Authority of Hadith in the light of Qur’anSince the beginning the Muslim Ummah has unanimously believed in Hadith as an established secondary source of the Islamic Law

after Qur’an. Infact it has always been recognized only another kind of revelation i.e. it is called Wahy Ghayr Matloo, Revelation that

is not recited.

In recent past some pseudo-scholars have come up with a heretic view of Hadith rejection. What are their motives and what are the

consequences, is a separate topic of interest itself. In this session we find some of the evidences for the Authority of Hadith from

Qur’an, the primary source of the Islamic Law and belief system.

Hadith Source referred to in the Holy Qur’an:

Proof 1:

Allah Almighty says in the Holy Qur’an;

-ا و-م-ا 1ن ع-ل -ة- ج- 1ل 1ق7ب 7ي ال =ت 1ت- ال ?ن 1ه-ا ك -ي 7ال= ع-ل -م- إ -ع1ل 7ن 7ع? م-ن1 ل =ب -ت س?ول- ي 1ق-ل7ب? م7م=ن1 الر= -ن 1ه7 ع-ل-ى ي -ي ع-ق7ب“And We did not prescribe the Qiblah which you used to observe except to know the one who follows the Messenger

as distinct from the one who turns on his heels.” (Qur’an 2:143)

We know that initially during the stay at Makkah and during first one and a half years at Medina the Muslims used to pray facing

Baitul Maqdas (i.e. Jerusalem) and later it was ordained to pray facing the Ka’ba as categorically told in Qur’an 2:144. But once this

order of change was given the Jews and the hypocrites at Medina objected to the idea. This verse gives a response to the objection.

The point of interest for us here is that the appointment of the previous Qibla has been attributed to Allah himself even though it

has never been mentioned in the Qur’an. Obviously it was Holy Prophet (PBUH) who used to teach the people to face Baitul Maqdas

prior to the change without referring to Qur’an yet we find the same to be attributed to Allah. The verse reads;

“We did not prescribe the Qiblah …” and not,

“The Prophet did not prescribe the Qiblah …”

This is solid evidence that the earlier order was given by the Holy Prophet (PBUH) on the authority of a revelation which did not form

a part of the Qur’an. This is what Hadith is, only another kind of revelation!

Proof 2:

?ح7ل= ?م1 أ -ك -ة- ل 1ل -ي 7 ل -ام ف-ث? الصfي 7ل-ى الر= ?م1 إ 7ك ائ 7س- -اسn ه?ن= ن 7ب ?م1 ل -ك ?م1 ل 1ت -ن -اسn و-أ 7ب -ه?ن= ل 7م- ل =ه? ع-ل ?م1 الل =ك -ن ?م1 أ 1ت ?ن ?ون- ك -ان ت -خ1 ?م1 ت ك 1ف?س- -ن -اب- أ ?م1 ف-ت 1ك -ي ?م1 و-ع-ف-ا ع-ل 1ك -ن- ع-ن وه?ن= ف-اآل1 ر? -اش7 -غ?وا ب 1ت -ب- م-ا و-اب -ت ك

=ه? ?م1 الل -ك ?وا ل ?ل ?وا و-ك ب ر- =ى و-اش1 ت =ن- ح- -ي -ب -ت ?م? ي -ك 1ط? ل 1خ-ي -ض? ال 1ي -ب 1ط7 م7ن- األ1 1خ-ي و-د7 ال -س1 ر7 م7ن- األ1 1ف-ج1 ?م= ال 7م�وا ث -ت -ام- أ 7ل-ى الصfي 1ل7 إ =ي الل

“It is made lawful for you, in the nights of fasts, to have sex with your women. They are apparel for you, and you are

apparel for them. Allah knows that you have been betraying yourselves, so He relented towards you and pardoned

you. So now you can have sexual intimacy with them and seek what Allah has destined for you and eat and drink

until the white thread of the dawn becomes distinct from the black thread; then complete the fast up to the

night.” (Qur’an 2:187)

1- The words ‘relented towards you and pardoned you’ show that prior to the revelation of this verse having sexual intimacy

with ones wife during the nights of Ramadan was a sin.

2- And the words ‘now you can have sexual intimacy with them’ show that with the revelation of this verse alone has it

become lawful.

All these points imply that the earlier prohibition was indeed from Allah yet we do not find that in the Qur’an. Who was then the

authority to prohibit it before this command if not the Holy Prophet (PBUH)? If he was the one, and surely he was, then is it not an

evident proof in favor of Hadith, the words of the Prophet, as a source of Law?

Proof 3:

We read in the Holy Qur’an;

?م1 م-ا -ة� م7ن1 ق-ط-ع1ت 7ين و1 ل- ?م?وه-ا أ 1ت ك -ر- 7م-ة� ت 7ه-ا ع-ل-ى ق-ائ ص?ول

? 7ذ1ن7 أ 7إ =ه7 ف-ب ?خ1ز7ي- الل 7ي ق7ين- و-ل 1ف-اس7 ال“Whatever palm-trees you have cut down, or have left them standing on their roots, it was with Allah‘s permission,

and so that He might disgrace the transgressors.” (Qur’an 59:5)

The verse was revealed about an event during the siege of the treacherous Banu Nadair, a Jewish tribe of Medina. It is clearly

mentioned that Muslims cut down trees with Allah’s permission. Where is the leave to cut down trees during a battle given in the

Qur’an? How was the leave of Allah, not found in the Qur’an, conveyed if not through a revelation that does not form a part of the

Qur’an? Obviously the only reasonable answer is that Allah conveyed the leave through ‘un-recited revelation’ and it was Holy

Prophet (PBUH) who gave the command to cut down trees in his words during the siege. Such a command given by the Prophet

(PBUH) is what is knows as Hadith. And the companions who carried out the command followed Hadith knowing fully that it was from

Allah.

There are more examples on these lines.

Obeying the Prophet means obeying Sunnah/Hadith:

There are 11 verses in the Holy Qur’an which have the words; ‘Obey Allah and [His] Messenger’

Allah Almighty says;

-ط7يع?وا =ه- و-أ س?ول- الل ?م1 و-الر= =ك -ع-ل ح-م?ون- ل ?ر1 ت“Obey Allah and the Messenger, so that you may be blessed.” (Qur’an 3:132)

-ط7يع?وا =ه- و-أ -ه? الل ول س? 7ن1 و-ر- ?م1 إ 1ت ?ن 7ين- ك م?ؤ1م7ن“And obey Allah and His Messenger, if you are believers.” (Qur’an 8:1)

-ا �ه-ا ي ي- =ذ7ين- أ ?وا ال -م-ن -ط7يع?وا آ =ه- أ -ط7يع?وا الل س?ول- و-أ ?وا و-ال- الر= 1ط7ل ?ب ?م1 ت -ك -ع1م-ال أ

“O you who believe, obey Allah and obey the Messenger, and do not nullify your deeds.”(Qur’an 47:33)

Other verses are 4:59, 5:92, 8:20, 8:46, 24:54, 58:13 and 64:12.

Every single verse of the Holy Qur’an which speaks of the ‘Obedience to Allah’ without an exception mentions ‘Obedience to the

Messenger’ as well.

Why is the Obedience to the Messenger mentioned separately if it has no implication other than obeying Allah’s commands in the

Qur’an?

Same is true for all the verses in which there is a warning for not being obedient to Allah.

-ع1ص7 و-م-ن1 =ه- ي -ه? الل ول س? -ع-د= و-ر- -ت د?ود-ه? و-ي 1ه? ح? ل ?د1خ7 ا ي -ار� 7د�ا ن ال -ه? ف7يه-ا خ- م?ه7ينn ع-ذ-ابn و-ل“Whoever disobeys Allah and His Messenger and transgresses the limits set by Him, He shall admit him to the Fire,

where he will remain forever. For him there is a humiliating punishment.” (Qur’an 4:14)

Other verses are 8:13, 9:63, 33:36 and 72:23.

Thus we find that in all the verses that deal with the positive and negative aspects of obedience mention ‘Obedience to the

Messenger (PBUH)’ along with ‘Obedience to Allah’ separately.

There is not a single verse in the Holy Qur’an wherein ‘Obedience to Allah’ is mentioned without that of the Messenger. On the other

hand there are certain verses in which only ‘Obedience to the Messenger’ has been mentioned. Same is the case with the verses

warning about disobedience. Following are a couple of examples;

-ق7يم?وا ة- و-أ ?وا الص=ال- -ت -اة- و-آ ك -ط7يع?وا الز= س?ول- و-أ ?م1 الر= =ك -ع-ل ح-م?ون- ل ?ر1 ت“Establish Salah and pay Zakah and obey the messenger, so that you may be favored with mercy.” (Qur’an 24:56)

7ذ� -و1م-ئ -و-د� ي =ذ7ين- ي وا ال -ف-ر? س?ول- و-ع-ص-و?ا ك -و1 الر= و=ى ل ?س- 7ه7م? ت ر1ض? ب- ?م?ون- و-ال- األ1 1ت -ك =ه- ي �ا الل د7يث ح-

“On that Day, those who have disbelieved and disobeyed the Messenger shall wish that the earth were leveled with

them. They shall not (be able to) conceal anything from Allah.” (Qur’an 4:42)

Also see 4:115 & 24:54.

The reason for attaching this much importance to the obedience to the Messenger (PBUH) is that obedience to Allah is simply not

possible without following the Prophet (PBUH) i.e. it is not possible to follow Qur’an without Hadith. And as to the verses that

mention only ‘Obedience to the Messenger’ or warn against disobedience to him, it is because whatever the Messenger (PBUH) says

is from Allah and obedience to him is in reality obedience to Allah. Qur’an itself says;

?ط7ع7 م-ن1 س?ول- ي -ط-اع- ف-ق-د1 الر= =ه- أ الل“Whoever obeys the Messenger obeys Allah” (Qur’an 4:80)

The summary is that Obedience to the Messenger, so often mentioned separately, always mentioned along with Obedience to Allah

and sometimes mentioned alone as well ,establishes the fact that the words and deeds of the Prophet (PBUH) (i.e. Hadith) are also a

source of guidance and are required to be followed along with the Holy Qur’an. Had it only been about following the Qur’an there

was no need to add ‘Obedience to the Messenger’ after ‘Obedience to Allah’ in all these instances. Verily the Book of Allah is free

from pointless verbosity!

Jibra’il and the Holy Prophet (PBUH); a comparison:

Qur’an is the Last and Final revelation of Almighty Allah to mankind. It came through Jibra’il (Archangel Gabriel) first to the Holy

Prophet (PBUH) and then through him to the whole world.

