Qur'an and it is to present practical application to its teachings. This statement is confirmed by Allah in the Qur'an which states: "Those who follow the apostle, the unlettered Prophet, whom they find mentioned in their own (scriptures), in the law and in the Gospel, for he commands them what is just and forbids them what is evil he allows them as lawful what good (and pure) and prohibits them from what is bad (and impure). He releases them from their heavy burdens and from the yokes that are upon them. So it is those who believe in him, honor him, help him, and follow the light which is sent down with him, it is they who will prosper" (VII : 157)
If a Hadith is quoted without pointing out its degree of Authenticity should we take it as authentic, or should we try to find out first whether or not it is authentic before implement it? an example of such an Hadith: the Prophet (PBUH) is reported to have said "whoever hears the call to prayer and does not answer it by coming to the mosque, his prayer shall be void, unless he has an excuse for absence. Answer: If you are sure that the person who quotes a hadith is well versed in matters of religion, you may rely on the hadith quoted. It is preferable however to determine the degree of authenticity of the hadith before acting on it literally. Moreover, there are Hadiths which were said by the Prophet (PBUH) in a certain contract. In order to implement them, we have to understand their contracts. We cannot just take them as a final verdict. We have to determine, for example, whether an order given in a hadith is given in a strict obligatory manner, or as an encouragement to do something desirable, or without it indicates a preference. To clarify the above example. To offer prayers with the congregation in the mosque is highly preferable for anyone who can hear the call to prayers. If anyone does not go to the mosque when he has heard the call, for any reason, he certainly fails to do what is highly preferable. His prayers however, are valid. You will not find among scholars anyone who tells you that to pray with the congregation in the mosque is the same as praying alone in your home. The more frequently you attend congregational prayers in the mosque, the better is your reward. This verdict is made on the basis of the Hadith quoted above, and numerous other hadiths. Most scholars tell us, however, is that these hadiths do not override the validity of prayers when it is offered by someone who has heard the call to prayer but did not go to the mosque. The general principals cannot be negated or superseded except by a definitive ruling given in the Qur'an or in a hadith. Thus the HADITH quoted and similar hadith are not of that definitive nature. Hence they are taken as only indicating a very strong preference. There are many Hadiths which are attributed to the Prophet (PBUH) but lack any degree of authenticity. As you are perhaps aware, scholars of Hadith have formulated very strict rules by which they can establish the authenticity of any particular saying of the Prophet (PBUH) it is liable to such tests. One such example is the Hadith Qudri which you mention and which includes a sentence which means "that if Allah did not create Mohammad (PBUH), then he would not have created the world or anything else". This hadith and many others like it cannot stand any test of authenticity by Hadith scholars furthermore, its impact is far from acceptable from the Islamic point of view. I would totally disregard it without any hesitation. It is not for the Prophet that Allah created the universe. He created it because He is the creator. Allah then sent His messengers, including Mohammad (PBUH) to teach people the way of life He wants them to lead.
"CONTRADICTIONS IN HADITH". Sometimes one comes across two traditions of the Prophet (PBUH) which seems to diametrically contradict or oppose each other eg. the Prophet is quoted to have given two different answers to the same question on "whether the eating of the meat of camels invalidates ablution". We know that the Prophet (PBUH) is infallible in matters which relate to his conveyance of the message. How can we account for such contradiction? Answer: The question here deals with the traditions or pronouncements of the Prophet (PBUH). This is a vast subject, but I shall give a brief answer to the question I am limiting myself, therefore to giving a few points which merit further study by the reader who is keen to pursue such enquiries. These are certainly pronouncements and tradition of the Prophet (PBUH) which seem to be contradictory like the case mentioned above. This is not surprising if we consider that the religion of Islam took 23 years to reveal. Certain matters were left untouched for a large part of those years before a verdict was given concerning them. One such matter, for example, is the dress of woman. It was not until after the immigration of the Prophet (PBUH) to Madinah that Muslim women were commanded to cover their heads and bodies when they go out. Certain rulings were given in the early periods on different matters but were later abrogated or amended because the Muslim community was then ready for a more comprehensive or radical ruling concerning them. It is quite possible then, that