HADITH: THE QUESTION OF AUTHENTICITY

By Aisha Musa

Hadith are such an integral part of traditional Islam in all its variations, that
when someone suggests that the Qur’an alone should serve as the source of
religious law and guidance for Muslims, the idea is usually met with shock
and amazement. So, those who advocate following the Qur’an alone must
address the issue of hadith.

The Arabic word "hadith," means a story, or saying. Any story, or saying,
from anyone. For traditional Muslims, it has come to mean specifically a story
or saying told about, or attributed to the prophet Muhammad.

Discussions of hadith have traditionally focused on the question of

authenticity. This is true of discussions among those who advocate following
hadith and between them and those who advocate following the Qur’an
alone. God willing, we will see how this focus on the question of authenticity
has overshadowed other crucial questions about hadith.

For traditional Muslims the focus on authenticity is an attempt to insure that

people can judge the veracity and reliability of hadiths, in order to determine
which are valid as sources of law and guidance.

Early Muslim scholars took great pains to compile biographical information on

the people who allegedly narrated and transmitted the hadiths in order to
determine those who were to be considered reliable from those who were
not. Only reports passed on by supposedly trustworthy individuals are to be
considered authentic, and hence valid. The question of whether or not
Muslims have always be true to their stated standards is a separate issue
that I will not address here. What is important here is the fact that the
question of authenticity is of primary importance in their understanding and
acceptance of hadith.

Many of those who advocate following the Qur’an also focus on the question
of authenticity when debating the use of hadiths. They do so by challenging
the authenticity of all hadiths and thereby, the validity of following them.
Their challenge to the authenticity is of hadith is based primarily on the fact
that the first so-called "sahih," or "sound, authentic" collections of the hadith
were written over 200 years after the death of Muhammad. Encouraged by
the work of prominent, non-Muslim western scholars have also questioned
the authenticity of hadiths on the same basis, those who advocate following
the Qur’an alone assert that hadith should not be followed because they are
late fabrications, with no connection to Muhammad.

In response to the original challenge posed by non-Muslim scholarship,

Muslim scholars have worked diligently to uncover the earliest possible
written sources of hadith and have some which they date to the middle of the
second century after hijra, about 100 years before the writing of the so-
called sahih collections. This together with early histories which talk about
the first generations of Muslims writing and relating hadiths, leads scholars
sympathetic to hadiths to conclude that even without actual physical
specimens of written hadiths from those early generations, it is reasonable to
accept that hadiths had been transmitted both orally and in writing from the
beginning.

The historical record has not provided clear evidence that can prove or
disprove the early transmission of hadiths. So, each side accepts and argues
the information that best supports its view; and the authenticity debate
rages on.

But is authenticity the real question we should be addressing? Does it

deserve to be the central focus in the discussions of hadith? Let us now turn,
God willing, to the other questions that are often overshadowed by the
question of authenticity.

The Qur’an poses a number of questions related to hadith. By considering

them, God willing, we can put the question of authenticity in it’s proper
perspective.

Among the questions the Qur’an poses in relation to hadith are:

"In which hadith after this will they believe?" (al-A`araaf [7]:185).

"These are God’s revelations we recite to you in truth. Then, in which hadith
after God and His revelations will they believe?" (al-Jatheya [45]:6).

We understand the import of these questions from yet another question

posed in the Qur’an:

"Shall I seek other than God as a source of law and judgment when He is the
One who has sent down the Book to you in detail?" (al-An`am [6]:114).

Also,

"What is wrong with you? How do you judge? Do you have another book
which you study?" (al-Qalam [68]:35-36).

These are the real questions that deserve to be the central focus in the
discussions about hadith. If we answer these questions in the negative (i.e.
"No, I shall not." and "None."), then we see that the question of authenticity
does not merely become secondary-it becomes moot.

If we seek only God and His revelations as a source of law and guidance, and
do not believe in any hadith other than God’s revelations, it makes no
difference if a hadith is authentic, or not. The Qur’an does not ask if hadith is
authentic. The Qur’an asks if it is "other than God and His revelations." Even
if we have absolute proof that a hadith came from the messenger, even if we
may have heard it directly from the lips of the messenger, with our own ears,
it is still "other than God and His revelations." Therefore, in light of 6:114
and 45:6 it is invalid as a source of law and guidance.

Not only are hadith, even authentic hadith, invalid as a source of law and
guidance, they can be a source of misguidance. It is obvious that hadith with
negative content, such as those that call for stoning adulterers, are a source
of misguidance. But what about hadith with positive content?

Mainstream Muslims of all schools of thought insist that hadith are necessary
for a number of reasons. Among the most important reasons, is that without
hadith we cannot properly understand the Qur’an. Hadith, they say, shed
light on the Qur’an. But God tells us that the Qur’an is light (4:174, 42:52).
Can the hadith shed light on the Qur’an which is light?

Can the moon shed light on the sun? No, for the moon only reflects the light
cast by the sun. Likewise, any light in found in any hadith from the
messenger is no more than a reflection of the light in the Qur’an.

The moon is only visible when our side of the earth is turned away from the
sun. When the sun is above us, the moon is no longer visible. But if the
moon moves between us and the sun, we find ourselves in the darkness of
an eclipse. During an eclipse, the moon which reflects the light of the sun
when we are turned away from the sun, now cuts us off from the light of the
sun.

For a believer, the Qur’an is as the sun which never sets. Hadith, any and all
hadith, are as the moon. If we turn toward the hadith, we turn away from
the Qur’an. If we let the hadith come between us and the Qur’an, we will find
ourselves in the darkness of a spiritual eclipse, cut off from the light of the
Qur’an.

THE MYTH OF HADITH!

By Layth (e-mail: laytth@hotmail.com)

"Do not accept anything that you have no knowledge of. Surely the hearing,
the sight and the mind you are responsible for." (Quran, 17:36)

The above verse does wonders for the students of GOD's religion, it always
reminds them what the "criteria" is for accepting and upholding what is
peddled to them as "law" from above.

We, as human beings, are commanded by the Lord to use our senses (sight,
hearing and mind) so that we may ascertain the truth from the
falsehood…Blind following is NOT allowed in the Quran and it is given as a
sign of disbelief:
"And the example of those who reject is that who REPEATS 'Yan3iq' only
what he hears of calls and sounds. Deaf, dumb, and blind; they do not
understand" (Quran 2:171)

In fact, the Quran preaches the opposite to BLIND following and emphasizes
on "Thought" and "Contemplation" since that is the only road to true
appreciation of the message the Quran has brought.

"If we revealed this Quran to a mountain, you would see it trembling,

crumbling, out of reverence for GOD. We cite these examples for the people,
that they may THINK." (Quran, 59:21)

History of Hadith:

The word "Hadith" is inseparable from today's Islam and can best be
translated as "Sayings" of the Prophet or his companions.

Hadith is accepted as the 2nd source of Islam (the Quran being 1st) and has
been well established into an entire science where people spend a lifetime
merely studying the "Hadith" and its compilations.

