Author: Ahmad Shoaib Ghaznavi
Deniers of Hadith and Their Modern Objections (Part Two)
The Denial of Hadith in the Modern Era
At the beginning of the 20th century, a group of Muslims who were intimidated by Western ideas and had surrendered to these alien thoughts considered many of the rules of sacred Islamic law to be obstacles to progress. These individuals believed that progress and advancement were not possible without imitating the West. For this reason, they attempted to distort Islam to adapt it to Western civilization. In their efforts, they resorted to absurd and false interpretations, and this group is referred to as “modernists.” Whenever these people encountered a hadith that contradicted their theories, even if the evidence for the hadith was very strong and solid, they denied its authenticity. Conversely, when a hadith supported their views, they readily accepted it. This group acted in line with Western ideologies by denying the miracles of the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allah be upon him), rejecting the Islamic veil, and considering usury transactions permissible.[1]
The first representative of this view in India was Sir Syed Ahmad Khan. He advocated the selective use of hadiths, believing that they should only be used in religious matters and that social and political details should be avoided. His close friend, Cheragh Ali, was even more radical, considering the hadiths to be a mixture of facts and legends.
A prominent proponent of this view was Ghulam Ahmad Parvez, who rejected hadiths altogether and regarded the Quran—interpreted according to his own ideas—as the only source of spiritual and moral standards. Others associated with this viewpoint include Muhammad Tawfiq Siddiqui, Ahmad Zaki, Mirza Ghulam Ahmad Qadiani, and Aslam Ji Rajpuri.
The Role of Orientalists in Denying Hadith
Among the new adversaries of the Sunnah, orientalists hold a special place. With their seemingly scientific research, they have attempted to discredit the prophetic hadiths and create the impression that no reliable source other than the Quran has reached the Islamic Ummah.
A dangerous figure among the orientalists is Ignatius Goldziher, who conducted extensive research in the field of prophetic hadiths. With his significant knowledge of Arabic sources, he was known among orientalists as the “Sheikh of the Orientalists.”[2] Goldziher claimed that prophetic hadiths (even mutawatir) were fabricated and elaborated upon by people, insisting that there were no authentic hadiths. In his research, he concluded that hadiths, especially in the field of jurisprudence, were unreliable.
Other orientalists who held similar views include Muir, Weil, and Douzi. The goal of these individuals was to undermine the authority of jurists, hadith scholars, and commentators among Muslims and to cast doubt on the validity of hadiths so that Muslims would distance themselves from these valuable sources and turn instead to Western theories to understand their religion.[3]
The Cause of the Second Outbreak of This Sedition
The first outbreak of this sedition occurred in Iraq, while the second outbreak took place in India. The cause of the second outbreak was the same as that which instigated the initial outbreak of this sedition in the second century AH: namely, the encounter with foreign philosophies and non-Islamic cultures, leading to the intellectual defeat of Muslims in the face of these philosophies. They accepted these ideas and cultures without criticism or examination.
During this period, the conditions were completely different. In the second century AH, Muslims were militarily and politically superior and viewed foreign cultures as belonging to defeated nations. As a result, these cultures had little impact on the psyche of Muslims. However, by the thirteenth century AH, Muslims had experienced defeat in military, political, and economic arenas.
The Muslim educational system had collapsed and was replaced by that of the conquerors, who imposed their culture and civilization upon the Muslims. Consequently, Muslims began to view these cultures as those of advanced and victorious nations, coming to consider it an honor to accept them. In such circumstances, individuals emerged who were intimidated by Western culture and philosophies. These individuals believed that the principles, ideas, and laws of Western life were completely logical and reasonable, deeming any criticism of them as short-sighted and outdated.
This group viewed the Sunnah of the Prophet (peace be upon him) as their greatest obstacle to reconciling Islam with Western philosophies. They regarded the Sunnah as the key factor in preserving the Islamic system and shaping Muslim culture and civilization. They believed that without the Sunnah, Islam would be reduced to mere words in the Quran, which, without a practical model, would be subject to any interpretation or commentary.
Methods of Denying the Sunnah
This group acted in a manner reminiscent of the old Mu’tazila’s, employing two primary strategies:
1. Questioning the Authenticity of Narrations: By casting doubt on the authenticity of hadiths, they aimed to diminish people’s trust in them.
2. Questioning the Authenticity of the Sunnah: By claiming that the Sunnah contradicted the Quran, and even contradicted itself, they sought to discredit it.
Continues…
[1] Dars al-Tirmidhi, Allama Muhammad Taqi Usmani, translated by Muhammad Reza Rakhshani, vol. 1, pp. 19-18, Siddiqi Publications, first edition.
[2] Sunnah and its Place in Islamic Legislation, Dr. Mustafa al-Siba’i, p. 179, Maktaba Dar al-Islam, third edition 2009.
[3] Familiarity with the Sunnah of the Prophet, peace and blessings of Allah be upon him, Muhammad Salim Azad, pp. 137-139, Siddiqi Publications, summer 1378.