The task of Jibra’il (AS) was to simply bring down the words of Allah (i.e. Qur’an) and recite them to the Prophet (PBUH) while this

alone was not the task of the Holy Prophet (PBUH). He was not only to recite the verses but also to teach the Book of Allah. We read

in the Qur’an;

-ق-د1 =ه? م-ن= ل 7ين- ع-ل-ى الل 1م?ؤ1م7ن 7ذ1 ال -ع-ث- إ س?وال� ف7يه7م1 ب ه7م1 م7ن1 ر- 1ف?س7 -ن ?و أ 1ل -ت 1ه7م1 ي -ي 7ه7 ع-ل -ات -ي fيه7م1 آ ك ?ز- fم?ه?م? و-ي ?ع-ل -اب- و-ي 1ك7ت 1م-ة- ال 1ح7ك و-ال“Allah has surely conferred favor on the believers when He raised in their midst a messenger from among

themselves who recites to them His verses and makes them pure and teaches them the Book and the

Wisdom.” (Qur’an 3:164)

The verse implies that the Messenger of Allah (PBUH) has the final word in interpretation of the Book [i.e. Qur’an] as he has come to

teach the Book and not merely to recite its verses.

If the task of the Holy Prophet (PBUH) was similar to that of Angel Jibra’il why is it that Allah so often mentions the Obedience to the

Prophet along with Obedience to Himself while there is no injunction about Obedience to Jibra’il?

Had the Prophet’s (PBUH) task been the same as that of Jibra’il (AS) there would have been no mention of obedience to him just as

there is no mention of obedience to Jibr’ail.

This is a strong notion in support of Hadith along with Qur’an as a source of Law in the House of Islam!

May ALLAH make us have faith in all the articles and fundamentals of His Deen!

INDEED ALLAH KNOWS THE BEST!

Hadith Compilation by the Companions of the ProphetOrientalists, Christians Missionaries and Hadith rejecting cultists often argue that Hadith compilation started in the 3rd century After

Hijrah. This can be anything but certainly not the truth.

In the following lines I give some evidences for Hadith compilations by different companions of the Holy Prophet, may Allah bless

him, and their pupils.

Please note in this particular paper I am not going to discuss compilations made on the directives of the Prophet, may Allah bless

him. Insha’Allah a separate paper will soon come out on it. For now let us consider the manuscripts and compilations made by

companions themselves or their immediate students.

1-  Abdullah bin ‘Amr’s Manuscript :

A well known companion of the Holy Prophet, may Allah bless him, named ‘Abdullah bin ‘Amr bin al-‘As (d. 63 A.H.) had prepared a

manuscript with narrations he directly listened from the Prophet. The manuscript is famous by the name, ‘Sahifa al-Sadiqah’

Mujahid said: I saw a manuscript with Abdullah bin ‘Amr bin al-‘As so I asked about it. He said: “This is al-Sadiqa and

in it is what I listened to from the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him, in it (means narrations therein) there is

no step between myself and the Prophet.” (Ibn Sa’d’s Tabaqat al-Kubra Darul Sader ed. 2/373)

Abu Rashid al-Hurani said: I went to ‘Abdullah bin ‘Amr bin al-‘As and I said to him: “Narrate to me what you listened

from the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him.” He handed me over a manuscript and said: “This is what I wrote

from the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him …” (Musnad Ahmad, Hadith 6851. Shaykh Shu’aib Arnaut authenticated it)

This was later passed on to his great grandson ‘Amr bin Shu’aib (d. 118 A.H.)

Although the book is not extant today, perhaps still we can  find out the narrations in it.

Hafiz Ibn Hajr has quoted that Yahya bin Ma’in said: “When ‘Amr bin Shu’aib narrates from his grandfather through his

father it is from (that) book.” (Tahzib al-Tahzib 8/49)

With a computer program I searched for this chain in just 20 well known Hadith compilations and found nearly 850 results.

2-  Manuscript of ‘Ali :

Sayyidina ‘Ali (d. 40 A.H.), may Allah be pleased with him, also had a manuscript of Hadith with him.

‘Ali, may Allah be pleased with him, said: “We have not written anything from the Prophet except the Qur’an and

what is in this manuscript …” (Sahih Bukhari, Hadith 3179)

Various narrations throw light on the contents of this manuscript. It had injunctions on, “Blood-money, Qasas, releasing of

captives.” (cf. Bukhari, Hadith 111), “Sanctity of Madina” (cf. Bukhari, Hadith 3179) etc. And ‘Ali, may Allah be pleased with

him, used to keep it tied with the scabbard of his sword (cf. Sahih Muslim)

3-  Compilations of narrations of Abu Huraira :

Al-Hassan bin ‘Amr said: I mentioned a Hadith to Abu Huraira which he did not acknowledge. I said, “Verily I have

listened to it from you.” He said, “If you got it from me then it must be written with me.” He held my hand and took

me to his home and we saw many books of Hadith of the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him, then we found the

Hadith. So he said, “Indeed I told you if I narrated it to you then it is written with me.” (Jami’ Bayan al-‘ilm, Hadith 422)

One may say this Hadith contradicts the narration from Sahih Bukhari in which Abu Huraira himself said that he did not write the

Ahadith. But this is not a problem for it appears Abu Huraira did not record the Ahadith in written form during the lifetime of the Holy

Prophet, may Allah bless him, and initial years of Khilafa but later he started writing them.

As per the narration recorded by Ibn Sa’d, Abdul ‘Aziz bin Marwan (d. 80 A.H.), the father of ‘Umar bin Abdul Aziz, wrote to Kathir bin

Murrah al-Hadharmi:

“At Hims you have met seventy of the companions of Messenger of Allah who fought at Badr … Write to me what you

have heard of the Ahadith of the Messenger of Allah from his companions, except those of Abu Huraira for they are

with us.” (Tabaqat al-Kubra 7/448 Entry: Kathir bin Murrah)

This proves Abdul Aziz bin Marwan had the Ahadith of Abu Huraira, may Allah be pleased with him, in written form with him. And it

further proves that efforts were being made to put the Ahadith in writing during the time of the companions for certainly many

companions lived even after 80 A.H. when Abdul Aziz died. Isn’t it much before the third century After Hijrah?

4- Manuscript of Anas bin Malik:

Anas bin Malik (d. 92 A.H.) had his own manuscript of Hadith which he copied from the Holy Prophet, may Allah bless him:

Ma’bad bin Hilal says: When many of us were with Anas bin Malik he came to us with a manuscript saying, “I heard

this from the Prophet, may Allah bless him, and so I wrote it and presented it unto him.” (Mustadrak al-Hakim, Hadith

6452)

This shows companions started making private Hadith collections right during the lifetime of the Holy Prophet, may Allah bless him.

5-  Books of Ibn ‘Abbas :

Another well known companion Ibn ‘Abbas (d. 68 A.H.), may Allah be pleased with him, had multiple treatises:

Musa bin ‘Uqbah said: “Karib bin Abi Muslim put in front of us a camel load or equal to a camel load of books of Ibn

‘Abbas.” (Ibn Sa’d’s Tabaqat al-Kubra 5/293)

6- Manuscript of ‘Abdullah bin Mas’ud:

Another great companion, Abdullah bin Mas’ud (d. 32 A.H.), may Allah be pleased with him, also had his own manuscript.

M’an said: ‘Abdul Rahman bin ‘Abdullah bin Mas’ud came to me with a book and swore, “Verily my father wrote it

with his own hand.” (Jami’ Bayan al-‘Ilm wa Fadhlihi, Hadith 399)

7- Manuscript of Samurah bin Jundub:

Another famous companion, Samurah bin Jundub (d. 58 A.H.), may Allah be pleased with him, also had his collection of Hadith:

Ibn Hajr writes:

“Suleman bin Samurah bin Jundub transmitted a large manuscript from his father.”(Tahzib al-Tahzib 4/198)

8-  Manuscript of Jabir bin Abdullah :

Jabir bin Abdullah (d. circa 70 A.H.) is also reported to have made a manuscript of Hadith with narrations on Hajj.

Consider the following narration from one of his top students.

“Mujahid narrated from the manuscript of Jabir.” (Tabaqat al-Kubra 5/467)

9- Compilation of Bashir bin Nahik:

A student of Abu Huraira, Bashir bin Nahik also compiled the Ahadith he learnt from Abu Huraira:

Bashir bin Nahik said: I used to write whatever I learnt from Abu Huraira. Then as I intended to part from him I came

to him with the book and read it to him and asked, “This is what I heard from you?” Abu Huraira said, “Yes.” (Sunan

Darmi, Hadith 494. Shaykh Hussain Salim Asad graded the report as Sahih)

10- Mauscript of Hammam bin Munabbih:

Another student of Abu Huraira, Hammam bin Munabbih (d. 132 A.H.) made a collection of the Ahadith he learnt from Abu Huraira.

All praise be to Allah, it is extant to this day. Dr. Hamiddulah, an erudite scholar of recent times, found two manuscripts of it in

Berlin and Damascus and published it. It has 138 Ahadith. Imam Ahmad has quoted all these narrations in his Musnad. Sometimes

back I made a little research on the first 20 narrations of this manuscript and compared them with Musnad Ahmad. My findings are

given Here.

All these facts refutes the lie about Hadith writing being a phenomenon originating more than 200 years after the Holy Prophet, may

Allah bless him.

May Allah guide all to true Islam!

Indeed Allah knows the best!

When did the documentation of Sunnah begin?

أجمعين أصحابه و آله على و بعده نبي ال من على السالم و الصالة و وحده لله الحمد الرحيم الرحمن الله بسمA research paper analyzing the development of written record of sunnah

by Gabriel Keresztes

1. Introduction

“There will be a man to whom my hadith will reach him, while he is sitting comfortably, and he will say: between me

and you is the book of Allah, whatever we find in it that is halaal we will make it halaal, and whatever we find in it

haraam we will make it haraam”.[1]

It is without surprise that such a prophecy has come to pass, and we find today many so called intellectuals, both Muslims and non-

Muslims denying the narrations of prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) without any proper scientific grounds for doing so. It is

a matter of desire and non-conformation, an epidemic influence from western ideologies of godlessness and moral disintegration.

However, intellectuals will never admit the reality of the problem and they will always attempt to throw stumbling blocks in the path

of the masses in hope of misguiding them to their own ideologies and philosophies. In attempting to do so, many Orientalists and

Muslim liberals have come up with different ways of attacking Islam, in an attempt to reform it or stop it from spreading its pure and

unaltered ways. When dealing with the Quran, such people have realized that it is very hard if not impossible to attack, however

they have found that the Sunnah of prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) might be an easier target. They could have not been

more wrong. Organizations of Quraniates[2], Orientalists, and Muslim Women Leagues have propagated ideas through their writings

and media, that the ahadith are narrations that have been compiled much later after the death of prophet Muhammad (peace be

upon him) and that such are not reliable and should be discarded.[3] In this paper I will prove beyond the shadow of a doubt that

such an accusation is baseless in the light of objective research and sincerity, and that the Sunnah of prophet Muhammad (peace be

upon him) was not a later invention as people claim. Contrary to this, it was during the life of Muhammad (peace be upon him) that

such a science of ahadith began, being collected, propagated and guarded by his companions till today. I have split this paper in

four sections: in the first section I will deal with the Muslim methodology of preserving information and authenticity. Second I will

show historical examples and proofs of documentation of the Sunnah during the life of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him).

Third, I will discuss the proliferation and documentation of the Sunnah after the death of Muhammad (peace be upon him). Last but

not least I will discuss the crystallization of the science of hadith, and the different stages that this science went through.