Muslims are taught that the Prophet Mohammed brought the Quran with him
as well as his sayings "Hadith" and actions "Sunna". The Muslims believe that
these pillars are inseparable and that Islam cannot stand at all if any of these
pillars are taken out.

What may come as a surprise to most, is that "Hadith" was not actually
compiled and reviewed until over two hundred years after Mohammed's
death, first by Imam Bukhari (d. 256/870), then Muslim (d. 261/875), Abu
Daud (d. 275/888), Tirmidhi (d. 270/883), Ibn Maja (d. 273/886), and al-
Nasa'i (d. 303/915).

In his opening statement, Bukhari (considered to be the #1 source of

authentic Hadith) states that out of nearly 600,000 Hadith's which were
known to him at the time, he could only record 7,397 as being authentic
from the prophet. This is a recognition by the upholders of Hadith that at
least 98.76%, of what people are led to believe is the 2nd revelation to the
Quran and a major source of Islamic law, is pure lies!.

What people also fail to realize is that the history of Hadith itself has been
overlooked and is treated as if the revelations were written down at the time
of the Prophet for record keeping. In fact, the record books indicate that
there was a BAN on the writing of Hadith ordered by the Prophet himself and
upheld for nearly 100 years thereafter.
"The prophet said:'Do not write anything from me EXCEPT QURAN. Whoever
wrote, must destroy it" (Muslim, Zuhd 72; Hanbel3/12,21,39)

The above "Hadith" is recognized and accepted by Hadith scholars the world
over, however, their justification for the ban is that the prophet feared that
the "Hadith" and Quran would be intermingled into one book and this ban
was simply a safeguard.

What these same scholars fail to explain is WHY the same ban was still in-
place nearly 30 years after the prophet's death and AFTER the Quran was
supposedly compiled!

Zayd Ibn Thabit visited the Khalifa Mu'aawiya (more than 30 years after the
Prophet's death), and told him a story about the Prophet. Mu'aawiya liked the
story and ordered someone to write it down. But Zayd said, "The messenger
of God ordered us never to write anything of his Hadith." (Reported by Ibn
Hanbal)

According to the history books of Islam, the ban on writing "Hadith" was only
lifted some 80 years after the Prophet had passed away by Omar Bin
Abdulaziz (the grandson of Omar Bin Al-Khatab). In fact, the irony of the
matter is that Omar Bin al-Khatab himself was vehemently opposed to the
writing of any religion revelations EXCEPT the Quran:

Omar Bin Al-Khatab is recorded as saying: 'I wanted to write the traditions
(Sun'an), and I remembered a people who were before you, they wrote other
books to follow and abandoned the book of GOD. And I will never, I swear,
replace GOD's book with anything' (Reported by Jami' Al-Bayan 1/67)

As we mentioned before, within a short span of 200 years from the Prophet's
death (only 130 years from the lifting of the ban) there were over 600,000
Hadith's floating around at the time of Bukhari which were all attributed to
the Prophet. Bukhari himself admitted to spending nearly 40 years studying
the Hadith's and could only verify the chain of transmission from 1.24% of
the total!.

Problems with Hadith:

Bukhari and those who came after him spent years and years in the research
and filtration of Hadith's until it became its own science. Bukhari was quickly
followed by Muslim (d. 261/875), Abu Daud (d. 275/888), Tirmidhi (d.
270/883), Ibn Maja (d. 273/886), and Al-Nasa'I (d. 303/915) as the most
recognized compilers in this field.
Although it may be a comfort to Muslims reading this to know that a filtration
process was undertaken by the above mentioned scholars, it must be
clarified as to exactly WHAT this filtration process was:

San'ad (Chain of Transmission)

Bukhari relied upon the self-invented art of "Transmission" for which he

states that a "Hadith" may be accepted as authentic or rejected based on
WHOM the Hadith is coming from.

Bukhari made a study of the Prophet's companions and established that they
were all trustworthy. He then asked about people who came after them, and
if the public "hearsay" was that this or that person was reputable, then
Bukhari had no problem accepting a "Hadith" transmitted from that source.

To get over the obstacle of "objectivity" and the fact that Hadith was based
mainly on "hearsay", Bukhari found a very convenient Hadith (which Islamic
scholars still quote) that gives the companions of the prophet and all Hadith
narrators super-human abilities which enabled them to memorize word for
word the sayings of the prophet without loss or distortion.

Although the above may not sound scientific or even objective to many, it is
a factual method which was used to obtain the 2nd source of Islamic law.

-------------------------

While very few outsiders have been able to question the authenticity of the
Quran, the Hadith has not been so lucky!.

Many opposing groups and other religions have made it a practice to

embarrass Muslims by quoting "dubious" Hadith's which compare a Woman
to a Donkey (the Hadith on what stops Prayer) or that the Majority of Women
will go to Hell! (Hadith about Isra & Mi'raj).

Muslims typically react to the above accusations by becoming angry and

evasive, saying that these people want only to "Slander" the Prophet. What
these same Muslims fail to realize is that the "TRUTH" can withstand any
amount of questioning and cross-examination.

More Problems with Hadith:

If it were only embarrassment that the Hadith causes, we would not have a
problem. The effects of this subjective "hearsay" are far far greater.
Human beings are born with the natural tendency to be inquisitive. Anyone
who has children will know that no matter how many times you tell them
"no", they will still try to touch a hot pan or play with the dirt to understand
WHY they should not. This is a GOD given mechanism that our Lord has
bestowed on the human species to let us expand our knowledge and only
accept what we understand and know.

When Muslims were ruling an living by the Quran, there was no problem with
this natural human tendency for curiosity since the Quran had an answer to
every question…Muslims at that time witnessed an intellectual growth
unparalleled in the history of Arabia or even the world at that time…

The tendency to question and inquire led Muslim children to grow-up in an

atmosphere where NOTHING was off-limits and nothing was taboo. Their
questioning simply developed an unlimited appetite for knowledge, which
was only fed by discoveries and advancements in just about every field.

Then, a few hundred years after the Quran had fueled an "intellectual"
revolution in the Muslim minds…Something began to change…

The widespread introduction of "Hadith" and its popularity with the masses
began to slowly create problems with the education of Muslims. Hadith was
not even to be compared on the same plain as the Quran due to its inferior
language and its basis on "hearsay" and "conjecture".

Propagators of Hadith were nearly always cornered by sincere Muslim

students who wanted explanations for obvious contradictions and illogical
contents.

We can only assume that the establishment of Hadith as a source of Islamic

law was only achieved many centuries after its initial gathering by Bukhari
and others ONLY by having it forced on the Muslim masses with a rejection
for scrutiny or questioning.

Muslim school children today are taught from a very early age not to
question or over analyze their sources for religion as they might be incurring
the wrath of GOD and walking the path of Hell.

Student's questions are typically answered with statements like: 'Are you
BETTER that the previous generations who fought with the Prophet?', or 'Do
you hate the Prophet that you QUESTION his Sunnah?'.