the Prophet should say one thing in the early period where a certain practice was acceptable, and give another ruling at later stage when that same practice was forbidden. If someone quotes an incident from the early period of Islam. i.e. before the proper dress code of Muslim woman was finally determined, and that incident shows clearly that one of the Prophet's wife appeared in public with her hair uncovered, we cannot accept that tradition as final, or indeed suggest that Muslim woman may not cover their hair on the basis of that tradition. It is, therefore, important to know which tradition or pronouncement preceded which on any single matter. Another area which may cause certain problems in the fact that the Prophet's traditions and pronouncement were not compiled until the third century of Islam. Al-Bukhari, for example who was the Imam of the compilers and classifiers of the Prophets tradition, lived after the year 200 AH. Many of the other Imams in the field lived later. Hence, those authorities on the Prophets tradition had to contend with a great problem of sorting out which traditions were authentic and which were not. They devised a method which was remarkable in its accuracy and unparalleled in the history of any nation. This method was based on the study of the history of all the people who reported the Prophet's traditions. If a person was known to be a liar or dishonest, they rejected any tradition reported by him furthermore, they had satisfy themselves as to the containing of the line of reporting in each pronouncement or tradition of the Prophet. It was inevitable that different Imams would come out with different results according to what information was available to them. For example, one Imam might consider one reporter to be trustworthy while another may find him not so trustworthy. Hence, certain tradition were acceptable as authentic by certain Imams, while they were classified as less than authentic by others. The scholars of FIQH (Islamic jurisprudence) had to rely on the findings of the Imams who sorted out the traditions of the Prophet. Many of them were authorities in the field as well, such as Malik, Ahmed and Al-Shafir It is well known that there were people who fabricated all sorts of traditions and pronouncements and attributed them to the Prophet. The Scholars of FIQH and HADITH had to be very careful what to reject. This provided a unique field of scholarship which is only known to the Muslim faith and the Muslim nation. This leads to the same conclusion that some pronouncements may be accepted or rejected on the basis of their line of reporting or on the basis of the information available to the Imam. There is certainly one final ruling which is correct in any single matter. This may not be readily available because of the circumstances to which I have just referred. Every scholar or a founder of school of thought has to rely on what is available to him of the Prophets traditions. Hence, the differences between these schools of thought. But it is important to point out that such differences occur only in matters of secondary details. There is no disagreement on matters of faith or the basic principles of Islam, or its essential practice and forms of worship. The case I mentioned is one such example. How often do people eat camels meat, and how often do they need to renew their ablution as a result ? if any person eats the meat of the camel and prays without renewing his ablution because he did not know of the Prophet's (PBUH) pronouncement in this respect, his prayers will certainly be valid. If on the other hand, he renews his ablution he will get the reward of having a fresh ablution. Perhaps it is interesting to give the opinion of most scholars in explaining this apparent contradiction in the case mentioned. The pronouncements which requires fresh ablution after eating camel meat was made by the Prophet after he and a few of his companions had a meal of camel meat. It is reasonable to assume that the Prophet had smelt some bad smell during the meal. Obviously other people must have smell it as well. Had the person responsible for that smell ban the only one to renew his ablution after the meal, he would have felt great embarrassment. The Prophet, being the most perfect man in his manners and the best to care for the feelings of his companions, instructed all his companions who were with him on that particular occasion to have a fresh ablution making the eating of camel meat the pretext for this requirement. In this way he saved the person concerned a great deal of embarrassment. Later, when he was asked about this matter directly, he gave the general rule that eating camels meat does not require fresh ablution. Other examples of apparent contradiction may or may not be explained in similar manner. That should not cause us any worry, because there is certainly an explanation for the contradiction. If we happen not to know that explanation, we can say that one side must be true. If we do not know it, and do the opposite because our information suggest that it is the true one. Allah will certainly forgive us our error, and reward us for acting on the basis of our knowledge. After all, "ACTIONS are but INTENTIONS" as the Prophet (PBUH) says.