2. The Muslim Methodology of Preserving Information

The Jewish and Christian Scriptures suffered at the hands of the very people who should have guarded them. Because of this, the

Muslim community felt a pressing need to safeguard the knowledge that was entrusted to them. To write a book using a false name

is tremendously easy; in the literary world the use of pen names is commonplace. Similarly, it is possible to tamper with someone

else’s work then republish it under the original author’s name...Muslims devised a working solution long ago, developing a

watertight system which they employed faithfully for eight or nine centuries.[4] Starting from the time of prophet Muhammad

(peace be upon him) him receiving the firs revelation, knowledge proliferation has been at the core of the Muslim nation. Upon

reaching Madinah the prophet (peace be upon him) arranged schools and ordered scribes to write whatever he dictated. Many

companions had copies of his letters dispatched to different people.[5] Not only those things were written down with the outmost

care, but also at the same time information was being checked for reliability and content. From the affairs of the government during

the reigns of the three caliphs to the administrative lessons, religious rulings, political and military strategies and all of the prophet’s

traditions were passed on through a very strict system.[6] The Muslims methodology of gathering information, verifying it and

passing it on had no match. The isnad systems that were developed to make sure that each incident or rapport is reported by an

unbroken chain back to the original narrator[7]. Evidence for the transmission of knowledge in this manner comes from thousands of

ahadith bearing identical wordings but coming from different corners of the Islamic world, each tracing its origin back to a common

source – the Prophet, a Companion, or a Successor.[8] For example the hadith of Abu Huraira about the obligation of following the

Imam is recorded at least 124 times, and reported by 26 third-generation authorities that unanimously trace its origin to

Companions of the Prophet (peace be upon him).[9] However the isnad system was only the first step in establishing authenticity

and preserving information. Establishing trustworthiness (morality, ability, memory etc.) of the narrator was another important step

in the Muslim methodology of preserving information. Umar Al Khatab and Abu Bakr, when collecting the Quran in one book, they

followed the instructions of Allah the Almighty:

“…and take for witness two persons from among you, endued with justice.”[10]

The people of ahlul suffah (companions of the rows) used to dedicate their whole lives just to record and propagate the teachings of

Islam during the time of prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him). Many companions such as Uthman, Ali, Umar and others

memorized not only the sayings of prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) but also the whole Quran. The knowledge they

preserved was passed on in the forms of books through a very stringent system that involved different levels of information delivery

such as Sama’ (teacher reading to student), Ardh (student reading to teacher), Munawala (hading someone a text and allowing

transmission), Kitaba (a form of correspondence), and Wasiyya (entrusting someone with knowledge to be delivered). These are just

a few examples of the strict methods taken by Muslims to preserve information and the early stage in which such began being

implemented[11]. Now we turn our attention to the proofs of the documentation of the Sunnah of prophet Muhammad (peace be

upon him) during his time.

3. Documentation of the Sunnah during the Prophet’s (peace be upon him) time

It is agreed upon that the Sunnah of prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) was not fully recorded in written form during his life

time, however as we have pointed out the Muslim methodology was not restricted to writing, and it relied heavily on memorization.

However much of the ahadtih have been recorded in writing and books during the lifetime of the prophet (peace be upon him).

There are many evidences showing that companions (in this case Abu Shah) used to write the speeches of prophet Muhammad such

as the example of the speech of the inviolability of Makkah.[12] The prophet (peace be upon him) also wrote letters to many kings

inviting them to Islam, some of them still being available today. Some critics have raised an objection by quoting the hadith of Abu

Sa’eed al-Khudri, who narrates that prophet Muhammad said:

“Do not take down anything from me, and he who took down anything from me except the Qur’an, he should efface

that…”[13]

They claim that prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) did not allow hadith to be recorded, however they selectively take what

suits their agenda and ignore the whole corpus of ahadith. It is clear from the wording of prophet Muhammad that such a statement

was general and it was during the time when the writing of the Quran was in it’s early stages. The prophet allowed and encouraged

his companions to write ahadith once the system for recording Quran was in place. He did not want companions to mix the Quran

with ahadith, and indeed we see today that such genius paid off. When some companions heard that Amr ibn Al As’s had scrolls of

ahadith, they reproached him, however he went and told the prophet who said:

“Write from me, for by the One Who has my soul in His hand, nothing other than the truth has ever come out of my

mouth”.[14]

The same Abdullah ibn Amr ibn Al As’s collected the book called Al-Sahefah As-Sadiqah. This is a book that contained many ahdith

of the prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) and was spread amongst the companions and later generations. The Sahefah of

Abu Hurayrah, which was proliferated by his student Hammam ibn Munabbih, that has survived till today and was published by Dr.

Hamidullah.[15] It is without a doubt that there is sufficient information in the history of Islam to show that the Sunnah of prophet

Muhammad (peace be upon him) was recorded and passed on with his permission and during his lifetime. Those who say that the

Sunnah was recorded only centuries after prophet Muhammad during the time of Bukhari and Muslim are far away from the

historical proofs that are widely available, wishing only to escape the strict security measures that were divinely implemented in

guarding not only the Quran and the Sunnah, but also Islam as a way of life.

4. Documentation of the Sunnah after the Death of Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him)

After the death of Muhammad (peace be upon him), his companions took an even stricter approach in preserving and reporting the

Sunnah. In this period, a number of leading companions wrote down narrations and preserved them. Abu Hurayrah to whom 5374

channels of hadith are attributed, had many books in his possession as reported by Hasan ibn Amr ad-Damari.[16]Abdullah ibn

Abbas to whom 1600 channels of narrations are attributed used to write whatever he heard and used to hire his servants to write

ahadith for him.[17] Abdullah ibn Amr ibn Al Aas to whom 700 channels of narration are attributed recorded ahadith in his Sahefah,

while Abu Bakr was also amongst those who used to possess written copies of the Sunnah of prophet Muhammad (peace be upon

him).[18] After the companions of prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), their students passed on the knowledge to their

students. Abu Hurairah had nine students writing down from him, Ibn Umar had eight, Anas had sixteen, Aisha had three, ibn Abbas

had nine, Jabir had fourteen, and others did the same as well.[19] The time in history is known as the era of the Tabi’oon and in this

era the science of gathering ahadith became stricter, as people began inventing ahadith. It is very important to highlight here the

fact that fabrication was discovered and dealt with. This shows the strict nature of the system and the strong filters it had for

innovations and lies. Under the reign of Umar ibn Abdul Azeez[20] the scholars compiled books of ahadith containing biographical

data on the various narrators of ahadith, exposing the liars and fabricators.[21] The hadith proliferation spread with such a great

strength and precise science that the science began influencing the other branches of Islamic knowledge such as Aqeedah, Fiq and

other. The people would not accept the authority of any teacher of any subject, unless he or she would possess the unbroken link till

prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) coupled with the reliability criteria for that person in question. The collection of ahadith

and knowledge was so intense and serious that some would not wait for the ahadith to reach them but they would travel for long

periods of time to hear and verify ahadith. Jabir ibn Abdullah heard of a hadith and traveled on a mount that he had purchased, and

after one moth of travel he gathered the hadith and returned back. The same happened to Abu Ayoob al Ansari.[22] The sciences

have only intensified and crystallized as time advanced and following the ear of the companions, the followers and their followers

came the ear of the Saheehs, which was the pinnacle of hadith sciences[23].

5. Crystallization of Hadith Sciences

The writing of hadith can be classified in four stages:[24]

· The stage of the Sahefah, which was the stage in the life of prophet Muhammad and his companions. The hadith were compiled

just for the sake of collection.

· The stage of the Musannaf, which was the stage of hadith classification according to subject matter. This was the ear of imam

Malik.

· The state of the Musnad, which classified ahadith under companion’s names. An example of such is the Musnad of imam Ahamad.

· The stage of the Saheeh, and this is the most important stage where ahadith were classified under the headings of different

subjects (8 main subjects of Jamiha books), and particular care was paid to the reliability and content of the hadith. This is the era of

imam Bukhari and Muslim.

The third century hijri became the most important time for the sciences of hadith, and it was pioneered by the strict measures taken

by imam Bukhari in compiling his monumental work Sahih al Bukhari. The ahadith were known in all circles of society, yet no one

would gather or narrate without the measures put in place. So even though imam Bukhari might have known of a hadith he would

apply the strictest measures to gather this hadith and put it in his book. It is recorded in one incident that he traveled for a long

period of time to gather a hadith, however when he reached the person from who he was supposed to record, he saw him tricking

his horse to come to him. Imam Bukhari turned around and refused to collect from him saying that if the man lies to his horse he

might lie to Bukhari. It was with this strict attitude that the science of hadith reached almost infallibility and safeguarded not only

the narrations of prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), but the narrations of companions, followers and scholars who have been

passing their knowledge till it has reached us with the same rules and same methodology that prophet Muhammad (peace be upon

him) used to apply, as well as his rightly guided Caliphs after him.

6. Conclusion

It is without a doubt that Muslims and non-Muslims alike have downgraded the Muslim educational system. Western educational

philosophies are considered superior and more popular. The strict method that was implied in passing down knowledge from

prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) might only be available in certain institutions[25] or private study circles taking place in

masajid. The reality is that most people are trying to employ modern methodologies of education, which do not take in consideration

the character of the person who narrates or their religious integrity. Teachers who use foul language and are far away from morality

stand in front of thousands of students who take knowledge from them as an ultimate truth. The Muslim methodology is not weaker

or inferior to the current methodology. It is actually light years ahead of it, however the fault is with us, who have abandoned it.

There are too many factors that have contributed to the forsaking the Sunnah, which are beyond the scope of this paper. Enough is

to say that based on the information presented above, people who say that the Sunnah of prophet Muhammad (peace be upon it)

was only recorded in the third century or later, have no leg to stand upon, and should re evaluate the position in the light of

historical data and proofs.

Indeed Allah knows the best!

[1] Sunan Tirmidhi, Kitab Al Ilm 38/5 as cited by Yahya, AbdulBary. "Hadith Studies." Chain of Command. University of Windsor,

Windsor. 2008. Lecture.[2] People whom only believe in Quran and reject the Sunnah.

[3] Seehttp://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/United_Submitters_International#Rejection_of_hadith_and_sunnah

[4] Aʻẓamī, Muḥammad Muṣṭafá. The History of the Qur'ānic Text: From Revelation to Compilation: A Comparative Study with the Old

and New Testaments. Leicester: UK Islamic Academy, 2003. Print.

[5] Aʻẓamī, Muḥammad Muṣṭafá. Studies in Early Hadīth Literature: With a Critical Edition of Some Early Texts. Indianapolis: American

Trust Publications, 1978. Print.

[6] As cited by Azami from Letters of the Second Caliph Umar Abdur-Razzaq asSanani, Musannaf, vol 1, pp.206-209.

[7] See A’zami, The History of the Qur’anic Text… pg. 170 for an example of the hadith of the prayer, and how it has been

transmitted. This chart is an excellent example of the unbreakable system of isnad.

[8] Ibid.

[9] Ibid.