With such a barrage of accusations, young Muslim students learn for early on
to simply accept what they are given without thought or questions…And
when they are older, they simply repeat to the younger generation what was
told to them about going to Hell and disrespecting the Prophet…The cycle
goes on!.
The REAL Story:

Although the historical data in itself leaves much to be desired…The real

story is far more dangerous than may be expected.

"When our verses are recited for them, those who do not expect to meet us
would say, 'Bring a Quran other than this, or change it.' Say (O Muhammad),
'I cannot change it on my own initiative. I simply follow what is revealed to
me. I fear, if I disobey my Lord, the retribution of a terrible day.' ...Who is
more wicked than one who invents lies about God, or rejects His revelations?
The guilty never succeed. Yet, they idolize beside God those who possess no
power to harm them or benefit them, and say, 'These are our intercessors
with God.' ...such is idol-worship." (Quran, 10:15-18)

The above verse clearly states that the people who's hearts did not believe
the message from GOD asked the Prophet to bring a "different" Quran, or
even "change" it.

And Mohammed's response was: 'I CANNOT change it, I simply FOLLOW
what is revealed to me!'.

The Prophet could not "make-up" his own religion to suite the desires of all
those around him….He was COMMANDED to adhere to the Quran and nothing
but the Quran.

Yet, it seems that after Mohammed's death, those who's hearts did not really
accept the message that he brought started to in-fact "change" the Quran by
adding to it.

It seems these people who were spreading false teachings and attributing
them to GOD did not heed the Prophet's warning:

"Shall I seek OTHER THAN THE GOD as a source of law, when He has
revealed THIS BOOK FULLY DETAILED? ....The word of your Lord is
COMPLETE, in truth and justice. Nothing shall abrogate His words; He is the
hearer, the omniscient. Yet, if you obey the majority of people, they will take
you away from the path of The God. That is because they follow
CONJECTURE, and they fail to think." (Quran, 6:114-116)

The Prophet taught people NOT to seek other than GOD as their source of
law since He had revealed a FULLY DETAILED book!.

The Prophet also warned people not to listen to what the MAJORITY have to
say, because he knew that they only follow CONJECTURE!.
Yet, despite all these clear warnings, the people after Mohammed could not
resist to make false claims that the Quran was NOT detailed, and that it
needed a mish-mash of hearsay to interpret.

They claimed that although the Quran was complete (as per GOD's
statement), it still did not cover all the areas of jurisprudence that needed
covering.

Perhaps they did not reflect upon the following verse:

"And We have sent down the Book to you as a CLARITY FOR EVERYTHING,
and a guidance and mercy and good news for those who Submit." (Quran
16:89)

In light of such evidence, it is extremely difficult for any sincere followers of

GOD to simply turn their backs to what the Quran has to say and hand their
destinies over to people for whom GOD was not enough.

The BEST 'Hadith':

For those who still have a desire to hold onto 'Hadith' after all the evidence
presented...there is just ONE Hadith that we deem to be authentic and also
encourage all people to goto:

"The GOD has revealed herein the best Hadith; a book that is consistent, and
points out both ways. The skins of those who reverence their Lord cringe
therefrom, then their skins and their hearts soften up for The GOD's
message. Such is The GOD's guidance; He bestows it upon whoever wills. As
for those sent astray by The GOD, nothing can guide them." (39:23)

Conclusion:

Idol worship, or associating partners with GOD, is the only unforgivable sin
that is mentioned in the Quran. Yet, it seems that for the majority of us, our
minds cannot accept GOD Alone!.

"The God DOES NOT FORGIVE that partners be established with Him, but He
forgives other than that to whom He wishes" (4/48)

And the ultimate litmus test can only be:

When The God ALONE is mentioned, the hearts of those who do not believe
in the hereafter shrink with aversion. But when idols are mentioned besides
Him, they rejoice (39:45).

Did talking about upholding the Quran Alone bother you?. Or does your heart
really believe?.

"They are the ones who examine all words, then follow the best. These are
the ones whom GOD has guided; these are the ones who possess
intelligence." (39:18)

QURANIC PRINCIPLES ABOUT THE POSITION OF 'HADEETH AND SUNNAH' IN

ISLAM
By brother Mujahid (e-mail: mquran@yahoo.com)

The Quran, the final scripture from God to humankind is considered to be the
first source of Islam. Hadeeth and Sunnah which is considered to be the
secondary source in Islam, must find its validation from the Quran. The
Quran is from God, after all, while Hadeeth and Sunnah , even if from the
Prophet himself, are from humans.

PRINCIPLE 1 :

By the Book that makes THINGS CLEAR (Quran : 44.2)

PRINCIPLE 2 :

Say: "Shall I seek for judge other than God? - when He it is Who hath sent
unto you the Book, EXPLAINED IN DETAIL." (Quran : 6.114)

PRINCIPLE 3:

God has revealed the most beautiful Message in the form of a Book,
CONSISTENT WITH ITSELF repeating itself in various ways (Quran : 39.23)

PRINCIPLE 4:

And pursue not that of which thou hast no knowledge; for every act of
hearing, or of seeing or of REASONING will be enquired into (Quran : 17.36).

PRINCIPLE 5:

Do they not consider the Qur'an (with care)? Had it been from other Than
God, they would surely have found therein MANY CONTRADICTIONS (Quran :
4.82).

6. PRINCIPLE 6:
Blessed is He who sent down THE CRITERIA to His servant, that it may be an
admonition to all creatures (Quran : 25.1)

Putting these 6 principles into simpler terms:

1- The Quran MAKES THINGS CLEAR or it clarifies things

2- The Quran is EXPLAINED IN DETAIL

3- The Quran is CONSISTENT IN ITSELF and so will use appropriate

terminology for the same concepts

4- Anything which is to be accepted as 'knowledge' must be either seen,

heard or reasoned..

5- If anything is from God, it will be consistent. On the other hand, if it is

from humankind, it will contain many contradictions.

6- The Quran also calls itself AL-furqan or the criterion which shows that it's
position must be the starting point by which to judge.

These principles may be brief, but you will see them being demonstrated
throughout the Quran. Hadeeth and Sunnah must fall within their criteria if it
is to be accepted in Islam.

Please see the following verse :

O ye who believe! let those whom your right hands possess, and the
(children) among you who have not come of age ask your permission (before
they come to your presence), on three occasions: before morning prayer; the
while ye doff your clothes for the noonday heat; and after the late-night
prayer: these are your three times of undress: outside those times it is not
wrong for you or for them to move about attending to each other: Thus does
God make clear the Signs to you: for God is full of knowledge and wisdom.
(Quran 24.58)

It's so very clear and detailed ! Even a number (three) is given , showing
how detailed the Quran is.

