The Ahadith; Do Shia Deny Prophetic Sayings?

The Ahadith; Do Shia Deny Prophetic Sayings? Technically, the Hadith are traditions attributed to the sayings and deeds of Prophet Muhammad (SAW). No doubt that the sayings of Prophet (SAW) is important and Quran cannot be understood without the explanations, teachings and practices of Prophet Muhammad (SAW). For if Quran alone was sufficient, as some people claim, then there was no need for a Prophet to come and explain the true meaning of Islam. And if Quran alone is self explanatory, then why do not i see only one sect in Islam, why does every sect in Islam have its own interpretation of Islamic Issues, all derived from the same Quran? Thus the sayings and actions of Prophet Muhammad (SAW) are as important in Islam as the Quran is, because the Quran was also a revelation, and so was the Prophetic actions. I swear by the star when it goes down. Your companion does not err, nor does he (Muhammad) go astray; Nor does he speak out of desire. It is naught but revelation that is revealed, The Lord of Mighty Power has taught him Quran [53:1-5] Shias do not refute the Ahadith of Prophet Muhammad (SAW). As i said earlier, they are very compulsory in understanding Islam. The only issue with Hadith is, if it was really said by Prophet Muhammad (SAW) or is it a false attribution to him. Which hadith should be acceptable and which should be not is a controversial issue. To me, any hadith is fake which goes against; Quran History Logic Quran will remain the ultimate criterion. Its authenticity can never be doubted. Thus any Hadith which goes against the Quran should be discarded. Similarly, there is a big difference between Hadith and History. You may ask why i give more weightage to history than to Hadith. There is a very strong, but simple reason for it. I tell my brother my views about the first world war. He was alone with me when i told him about it. You must note in mind that there were no tape recorders back then, and my brother cannot reproduce the exact thing most of the time. Secondly, if my brother is a known liar and people doubt his character, then what ever my brother says will come into scrutiny. Thirdly, if my brother hates someone, then my sayings regarding that person narrated by my brother will come under suspicion because his natural bias and hatred towards that someone might alter the meaning or wordings of my saying. To conclude it, my hadith narrated within four walls will only be witnessed by the minimum number of people and it's narration will depend on the nature, character, biases and memory of the narrator. As far as history is concerned, there will never be any doubts regarding it's occurrence. Me and my brother had a fight in a busy market place. There were hundreds of witnesses, the police arrives at the spot etc. No one can doubt if this "historical" event occurred or not. The only difference, if any, will be the difference in people's analysis of the event. Some will reason for me and declare me on the right in my fight, while some will side by my brother's stand. Thus the occurrence of a historical event will be more reliable than the narration of a hadith by a person. If any hadith goes against a historical event, then i will discard that hadith. Similarly, Logic is important. We are Muslims because maybe we were born in Muslim families, and we have a tendency to accept things as they come. What if we were not born in Muslim families? Then Quran would mean nothing to us. Every person has check of right and wrong within him, Logic. It is just a matter of using it and the sincerity with which you use it. Obviously, as Muslims, we should surrender our Logic when it comes to the Quran, but forgery of Ahadith is a possibility. Any Hadith which doesn't satisfy our logical thirst should be discarded. Every mature mind has created an Image of Prophet Muhammad (SAW) in their mind. This image relies on Quran and our logic, our understanding of religion. Everyone has an image of the Prophet (SAW) in his mind, some have reasons to have it while some create it just for the sake of it. For example, i Believe that Prophet (SAW) was the noble messenger of Allah. He was merciful, noble and just. He was sin-free, error-free and infallible. He was brave and had an exalted character. Every action done by him (SAW) was in accordance to the commands and guidance of Allah. Read Muhammad (SAW) Of The Quran to know more about what i believe and why do i do so. 1