[10] Quran 65:2 Hilālī, Taqī Al-Dīn., and Muhammad Muhsin. Khan. Interpretation of the Meanings of the Noble Qurʼān in the English

Language: A Summarized Version of At [i.e. Al.]-Tabarī, Al-Qurtubī, and Ibn Kathīr with Comments from Sahīh Al-Bukhārī. Riyadh,

Saudi Arabia: Darussalam, 1996. Print.

[11] For a full detailed explanation and proof of the Muslim Educational Methodology see chapter 12 in A’zami’s book The History of

the Qur'ānic Text: From Revelation to Compilation: A Comparative Study with the Old and New Testaments. Leicester: UK Islamic

Academy, 2003. Print.

[12] Siba'ee, Muṣṭafá. The Sunnah and Its Role in Islamic Legislation. Riyadh: International Islamic House, 2008. Print.

[13] Muslim, vo.14 nr. 5326, "Hadith (Hadis) Books (Sahih Al-Bukhari, Sahih Muslim, Sunan Abu-Dawud, and Malik's

Muwatta)." Search Engine: Search in the Quran and Hadith. Web. 20 Mar. 2012. <http://www.searchtruth.com/book_display.php?

book=1>.

[14] Siba'ee 93.

[15] "Greatest Living Islamic Scholar Dr. Hamidullah Passes Away, The Milli Gazette, 20 Dec 02." MG. Web. 20 Mar. 2012.

<http://www.milligazette.com/dailyupdate/200212/20021220a.htm>.

[16] Philips, Abu Ameenah Bilaal. Uṣool Al-Ḥadeeth: The Methodology of Hadith Evaluation = Uṣūl Al-Ḥadīth. Riyadh: International

Islamic House, 2007. Print. P.23

[17] Ibid.

[18] Ibid.

[19] Ibid.

[20] 99 - 101 A.H.

[21] Ibid.

[22] Siba'ee p. 107

[23] For a detailed exposition of the companions and followers who wrote down ahadith and possessed books see M.M. A’zami p. 34

– 70.

[24] Philips p. 28

[25] We still have a few universities that follow the isnad methodology

Excellence of Islamic Science of HadithMany people have a query and some use the same to doubt the entire Hadith treasury as to how come a narration remains

unchanged after passing through different narrators. This notion is a clear show of the ignorance of the amount of care taken and

efforts put in by the people who were Masters of the Science of Hadith (Muhaddithin). Much argumentation can be done on this but

nothing will be more relevant then a direct study and analysis of different Hadith collections of scholars of different times.

Dr. Muhammad Hamidullah in one of his lectures mentioned that if we find a Hadith in certain collection and the compiler gives the

chain through which it reached him. Then if we find the same Hadith in the book of a person in the chain and see the startling

similarity between them then we have no other option but to believe in the credibility of the compiler of the book we initially

considered.

While I read this interesting idea of analysis I made my mind to make some study on these lines. I looked for the first few Ahadith of

Sahifa Hammam bin Munabbah, the oldest extant manuscript of Hadith and sought to compare them with Ahadith in other

Collections of later times.

Following table gives my findings:

First column gives the Hadith Number of Hammam’s manuscript who was the direct student of Abu Huraira (RA) and all the

Ahadith he wrote are through Abu Huraira (RA) from the Holy Prophet (PBUH).

Second column gives the Hadith Number from Abdul Razzaq’s collection (Musannaf) and remarks about it compared to the

narration in Hammam’s manuscript. Abdul Razzaq narrated these Ahadith through Ma’mar bin Rashid from Hammam.

While the third column gives the Hadith Number from the Musnad of Imam Ahmad and remarks about it vis-à-vis the narration in

Hammam’s collection. Ahmad narrated these Ahadith from Abdul Razzaq through Ma’mar from Hammam. (Click on the image to

enlarge)

This analysis leaves one with no choice but to acknowledge the fact

that Muhaddithin took extreme care in narrating Ahadith.

Infact the least level of precaution taken in narrating the words of the Holy Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) stays above

the highest level of precaution taken ever in presenting any historical happening.

This is just a test case. I am confident a more detailed research on these lines undertaken by a scholarly person can give a death

blow to an oft-repeated argument about Authority of Hadith in general.

May Allah make it a source of learning for all of us!

INDEED ALLAH KNOWS THE BEST!

The Problem of Enormous Numbers of Hadithأجمعين أصحابه و آله على و بعده نبي ال من على السالم و الصالة و وحده لله الحمد الرحيم الرحمن الله بسم

This is reproduction of APPENDIX II from Shaykh Muhammad Mustafa Azmi’s work“Studies in Early Hadith Literature” Suhail

Academy, Lahore 2001 pp. 301-305

There are references to hundreds of teachers from whom al-Thauri, Ibn al-Mubarak, al-Zuhri, etc. had written ahadith. In the works

of biographers we find a long list of teachers and students of eminent scholars. There are at least fifty students of al-Zuhri who

made their written collections from him. If, on average, every one of them had written only five hundred traditions from him, then

this number would have been 25,000. If we go a step further and assume for example that every student of al-Zuhri had only two or

three students, then this numbers of traditions might have increased at the end of the second century to some 75,000, and in the

time of Bukhari and his contemporaries they have been in hundreds of thousands.

Thus, the number of a few thousand ahadith reached about three quarters of a million in the mid third century. 

According to Ibn Hanbal’s statement, over 7,000,000 traditions were sound, of which 6,000,000 were memorized by Abu Zur’ah. [1]

 

Al-Bukhari claimed that he made his collection of traditions out of six hundred thousand[2]. His book contains only 7,397 Hadith with

repetition, and only 2,602 Hadith without repetition.[3]

The actual number of traditions preserved in the Sihah and other collections is only a small fraction of the body of the traditions

described above. This is a puzzling problem. Many scholars have been perplexed, and so have reached very strange conclusions.

Guillaume says, “Bukhari’s biographer says that he selected his material from no less than 600,000 hadith. If we allow

for repetitions which occur under different heads, he reduced this vast number of forgeries or dubious reports to less

than 3,000 Hadith. In other words, less than one in every 200 traditions which circulated in his day could pass his

test.”[4]

 

The problem consists of (a) Hadith and (b) enormous numbers and their implications. 

(a) Hadith in the terms of some traditionalists, means utterance, deeds and tacit approval of the Prophet[5], while in definition of

other scholars it covers utterances, deeds, legal decisions and tacit approval of the Prophet as well as those of Companions and the

Successors.[6]

 

(b) As for the problem of enormous numbers, every channel of transmission is counted as a separate hadith. ‘Abd al-Rahman b.

Mahdi (d. 198) says, “I have thirteen traditions from Mughriah transmitting from the Prophet, concerning al-mash ‘ala

Khuffain.”[7] 

 It is quite obvious that al-Mughirah is reporting single action or habit of the Prophet. It does not matter how many times this action

was repeated. It would be reported as a single action. As this single action is reported to ‘Abd al-Rahman b. Mahdi from thirteen

channels, he counts them as thirteen traditions. 

The first four centuries of the Hijrah were the golden age of the science of tradition, and the number of transmitters grew

tremendously. Ibn Khuzaimah (d. 311) gives some thirty isnad for one hadith is one chapter, concerning the single act of ‘Aishah for

cleansing the cloth. Meanwhile it is obvious that there might have been many other channels of transmission which were unknown

to him. Muslim bin al-Hajjaj (d. 261) cites the names of a great number of transmitters, when he argues about certain points,

especially when there is a mistake committed by some transmitters. For example, he gives thirteen traditions concerning the single

incident of Ibn ‘Abbas and histahajjud prayer. In the prayer, he stood on the left of the Prophet and then Prophet pulled him to his

right side. Yazid b. Abu Ziyad related on the authority of Kuraib that Ibn ‘Abbas stood on the right side of the Prophet, but he was

placed on the left. On this occasion Muslim gives thirteenisnads – making thirteen Hadith – contradicting Yazid’s statement.

[8] Furthermore, he does not give the complete isnad and their full growth until his time. He mostly gives the details of channels

until about 130 A.H. had he given the complete comprehensive isnad flourishing in his own time, they might have grown to fifty

traditions at least. 

Growth and development of isnad in the third century

 

There have been some traditionalists who claim that they had every Hadith from one hundred channels[9], and many others who

have written every Hadith from twenty or thirty channels[10]. So, we may now infer what the real numbers of the traditions were

which were described as 600,000. Another point is that they were not purely traditions of the Prophet, but the sayings of the

Companions and the Successors and their legal decisions as well; the word ‘Hadith’ covers all these subjects and matters in some

scholars’ terms. 

The True Numbers of the Traditions

 

What is the real number of authentic traditions? The exact number is unknown, but according to Sufyan al-Thauri, Shu’bah, Yahya

al-Qattan, ‘Abd al-Rahman b. Mahdi and Ibn Hanbal 4,000 Hadithonly[11]. The statement is incomprehensible. Gilani is inclined to a

number less than 10,000Hadith, based in his statement, on the quotation from Tahrir al-Jaza’iri, who in turn was quoting al-Hakim al-

Nishaburi[12]. This is apparently a misinterpretation of al-Hakim’s attitude. He gives an estimate of less than 10,000 Hadith for the

first-class authentic traditions which are transmitted according to al-Bukhari and Muslim b. al-Hajjaj’s stipulation. Furthermore he

himself objects to this number, saying, “How can it be said that this [Prophet] traditions do not reach 10,000 traditions

when 4,000 Companions… have transmitted traditions from him, who associated with him for more than twenty

years…”[13]

 

It is said that the Musnad of Ibn Hanbal consists of some 40,000 Traditions, and without repetitions it would be about 30,000[14],

but there has not been any research so far.[15]

 

Al-Bukhari, his Sahih and other Traditions

 

Al-Bukhari did not claim that what he left out were the spurious, nor that there were no authentic traditions outside his collection.

On the contrary he said, “I only included in my book al-Jami’ those that were authentic, and I left out many more authentic traditions

than this to avoid unnecessary lengths.”[16] He had no attention of collecting all the authentic traditions. He only wanted to compile

a manual of Hadith, according to the wishes of his Shaikh Ishaq b. Rahwaih[17], and his function is quite clear from the title of his

book “Al-Jami’, al-Musnad, al-Sahih, al-Mukhtasar, min umur Rasul al-Allah wa Sunanihi, wa ayyamih.”[18] The word al-

Mukhtasar, ‘epitome’, itself explains that al-Bukhari did not make any attempt at a comprehensive collection. 

Now it is clear that when traditionalists give enormous numbers for the traditions, they mean channels and sources of their

transmission, and do not mean real numbers of Hadith. But when they give small figures, saying: “Al-Zuhri has 1,000 Hadith, or

al-Qasim has 200 Hadith”they most probably mean Hadith as a subject matter not counted according to its isnad. 

Does ‘Unauthentic’ Mean a False Statement?

 

Traditionalists, at first, look into the isnad and if it is defective, they call the Hadith defective, without scrutinizing the subject

matter[19]; because a Hadith, according to their criteria, cannot be authentic unless both its parts are perfect. 

