For 1,430 years, Islamic scholarship maintained a stable approach on how to partake in Qur’ānic exegeses and hadīth explanation. Ahmadis do not adhere to this methodology. Without structure, they are free to interpret the Qur’ān and hadīth literature as they please, thereby allowing for the possibility of deviant interpretations of otherwise simple concepts. The author intends to follow the approach of classical Islamic scholarship with regards to Qur’ānic exegeses and hadīth explanation. The methodology of this work is as follows:
Reliance on Textual Evidence
Islam is not a
religion in which anyone can propose a new idea or concept and have it accepted
by the Muslim community based merely on how it looks or sounds. Islam is an
evidence-based religion. One cannot bring forth anything unless there is a firm
basis for it. In Arabic, this is called a دليل (dalīl),
or evidence.
For the purpose of these essays, textual evidence is defined as supportive statements of a position from the primary or secondary source of Islam. The primary and secondary sources of Islam are listed below:
Ø
Verses of the Qur’ān
o The Qur’ān is defined as the speech of
Allah revealed in the Arabic language in the exact wording and meaning to the
Prophet Muhammad ibn 'Abdullah صلى
الله عليه و
سلم
and
preserved in the recorded Qur’ān. It stands as a
challenge to all of mankind and jinn to produce something similar to it.[1]
Ø
Statements of the Prophet
Muhammad صلى
الله عليه و
سلم
o The Qur’ān commands the believers to obey Allah and obey the Prophet Muhammad عليه الصلاة والسلام.[2] Therefore, the Prophet’s صلى الله عليه و سلم statements, actions, and silent approvals are sources of guidance for the believers.
o Ahmadis argue that the Qur’an
is superior to prophetic traditions. While this is a valid principle, it
frequently causes Ahmadis to reject authentic hadīth when the hadīth
conflict with Ahmadi-specific interpretations of the Qur'ān. In practical application, if a hadīth is authentic, it is inconceivable that it would
contradict the Qur’an because that would imply that
the Prophet was speaking in contradiction to the Qur’an.
Instead, the Qur’an is understood in light of
prophetic traditions as a source of guidance and explanation of the divine
text.[3]
Ø
Statements of the Companions of
the Prophet صلى
الله عليه و
سلم
o The companions of the Prophet عليه الصلاة والسلام are the ones who knew the Prophet عليه الصلاة والسلام personally, were blessed to spend time with him, fought with him, and died in his cause while upon Islam. Verses of the Qur’ān were frequently revealed concerning their actions and questions. Therefore, they are most knowledgeable of its context and deep meanings.
o Allah testifies in the Qur’ān that he is pleased with them.[4]
o Their statements in matters of Islam are indirectly attributed to the Prophet, صلى الله عليه و سلم because he is the only source that knowledge of the unseen could originate.
Ø
The Ijma’a (consensus) of the earliest
generations of Muslims
o The Prophet عليه الصلاة والسلام said that the best generation of Muslims was his generation, followed by the next three generations[5]. Therefore, if there is ever a dispute regarding the interpretation of the Qur’ān and hadīth that cannot be resolved by the statements of the companions, preference is given to the consensus of the classical scholars concerning the issue at hand. They were closer to the prophetic cup of guidance than all contemporary leaders, from amongst the Muslims or Ahmadis. They were taught Islam at the hands of the ṣahāba, who made up the greatest generation of Muslims. For them, the Qur’ān was contemporary Arabic spoken on a daily basis, whereas for contemporary scholars, it is classical Arabic studied in universities, but rarely used in daily life.
The statements of latter and contemporary scholarship are considered, but if there is an irresolvable dispute between any of the four primary sources and the former, preference is given to the statements of classical scholarship. The reason for this is based on logic. If the purity of Islam was diluted with time, and it was absolutely pure during the life of the Prophet صلى الله عليه و سلم, then one can logically conclude that the beliefs of the earliest Muslims were closer to the true Islam than those of the contemporary Muslims.
Reliance on Ijtihād
Deep analysis of the Qur’ān through personal reflection is a praiseworthy act and is encouraged by the Qur’ān itself. However, by no means can an individual’s personal reflection be considered an authoritative interpretation of the Qur’ān. Among the many reasons is the fact that it is possible for two individuals to be absolutely logical in their approach but come to differing conclusions. If personal interpretations were authoritative and there was disagreement, there would be no way to determine whose interpretation was correct and whose was incorrect. Therefore, this work gives preference to textual evidence over subjective personal reflection.
