Internet discussions about Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) and early Islam often go around in circles.
Opponents of Islam dig out narratives from Hadith and Seerah that present Islam as an intolerant and violent faith.
Muslims respond with verses of the Qur’an and other reports that counter the objections raised. Generally this can be done very effectively.
Nevertheless, many seekers of truth are left confused about the truth.
Is the true picture of Islam the one presented by the opponents? Or is it the Muslims who have got it right?
What about where Muslims are themselves espousing the violent, sexist or racist interpretations?
This article will seek to return to the Quran and established historical sources to argue that the violent, regressive and ugly intepretations of ISIS (on one hand) or David Wood (on the other), are in stark contrast to the Qur’an and the most authentic and established parts of Islamic history.
THE QURAN VS HADITH & SEERAH?
The Qur’an is the oldest and most historically authentic document in Islam.
Sometimes reports from the Hadith literature and the Seerah (biographies) of the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) are presented that clearly contradict it.
For instance the Quran is absolutely clear that sexual relationships with slaves i.e.concubinage is invalid. Sexual relationships can only be established after freeing them and marrying them honourably:
If any of you does not have the means to marry a believing free woman, then marry a believing slave- God knows best [the depth of] your faith: you are [all] part of the same family- so marry them with their people’s consent and their proper bride-gifts. [Make them] married women, not adulteresses or lovers. If they commit adultery when they are married, their punishment will be half that of free women. This is for those of you who fear that you will sin; it is better for you to practise self-restraint. God is most forgiving and merciful,
Quran 4:25
Despite this and other such clear verses that stress that only celibacy must be practiced by those who cannot marry even a slave (24:32-33) there are problematic hadith that seem to indicate women can be used sexually after a battle, without marriage:
“We went out with Allah’s Messenger (ﷺ) for the Ghazwa of Banu Al-Mustaliq and we received captives from among the Arab captives and we desired women and celibacy became hard on us and we loved to do coitus interruptus So when we intended to do coitus interrupt us, we said, ‘How can we do coitus interruptus before asking Allah’s Messenger (ﷺ) who is present among us? ” We asked (him) about it and he said, ‘It is better for you not to do so, for if any soul (till the Day of Resurrection) is predestined to exist, it will exist. “
Sahih Bukhari 4138
This is by no means an exceptional case. One finds scores of narratives that contradict the clear words of the Quran.
Indeed, hadith graded as ‘Sahih’ or authentic can easily be found that contradict each other. Take the example of the prohibition of killing women and children in battle:
It is narrated on the authority of ‘Abdullah that a woman was found killed in one of the battles fought by the Messenger of Allah (may peace be upon him). He disapproved of the killing of women and children. |
It is narrated by Sa’b b. Jaththama that he said (to the Holy Prophet):Messenger of Allah, we kill the children of the polytheists during the night raids. He said: They are from them.
Sahih Muslim 1745b
As the above examples show, one can construct a totally different narrative of Islam from the same historical sources. Those who want to portray Islam in a negative sense can find ample ammunition to do so, and can just ignore all historical context and questions of authenticity, as most reports are just snapshots of a single occasion without any context given.
Sahih Bukhari & Muslim: How Sahih?
One of the most effective tools in the hands of the Islamphobe, is the general attitude of Muslims towards Hadith that collectors have graded as ‘Sahih’ or authentic. In the case of Sahih Bukhari & Sahih Muslim in particular, Muslim scholars are often unwilling to criticise any narration in these books and regard doing so as some kind of heresy.
Yet so many of the hadith that contradict the Quran and very often each other can be found in these collections. There are blatant historical and scientific errors in these works. Moreover they are filled with contradictions to other hadith, often within the same book.
How justified is the slavish attitude towards these works from a historical and academic point of view? Joseph. A Islam points out the large historical period that elaspsed between the first books of Seerah (Prophetic biography) and the a further century until Imam Bukhari’s collection appeared:
A historian is primarily concerned with the earliest, most reliable, source. The earliest narrative of the Prophet’s biography collected nearly 150 years later held in oral traditions only and without contemporary verification that survives today raises many problems for historians. Ibn Ishaq’s work attracts many criticisms from both Muslim and Oriental scholarship. However, this analysis is outside the remit and purpose of this article.
He demonstrates that there are many contradictions in the earliest sources down to whether the Prophet (peace be upon him) had nine wives or thirteen!
It is useful to note that no information is provided as to who has narrated these traditions other than where it has been recorded (In Ibn Hisham’s notes). What level of confidence does one place on narratives held in oral traditions removed over a century from source held amongst memories of traditionists?