Authentic matter with false isnad is a false statement. This will be clear from – [Nuskhah of Zubair b. ‘Adi] -- which is a collection of

traditions, transmitted by Bishr b. Malik on the authority of Zakariya b. ‘Adi from Anas b. Malik from the Prophet – is called spurious,

though about one quarter of the traditions of this collection are found in Bukhari and Muslim’s Sahih collections, and are called

authentic. The only reason for discarding them is that it is maintained that Zakariya did not hear all these traditions from Anas, and

they are falsely attributed to him. 

Therefore, if the scholars say that 200,000 Hadith were not authentic, it does not mean that they spurious. It only means that

there isnads are questioned while the subject itself may or may not be false. 

(Azmi, Muhammad Mustafa, Studies in Early Hadith Literature, Suhail Academy, Lahore 2001 pp. 301-305)

Addendum:

Orientalist Dr. James Robson also mentioned this in his introduction to translation of Mishkat al-Masabih.

"Bukhari, in compiling his work, said he had collected 600,000 traditions, and yet he included only 7,275 altogether in his Sahih, a

total which is said to be reduced to 4,000, or even 2762 when repetitions are eliminated. Abu Dawud out of 500,000 traditions

included only 4,800 in his Sunan, and of these he said that some were not sound. It should be understood, however, that when

one speaks of 600,000 traditions, for example, this does not mean that number of separate items of

information. Each tradition has two parts, the isnad (chain of authorities through it is transmitted) and the matn (text). If

therefore we found the same text with, say, three different isnads, that would be considered to represent three

traditions."

(James Robson, Dr., Mishkat al-Masabih- English Translation with Explanatory Notes, Sh. Muhammad Ashraf Publishers,

Lahore, 1991, Vol.1, vii)

[1] Al-Hakim, Madkhal, 13.

[2] Al-Kathib, Tarikh Baghdad (Bagh.), ii, 8,14. Other traditionalists also gave an enormous number which they memorized or wrote

down. I discuss only one case of al-Bukhari to clarify the problem.

[3] Ibn Hajar, Hady al-Sari, as quoted by al-Siba’i in Sunnah, 501.

[4] Guillaume, Islam, 91; a similar idea is maintained by Ahmad Amin, Fajr al-Islam, 211-12; Muir,Mahomet, xxxvii; see also J.

Robson, Traditions in Islam, M.W., vol.xli, pp.101-2; Nicholson, A Literary History of the Arabs, p.146; Gibb, Mohammedanism 79,

Haikal, Hayat Muhammad, p.49

[5] Tahanwi, Kashshaf, 279; Qasimi, al-Tahdith 61; Suyuti, Alfiyah 3; Subhi, Mustalahat 3; Sakhawi, Mughith 4.

[6] Jurjani, Risalah, 1; see Tahanwi, Kashshaf, 279; Suyuti, Tadrib, quoting al-Tibi 6; Sakhawi,Mughith, 12 “predecessors called them

Hadith”; Gilani, Tadwin 62; for early usage of this word for the sayings other than the Prophet see Hasan b. ‘Imarah’s discussion with

al-Zuhri, Islam, v, 147

[7] Razi, Introd. 261

[8] Muslim, Tamyiz, fol. 6b-7a; for more examples see fol. 10a; 11 channels; fol. 11b; 17 channels; these isnads are shown in the

mid-second century as they flourished , not at the time of Muslim, who was a century later.

[9] Siba’i, Sunnah, 224, quoting sayings of Ibrahim b. Sa’id al-Jauhari from Tanib al-Khatib.

[10] Madkhal, 9; and it is quite possible, at least 50 students transmitted al-Zuhri’s book, so within 25 years’ time his traditions

might have grown 30 or 40 times, see also Majruhin, 10a; Jami’ 165a;Mizan, I, 35

[11] Rashid, Ibn Majah, 164, quoting al-Amir al-San’ani

[12] Gilani, Tadwin, 66-67

[13] Madkhal, 11-12

[14] Shakir, Commentary on Suyuti’s alfiyah, pp.218-222, Shakir gives the estimate of the early scholars of 30,000 to 40,000;

perhaps the first number indicates traditions without repetition.

[15] (Lately Musnad Ahmad has been published with proper continuous Hadith numbering. The total number of hadith according to

al-Resala ed. is 27647. However if we count each channel separately the number will be quite large. See Hadith No. 535, 2008 etc –

Waqar A. Cheema)

[16] Baji, 9b; also Ibn Hajar, Hady al-Sari, I, 18; also Bagh., ii, 8-9

[17] Ibn Hajr, op. cit., 18; Bagh. Ii, 18

[18] Ibn al-Salah, ‘Ulum al-Hadith, 24-5

[19] See for the priority of isnad criticism, Robson, Materials of Tradition, M.W., vol. xli, p.166; Guillaume, 55

There is no adult breastfeeding in IslamMany Christian missionaries use a report from Sahih Muslim to argue that Islam allows adult breastfeeding. They try to seek for

different arguments that kill their contentions. Let me respond to each of their arguments.

The Hadith:

There are quite a few narrations on this in Sahih Muslim and other collections. I quote one of them here;

'A'isha -Allah be pleased with her-reported that Sahla bint Suhail b. 'Amr came to Allah's Messenger –may Allah bless

him- and said: Messenger of Allah, Salim (the freed slave of Abu Hudhaifa) is living with us in our house, and he has

attained (puberty) as men attain it and has acquired knowledge (of the sex problems) as men acquire, whereupon he

said: Feed him (i.e. make him drink your milk) so that he may become unlawful (in regard to marriage) (Sahih Muslim,

Hadith 2636)

Another narration says the Prophet –may Allah bless him- said: “Feed him, and it would remove what is there (expression of

disgust) on the face of Abu Hudhaifa. She said: (I did that) and, by Allah, I did not see (any sign of disgust) on the

face of Abu Hudhaifa.”(Sahih Muslim, Hadith 2638)

Same is reported in other Hadith works too including Muwatta of Malik, Hadith 1113.

There was no physical contact:

The first thing that must be clarified is that there was no physical contact between Sahla bin Suhail and Salim –may Allah be pleased

with them both.

Meaning of the Arabic word   7ض7ع7يه ر1- : أ

The Hadith actually uses the word 7ض7ع7يه ر1- to show what the Prophet –may Allah bless him- asked Sahla to do. The word is a derivative أ

of رضاع (Radhha) and it does not basically meaning suckling i.e. drinking from the breasts.

In Arabic it is perfectly valid to say, as it appears in classical Arabic lexicographic work Tajul ‘Uroos (1/7848) and is often used

otherwise too;

أمه ثدي) من (رضع

“He did Raddha (from the) breasts of his mother.”

So the basic, original meaning of Raddha cannot be “suckling” but it has to be “feeding.” Had it been “suckling” there was no need

to add “from the breasts …” The real meaning is “feeding” and the context or explicit information alone can clarify if it means,

“suckling” i.e. “feeding from the breasts” or it was some other way.

Categorical Narration:

While the context does not say anything explicitly, we have to look for the answer elsewhere.

Qadhi Ayyaz said: “It is possible that she (Sahla) poured (her milk) and then he (Salim) drank it without having to

touch her breast.” al-Nawawi said, “It is a fair possibility.” (Fath al-Bari 14/346)

Infact one narration gives us the explicit answer. We read;

Muhammad bin 'Umar (al-Waqidi) told us: Muhammad bin 'Abdullah, al-Zuhri's nephew, told us on authority of his father that he

said, “An amount of a drink milk was collected in a pot or a glass, and Salim used to drink it every day, for five

days. After this, he used to enter upon her while her head was uncovered. This was permission from Messenger of

Allah to Sahla bint Suhail." (Ibn Sa’d’s Tabaqat al-Kubra 8/271 Quoted by Ibn Hajr in al-Isabah 4/11)

What they mention as a problem with this report is not a problem even though one of the narrators is al-Waqidi.[1]

It was a special case:

Except ‘Aisha –may Allah be pleased with her- all the Wives of the Holy Prophet –may Allah be pleased with them all- maintained

that it was a special case and that the same cannot be extended to anyone else.

Umm Salama, the wife of Allah's Messenger -may Allah bless- used to say that all wives of Allah's Messenger -may

Allah bless- disclaimed the idea that one with this type of fosterage (having been suckled after the proper period)

should come to them. and said to 'A'isha: By Allah, we do not find this but a sort of concession given by Allah's

Messenger -may Allah bless- only for Salim, and no one was going to be allowed to enter (our houses) with this type

of fosterage and we do not subscribe to this view.(Sahih Muslim, Hadith 2641)

This is so because the general principle goes as;

“Foster relationship is established only when milk is the only food of the child." (Sahih Bukhari, Hadith 4712. Narrated

‘Aisha from the Prophet –may Allah bless them both)

Al-Nawawi writes: “And all the scholars from amongst the Companions and the Successors and scholars of all regions to

this day have said, ‘Foster relation is not proved if it after two years.’” (Sharah al-Nawawi 5/182)

This is agreed upon opinion. Those who are said to have differed also include Abu Hanifa and Malik –may Allah have mercy on them

both- but even they did not hold that someone reaching puberty can be suckled, they only added few months to the period just after

the two years.

So among the companions the opinion of ‘Aisha –may Allah be pleased with her- is weak as the rest of the Companions, including

the other Wives of the Prophet –may Allah be pleased with them all- disagreed with her and held that it was a special relaxation for

Salim. The rationale of this special permission is discussed below.

And among the later scholars, it was rare to find one allowing it, while the overwhelming majority of the scholars held the same

opinion as the majority of the companions did.

The context, explaining why it must be a special case:

Now let us dig a little more and try to find out what leads us to believe that it was a special case and should not be extended to any

other people.

In Malik’s Muwatta, Hadith 1113 we read the background;

“Abu Hudhaifa ibn Utba ibn Rabia, one of the companions of the Messenger of Allah -may Allah bless him and grant

him peace- who was present at Badr, adopted Salim -who is called Salim, the mawla of Abu Hudhaifa- as the Messenger of

Allah -may Allah bless him and grant him peace- adopted Zayd ibn Haritha. He thought of him as his son, … When

Allah the Exalted sent down in His Book what He sent down about Zayd ibn Haritha, 'Call them after their true

fathers. That is more equitable in the sight of Allah. If you do not know who their fathers were then they are your

brothers in the deen and your mawali,'(Sura 33 Ayah 5) people in this position were traced back to their fathers. When the

father was not known, they were traced to their mawla. Sahla bint Suhayl who was the wife of Abu Hudhaifa, and one of the

tribe of Amr ibn Luayy, came to the Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, and said,

'Messenger of Allah! We think of Salim as a son and he comes in to see me while I am uncovered. We only have one room, so

what do you think about the situation?' The Messenger of Allah, may Allah bless him and grant him peace, said, 'Give him five drinks

of your milk and he will be mahram by it.' She then saw him as a foster son.” (Muwatta of Malik, Hadith 1113)

This clarifies the whole thing. Salim was adopted by Hudhaifa and both he and his wife considered Salim as their son. His case was

very much like Zaid bin Harith except that the wife of the Prophet –may Allah bless him, Khadijah –may Allah be pleased with her- in

whose presence Zaid was adopted had died long before the revelation of Surah Ahzab (which includes instructions on veil). And

further that Zaid’s lineage was known but that of Salim was not (Tabaqat al-Kubra 3/87)

Now when Surah Ahzab was revealed, two issues came up. Verse 5 ordered the adopted sons to be known with reference to their

own biological fathers and in case it was unknown they were to be considered brothers in faith and “mawali.” And in verse 59 were

revealed the instructions on Hijab for women.

