-
Hadith And The Sources Of Religion
Salam,
I understand that Ghamidi Sahib is of the view point that Ahadith are not the source of Islam. They are merely a historical record.
My question is:
When somebody is living in South Asia ex india Pakistan etc, there are many biddat added into our islamic intrepetation.
For example, giving azan in the ear of new born or giving niyaaz on specific days or celebrating the birth of prophet.
These events are potrayed as a religious thing which has to be done rather than a cultural thing.So for any common man, to either refute or accept these things, that person would have to go books of ahadith, that person would have to read the lives of prophet to know whether these biddat actually happened or not.
So in such a case, the ahadith or the historic record, kind of becomes a source of religion.
Correct me if I am wrong here, Islam is a combination of things. 1 is belief and 2nd is the practise. The true practise will only come after knowing the true practise of prophet himself or his sahabas.Do we only take the ahadith which tell the practise of prophet (like when he is offering namaz, or doing something) and take only those ahadith as the source of religion as they are showing the sunnah, or we take the whole record of ahadith as the source of religion(which include his practise, his words, his commands)?
So how does one reconcile with this? Please enlighten
-
4 Replies
-
Hadith And The Sources Of Religion
updated 2 weeks, 4 days ago
3 Members
·
4
Replies
-
Bidaat can be verified by seeing the facts that they are local, other Muslims communities in other parts of the world do not know of them.
Ahadith in this regard are presented as a supportive argument.
Ahadith are a precious knowledge of Ans about the holy prophet. The part which tells about that rituals that how the project performed the rituals shows the best ways to do it. That is called uswa hasanah of the prophet, ijtihad in a given situation etc.
The rest is the history of the prophet. His seerah etc.
-
Okay so, this is what I understand from your explanation and my prior knowledge.
There are 3 types of ahadith: Hadees e Qauli, Hadees e Faili and Hadees e Taqreri.
The sayings of the Prophet – Sunnah Qawliyyah/Hadith.
The actions of the Prophet – Sunnah Al Filiyya.
Sunnah Taqrīriyyah, practices prevailing at the time of the Prophet which he did not oppose or prohibit.
Reference to above: https://guides.law.columbia.edu/c.php?g=1221841&p=9280464
The actions of prophet are to be divided into two parts: Religious and Personal.
All the religious actions are to be followed regardless as they are the SUNNAH. All the personal actions are personal, one can adopt or refuse depending upon his likeness or wishes. It is better to adopt.The Sunnah Taqririyah are those actions which happened in front of him and he didnot say a word regarding them. One time I listened to a lecture of Ghamidi Sahib, in which he explained an event in Madinah. He told, that Hazrat hamza was in a gathering in which he was drinking and there were women/ or there was a women who was dancing and there was music. Hazrat Ali came and tried to stop this in which Hazrat hamza murdered the she camel of Hazrat ali.
Prophet came later and he objected on all the actions that happened there, except for the objection on the music.
I dont remember the video, else I would have posted that too. Please correct me if i am wrong.
Such events maybe too classified into religious actions or personal.The Hadees e Qawli are the sayings of prophet. Just as for example, grow your beards and shorten your moustache.
Now, that is where my dispute lies. How does one identify that these particular hadees qawli is just a time being command from the leader of the muslims at that time, or it is a command for all the muslim generations to come?
There are alot of hadith that confuse me and they usually fall into the category of this hadees e qawlii.
How does one reconcile with this? Maybe prophet gave such commands and allah actually wanted those to implemented as the religion but as we progressed, the history was lost? How does one come to a final conclusion? -
You may need to learn the subject with some deliberation. Spend some time with it to understand the difference between Sunnah and Hadith, the principle of Deen which helps us determine the status of a hadith whether it belongs to religion or a cultural or personal thing.
Read Ghamidid saheb’s book Meezan, the chapters on the Quran, Sunnah, and Hadith, and their relevant lectures. and also his detailed series on Sunnah and Hadith.
-
@Saim: Please allow me to correct you when you said “that person would have to read the lives of prophet to know whether these biddat actually happened or not” ..No, that person will have to read the Qur’an to know whether something is biddat/shirk/sin or not.
It’s like a Christian cannot keep validating verses of their (forged) Bible with Bible itself. We need to get out of the loop and start to validate everything with the Qur’an.
As for Hadiths, as Dr. Irfan said, try to understand the difference between Sunnah and Hadiths.. I understand there’s a vast overlap, but that overlap doesn’t make Hadith the source.
For example: Had there been zero hadiths compiled and passed down as books, (imagine no written hadith books), do you think we Muslims would have gone astray? No, we Muslims would still be practicing Islam based on the Sunnah, the living Sunnah passed down through generations uninterrupted. We Muslims would still be 100% obeying the Messenger by following his message (the Qur’an) and the method (the Sunnah).
Hadiths are historical records, a work of humans, that a common man doesn’t need to dive into, at all.
We need to learn to follow Islam how (for example) Tabiyeen and Taba’tabyeen did. They didn’t follow/rely on written hadiths, they followed Sunnah. Imam Malik even refused to follow authentic Hadiths which contradicted with the living Sunnah they were practicing in Madinah. Sunnah is what we must focus on. And Sunnah is not derived from Hadiths.
JazakAllah khair.
Sponsor Ask Ghamidi