Hadith compilers such as Imam Bukhari are further removed from early historians by nearly another century. The pool of traditionists that they were privy to were even further displaced from source. Could compilers such as Imam Bukhari provide any new information with regards the Prophetic biography that Ibn Ishaq could not provide nearly a century earlier? Or, were they simply drawing from an even more embellished pool of traditions?
Lest anyone think criticism of Bukhari and Muslim has always been regarded as heresy, earlier scholars did criticise many reports found in these books. For instance Imam Dar Qutni wrote a detailed critique of many narratives found therein and its narrators.
In recent times Shaykh Nasir Albani also admitted that there are some weak narrations to be found in these books:
I know the authentic hadiths from the weak, from the fabricated due to my studies of this science. I applied this study to some of the Hadiths that appear in Sahih Al Bukhari. Thus I found that the result of this study that there are some Hadiths that are not considered to be on the grade of Hasan much less the level of Sahih, in Sahih Al Bukhari not to mention Sahih Muslim.
cited here
Returning to the hadith about slave women quoted at the start of this article, Ikram Hawramani has applied a careful analysis of all the chains of narrations for this narration and concluded it has a possibility of only 11% of being accurately reported – despite being in Bukhari.
What about the Quran & Sunnah ?
The Quran is mass-transmitted from the first-generation of Muslims to now. This means each generation has memorised its text in large numbers, passed it down orally to the next generation and also preserved it in writing. There is irrefutable evidence for it being preserved accurately.
The Sunnah is not the same as the Hadith. Rather the Sunnah is the living practice of Islam, mass transmitted via Amal or action by each generation of Muslims.
All Ahadith are khabar-al-wahid or solitary narratives. This means they are reported from a few individuals. As they do not have the same level of authenticity as the Quran and Sunnah, they can only be accepted if they meet certain criteria.
The Shafi scholar Imam Khatib-Al baghdadi set out the following criteria, which appear most satisfactory to me:
An individual-to-individual report cannot be accepted if it offends common sense, the Holy Qur’ān, and the known Sunnah (recognized by the Muslim community) or practice, which is as current as Sunnah or is against an argument which is definitive.
(Al Kifayah fi `Ilm ir Riwayah: 1:334)
It is the need of the hour for Muslim scholars to consistently apply these principles to all hadith, regardless of the prestige given to particular books or collectors.
A CASE STUDY : EARLY ISLAM & NON MUSLIMS
The Qur’an enjoins justice to all regardless of faith and stresses good treatment of people in general, regardless of their religion. It also emphasises protection of Places of worship and forbids using offensive language for the ‘gods’ others worship:
Allah does not forbid you from those who do not fight you because of religion and do not expel you from your homes – from being righteous toward them and acting justly toward them. Indeed, Allah loves those who act justly.
Quran 60:8
...Speak kindly to mankind
Quran 2:83
They are those who have been evicted from their homes without right – only because they say, “Our Lord is Allah.” And were it not that Allah checks the people, some by means of others, there would have been demolished monasteries, churches, synagogues, and mosques in which the name of Allah is much mentioned.
Quran 22:40
“And do not insult those they invoke other than Allah, lest they insult Allah in enmity without knowledge. Thus We have made pleasing to every community their deeds. Then to their Lord is their return, and He will inform them about what they used to do.”
Quran 6:108
The Quran also repeatedly declares that nobody should be compelled to accept Islam(2:256) and that war should only be waged against those actively fighting (i.e. combatants) (2:190). Some verses of the Quran (For example in Surah 9) that are stripped of their context can easily be understood when read in context, and these also, do not allow any violence to compel people towards Islam.
There are many beautiful hadith that show how the Prophet followed the Quranic instructions. He stood up to honour the body of Jewish man out of common humanity, he forgave a Jewish woman who tried to poison him, he allowed Christians to worship in the Mosque of Medina. I have shared many of these examples in my book. One narrative is particularly striking:
Beware! Whosoever oppresses a Muahid (i.e. Non-Muslim living in Muslim land with agreement) or snatches (any of) his rights or causes him pain which he cannot bear, or takes anything from him without his permission, Then “I WILL FIGHT AGAINST SUCH A (MUSLIM) ON THE DAY OF JUDGEMENT”
Sunnan Abu Dawud, Volume No. 3, Page No. 170, Hadith No. 3052
The problem however occurs, when critics of Islam get hold of certain hadith that say the opposite. Equally those hadith, that espouse violence and hatred against non-believers are used by ISIS and other extremists to justify their odious acts.