What is difference between Qur'an, a Hadith Qudsi, and an Hadith? Answer: The message of Islam was revealed by Allah to the Prophet. Whatever the Prophet conveyed to us in matters of religion was through revelation from Allah. The revelation takes however three forms: i) Hadith: Which is a revelation in meaning expressed in the Prophet's own words. ii) Hadith Qudsi: Which revealed in both meaning and words, and iii) The Qur'an which is Allah's own revealed words. The difference between Hadith Qudsi and the Qur'an is that unlike the Qur'an, it cannot be read or recited in prayers. It is normally expressed in such a form as to indicate very clearly that the Prophet is using Allah's own words. It begins with such phrases as "Allah says". Other points of difference between Hadith Qudsi and the Qur'an is that by reading or reciting it, we are not doing an act of worship. The Qur'an is also distinguished by its unique style which defies imitation. This does not apply to Hadith Qudsi.
"SCHOOLS OF THOUGHT" I understand that there are 4 schools of thought in Islam, who were the founders. which of the four schools of thought is considered "strict" in the acceptance of Hadith? How did they achieve their unique status and become fancies? Answer: The question is not of being strict or not in accepting a Hadith. It is whether a Hadith was known to the scholars of a particular schools of thought. All scholars of these schools are known to have said that their own opinions count for nothing if they are found to be in conflict with an authentic Hadith. One of them says that if an authentic Hadith differs with his opinion, then his opinion must be thrown out. Moreover, the circumstances that prevailed in the area where the founders of these schools of thought lived were of considerable effect on these schools. The Hanafi school of thought, for example, was the first to be established. Its founder died in 150 AH. He lived in Iraq at a time when Hadith was not widely studied there. Indeed a great deal of fabrication of Hadith took place on that particular part of the Muslim state which was the haven of a large number of sects and religious factions which did not hesitate to fabricate statements and attribute them to the Prophet (PBUH) in order to gain support for their own beliefs or goals and ambitions. It was only natural that this school would be extra careful in the acceptance of any statement attributed to the Prophet (PBUH). The two factors of the limited knowledge of Hadith at that time in Iraq and the widespread fabrication of Hadith by different groupings led to the fact that it is characteristic of the Hanafi school of thought to rely heavily on discretion and logic in the formulation of it rulings. Imam Malik, on the other hand lived in Madinah where he met a number of scholars from the generation which followed that of the companions of the Prophet (PBUH). The knowledge of Hadith and the practices of the Muslim community in Madinah were well known to him. Sectarian divisions were not known in that happy city. Hence, we find the Maliki school of thought follows Hadith more closely. Imam Al-Sahfie was one of Malik's students. He learned a great deal from him before travelling to Iraq where he met Mohammad Ibn Al-Hassan, one of the best known students of Abu-Hanifah. That provided Al-Shafie with a chance to understand perfectly well the principles upon which the Hanafi school of thought was founded. There were many discussions between the two, this enabled Al-Shafie to have a broader vision while not neglecting the importance of Hadith. Ahmed ibn Hanbal met with Al-Shafie. Ahmed ibn Hanbal was a great scholar of Hadith in his own right. Both Ibn Hanbal and Al-Shafie learned from each other. While ibn Hanbal formulated all his scholarship round Hadith, Al-Shafie who was the elder of the two, made use of his knowledge of the Hanafi principles in the formulation of his scholarship round Hadith also. In other words both Al-Shafie and Ibn Hanbal relied heavily on Hadith cont * * * * see end of next question.