In light of the instruction in verse 5, Salim was referred to as “Mawla Abu Hudhaifa” and that is the reason everywhere we find his

mention like this only. And the verse on Hijab brought the other issue of him visiting Sahla, so to say his adoptive mother. Sahla –

may Allah be pleased with her- brought the case to the Holy Prophet –may Allah bless him- and he considering the fact Salim was to

Sahla like her own son, he told them a way out of the situation.

However, now that rulings about adoption and Hijab are already in place, such a practice cannot be repeated. If the adopted one is

an infant and can be fostered before he reaches his second birthday, then he will become a foster child without involving any

controversy. And if he is older, then right from the start Hijab factor must be considered in the light of the general injunctions and

etiquettes of Islamic Law and civilization.

Abu Hudhaifa’s disgust:

The Hadith narrations say, Abu Hudhaifa was disgusted (Muslim, 2638) with Salim visiting Sahla –may Allah be pleased with them

all- like before. This happened as Salim reached puberty (Muslim, 2636) and verses of Surah Ahzab were revealed (Muwatta, 1113).

But Muwatta’s narration also says they considered him as their son. So apparently the disgust on Abu Hudhaifa’s face was due to

something basically unlawful happening and not due to any other concern. And that is why when practically an out of way solution

was suggested and put into practice the disgust on his face disappeared. It also hints that there was no physical contact for Abu

Hudhaifa who had disliked Salim visiting Sahla would have not been satisfied had there been a direct physical contact during

feeding. And of course it is wrong to suggest that Prophet –may Allah bless him- would have allowed physical contact. He prescribed

the out of way solution because on the emotional level the relation between Salim and Sahla –may Allah be pleased with them both-

was indeed pure and innocent as testified by Sahla (Muwatta, 1113) and because of the adoption to have taken place during the

transitionary period they were given a special consideration and an exception.

Summary and Conclusion:

Salim, the freed-slave of Abu Hudhaifa –may Allah be pleased with them both- was an adopted son of Abu Hudhaifa. Both Abu

Hudhaifa and his wife, Sahla treated Salim like their son. And Salim used to walk up to his adoptive mother and when instruction on

Hijab was revealed Abu Hudhaifa felt bad about Salim coming to Sahla when she was not observing full Hijab at home. So the

Prophet –may Allah bless him- gave them a special relaxation considering the details of their case. And when they actually followed

the instruction, there was no physical contact. The milk was drawn in a cup and Salim drank it.

And but now when all the instructions on adoption and Hijab are well in place, such a relaxation cannot be sought. This is the well

established opinion of all but one of the Companions, the four established schools of Islamic jurisprudence and nearly all of the top

scholars from the earliest generations.

Indeed Allah knows the best!

[1] Status of al-Waqidi’s narrations

Muhammad bin ‘Umar al-Waqidi (d. 207 A.H.) is one of the few narrators on whose reliability classical Muslim scholars had much

difference of opinion. While he has been criticized by many, there are others who have graded him as reliable. On one hand some

have called him a liar; on the other hand some have greatly admired him. Al-Darawurdi even went to extent of calling him “Leader

of the Faithful in Hadith” (See Tahzib al-Kamal and Sayr Alam al-Nubala)

This leaves students like us in a very difficult position to decide about him. However some later classical scholars like Ibn Hajr, al-

Dhahbi and Ibn Kathir have considered all the earlier opinions carefully and made a reasonable trade-off between the varying

opinions without going to either extreme. Here I quote a few sayings from them.

Al-Dhahbi (d. 748 A.H.) writes: “He collected, hoarded and mixed the butter with the fats and pebbles with the pearls, so

they have ignored him for this reason but in spite of this,he cannot be ruled out in the narrations on "Maghazi" (i.e.

wars) and the lives of the Companions and reports about them.” (Sayr A’lam al-Nubala 9/454-455)

Ibn Hajr  (d. 852 A.H.) said: “And al-Waqidi, when he does not contradict the authentic reports or the others from the

narrators of “maghazi” (i.e. wars), is acceptable in “Maghazi to our fellows. And Allah knows best!” (Talkhis al-Habir

3/324)

And before him Ibn Kathir (d. 774 A.H.) said: “al-Waqidi, he has reliable additions, and well document history. He is from

the great leaders of this field. And he is trustworthy in himself, excessively reporting as I have deliberated at length

about his reliability and criticism on him in my book titled ‘al-Takmil fi Ma’rifah al-Thiqat wal Dhu’afa wal

Majahil.’” (al-Bidayah wal Nihayah 3/288)

Unfortunately the book he mentioned is not readily available, in fact has not been published yet. I have learnt about its manuscript

version. In-sha-Allah I’ll try to dig it out and share the details about al-Waqidi from it.

All these quotes put together conveniently lead us to conclude that narrations from al-Waqidi are acceptable if they do not

contradict absolutely authentic reports and if they are about the times of Sahaba and especially if they only add small little

information to independently known facts. This is well known to those who have studied the works of Hafiz Ibn Hajr.

And as the above stated conditions are all true for the report under consideration, therefore there is no problem in accepting the

narration as reliable. And Allah knows the best!

Hadith about Israelites changed into rats explainedIslamophobes and Hadith rejecting cultists use a particular narration to malign Islam and to put to doubt the entire Hadith treasure

respectively.

The narration:

Narrated Abu Huraira: The Prophet said, "A group of Israelites were lost. Nobody knows what they did. But I do not

see them except that they were cursed and changed into rats, for if you put the milk of a she-camel in front of a rat,

it will not drink it, but if the milk of a sheep is put in front of it, it will drink it." I told this to Ka'b who asked me, "Did

you hear it from the Prophet ?" I said, "Yes." Ka'b asked me the same question several times.; I said to Ka'b. "Do I

read the Torah? (i.e. I tell you this from the Prophet) (Sahih Bukhari, Hadith 3060)

Reality of the matter:

Commenting on the Hadith from Sahih Bukhari Hafiz Ibn Hajr wrote:

“And majority has responded to this saying that the Prophet –may Allah bless him- said this before the revelation

came to him about the reality of this matter. And for this reason there is no dogmatic assertion from him on this, but

it is there in the denial of this as found in Ibn Mas’ud’s narration.” (Fath al-Bari 11/166)

Towards the end of a long Hadith reported by Ibn Masu’d –may Allah be pleased with them both- we read that the Holy Prophet –

may Allah bless him- said: “Verily, Allah did not cause the race of those which suffered metamorphosis to grow or they

were not survived by young ones …” (Sahih Muslim, Hadith 4815)

The Missionary haters of Islam will never share this Hadith in its due perspective while discussing this topic.

The case of the Hadith from Sahih Bukhari is very much like the case of narrations about the event of fecundation of palm-trees and

the one about al-Ghila. The Prophet –may Allah bless him- said the thing about rats based on his observation that rats did not drink

milk of a she-camel as Jews did not deem it lawful for them. So it was just his guess based on an observation as clear even from the

tone of the narration.

It’s not the question of contradiction even. We must remember what the Messenger of Allah –may Allah bless him- said:

“So, do not cling to me in my guess. But when I tell you something on behalf of Allah, take it firm, because I shall

never tell a lie on behalf of Allah.” (Sahih Muslim, Hadith 4356)

A clarification:

One may however try to contrast the above with the following verses of the Holy Qur’an:

“Nor does he speak out of desire. It is naught but revelation that is revealed,” (53: 3-4)

“The verses tell us that it is absolutely impossible for the Messenger –may Allah bless him- to forge lies and impute them to Allah.

Nothing he utters is of his own wish or desire. He only conveys to the people what he was commanded to convey, in its entirety,

without additions or deletions.”

Along with the kinds of revelation –i.e. the one included in Qur’an and the one which is not- at times the Prophet –may Allah bless

him- made ijtihad (i.e. personal analogy etc.)

“In this there does exist the possibility of mistake of judgment. But it is the characteristic of the Messenger –may Allah bless him-

and other Prophets –may Allah bless them all- that if they commit any error of judgment, Allah sends down a revelation to amend it,

so that they do not unwittingly persist in their erroneous conclusions.” (Shaykh Mufti Muhammad Shafi’, Ma’arif al-Qur’an, English

Translation vol.8 p.202)

For a relatively detailed discussion on Ijtihad of the Holy Prophet –may Allah bless him- see Dr. Muhammad al-Saduqi’s work al-Imam

Muhammad bin Hassan al-Shaybani wa Athruhu fil Fiqh al-Islami, Darul Thaqafah, Doha, 1987 pp. 16-20 (Online Source)

Indeed Allah knows the best!

Hadith about food of Israelites and Eve’s betrayalMany people have trouble understanding the following Hadith:

Narrated Abu Huraira: The Prophet said, "Were it not for Bani Israel, meat would not decay; and were it not for Eve, no

woman would ever betray her husband." (Sahih Bukhari, Hadith 3083)

Infact the same Hadith is found in Sahih Muslim (Hadith, 2674) too. In his commentary to Sahih Muslim, Shaykh Muhammad Taqi

Usmani explains this.

“Were it not for Bani Israel, meat would not decay”:

Explaining this phrase he writes;

“It means that People of Israel were the first to keep food and meat until it would go bad and get rotten and if it was

not for the People of Israel who started this habit, people would not have kept food for so long till it goes bad. This is

how al-Abi[1] and al-Hafiz[2] explained it in al-Fath[3]. However; it does not mean that for the people before the

People of Israel food and meat never rotted even if they saved it. But the meaning in fact is that the habit of saving

the food was not common before them. For the people used to eat and feed others and nothing decayed till the

People of Israel came, and they kept saving it till it would get rotten.”

So the meaning actually is that these were the people of Israel who started the general practice of hoarding surplus food with them

which used to rot and get wasted. Before them generally the people used to collect food only for their own selves. And when they

had surplus they would share it with other people (either through charity or trade). So they were actually the people who started the

general practice that lead to wasting of food.