Narrated Jabir bin 'Abdullah: While Allah's Apostle was carrying stones (along) with the people of Mecca for (the building of) the Ka'ba wearing an Izar (waist-sheet cover), his uncle Al-'Abbas said to him, "O my nephew! (It would be better) if you take off your Izar and put it over your shoulders underneath the stones." So he took off his Izar and put it over his shoulders, but he fell unconscious and since then he had never been seen naked. Sahih Bukhari, Volume 1, Book 8, Hadith 360 I consider such hadith to be an insult to the Prophet (SAW) himself, for no sane man would take off his trousers infront of people, no matter how tired he is. Thus any hadith, which nullifies the image of Prophet (SAW) or his Ahlulbayt i have in my thoughts, will not be taken into account. However, creating such images, based on argumentative ahadith only, can be damaging and error-prone at times. For example, if i believe that Person X is infallible and loving person X is a part of faith, and this belief is due to certain ahadith narrated in any book, and Person X was known to be historically a cruel person, I will begin to have my doubts. Sunnis claim that as shias dislike and disrespect certain sahabas, they deny hundreds of ahadith which are in praise of them. Uqbah ibn Amir reports: The Prophet, may Allah bless him and his family and grant them peace, said, 'If there were to be a prophet after me it would be 'Umar ibn al-khattab The History of the Khalifahs by Jalal ad-din as-suyuti You should note that this hadith doesn't satisfy my logical thirst and also doesn't coordinate well with history. I believe that a Prophet is a born prophet and is masoom since his birth. Umar was an idol worshipper before he accepted Islam and used to drink alcohol. Is this how Prophets are suppose to act before being bestowed with Prophethood or announcing their Prophethood? Similarly, if Prophet Muhammad (SAW) is the last Prophet, there is no point in talking about future or would-be Prophets. Sunnis criticize shias to raise the merits of Ali ibn AbuTalib to awful heights, then should i call this hadith a blasphemy in itself, which i consider an abuse to the office of prophethood itself? You must also note that according to Sunnis, Umer innovated many things, doubted the Prophethood of Prophet (SAW) at hudabya, was a culprit in the pen and paper incident, ran away at Uhud and Hunain and was an accomplice with Abubakr against Hz Fatima (AS) at Fadak. These historical facts force me to think if the Prophet, an infallible and who speaks only what is revealed to him by an omnipotent God, can really say this hadith. Narrated Abu Qatada: When it was the day of (the battle of) Hunain... The Muslims (excepting the Prophet and some of his companions) started fleeing and I too, fled with them. Suddenly I met 'Umar bin Al-Khattab amongst the people and I asked him, "What is wrong with the people?" He said, "It is the order of Allah" Then the people returned to Allah's Apostle (after defeating the enemy).... Sahih Bukhari, Volume 5, Book 59, Hadith 611 Narrated Abu Wail: We were in Siffin and Sahl bin Hunaif got up and said, "O people! Blame yourselves! We were with the Prophet on the day of Hudaibiya, and if we had been called to fight, we would have fought. But 'Umar bin Al Khatab came and said, 'O Allah's Apostle! Aren't we in the right and our opponents in the wrongs' Allah's Apostle said, 'Yes.' 'Umar said, 'Aren't our killed persons in Paradise and their's in Hell?' He said, 'Yes.' 'Umar said, 'Then why should we accept hard terms in matters concerning our religion? Shall we return before Allah judges between us and them?' Allah's Apostle said, 'O Ibn Al-Khattab! I am the Apostle of Allah and Allah will never degrade me. Then 'Umar went to Abu Bakr and told him the same as he had told the Prophet. On that Abu Bakr said (to 'Umar). 'He is the Apostle of Allah and Allah will never degrade him.' Then Surat-al-Fath (i.e. Victory) was revealed and Allah's Apostle recited it to the end in front of 'Umar. On that 'Umar asked, 'O Allah's Apostle! Was it (i.e. the Hudaibiya Treaty) a victory?' Allah's Apostle said, "Yes" Sahih Bukhari, Volume 4, Book 53, Hadith 406 Also, Abu bakr was better than Umar according to Sunnis. Narrated Muhammad bin Al-Hanafiya: I asked my father ('Ali bin Abi Talib), "Who are the best people after Allah's Apostle?" He said, "Abu Bakr." I asked, "Who then?" He said, "Then 'Umar. " I was afraid he would say "Uthman, so I said, "Then you?" He said, "I am only an ordinary person. Sahih Bukhari, Volume 5, Book 57, Hadith 20 2