How did the four Imams who established the four major schools of thought become famous? "Why is there a need for different schools of thought". Is it necessary to follow any particular one of the four major schools? or can we follow the Qur'an and the Sunnah? why do they differ in the first place? Answer : Let us first begin by pointing out that differences generally are of two sorts : i) Difference of objective and ii) Difference of Means. If we take the example of pilgrims on the day of Arafat, their objective is to arrive at the proper place in the proper time. They must be at Arafat on the ninth of Dhul- Hajja. If they set themselves different objectives, and some of them go to Jeddah while others go to Taif, for example, their pilgrimage is not valid and they incur a sin. Pilgrims however, make use of different means in order to achieve their objective. They use different means of transport and travel in different routes. The fact that there are various routes leading to Arafat makes it easy for a larger number of pilgrims to arrive at their place at the right time. It is obvious here that the difference of means is permissible while the difference of objective is not. Differences between the schools of thought are of the permissible type. They are differences in the understanding of the meaning of a particular verse of the Qur'an or a particular pronouncement of the Prophet (PBUH), within the accepted rules and meanings of Arabic which is the language of the Qur'an and the Hadith. Some people may question whether this can apply to matters of faith and worship. The answer is that it does. Otherwise, Allah would have given us, on every point, a specific rule which admits only a single interpretation for every question. It is not only that He has not done so, He has indeed indicated that such differences are admissible. Shaikh Ali Al-Tantawi a leading scholar throughout the Arab world, gives the following arguments in support of his view. It is well known that the waiting period of divorced woman extends for three menstruation periods or three periods of cleanliness from menstruation. This is derived from the Quranic verse which states: "Divorced women shall wait concerning themselves for three monthly quroo" (11 : 228) This Arabic terms quroo means both menstruation and cleanliness from menstruation, Arabic includes a number of terms which indicate opposite meaning such as "JAWN" which indicates both black and white, and MAWLA which means both master and slave. Shaikh Al-Tantawi argues that Allah could have used in this context a term which indicated either one of the two meanings if He wanted the waiting period of divorced women to be defined in either fashion. The fact that He has used a term which admits two interpretations indicates that He accepts either interpretation. We cannot explain away this usage as simply as simply a matter of style or coincidence. The Qur'an is the word of Allah and every word in it is carefully selected and accurately used. This leads us to the only possible conclusion which we have just mentioned. This usage amounts to a permission from Allah allowing us to differ in our understanding of Quranic statements, and those of the Prophet. There are in the Qur'an and in the Sunnah statements, which admit only one interpretation. In such matters, there can be no difference of opinion. Indeed, there is not any such difference among all schools of thought, whether the major four schools or others. There are statements of the Prophet hich admit more than one interpretation. We find that the companions of the Prophet (PBUH) themselves differed in many questions which relates to various aspects of life. There are only matters of detail. They do not touch on basic principles of faith or the essential questions of worship. In prayer, for example, all schools of thought agree that the number of obligatory prayers are five, the number of Rakahs in every prayer the obligatory parts of every Rakah, the span of time allowed for every prayer, the reading of the opening SURAH in every RAKAH etc. They differ only in such details as whether the imams reading or the opening SURAH is enough for himself and all those who join him, or should every one of them read that SURAH. That there is a need for people to specialize in religious scholarship and be able to give rulings on problems which may occur and be put to them by other people is only natural. Among the companions of the Prophet (PBUH) themselves, there were about 100 people whom we can designate as "scholars" who were able to give such rulings. Since the Prophet's companions numbered more than 100,000, these scholars were only a fraction of them. Religious learning is not exceptional among all fields of education in being accessible to all. Indeed it requires more strenuous effort than possibly any other branch of learning. Hence, it is only natural that those who excel in it are those who dedicate their lives to it. If we look at our practical life, we find that we accept the opinion of "the expert" in every branch of learning science, art and industry. when we call in an expert, we do not argue with him on the basis of the opinion he gives us. When we have a problem which requires a religious ruling, we simply ask "the expert" or the religious scholar. The religious scholar who can give us a ruling on our problems is one who has studied the Qur'an and the Sunnah throughly, learned how to relate one Hadith to another, how a general statement in the Qur'an or theThe religious scholar who can give us a ruling on our problems is one who has studied the Qur'an and the Sunnah thoroughly, learned how to relate one Hadith to another, how a general statement in the Qur'an or the Sunnah is reduced to a more specific interpretation by relating it to another statement, how a specific statement is made more general in application, how the Prophet's practice in a certain situation is given greater or lesser importance than verbal statement and so on. No one can suggest that by merely reading the Qur'an and the books of Hadith one can acquire such knowledge in the same way as no one suggests that by merely reading a textbook of medicine the reader can