Lets see a further demonstration :

O ye who believe! When ye deal with each other, in transactions involving

future obligations in a fixed period of time, reduce them to writing Let a
scribe write down faithfully as between the parties: let not the scribe refuse
to write: as God Has taught him, so let him write. Let him who incurs the
liability dictate, but let him fear His Lord God, and not diminish aught of what
he owes. If they party liable is mentally deficient, or weak, or unable Himself
to dictate, Let his guardian dictate faithfully, and get two witnesses, out of
your own men, and if there are not two men, then a man and two women,
such as ye choose, for witnesses, so that if one of them errs, the other can
remind her. The witnesses should not refuse when they are called on (For
evidence). Disdain not to reduce to writing (your contract) for a future
period, whether it be small or big: it is juster in the sight of God, More
suitable as evidence, and more convenient to prevent doubts among
yourselves but if it be a transaction which ye carry out on the spot among
yourselves, there is no blame on you if ye reduce it not to writing. But take
witness whenever ye make a commercial contract; and let neither scribe nor
witness suffer harm. If ye do (such harm), it would be wickedness in you. So
fear God; For it is Good that teaches you. And God is well acquainted with all
things. If ye are on a journey, and cannot find a scribe, a pledge with
possession (may serve the purpose). And if one of you deposits a thing on
trust with another, let the trustee (faithfully) discharge his trust, and let him
Fear his Lord conceal not evidence; for whoever conceals it, - his heart is
tainted with sin. And God knoweth all that ye do. (Quran : 2.282)

So we cannot accuse the Quran of not being clear , fully-detailed and

consistent simply because we cannot find our ideas in it.

Let us now apply our principles to the idea of 'hadeeth and sunnah' :

PRINCIPLE 1 : The Quran makes things clear or clarifies things.

The supporters of hadeeth and sunnah have had to rely on half verses and
verses taken out of context in order to make us believe they are part of
Islam. Among these verses are :

1. 'obey Allah and obey the messenger' (even though the Quran clearly
defines the messengers only inspiration)

2. 'in the messenger you will find a beautiful example' (even though the
Quran clearly commands him to follow the way of Ibrahim, which is found in
the Quran itself)

3. 'whatever the messenger gives you, take it...' (this is a half a verse,
quoting the entire verse will find it referring to war spoils, not hadeeth and
sunnah)

There is not a single verse in the Quran referring to what we know as

'hadeeth and sunnah of Muhammad'.
PRINCIPLE 2 : The Quran is fully-detailed

The supporters of hadeeth and sunnah claim that hadeeth and sunnah
provide the details of Islamic living. We can see that this simply isn't true.
The Quran is not a general document. As we can see from the Quranic verse
(24.58), the Quran is detailed when Allah wants us to be informed of the
details. It only isn't detailed to those who apply an artificial standard of being
'detailed'

Despite the Quran being fully-detailed, we can see nothing of the system of
classification which filters the hadeeth and sunnah. Hadeeth relies on a
system of classification which tells us which hadeeth is reliable and which
isn't. Yet this system is not mentioned in the Quran at all. Instead the
system was created and developed by the scholars of sunnism and as
expected, there are many standards by which to judge. Everything is relative
to a scholar's opinion.

PRINCIPLE 3 : The Quran is consistent internally.

The Quran DOES use the words 'hadeeth' and 'sunnah'. For example :

1.

Such are the Signs of God, which We rehearse to thee in Truth; then in what
HADEETH will they believe after God and His Signs? (Quran 45.6)

2.

Do they see nothing in the government of the heavens and the earth and all
that God hath created? (Do they not see) that it may well be that their terms
is nigh drawing to an end? In what HADEETH after this will they then believe?
(Quran 7.185)

3.

Then what HADEETH after that, will they believe in? (Quran 77.50)

4.

God has revealed the most beautiful HADEETH (Quran 39.23)

As we can see, even though the Quran is consistent internally, it NEVER uses
'hadeeth and sunnah' to mean 'hadeeth and sunnah of Muhammad'. This was
a later invention of Sunni scholars who even opposition for thier innovation.

PRINCIPLE 4 : In order to accept something as knowledge, we must

either HEAR it, SEE it, or use reason to determine it

Hadeeth and Sunnah by its very nature completes goes against this 4th
principle. The hadeeth collection of the Sunnis came into thier final nearly
200 years after the Prophet. The compilers of hadeeth had no way of
knowing if the hadeeth actually came from the narrator or not. Instead , they
relied on either oral and written reports. As for the use of reason, there is
very little or none. Some hadeeth exhibit an utter disregard for reason and
blatant contradiction to the Quran itself. Furthermore, hadeeth collections
have so many classifications by so many scholars, it's impossible to accept
any hadeeth, since even Sahih al-bukhari , 'the second most correct book
after the Book of Allah' according to sunnis are found with hadeeth which
have been reclassified.

PRINCIPLE 5 : If anything is from God, it should not have any

inconsistencies. Anything from mankind will have MANY
contradictions.

The most blatant contradictions of the hadeeth and sunnah is with the Quran
itself, for example , the practises of :

1- stoning

2- punishing apostates

3-the wearing of veils for women

4- the institution of forbidden foods (even though the Quran explicitly states
that it's the only source to forbid anything)

Moreover, hadeeth and sunnah are in contradiction with themselves. This is

shows by the three versions of the farewell sermon , witnessed by TEN
THOUSAND PEOPLE. The three versions are :

1. Follow Quran and Sunnah (from Muwatta of Malik)

2. Follow Quran and Prophet's Family (from Sahih al-Muslim)

3. Follow Quran alone (from Sahih al-Muslim)

And worse still , all three versions are canonised permenantly by books of
hadeeth !

PRINCIPLE 6 : The Quran is the criteria

If we look closely, it's principle 6 which sums everything up most clearly. The
Quran is the starting point, the definition point by which all Islamic
institutions must be judged. Principle 6 is really the sum of Principles 1
through Principle 5. Hadeeth and sunnah have failed the Quranic test.

THE HADITH CONSPIRACY & THE DISTORTION OF ISLAM

By M. Asadi (e-mail: koran114@aol.com)

The Koran and the History of Religion

Humankind were one community, then God sent prophets as bearers of good
news and as warners and revealed with them the Book with the truth that it
[the Book] might judge between humankind concerning that in which they
differed. And only those to whom the book was given differed concerning it,
after clear proofs had been given them, through mutual hatred and
rivalry&127;(Koran 2:213)

According to the Koran, as has been the case in the history of all the
prophets (Koran 25:30-33), Muslims have fallen victim to inventions against,
the word of God, the Koran. These inventions have distorted the way that
God sent down via all the prophets. The message that God has been sending
down has been the same all throughout history, same in every way
(Koran42:13). Even though the Koran says in well over 15 places, that it is
explained in detail, Tafseel (Koran 6:114 etc.), and contains a full
explanation of whatever is needed by a believer (Koran 16:89), and should
be enough, Kaafi, for them (Koran 29:51), and contains the complete law
(Shariah) of God (Koran 45:18 and 42:13), as against man-made law or
Shariah (Koran 42:21), "Muslims" insist that the Koran needs supplements to
be understood, and lacks details. This amounts to disbelieving what God
himself says in unequivocal terms in the Koran.