Can there exist people in a time who are better than their Prophet. If Umer had Prophet-like characteristics (Astagfirullah), then Abu Bakr deserved to be a greater Prophet. And finally, the hadith of Prophethood is narrated by Uqbah ibn Amr, who was loyal to Mawiya ibn Abu Sufyan, the enemy of Ali ibn Abu Talib. Explains the forgery i guess. Similarly there are hadith which praise almost all of the companions and promise them paradise. But historically, the companions have fought battle against each other, killing each other. I fail to believe that the killer and the killed, both will go to paradise as if both were on Haqq. Thus we tend to overlook such hadith which collide either with Quran, or historical facts or our logic. And i hope everyone will verify whatever they hear to, from mosques and madressahs, because these places are usually run by ignorant and extremist men. Now coming to the facts. Sawami Dianand, a hindu from India was killed by a muslim for publishing his dirty work 'Rangeela Rasool', a propoganda against the prophet. Astonishingly, Dianand's book, Rangeela Rasool contained excerpts from muslim books some were out of context and some were not. The hadith books are filled with narrations from Ayesha regarding her "marital" life with Prophet (SAW) and how the prophet loved her more than every other woman just because she was a virgin. Such fake claims weaken the position of the Prophet (SAW), for he was a man who did not desire lust. I am not posting the ahadith related to the Prophet's sexual life, as a sign of my respect for him. If you show such hadith to any non-muslim, he would definitely label Prophet Muhammad as a 'Rangeel Rasool'. We have killed Dianand, what about such hadith books which are deteriorating the standard of Prophet Muhammad? If the sunnis are over with elevating the companions of the prophet, they should ponder over it and stop deteriorating the standard of the prophet and his ahlulbayt with such propaganda. It must be borne in mind that according to Shia belief, every book authored by a human mortal can be subject to error, and, therefore, unlike the Sunni brothers, they do not consider their books of Ahadith as 'SAHIH' or fully authentic and sound. While the Sunni school has 6 books labelled as 'SIHAH', eg SAHIH OF BUKHARI and MUSLIM etc., the Shias believe that the only book which can be classified as pristine and unsullied is the Book of Allah, the Holy Qur'an. Though some hadith found in these books can be regarded as sahih, not all of the hadith found in them are sahih, but in fact are zaeef or weak. Hadith can not oppose Islam, Hadith can not oppose logic. Narrated 'Aisha: The Prophet used to lean on my lap and recite Qur'an while I was in menses. Sahih Bukhari, Volume 1, Book 6, hadith 296 Narrated Qatada: Anas bin Malik said, "The Prophet used to visit all his wives in a round, during the day and night and they were eleven in number." I asked Anas, "Had the Prophet the strength for it?" Anas replied, "We used to say that the Prophet was given the strength of thirty (men)." And Sa'id said on the authority of Qatada that Anas had told him about nine wives only (not eleven). Sahih Bukhari, Volume 1, Book 5, hadith 268 The Holy Prophet was a just person. He treated all his wives justly. He spent a day with each of them. He visited only one wife in a night. He preferred to sleep early after the Isha prayers and wake up soon after the midnight for Tahajjud prayers he then continued various Ibadats (worship & veneration) until the Fajr (Morning Prayers), this was his routine. And most surely you (Muhammad) conform (yourself) to sublime morality. Quran [68:4] And during a part of the night, pray Tahajjud beyond what is incumbent on you; maybe your Lord will raise you to a position of great glory. Quran [17:79] We the Shi a refuse to accept such filthy traditions. As far as we are concerned protecting the integrity of the Prophet (SAW) if far more important than protecting the integrity of Sahih al Bukhari. 3