diagnose all sorts of illnesses and prescribe medical treatment for them. Hence, the need to refer to religious scholars. There are two questions, namely whether we must follow a particular school of thought or we can refer to the Qur'an and the Sunnah ourselves, and whether we must follow a single school of thought or we can switch over from one to another in different matters and questions. The answer to the first question has more or less been given. What remains to be said is that if someone has achieved a degree of scholarship in matters of religion which qualifies him to refer to the Qur'an and the Sunnah directly, then he may, and should do so. If not, he should refer to "the experts". The answer to the second question may be given as follow Let us imagine a man living in place close to Madinah shortly after the Prophet's death. He has problem in which he needs to have a FATWA or religious ruling. He goes to Madinah and seeks one of the Prophets companions who were able to give such a FATWA. When he learns the religious ruling, he goes back to his home and implements it. Now suppose that some time later, he faces another problem and he goes to Madinah to find out the religious ruling. Is it necessary for him to go to the same companion of the Prophet (PBUH) who gave him his first ruling. The fact was that he simply sought a companion of the Prophet (PBUH) who was known for his learning. The new companion of the Prophet (PBUH) did not ask him whether he belonged to his school of thought, or whether he asked anyone else before he came to him. He simply gave him the proper verdict and the man would go away. Similarly, nowadays when we need to find out the opinion of Islam on any particular subject, we go to the local Imam. If we happen to meet a scholar we simply ask him without questioning him first to which school of thought he belongs. What this means in practice is that rigid adherence to a single school of thought is neither required nor practiced. The proper answer to the question is the following: People are two groups, there are those who can distinguished between the evidence in which each school of thought basses its arguments for its rulings, and those who cannot do so. The first group of people should not follow a single school of thought all the time. They must weigh up the arguments advanced by each school of thought on any single matter and follow, in that specific matter, the opinion which they judge to be supported by the weightier argument. The other group should simply follow a single school of thought and unwittingly change from one to another when they ask their local Imam about their immediate problem. There is no harm in doing so. But we must not view the question of switching over from one school of thought to another as one of great gravity. None of the four Imams argued that his was the only correct understanding of the Qur'an and the Sunnah. Each one of them admitted that he might be wrong on certain questions. They simply taught what they believed to be right, admitting always that they could be mistaken. They also made it clear to their students that should they learn of an authentic Hadith which contradicted their own opinion then they must follow the Hadith, not the opinion of their Imam. Hence, if we can determine that for ourselves, we should do so. If not we ask those who can. By doing so, we make ourselves open to change our school of thought without knowing it. Again no harm in that, as long as we ask those who are honest, religious and learned. continued from previous question Now how the four Imams, Malik, Abu Hanifah, Al-Shafie and Ibn Hanbal achieved their unique status as founder of the four major schools of thought. The fact is that everyone of them was endowed with exception intelligence Moreover, each was dedicated to religious scholarship. But they were not alone in this. There were others who either preceded or followed them and who had such qualities in equal, if not greater measure. What distinguished these four was that each one of them had imported his knowledge to students who included some who, in time, achieved equal excellence. The process was continued by these students and their students for several generations. Thus, each school of thought has a number of highly renowned scholars, although it is called after its founder. Other scholars of equal or greater distinction did not enjoy that advantage, and subsequently, their scholarship did not spread far and wide as that of those four.
Is there a Wahibi school of thought? I understand that the ideology of Mohammad ibn Abdul Wahab is widely followed in Saudi Arabia; is that true? Answer: Mohammad Ibn Abdul Wahab was a reformer who lived in the 19th century. He was a prominent scholar who received a sound education in various aspects of the faith of Islam. He realized that the Arabian society at his time had allowed numerous innovations and practices which were contrary to the teachings of Islam to creep into its ways of life. He, therefore started his movement with the aim of eradicating innovations and to help the society to return to the teachings of Islam as practiced by the Prophet (PBUH). His hard work in this respect was fruitful and Saudi Arabia returned to the pure form of Islam which is followed there now. Mohammad Ibn Abdul Wahab did not have an ideology of his own. His ideology was that of Islam in its pure form, as preached by the Prophet (PBUH) and practiced by his companions. It is wrong, therefore, to say that the Saudi people follow the Wahibi Ideology. They follow Islam pure and simple. In matters of `FIQH' or jurisprudence, the Hanbali school of thought is widely followed in Saudi Arabia. Mohammad Ibn Abdul Wahab concentrated his tireless efforts on what relates to people's beliefs. In that respect he wanted people to believe in Allah as the only one who can effect and influence their lives, and the only God to be worshipped. He also wanted them to understand that the Prophet (PBUH) was the only person to be followed in every sphere of life. Hence, it is wrong to say that there is such a thing as a Wahibi ideology. There is only as Islamic ideology which is followed in Saudi Arabia.
|