The Koran and Hadith:

The Koran states explicitly that the messenger's duty was only to convey
(Balagh) the message (Koran 29:18) contained in the Koran (Koran 69:44)
and that the Koran was the only Wahi (revelation) given to the prophet to be
conveyed to people (Koran 6:19), by testimony of God Himself. Therefore to
follow the words of God in the Koran would be to follow the messenger. Thus
following God is the same as following the messenger, who only conveyed
the Koran (see Koran 4:80)

The inventions against the true words of God, revealed to the messengers,
which is called their true speech (Qawl- Koran 69:40) are the so called
"Hadith" (stories about the sayings and doings of the prophets) as narrated
by the writers of the Old Testament, the Gospels of Jesus (i.e. the "Hadith"
about Jesus), and the various Hadith about the prophet Muhammed
contained in the many "extra-Koranic" books believed in by the Sunni and
Shia schools of thought. People have attributed these things throughout
history to the messengers, whereas the messengers could never have said
them given the history of the documents and the Criterion (Furqaan) of the
Koran (Koran 2:185)

The Koran states:

"Do they not consider the Koran with care, If it had been from anyone other
than Allah, it would contain many discrepancies (Koran 4:82)."

Any document that claims to be from God, but in actuality is not would
contain some form of error according to the Koran. What we see on analysis
is that the Hadith attributed to Muhammed and the Gospels attributed to
Jesus fail this test of authenticity. What we also see is the subjectivity of the
various Muslims groups. They reject the Gospels of Jesus based on the same
test as being corrupt whereas similar defects found in the books of Hadith
are overlooked by them and they accept them as being authentic sayings of
Muhammed. Let us have a look at the books of Hadith:

Hadith are the various traditions contained in specific books, believed in by

the majority of Muslims to be the sayings of the prophet Muhammed. These
in the major part are extra-Koranic, i.e. from outside the Koran. They either
contradict or add to the Koran. Muslims sometimes present them as an
explanation of the Koran or as an integral part of Islamic law, even though
the Koran does not confirm them.

A minority among the Muslims does not accept the various books of Hadith
as being an accurate representation of what the prophet Muhammed said.
They take the Koran as Criterion (Furqaan in Arabic), according to the
Koran's own claim (2:185), accepting only those Hadith [tradition or
narration attributed to the prophet] which the Koran confirms and attests in
totality. I represent that view in this paper. Opposition to the Hadith, and the
whole body of extra-Koranic literature on Islam as doctrine, has existed from
the earliest days of Islam. This is well documented by Shafi (died 204AH/
819AD).

The Koran, historically predates any written Hadith and there is no mention
of Hadith or the Sunna of the Prophet in what we possess as writings before
the third century after the prophet. Koran and rationality based on its
principles formed the basis of religion for first century Muslims (Rahman
1979). Thus contrary to being an innovation, following the Koran alone is
historically the original Islam and hadith and other extra-Koranic literature is
an innovation, introduced in its written form in the 3rd century after the
prophet.

And they scattered not, those who were given the Book, except AFTER the
clear sign came unto them. They were commanded only to serve God,
making the way PURE for Him alone(Koran 98:1-)

Hadith and the Gospels:

The various books of Hadith that we see in Muslim society today are the
same in relation to Muhammed, as the gospels are to Jesus. They are both
similar in that both were complied [in what we possess today] centuries after
Muhammed and Jesus respectively [unlike the Koran which was memorized
and written down at the time of its revelation] and they both present no
proof of authenticity [unlike the Koran in which numerous verses say: In this
is a sign [or proof]&127;", and then asks you to refute it]. Therefore,
objectively speaking both the Hadith and the gospels do not present any
evidence as to be considered a 100% reliable representation of the words of
the prophets, Muhammad and Jesus. Modern scholarship of both the gospels
[the Jesus Seminar] and the Hadith finds them an unreliable representation
of the words of the prophets or even their close companions.

Fazlur Rahman, who was the Harold H. Swift Distinguished Service Professor
of Islamic Thought at the University of Chicago wrote in his book Islam
(1966) on the historic study of the Hadith. Summarising I. Goldziher's
scientific study of the Hadith, he writes:

But his argument runs, since the corpus of the Hadith continued to swell in
each succeeding generation, and since in each generation the material runs
parallel to and reflects various and often contradictory doctrines of Muslim
theological and legal schools, the final recorded product of the Hadith, which
date from the 3rd/ 9th century [over 250 years after the death of the
prophet], must be regarded as being on the whole unreliable as a source for
the prophets own teaching and conduct (1979:44)

Professor Schacht, who according to Fazlur Rahman is the first scholar to

have undertaken a, "extensive and systematic comparison of legal traditions
in their historical sequence, is unassailably scientific and sound in
method&127;(1979:47-48), did not believe that the Hadith or the concept of
"Sunna of the Prophet" were part of first century Islam. Shafi [150-204/767-
819] introduced them, at the earliest, nearly two hundred years after the
death of the prophet. The Koran states exactly the same. The Koran was the
only "Hadith" that was conveyed by the prophet and formed the guidance for
the early Muslim community.

Most Muslims who have taken on themselves the responsibility of teaching

Islam to others have themselves abandoned the Koran by upholding Hadith.
They say without hesitation: "The majority of Shariah (Law) in Islam is
contained outside the Koran in books of Hadith and fiqh." Such a saying is a
direct attack on the validity of the Koran, which claims to contain the
complete Islamic law from God. We need to ask ourselves, what kind of
submission (Islam) is this when you are rejecting God's words to follow your
traditions.

"...If any do fail to judge by what Allah(God) has sent down (i.e the Koran),
they are unbelievers (Kaafiroon)." (Koran 5:45).

"...If any do fail to judge by that which Allah has sent down, they are tyrants
(dhilamoon)." (Koran 5:45)

"...If any do fail to judge by that which Allah has sent down, such are evil-
livers (fasikoon)." (Koran 5:47)

The Koran reports that the messenger himself will complain to God about his
so called followers abandoning the Koran:

"And the messenger says,"O my Lord, my OWN people have forsaken the
Koran." (Koran 25:30)

Muslims, those, who claim also to believe in the Hadith as being totally true,
need to be objective and not subjective. They should, as concern for truth
demands not change standards while evaluating phenomena. If they reject
the Gospels as being true based on reasons that are valid, i.e. contradictions,
history etc (and they almost all do), then they should also reject the Hadith
on the same criteria. Hadith have the same problems of authenticity as the
gospels do. Hadith do not represent the words of Muhammed just like the
gospels don't represent the words of Jesus in total.

One would be mistaken in thinking that once the Gospels were written they
constituted the basic Scriptures of the newly born Christianity and that
people referred to them the same way they referred to the Old Testament. At
that time, the foremost authority was the oral tradition as a vehicle for Jesus'
words and the teachings of the apostles. The first writings to circulate were
Paul's letters and they occupied a prevalent position long before the Gospels.
They were, after all, written several decades earlier.