And he then quotes the report telling us when it so happened;

“al-Aini[4] narrated from Qatadah: "the Mann and Salwa used to fall upon the People of Israel, from dawn to the

sunrise, like the ice falls. So they would take from it just enough for the day except Friday, when they had to gather

for it and the next day (Saturday). But if they exceeded (their need), it used to get spoiled. So their saving used to

cause a food waste for them and others." (Takmilah Fath al-Mulhim, Darul Ahya al-Turath al-‘Arabi Beirut 2006 vol.1 p.140)

“Were it not for Eve, no woman would ever betray her husband”:

Shaykh Taqi Usmani writes:

“al-Hafiz (Ibn Hajr) said: It has a reference to what Eve did when she tried to seduce Adam to eat from the tree until

he actually did. And since she was the mother of the daughters of Adam (all females), they in turn resembled her by

birth and genes, that you can hardly find a woman that had not betrayed her husband in one shape or form.And here

betrayal does not mean infidelity. Far be it! It rather refers here to the incident where Eve inclined to the desire of

eating from the tree and she beautified that to Adam, it was counted as a kind of betrayal for him. But for all women

who came after her, their kinds of betrayals varied in levels and forms. And what is similar to that Hadith is the

Hadith that says "And Adam denied, so his descendants denied.[5]"

And in this Hadith a consolation for those men - who have been afflicted by some actions of their women - through

the mention of what had happened from their great grandmother, affirming that this is one of their natural traits. So

the man shouldn't excessively blame the woman who unintentionally or occasionally errs or wrongs him. And for the

woman not to dwell in such a manner but to discipline herself and fight her desires. It is so in Fath al-Bari.” (Takmilah

Fath al-Mulhim, vol.1 pp.139-140)

Here I must elucidate on certain points to avoid confusion.

Does this Hadith imply the blame rests on Eve alone?

Not really, because the sin was committed by both and Islam holds that both of them were basically seduced by the Devil. In fact,

Islamic sources explicitly state that Devil seduced them both. In Qur’an 20: 120 it is mentioned that the Devil seduced Adam –may

Allah bless him. This Hadith suggests Devil first spoke to Eve –may Allah bless her- and Qur’an (7:20) plainly says that Devil seduced

them both. So, clearly the Islamic standpoint is that both of them made the mistake. The betrayal referred to in this particular

Hadith is about Eve speaking to Adam –may Allah bless them both- about the forbidden tree. Eve having been deceived spoke to

Adam but Devil himself also seduced Adam as clear from Qur’an 20: 120.

Why specifically mention of Eve here?

As clear from Qur’anic references cited above Devil seduced both Adam and Eve and as Qur’an says they both prayed to Allah for

forgiveness after the whole thing took place. See Qur’an 7: 22-23.

However the stress about Eve here is to instruct the man not to over react when a woman makes a mistake for the same was done

by his own great grandmother. This is just natural for her. See the explanation of Hafiz Ibn Hajr quoted above.

Is it about Original Sin?

Next question is if the Hadith supports the Christian doctrine of original sin?

It does not because in Islam the issue of falling from heavens was a specific incident related to two individuals and their progeny is

not to bear the brunt for it. The idea is simply that capacity to err and sin is in the genes of humankind. Man and woman have the

innate weakness and characteristics as such which were made evident in the lives of the first humans. Qur’an refers to this fact

often;

“And man is created weak.” (4: 28)

“Surely man is created of a hasty temperament.” (70: 19)

“Truly man is, to his Lord, ungrateful; And to that (fact) he bears witness (by his deeds);” (100: 6-7)

And a Hadith substantiates it and kills the notion of Original Sin and deliverance from it through vicarious atonement;

The Prophet –may Allah bless him- said, “Every son of Adam commits sin but the best of those who sin are those who

repent.” (Jami’ Tirmidhi, Hadith 2499. Classified as Hasan by Albani)

Certainly the idea of mankind as being sinful in nature, and that of a person being held responsible for the sins of his ancestors, are

not even remotely related. Also the fact that it is mentioned along with the issue about the People of Israel, leads us to maintain

that it is not a concept related to Christian dogma of original sin.

LET ME TURN THE TABLES

Usually some missionary haters of Islam use this narration to attack Islam, so let’s show them the mirror.

Bible asserts that only Eve was deceived and she herself gave the forbidden fruit to Adam.

“And when the woman saw that the tree was good for food, and that it was pleasant to the eyes, and a tree to be

desired to make one wise, she took of the fruit thereof, and did eat, and gave also unto her husband with her; and he

did eat.” (Genesis 3: 5-7)

This is certainly different from Qur’an which says that both of them were deceived and Qur’an makes a special reference to Devil

seducing Adam. Even the Hadith is not saying what the Bible says because taking it along the Qur’anic references to the story it

becomes apparent that while she did speak to Adam about eating the forbidden fruit after being deceived, Adam was seduced by

Devil himself.

According to Qur’an they both erred and then together sought Allah’s forgiveness whereas Bible is too dogmatic to assert to the

contrary when it says;

“And Adam was not deceived, but the woman being deceived was in the transgression.”(1-Timothy 2: 14)

As to the specific reference to Eve’s fault in the Hadith under consideration, let me reiterate that it was for a special reason to

instruct men in their behavior towards women and we find that another Hadith specifically mentioning Adam to have erred.

And Bible even says that pain during child birth and man ruling over her was a punishment for Eve for what she did. (See Genesis

3:16)

All this highlights the difference between Islamic and Christian approach.

To summarize: In Islam both Adam and Eve erred and were equally responsible (Qur’an 7: 20) Adam was personally seduced by

the Devil (Qur’an 20:120) whereas Bible maintains only Eve was deceived by the Devil and she made Adam to eat the forbidden

fruit (Genesis 3:6) While Qur’an hold both of them responsible Bible categorically vindicates Adam and puts the blame on Eve (1-

Timothy 2:14) Islam highlights their mistakes to show that it is only natural for humans to err Bible goes on to hold the subsequent

generations responsible for the sin actually committed by their great grandparents (1-Corinthians 15:22)

Note: Translation of Hadith’s commentary  from Takmilah Fath al-Mulhim by sister Rabbaniya from Cairo, Egypt

Indeed Allah knows the best!

[1] Abu Abdullah Muhammad al-Washtani al-Abi al-Maliki (d. 828 A.H.) For the referred passage see his work Ikmal Ikmal al-Muallim

4/101

[2] Ahmad bin ‘Ali Ibn Hajr al-Asqalanai al-Shafi’ (d. 852 A.H.)

[3] Fath al-Bari 10/110

[4] Abu Muhammad Mahmud bin Ahmad Badruddin al-‘Ayni al-Hanafi (d. 855 A.H.). For the quote given see his ‘Umdatul Qari 15/211

[5] Abu Huraira reported that Allah’s Messenger- may Allah bless him- said: "When Allah created Adam, He wiped his back and every

soul of his offspring He was to create up to the Day of Resurrection dropped from his back. He made between the eyes of everyone

of them a flash of light and presented them to Adam who asked, “O Lord, who are they?” He said, “These are your offspring.” He

observed a man among them and was impressed by the light between his eyes and asked, “O Lord, who is he?” He said, “He is a

man among the last of the communities of your offspring who is called Dawud.” He asked, “Lord, how long a life have You given

him.” He said, “Sixty years.” Adam said, ‘O Lord, add to it forty years from my life.” When Adam’s span of life came to an end, the

angel of death came to him, and he asked, “Do not another forty years still remain in my life span?” He replied, “Have you not given

them to your son, Dawud?” But, Adam denied and his offspring denied (like him), and Adam forgot and likewise his

offspring forgot, and Adam erred, so his offspring also erred." (Jami’ Tirmidhi, Hadith 3076. Classified as Hasan by Albani)

Understanding Hadith narrations on Evil EyeMany people have a lot of problems, reservations and queries about the Evil-Eye phenomenon recognized in Islam. Some say it is an

outright superstition of the old and many others simply doubt anything like this having an effect on another being. Frankly, until

recently I also had no clue about what all this may be. But I searched and in this episode I share the same.

I shall try to deal with the well known Hadith narrations on the topic saying briefly about each of them.

Evil-Eye is a fact:

The Messenger of Allah -may Allah bless him- said: “The influence of an evil eye is a fact.”(Sahih Bukhari, Hadith 5299)

The same Hadith is found in many other narrations. So undoubtedly the idea and influence of evil eye is recognized as a fact in

Islam.

On the nature of evil eye:

This is the actual question I tend to draw the readers’ attention to. Firstly I give as to what a celebrated classical Muslim scholar

commented on it and then we turn to some modern findings.

Classical Muslim exegesis:

Hafiz Ibn Hajr (d. 1448 C.E.) wrote the following in his commentary to the Hadith in Sahih Bukhari;

“Some people raised an objection/query on this and said: How does the evil eye affect someone from a far distance

to the extent of causing harm? The response to it is that the nature of people is different. So to say, the evil eye doer

possesses this ‘poison’ of evil eye that will flow in the air and eventually hit the body of the one on whom it acts

upon. One of those who affect with evil-eye once said, “Whenever I saw something that I liked, I would immediately

feel a fire surge in my eyes.” …. In his commentary Al Khattabi said, “It was mentioned in the prophetic tradition that

the “evil eye” negatively affects oneself. This negates the naturalists’ claim that there is nothing but what the five

senses observe, and that everything else is unreal. Al-Mazzari commented on this saying: some naturalists say that

the evil eye doer emits harmful radiation from his eyes that hit the body of one who is target of the evil eye inflicting

his body with harm similar to the sight of the snakes that have poison on their tongue tip.” (Fath al-Bari 16/264)

Modern research and its prospects:

Now considering the above, is it actually possible that what those men from the medieval era said in line with their belief in the

words of the Prophet –may Allah bless him- turns out to be true? Western scientists generally respond in negative. However a

certain researcher Dr. Colin A. Rosspublished a paper with a hypothesis hinting at the “Electrophysiological basis of the Evil Eye

beliefs.” The paper was published in Anthropology of Consciousness vol. 21 Issue 1 pp.47-57 March 2010.

His basic contention in the paper is that “Evil eye beliefs must be validated if there is to be electrophysiological support

for the extramission theory of vision.” (p.49) He then gives the findings of his experiment in support of the extramission theory

of vision (p.52). Without going into any details, let me quote the conclusion in his words.

“In terms of the anthropological study of evil eye beliefs, then, there is now a testable scientific hypothesis about

the electrophysiological basis of evil eye beliefs, because there is a detectable electromagnetic signal emerging from

the eyes.” (p.53)

He then answers several possible objections to his hypothesis. Suggesting lines for further research in this field he writes;

“… members of some cultures have lower average thresholds for the sense of being stared at than members of other

cultures, which could in part be a function of local variations in the earth’s geomagnetic field, or, in the modern

world, the amount of ambient electromagnetic pollution in the area. The decay of evil eye beliefs when people

emigrate to an urban Western culture might in part be due to the signal for extramission sinking below threshold in

the electromagnetically polluted environment of a big city.” (p.54)

In short, the hypothesis of Mr. C. A. Ross at least readily shakes the notion of outright rejection of the evil-eye phenomenon or

calling it a mere superstition. I am confident with further research into this field and on the lines suggested by the author of the

above mentioned paper, humanity can come to a more profound understanding of the concept, not only widely recognized in

various cultures but also supported by the sayings of the most truthful person ever to have walked this Earth –Muhammad, on whom

be the peace and blessings of Almighty Allah.

Other Hadith narrations on evil-eye:

Now let me briefly touch upon a couple of other reports from the Prophetic tradition about evil eye thing.