So how can we establish historical facts or at least try to do so? How can we know which hadith are being misrepresented, or which are themselves inauthentic?
Alongside the Quran, we have some important historical evidence that sheds light on the true attitude of early Muslims towards Non-Muslims.
- The Charter of Medina – the constitution of Medina is cited in all sources of early Islam and gives unprecented rights to the Jewish community in Medina. It even declares that ‘No Jew should be wronged for being a Jew’ and that the Jewish tribes and Muslims of Medina are ‘one people’.
- The Charter of Privileges to Christians – This stunning charter from Prophet Muhammad (saw) gives total religious freedom to Christians and obligates Muslims to defend Christains until the day of judgement. It is preserved in Christian and Muslim sources, and was confirmed as aunthentic by all Muslim rulers who honoured it throughout time.
- The Muslim conquest of Egypt – Encylopedia Britannica confirms the humane way the people of Egypt were treated, and how they were relieved of the religious persecution of fellow Christians: Treaties concluded between ʿAmr and the muqawqis (presumably a title referring to Cyrus, archbishop of Alexandria) granted protection to the native population in exchange for the payment of tribute. There was no attempt to force, or even to persuade, the Egyptians to convert to Islam; the Arabs even pledged to preserve the Christian churches. The Byzantine system of taxation, combining a tax on land with a poll tax, was maintained, though it was streamlined and centralized for the sake of efficiency. The tax was administered by Copts, who staffed the tax bureau at all but the highest levels.To the mass of inhabitants, the conquest must have made little practical difference, because the Muslim rulers, in the beginning at least, left them alone as long as they paid their taxes; if anything, their lot may have been slightly easier, because Byzantine religious persecution had ended
- The Second Caliph Umar gave a Charter to the Christians of Aelia, which too offered them complete freedom and peace. This has been confirmed by Christian and also Muslim sources.
- Jews were allowed to return and live in Peace in Jerusalem, after being exiled by Christians. Rabbi Simon Ben Yohai believed that Prophet Muhammad had been sent by God to rescue the Jews from oppression: “raises up over them a prophet according to his will and will conquer the land for them and they will come and restore it in greatness, and there will be great terror between them and the sons of Esau.’ Rabbi Simon answered and said: ‘How do we know that they (Muslims) are our salvation?’ He answered: ‘Did not the Prophet Isaiah say thus: “And he saw a troop with a pair of horsemen, etc.”? Why did he put the troop of asses before the troop of camels, when he need only have said: “A troop of camels and a troop of asses”? But when he, the rider on the camel goes forth the kingdom would arise through the rider on an ass. Again: “a troop of asses”, since he rides on an ass, shows that they are the salvation of Israel, like the salvation of the rider on an ass.’
CONCLUSION
- The Quran is the oldest and most authentic Islamic text. It is mass-transmitted in each generation and is not reliant on individual narrators, or the efforts of individual collectors. We can verify manuscripts that date back to the first century, indeed to the time of the Prophet (Peace be upon him). As such any later source, or any source that is not mass transmitted cannot be taken as authentic if it contradicts this historically reliable source regarding what Islam teaches, or the Prophet did.
- There are documents, treaties, charters, letters that are attested to in Muslim and non-muslim sources. Whilst they do not reach the same status as the Quran in authenticity, they can and should be considered as more reliable than lone-narrator reports in books of hadith and seerah, that are not corroborated by other independent sources.
- This brief article has established the concubinage is expressly forbidden by the Quran and some of the reports that allow it, are proved to be unreliable despite being labelled ‘Sahih’ after a careful analysis of their chains. This shows that simply being labelled as ‘authentic’ does not guarantee that a hadith is correctly reported. Each report should pass the litmus test of concordance with the Quran, established knowledge and common sense and the well-known Sunnah as Imam Khatib Baghdadi and Imam Abu Hanifa rightly said.
- A report that is classified as weak is automatically excluded from being further considered. A report being classed as ‘Sahih’ is not automatically accepted but must be considered in light of the considerations above. All traditional scholars accepted that the Quran is Qati (Certain) because it is mass transmitted, while Hadith are Dhanni (speculative).
- The reports that suggest Muslims are to treat non-muslims in a violent and intolerant way, are disproved by comparison to the Quran but also a number of independently-verified historical documents preserved by non-Muslims. This shows that the brutal intepretation of Islam by ISIS is not authentic Islam, but a later perversion of its teachings.