It has already been shown that contrary to what certain commentators are
still writing today, before 140 AD there was no witness to the knowledge that
a collection of Gospel writings existed. It was not until circa 170 AD that the
four Gospels acquired the status of canonic literature (Bucaille 1987).

Both the Hadith and the Gospels are based on oral traditions that were
written down, in the written form that we have today, centuries after the
prophets, Muhammed and Jesus. In recalling events, a gap of even a year
can be distorted by memory beyond recognition. However, when the gap is
of more than a hundred years, and you're narrating something to support a
point of view [the Ahl-al Kalam and Mutizila, against the Ahl al Hadith in
early Islam or the Judeo Christians against the Pauline Christians in early
Christianity], your own as against conflicting points of view, the distortions
are immense. Since history shows that eventually the followers of the Hadith
and the followers of Pauline Christianity, politically dominated the scene both
the teachings of Muhammed and Jesus got distorted. Modern scholarship
recognizes this. Except for the Koran, we have no reliable historical record of
the message that Muhammed conveyed.

John Dominic Crossan, in his book, The Birth of Christianity (1998), cites a
study done after the Challenger explosion:

The morning after the Challenger explosion, the 106 students in Psychology
101 [Personality Development] at Emory University filled out questionnaires
on how they had first heard of the disaster. That established a baseline for
their memories within twenty four hours of the even itself in January of 1986.
Then in October of 1988, the forty-four of 106 students still at Emory were
requestioned (only 25% remembered the original questionnaire) and their
two answers compared. Finally in March of 1989, follow up interviews were
given to the forty students willing to participate in the final phase of the
experiment&127;When those second versions were compared with the first
ones for accuracy and graded on a 0-7 scale for major and minor attributes
of the event, the mean was a 2.95 out of a possible 7. Eleven subjects were
wrong about everything and scored 0 (25% of the sample). Twenty two of
them [50% of the sample] scored 2 or less, this means that if they were
right on one major attribute, they were wrong on both of the others&127;
what makes these low scores interesting is the high degree of confidence
that accompanied many of them (Crossan 1998: 62-63)

The Koran captures the similarity of what has happened in the case of both
Jesus and Muhammed in this statement:

Has not the time arrived for the believers that their hearts should engage in
the admonishment from God and the truth that has been revealed to them
and that they should not become like those to whom was given the Book
before, but long ages passed over them and their hearts grew hard..(Koran
57:16)

Hadith believing Muslims make big claims on the so-called scientific

compilation of Hadith. Let it be clear however, that no matter how scientific
you are in your compilation of what is "false" to start with, the compilation
cannot make it true. Even the criteria that is presented are un-objective, i.e.
the truthfulness of a particular narrator with a story of how truthful he was.
To repeat, falsehood is not converted to truth by its scientific compilation.

The scientific method demands that "subjective" proof i.e. how truthful a
person was be ignored and the item tested on objective criteria. What does
the content say?

THE DILEMMA:

Hadith doctors have traditionally evaluated Hadith on its chain of narrators

and its body text, according to their own criteria of what should be correct.
However even according to their own standards, they fell into a dilemma.
Some Hadith exist which have according to them a "sound" chain of narrators
i.e. it was truthfully narrated but they dispute the text of the Hadith. One
example of this and their whole system collapses. The Koran gives us the
standard for judging anything that is presented. If the Koran confirms it in
total its true. If the material adds to or contradicts the Koran, its source is
not God or his messenger.

HISTORY OF COMPILATION OF HADITH:

Out of the books that the majority of Muslims believe in as being authentic,
Sahih Bukhari is presented as being the MOST authentic. However a analysis
of the history of the books shows that it is anything but authentic. Imam
Bokhari the collector of the narration lived in a period over 230 years after
the death of the prophet. Out of the 600,000 Hadith (narrations) that he
collected, which were initially attributed to the prophet, he threw out as
fabrication 592,700 of them and kept only 7300 as being genuine. They
further reduce to 2762 Hadith after repetition.
The margin of error in these numbers is so great, that any rational inquirer
can see that accepting the book of Bukhari as containing all authentic Hadith
or even a majority of authentic Hadith is stupidity. Yet the majority of
Muslims unquestionable accept it as "gospel" truth!
There are many scientific and logical errors and contradictions in the Book of
Bukhari, as well as the other books. Some examples:

1.The prophet according to Bukhari in one of the narration tells his

companion Abu- Dharr Ghafari that the sun goes around the earth, in the
apparent description that he gives (Hadith 421, pg. 283, vol. 4 of M.Muhsin
Khan's translation of Sahih Bukhari).

This erroneous view was very popular at the time Bukhari compiled his
collection. However this is absurd, we know today that the earth rotates
around the sun, proven by scientific evidence. The Koran not only corrected
this erroneous notion but also gave an accurate description of a round earth
centuries before scientists discovered it.

2.According to Hadith no disease is contagious [Adwa]. This as we all know is

inaccurate. What about the common cold and viruses like Ebola etc. [Hadith
649, page 435, volume7]

3.Books of Hadith contain many home-remedies, according to ideas

prevalent at that time, which are scientifically absurd. The Hadith mentions
there being a cure for every ailment in black cumin seed [Hadith 591,
pg.400, vol 7]. This is evidently not true. Can it cure cancer or AIDS, not to
mention even the common cold? Hadith suggests that we drink "camel-urine"
to recuperate after an illness [Hadith 590, pg.399, vol.7]. This is disgusting,
naturally speaking. Urine is toxic stuff. The Koran places extreme importance
on cleanliness and clean eating (tayyab). The Hadith mentions that "fever" is
from the "heat of hell" [Hadith 621,622, page 417, vol 7]. Atrocious!

4.The Hadith books insult the prophet by giving him a contradictory

personality. In one instance it mentions that the prophet ate with a leper and
in another it mentions that he refused to meet with a leper who had come to
take allegiance at his hand and accept Islam. He told the man to leave and
accepted his allegiance in absentia.

5.The famous Hadith about the fly: "If a fly falls into the vessel of any of you,
let him dip all of it (in the vessel) and then throw it away [and use the
material in the vessel], for in one of its wings there is a disease and in the
other there is a healing [Bukhari, Hadith 673, pg. 452, vol 7]
Beware world, there is going to be an outbreak of typhoid and cholera if
people take the above as "Hadith-truth", just like "gospel truth" made some
people get castrated just because it reports Jesus saying, "....and there are
some who make themselves eunuchs for the Kingdom of God." Beware these
myths can harm you!

6.According to Hanbel 6/136, 192,213, the prophet "Never urinated in a

standing position." However Bukhari in his "authentic" book of Hadith says
that the prophet indeed urinated in a standing position. (Bukhari 4/60-64)

7.According to Bukhari 56/152 and Hanbel 3/107, 163; the prophet

recommended that people drink camel urine to recuperate after an illness
Later on when the same people killed the prophet's shepherd, he
commanded that they be seized, their eyes taken out and their hands and
feet cut and left them thirsty in the desert. This does not fit in with the
personality of the prophet presented in the Koran. The Koran says that the
prophet was compassionate. How could the prophet recommend the drinking
of camel's urine, considering the importance that the Koran gives to hygiene?