The Messenger of Allah –may Allah bless him- said: "The influence of an evil eye is a fact; if anything would precede the

destiny, it would be the influence of an evil eye …" (Sahih Muslim, Hadith 4058)

In this narration only the validity of evil eye phenomenon is stressed. Hafiz Ibn Hajr writes about it;

“The Hadith is by the way of exaggeration to uphold the evil eye phenomenon. Not that anything can (actually)

precede destiny for predestination refers to the prior knowledge of Allah and not to His will … To sum up, if it is

assumed that something can precede destiny it is evil-eye. But it does not, then how can anything else precede

it?” (Fath al-Bari 16/268)

In another narration ‘Aisha –may Allah be pleased with her- reported: “The person with the evil-eye is ordered to

perform wudu (ablution), and the man affected by the evil eye is washed with that water.” (Sunan Abu Dawud, Hadith

3880. Classified as Sahih by Albani)

While discussing this kind of treatment, Ibn Hajr writes;

“Ibn Al Qayyim said: This attitude does not avail the one who does not believe in it, or the one who suspects it,

ridicules it, denies it or the one who does (believe in) it without believing its effect. Insofar, nature bears many

unexplained phenomenon that doctors fail to prove, infact they believe that their reasoning is beyond perception and

they occur in special ways. So why then they do not acknowledge these characteristics known through divine

authority? Treating this with bathing is not something that causes consternation with people of sound intellect, just

like using the antidote for the snake's poison taken from its body. It is like an outraged soul which becomes calm and

tranquil when patted. The impact of this evil eye is like a surge of fire that reaches a body. In bathing is the

treatment to this fire surge … water will exhaust this surge of fire and its impact will be annulled.” (Fath al-Bari 16/268)

So the treatment suggested in the above mentioned narration is akin to the idea of vaccination (akin in the sense of fighting the

disease through its own source). But remember the whole phenomenon is from the extra-sensory realm. And as yet science needs

to make a lot of progress to completely fathom ideas of this nature.

Indeed Allah knows the best!

Hadith, ‘Ajwa Dates and ScienceOther day a person, seemingly a Christian polemicist left me an email, challenging me on something which he thought was really a

big deal. He quoted the following Hadith:

Narrated Sa’d: The Prophet said, "If somebody takes some 'Ajwa dates every morning, he will not be effected by

poison or magic on that day till night." (Another narrator said seven dates). (Sahih Bukhari)

And then hurled the challenge;

are you today ready to take this simple challenge and eat 7 Ajwa dates and then drink poison and survive ?

The response:

The unfortunate fact is that most people in our time think that just reading any translation of Hadith texts, they can lay hands upon,

is quite enough to have a full grasp of it and they find themselves worthy enough to comment. The practice might have had some

justification if Hadith -or for that matter any classical Islamic text- was in some dead language hardly known to even the followers of

the religion as it happened with Judaism and Christianity.

A basic principle in studying any historical narration is to understand the environment and context in which it originated. While it

may not be possible to find details as to when and why was some particular words were uttered, another reasonable way is to see

the complementing narrations before looking to reach a conclusion.

Sa’d told of hearing Allah’s Messenger say, “He who has a morning meal of seven ‘ajwa dates will not suffer harm that day

through toxins or magic.” (Bukhari, Hadith 5327 and Muslim, Hadith 3814)

‘Aisha reported Allah’s Messenger as saying, “The ‘ajwah dates of al-‘Aliya contain healing, and they are an antidote

(when taken as) first thing in the morning.” (Muslim, Hadith 3815)

‘Aisha reported Allah’s Messenger as saying, “The ‘ajwah dates of al-‘Aliya taken as the first thing in the morning, in the

state of fasting; contain healing for all (kinds of) magic or toxins.” (Musnad Ahmad, Hadith 23592)

Al-‘Aliya is the named applied to some villages a few miles east of Medina.

Narrated ‘Urwah: ‘Aisha used to order to make a habit of or taking in regular intervals seven ‘ajwah dates, in the state

of fasting for seven mornings. (Musannaf Ibn Abi Shayba, Hadith 23945)

Now considering all these narrations it becomes clear that the benefits mentioned are for link to certain specifics.

1- It is about 'Ajwa dates from al-Aliya, a particular locality near al-Medina

2- The benefit is for eating them early in the morning breaking the night fast with it

3- It is for the one who eats them regularly as Aisha (RA) used to instruct people. Her instruction matters for she is one of the

narrators of the Hadith in question.

Now let me explain a few things:

"The Poison/Toxin": The word actually used is "summ" which means, poison or toxin. The problem is some people think it is about

instantly killing poisonous stuff. However the fact mention in Hadith that it benefits when taken as the first thing early in the

morning and on regular basis itself establishes that it is about toxins, which are indeed poisonous and harmful to the body. Also see

the following evidence.

Al-Mawarid Arabic-English Dictionary Dar el-Elm Lilmalayin, Beirut 1995 p.642

Ibn Qayyim in his Tibb al-Nabawi writes: "For the people of al-Medina, dried dates are their staple like wheat is to other

people. In addition, dried dates from the area of al-Aliyah in al-Medina are one of the best kinds of dates ... Dates are

a type of fruit that is also used for its nutritional and medicinal value, being favorable for most bodies and for their

role in strengthening the natural heat. Moreover, dates do not produce harmful wastes or excrement like other types

of food and fruits. Rather, dates preserve the body wastes from being spoiled and from rotting, especially for those

who are used to eating dried dates." (Healing with the Medicine of the Prophet, Translated by Abd el-Qader bin Abd el-Azeez,

Dar al-Ghadd al-Gadeed, al-Mansoura (Egypt), 2003 p.121)

Here are a couple of more narrations,

Narrated Sa'd: I suffered from an illness. The Messenger of Allah –may Allah bless him- came to pay a visit to me. He put his hands

on my chest and I felt its coolness at my heart. He said: “You are a man suffering from heart sickness. Go to al-Harith ibn

Kaladah, brother of Thaqif. He is a man who gives medical treatment. He should take seven ajwah dates of Medina

and grind them with their kernels, and then put them into your mouth.” (Sunan Abu DawudHadith 3875)

It is reported, though through a weak chain, that ‘Ali –may Allah be pleased with him- said: “And whoever eats seven ‘ajwa

dates every day it kills every disease in the stomach.” (Kanzul Ummal, Hadith 28472)

These show that they have healing effect against heart ailment and problems of the stomach.

And we have scientific evidence that dates protect arteries and lower the risks of heart attack. Cholesterol that causes many heart

problems itself is a toxin. Moreover some of the ingredients of the dates are protective against digestive system related problems,

e.g. dietary fiber helps eliminate human intestinal toxic substances, researchers suggest.

Magic: As to magic, there are two possibilities. If it is literally a reference to magic as it was and is known then we cannot actually

say much about it in the light of modern scientific research. Western science has, to the best of my knowledge, only skeptical

notions about it which do not have any real value. (We earlier discussed a similar case about the Evil-eye)

It may simply be a reference to some diseases caused by apparently unknown factors expressed this way especially taking into

account the times in which the statement was made.

The word "Sihr" is so called as "it changes health and soundness to disease" (see E.W. Lane's Lexicon Book I p.1316) and in that

sense it is simply a reference to the something causing ailment like the word used to imply toxin poison and is hinted to by the word

"or" used in many narrations. This might be a reference to certain radiations that adversely affect human body. And we know certain

of the ingredients of dates like Calcium, magnesium, Selenium, Zinc, Vitamin C etc. arehelpful against radiations.

Summary of the above:

The two things mentioned above are for dates in general and as clear from the Hadith reports the ‘ajwa dates from al-Aliya locality

of al-Medina are even more beneficial especially in that particular environment.

With regards to toxins there is no doubt the dates are indeed curative. As to magic more research is possible however whatever is

written above suffices to kill the skeptical notions about the Hadith. Those who doubt the Hadith have nothing to substantiate their

view. We at least have fair amount of support in favor of our thesis.

The Hadith narrations say, 'ajwa dates from al-Aliya taken regularly as first thing in the morning breaking the fast -in spells of 7

successive days- is a cure against toxins, just as they are helpful as a preventive cure against heart and stomach problems.

LET ME TURN THE TABLES!

While the explanation above is quite enough for any ardent and reasonable observer, for the hate mongers from amongst the

Christian missionaries I have a challenge on these lines. And the challenge is to drink the “any deadly thing” and stay unhurt. This is

what the Bible promises putting the words into the mouth of Jesus –may Allah bless him.

“They shall take up serpents; and if they drink any deadly thing, it shall not hurt them; they shall lay hands on the

sick, and they shall recover.” (KJV, Mark 16:18)

I always wonder how come missionary haters of Islam muster up the courage to talk about Islam. Don’t they ever turn back and

have a look at their own house?

Acknowledgement: I am indebted to the invaluable help offered by brother Azhan Ahmad in bringing up this article.

Indeed Allah knows the best!

Fever and Hell connection in the HadithAbdullah bin 'Umar said, the Prophet, may Allah bless him, said, 'Fever is from the heat of Hell. Put it out (cool it) with

water.' (Sahih Bukhari, Hadith 3024)

Some fellows ask as to what is the connection between fever and the hell. The Hadith itself does not say it explicitly.

General Meaning of the Hadith:

Certain scholars like Hafiz Ibn Hajr al-Asqalani and al-Manawi have said that the Hadith means, heat of fever is like the heat of hell

and it works as an admonition to the people against its torment.

Zainuddin Muhammad al-Manawi (d. 1031 A.H.) wrote:

“And it is in the likeness of hell fire in that it torments and afflicts the body. And its significance is in its being a

reflection and a shadow of the archetype from hell which is brought as evidence unto people (to be mindful of the life

hereafter). And they are asked to reflect on it just like joy and pleasures are brought to show the blessings of the

Paradise.” (Faidh al-Qadir fi Sharah Jami’ al-Saghir, 3/409 Hadith 3838)

This is the significance for everyone. However another Hadith narration highlights a meaning of this Hadith specifically relevant to

true believers.

Especially for the believers:

The Messenger of Allah –may Allah bless him- said: “Fever is from the bellows of the Hell. So whatever of it afflicts a

believer is his share from the hellfire.” (Musnad Ahmad, Hadith 22328. Authenticated by Shu’aib Arnaut)

One can understand this better if he reads it along with the following narration.

Umayyah asked Aisha –may Allah be pleased with them both- to explain the verses, “If you disclose what is in your

hearts or conceal it, Allah shall hold you accountable for it” (2: 284) and “Whoever does evil shall be requited for it”

(4: 123) Aisha said that no one had asked her about these verses since she had asked Allah’s Messenger –may Allah

bless him- about these. He said: “This is how Allah afflicts His slaves in difficulties, like fever or misfortune - even

loss of something that he places in his shirt pocket and grieves for it. Thus, the slave comes out of his sins just as

gold comes out the bellows.”(Jami’ al-Tirmidhi, Hadith 2991. Classified as Hasan by al-Tirmidhi)

Cooling with water:

The mention of cooling with water is to do away with the physical effect of fever only.

Conclusion:

In conclusion, the Hadith tells us that physical effect of fever is simply a reflection of the hellfire and the purpose is to warn people

against transgressing Allah’s commandments.

And for the true believers the significance is that it is a source of expiation of their sins so that when they meet their Lord on the

Day of Recompense they are pure, free from sins like pure gold free from all dross. And thus they will not be subjected to any

punishment in the hell.

Indeed Allah knows the best!