Authentic Hadīth over Weak and
Fabricated Hadīth
Based on the study of the authentication, preservation, and compilation of the statements of the Prophet عليه الصلاة والسلام, this work uses the two most authentic hadīth books first and foremost: Sahīh Bukhārī and Sahīh Muslim. This is in agreement with the official Ahmadi position.[6]
Next, this work uses the four other major compilations of hadīth: Sunan al-Nasā’i, Sunan Abū Dawūd, Sunan al-Tirmidhī, and Sunan Ibn Majah.
In total, these six books are the six authentic books of hadīth in Islam. While there exist weak ahadith in the latter four, there is no dispute among any of the scholars of the people of Sunnah, whom the Ahmadis claim to be a sub-sect of[7], that the first two books, Sahīh Bukhārī and Sahīh Muslim, are completely authentic. The other hadīth books are subject to question and criticism.
For example, consider the statement:
لا مهدي
إلا عيس
There is no Mahdi
except ‘Esā [bin Marīam عليه
السلام]
This hadīth is reported in Ibn Mājah. However, numerous Islamic scholars, from before Mirza Ghulam Ahmad was even born, criticize the authenticity of this statement, saying it is either fabricated, problematic or very weak. Ibn Taymiyya, in his Manhāj al-Sunnah and Ibn Al-Qayyim in his Al-Manār al-Munīf, classified this report as da’īf (weak). Al-Qārī, in his Mirqāt al-Mufātīh, reported that this narration is da’īf according to the consensus of the scholars of hadīth. Dhahabī says in his book al-Mizān that this is a munkar (problematic) report. Al-Saghānī says it is mawdū' (fabricated). Al-Shawkānī, in his book Al-Ahādīth Al-Mawdū' also wrote that the hadīth is fabricated. Even the contemporary commentator of hadīth, Muhammad Nāsir al-Dīn Al-Albānī, in his Silsilat Al-Ahādīth Al-Da’īfah, reported that this is a munkar report. This is an example of a hadīth that exists in traditional hadīth books, but was found to be very weak or potentially fabricated.[8]
The rejection of this hadīth is not a rejection of all other hadīth books. Rather, it places the burden of proof on the one who references from less authentic hadīth books to prove that the statement can be validated as a true statement of the Prophet صلى الله عليه و سلم.
Finally, this work does not use the statements of those who refer to themselves as the Party of ‘Ali (The Shī’a). They refer to a completely different set of narrations based on different principles and sources than the people of the Sunnah. Many of their narrations are considered weak, fabricated, or highly problematic.
Sunnah vs. Bid’ah
The concept of sunnah vs bid’ah is very simple and fundamental to Islam, but often overlooked because of an emotional attachment to a practice, belief, or pre-conceived notion.
In terms of any religious matters, if the Prophet عليه الصلاة والسلام is reported to have performed an action, made a statement, or silently approved of the action or statement of others in his presence by not correcting it, it is considered part of the prophetic tradition and acceptable in Islam. The ultimate sources of Islam are exclusively Allah and his Messenger صلى الله عليه و سلم. Even if one of the most righteous of men says something with no basis in the Qur’ān or prophetic tradition, his statements are rejected and the latter is given preference.[9] Islam has no concept of “holy men” who independently define Islam. Ultimately, everything must be traced back to the Qur’ān and prophetic traditions.
[1] An Introduction to the Sciences of the Qur’aan (Chapter 2, page 25) by Shaykh Yasir Qadhi
[2] This is mentioned in many places in the Qur’ān, such as Chapter 4, verse 49, Chapter 8, verse 1, Chapter 24, verse 47, and Chapter 47, verse 33
[3] Sūrah Najm, verse 4
[4] Chapter 9, verse 100; Chapter 48, verse 18
[5] Sahih Bukhārī, Volume 3, Book 48, Number 819
[6] Selected sayings of the Holy Prophet of Islam, under the Prefae.
[7] Welcome to Ahmadiyyat, The True Islam, page 205
[8] Fake Pearls by Syed Iqbal Zaheer, page 111, “Part Five: Nasiruddin Albani”, under “There isn't any Mahdi”
[9] Sahīh Bukhārī, Volume 3, Number 49, Hadīth number 861