8.The Koran commands believers not to make any distinction between any of
God's messengers (Koran 2:285 and many other places), yet according to
Bukhari's books of Hadith (Bukhari 97/36), the prophet contradicted the
Koran saying that he was the "most honorable" among all the messengers.
Not only this, the books of Bukhari make the prophet even contradict himself
by saying in a different Hadith (Bukhari 65/4,6 and Hanbel 1/205,242,440)
that we should not make any distinction between the messengers and that
he was not better than even Yunus. Could the prophet have contradicted the
Koran? Could the prophet of Allah have contradicted himself? The books of
Hadith in fact insult the prophet by attributing to him things he never said or
did.

9.According to the books of Hadith, a woman is compared to a black dog or a

monkey (this Hadith pre-dates Darwin but it refers to women only) Bukhari
8/102 and Hanbel 4/86. The Koran on the other hand honors women and lifts
up their status contrary to what is contained in the Hadith. A woman is called
bad luck in the haidth (Bukhari 76/53). Also, according to the collection of
Muslim (Sahih Muslim), most of the people in hell were of the feminine
gender! According to Bukhari, "Women are naturally, morally and religiously
defective." Therefore, according to the standard of the Koran, no Muslim
should accept such prejudiced Hadith as issuing from the lips of the prophet
of God.

10.According to Bukhari (Book of Jihad, 146) and Abu Dawd 113, the prophet
gave permission to warriors to kill women and children in war. Indeed these
people are attributing tyranny to a prophet held in honor by Allah, and
described as having mercy for the people. The Koran says, even about the
people that attack us first, that we should quit fighting if they offer peace,
leave alone killing women and children. According to the standard of the
Koran, the prophet could NEVER have asked his warriors to kill women and
children.

11.The Koran describes accurately, the shape of the earth as being rounded
(Koran 39:5), and the cause of night and day as being the rotation of the
earth. The Hadith and similar writings however contain mythological
concepts, which are then by hook or by crook attributed to the prophet. The
most famous commentary of the Koran, that by Ibn Kathir (2/29 and 50/1)
makes extensive use of the Hadith as explaining the Koran. In that spirit, Ibn
Kathir suggests that the earth is "carried on a giant bull." When the bull
shakes its head, an earthquake results. As stated earlier, Bukhari's book of
Hadith states that the sun revolves around the earth.

12.According to Hanbel 4/85, 5/54, the prophet ordered that all black dogs
be killed because they were devils. Inspired by that Hadith so called
"Muslims" kill hundreds of dogs all over the world and consider them unclean.

The Koran, on the other hand talks about the sleepers in the cave (sura 18)
as having a dog, inside their dwelling place and allows meat killed by hunting
dogs. There is nothing in the Koran, which even remotely suggests that dogs
are unclean as pets. Indeed the Koran states that God has subjected animals
to be of use to humankind.

13.The Koran states that," Vision cannot comprehend God, who comprehends
all vision," yet the Hadith of Bukhari 97/24 and 10/129 says that to prove his
identity to Muhammed, God showed the prophet his thigh.

14.The Koran mentions with absolutely no ambiguity that the punishment of

adultery or fornication is 100 lashes (Koran 24:1-3); which is half in the case
of slave girls (50 lashes) and double in the case of the wives of the prophet
(200 lashes) if they were to become guilty. The Hadith, contrary to this
mention "stoning to death," as being the punishment of adultery in the case
of married couples. This is completely against the commandment of Allah in
the Koran, which makes no distinction between married or unmarried in the
case of adultery.

The Hadith is definitely borrowed from a similar ruling in the Old Testament.
It contradicts the Koran. Could the prophet have issued a ruling contrary to
the ruling of Allah in the Koran?
There is no verse on stoning adulterers in the Koran. Hadith forgers knew
about this so they inserted another Hadith which claims that a verse on
stoning existed in the Koran but it was eaten by a goat and so vanished from
the earth (Ibn Maja 36/144; Ibn Hanbal 3/61;5/131, 132, 183;6/269). The
Hadith also tells of a "planet of the apes" type story in which the prophet
helped stone a monkey guilty of adultery whom the other monkeys had
caught in order to bring it to justice. Why do they attribute such fairy tales to
the prophet? Could not God protect his book from the goat? The Koran
suggests halving or doubling the punishment for adultery, how can you kill
someone (stone to death) half or double?

15.The Koran states that God is the protector of true believers, yet the
Hadith states that the prophet was bewitched by a Jew and for many days,
he didn't know what he was doing (Bukhari 59/11, 76/47; Hanbel 6/57 and
4/367). This Hadith goes completely against the Koran, which counters in
many places the claim of the unbelievers that the prophet was bewitched.

16.The Koran talks of itself as being the only message that God intended the
prophet to convey (Koran 42:52, 14:52;69:44;6:19 etc.). The Hadith of
Muslim quotes the prophet as saying (Muslim, Zuhd 72, Hanbel 3/12,21,39)
that no one should write anything from him other than the Koran. This
particular Hadith is in harmony with the Koran, but then another Hadith
contradicts not only the Koran but this Hadith. The prophet is quoted as
asking, in Hanbel 2/162, Amr bin As, his companion to write everything he
spoke.

17.The Koran states that those who forbid things even though God has
allowed them, are committing a great sin. Yet the followers of Hadith have
forbidden (haraam) the use of silk and gold by men, even though Allah never
forbade these in the Koran. Contrary to that Allah specifically allows them
(Koran 7:30-32, 42:21;22:23; 35:33). The Hadith in keeping with its
reputation of contradictions, even contradicts this forbidding law by stating
that the prophet allowed a "gold ring" to be worn by one of his companions
and forbade the others! Could the prophet have invented laws not in the
Koran? Could he then have been partial in implementing those laws?

18.The Koran only prohibits the meat of one animal, the pig. Certain sects in
Islam however, based on the authority of the Hadith forbid clams, shrimp,
crab etc. Why are they attributing against God a lie if they are submitters?

19.According to the Koran, division into sects is the work of evil, and is the
result of following man made ideas like the Hadith (Koran 23:52-56 and
6:159) Division into sects can never be a mercy as claimed by some schools
of thought.
The Koran claims to be the best Hadith (Ahsan ul hadeeth 39:23), and states
that after Allah and his ayat (verses) no other Hadith is to be followed (Koran
45:6). The Koran also states that people have fabricated Hadith to mislead
from the way of Allah (Koran 31:6 Lahwal Hadith). The Koran challenges
people to produce a "Hadith" like the Koran (Koran 52:34) if they are
truthful. The difference in language, style and content between the Koran
and the other "Hadith" has been evident and is not denied even by those who
believe in the Hadith as being genuine.

"These are the verses of Allah (God) which we rehearse to you with truth.
Then in what Hadith will they believe after Allah and His verses? (Koran
45:6)."