Hence yes we disregard these as tales we believe that: It is utterly untrue that the Holy Prophet visited all his wives (i.e. eleven) in just one night. It is also untrue that Holy Prophet had the desire of fondling his wives during menses because his self control was unmatchable. It is also untrue that The Holy Prophet recited The Holy Qur an in the Laps of any wife during her menses. The above traditions are derogatory to the piety & holiness of The Holy Prophet. When a Non-Muslim commits blasphemy by quoting these narrations our necks bow down with humiliation & embarrassment. On the Day of Judgement at least the Shi a will say we protected the perfection of the infallible Prophet. Narrated Abu Huraira: The Prophet offered one of the evening prayers (the sub-narrator Muhammad said, "I think that it was most probably the 'Asr prayer") and he finished it after offering two Rakat only. He then stood near a price of wood in front of the Mosque and put his hand over it. Abu Bakr and 'Umar were amongst those who were present, but they dared not talk to him about that (because of excessive respect for him), and those who were in a hurry went out. They said, "Has the prayer been reduced?" A man who was called DhulYadain by the Prophet said (to the Prophet), "Has the prayer been reduced or have you forgotten?" He said, "Neither have I forgotten, nor has the prayer been reduced." He said, "Certainly you have forgotten." So the Prophet offered two more Rakat and performed Tashm and then said Takbir and performed a prostration of Sahu like his ordinary prostration or a bit longer and then raised his head and said Takbir and then put his head down and performed a prostration like his ordinary prostration or a bit longer, and then raised his head and said Takbir. Sahih Bukhari Volume 2, Book 22, Number 321 Do you really think the Prophet of Allah can forget his prayers while the people around him do not? Secondly, the sunni school of thoughts asks for two conditons to be present in the narrators of hadeeth. These are; 1. Justice : they refer to justice to Being Muslim, Being Mature, Being Sane, and being clear from corruption and inhumane manner or behavior. 2. Being Prompt : They refer to this by the ability to memorize and narrates the hadith as he/she heared it. Now these seem to be very nice conditions which maybe enough to agree upon the authenticity of Hadith. But there are some astonishing facts. Omer ibn Saad Narrated for Bukhari, and was in the narrators chains in more than 800 hadiths! And He himself, is the actual leader of yazeed's army that massacred Imam Hussain (AS), his household and companions. Basr Ibn Artaa, the main man who was sent by muawiya to commit assassinations, was a narrator, within the chain of narrators, for 14% of the Hadiths. Amr Ibn Saeed Ibn Al'ass, the Ummayad leader of Medina who was appointed by Muawiya and yazeed, and was known as "al ashdaqu", and history clearly shows massacres and killing he committed to protect the Ummayad leadership. His opposition to Imam Ali proves his wretchedness. Imran Ibn Hattaan, a known poet who worte a huge poem accrediting the Killer of imam Ali (A.S) Abdulrahman ibn muljim is also a narrator. The mother of muslims, Aeysha, Narrated 18% of Bukhari and 13% of Muslim, and we know that she was not just, by leading a war against Ali(A.S) Mawiya bin Abu Sufyan is also a narrator within the Sahah e Sittah and his hatred for Imam Ali is reflected by the battles he fought against him ["Al-Hadis" Volume 1, English translation/commentary of Mishkat Al-Masabih by Fazal-ul-Karim] All the books of hadith, six of them were written at the time of Abbasid Caliphate. Nothing, not even 5 Hadith are Narrated through Ahlulbayt (AS). This shows how unauthentic these hadith books look. The Prophet had commanded to take good things from anyone, everyone, and so we donot refute the Sahah Sittah as a whole. Muslim and Bukhari have put in great and sincere efforts to collect the sayings of Prophet (SAW). But you cannot overrule the fact that the these hadith books have gone through the periods of Abbasid Caliphate and the narrations have been influenced by the tyrant dynasties of Ummayads and Fatamids in order to justify their 4

rule as a divine order. Just like the CNN or New York Times are the mainstream media, BUT are controlled by the AIPAC ( American Israeli Public Affairs Committee) and convey the news which is in the best interest of America. So i request everyone that next time you hear a hadith from a mosque or a madressah, please verify it with Quran, history and your own Logic. Because i do not believe that the Prophet would be promising the same men paradise who would be later on fighting amongst themselves. And similarly, i donot believe that the Prophet (SAW) would forget prayers but his companions would not. 5