The Koran's Verdict:

" And the messenger says of Judgment Day, "O my Lord! My own people
took this Koran as a thing to be shunned (KORAN 25:30)."

The Koran says in well over 15 places that it is "explained in detail (6:114
etc)." One word used is Tafseel which means a detailed explanation. It
further says that it contains a Biyan or clear exposition of everything
(16:89). God says in the Koran that He neglected nothing in the Book (6:38).
The Koran talks about Moses' Book being Tamam (which means complete),
and that the Koran is in no way less than that. The Koran also suggests that
it should be Kaafi meaning "enough" for guidance by itself (29:51).

The Koran states explicitly that the messenger's duty was only "to convey
the message (29:18)," and he said nothing on his own as his own sayings
(69:44). It states that the message that the messenger conveyed was the
Koran only (42:52 & 14:52 & 69:44). Therefore, to follow God's words in the
Koran would be to follow the messenger , (4:80), as the words of the Koran
is the messenger's speech (69:40). It also claims to be the Qawl or the
speech of the messenger (69:40). The Koran claims that it contains answers
to ALL relevant questions (25:33) and contains the best explanation
(Tafseer) of itself (25:33 & 2:159). The Koran claims to be the Hukm or
commandments of God, according to which humankind is to be judged
(5:48). It also states that it is the Shariah or law/way with which God sent
the messenger (45:18 & 42:13).
Who would know best on how to talk to humankind but their creator?
Therefore, it makes no sense to say that outside sources better explain God's
word.

The Koran claims that it is explained fully in detail and lacks nothing.
Therefore it must, according to its claim, contain a full explanation of
everything in Islam, including Salaah (prayer). It surely does, we just need
to study it. A careful reading of the Koran reveals that we are to get our
Salaah from the Masjid-el Haraam [the continuous practice at Mecca since
the time of Abraham], specifically the "place of Abraham (moqaam e
Ibraheem)." The Koran tells us that the purpose of Hajj is to educate Muslims
in Islam (Koran 22:27-28) and that the Masjid-el-Haraam is "guidance for all
the worlds (3:96)."

By indexing the verses of the Koran, we can check all relevant details on the
Salaah [the daily prayer]. The Koran confirms and covers every aspect of
Islam, more comprehensively and with no discrepancy compared to the
books of Hadith. The Koran states explicitly that it guides to that "which is
the MOST STRAIGHT PATH (17:9)."

In Koran 2:185 it is stated explicitly that the Koran is the Criterion

(Furqaan). It is the distinguisher between what is correct and what is wrong.
If the Koran is missing details, as Muslim sects purport, how can it be a
criterion or a distinguisher over those details?

Notes:

The Koran is in detail [6:114; 2:159-160; 10:37; 11:11; 41:1-3; 22:16;

6:38; 12:111; 14:52; 17:89; 75:16-19; 18:54; 20:113; 39:27-28; 54:17;
25:33; 16:89 etc.]

The messenger's duty is only to convey the Book [5:102; 16:35; 16:82;
24:54; 36:16-17; 14:52 etc.]

The way sent down by God has been uniform in history in every way [41:43;
42:13; 46:9; 30:30; 6:20; 23:68; 21:24; 4:26; 1:7 read together with
19:58; 6:83-88]

Extra-Koranic Hadith an innovation [6:112; 22:52; 17:73-77; 10:15;

16:116; 42:21; 10:69-70; 5:47-49; 7:28; 33:64-68; 6:123; 6:144; 49:16;
39:23; 45:6; 31:6; 52:33-34; 31:20; 6:116; 2:170; 69:38-49;81:15-19;
51:7-11]

Bibliography:

Koran. Translated from the Arabic

The Bible. Revised Standard Version (1971)
Fazlur Rahman. Islam (1979). University of Chicago Press. Chicago. Illinois.
Sahih Al Bokhari. English Translation by M. Muhsin Khan.
Bucaille, Maurice. The Bible, The Qur'an & Science. 1987. Seghers. Paris
References to the Koran in this paper e.g. 39:23 refer to Koran chapter or
sura 39, aya or verse 23. References to the various books of Hadith e.g.
Bukhari 56/152 refer to the Book of Bukhari, book (chapter) 56, Hadith
number 152.

Copyright © 1997 Muhammed Asadi

WHO AUTHORIZED BUKHARI?

By Layth (e-mail: laytth@hotmail.com)

Imam Bukhari (died in 256H/870A.D), was well known for his compilation of
Hadith/Sayings attributed to the prophet (peace be upon him). Al-Bukahri is
considered by the majority of Muslims to be the 2nd source for Islam after
the holy Book and is used by the majority to 'explain' the revelations of the
Quran by showing what the prophet and his companions used to do/say.

When GOD says in His book: 'Obey GOD and obey the Messenger', the
Muslims take GOD to be represented by the Quran and the Messenger to be
represented by Bukhari and the Hadiths.

The prophet (peace be upon him) delivered to us the holy Quran by receiving
its inspiration for many years.

"Say, 'Whose testimony is the greatest?' Say, 'GOD's. He is the witness

between me and you that this Quran has been inspired to me, to preach it to
you and whomever it reaches. Indeed, you bear witness that there are other
gods beside GOD.' Say, 'I do not testify as you do; there is only one god, and
I disown your idolatry.' (6:19)

Some of the people around the prophet at the time of revelation were very
disturbed by the words of the Quran and even asked the prophet to bring
them sayings 'other' than the book:

"When our revelations are recited to them, those who do not expect to meet
us say, 'Bring a Quran other than this, or change it!' Say, 'I cannot possibly
change it on my own. I simply follow what is revealed to me. I fear, if I
disobey my Lord, the retribution of an awesome day.' (10:15)

Yet, the prophet could not help these people by changing the words of the
Quran to suit their desires...he could only deliver the message as it was
inspired to him and to them, for the Quran is a book unlike any other:

"Say: If men and jinn should combine together to bring the like of this
Quran, they could not bring the like of it, though some of them were aiders
of others. " (17:88)

So, when the people of the time listened to the words 'obey GOD & obey the
Messenger', they understood that the words of GOD were being revealed
through the person of the Messenger, and that to accept and obey these
words was to obey and accept GOD Himself!.

After all, the words of GOD were unlike anything they had heard of before...

"When you read the Quran, we place between you and those who do not
believe in the Hereafter an invisible barrier. We place shields around their
minds, to prevent them from understanding it, and deafness in their ears.
And when you preach your Lord, using the Quran alone, they run away in
aversion." (17:45-46)

After the death of the prophet (peace be upon him), the people who had
fought his message and the words of GOD saw that this was a 'no win'
situation for them, and that the words of GOD would capture the hearts of
every believing man and women filling them with justice, equality, tolerance,
peace, and freedom.

Yet, even with the spreading of the message, GOD had predicted the
inevitable:

"We have permitted the enemies of every prophet - human and alien devils -
to inspire to each other fancy words, in order to deceive. Had your Lord
willed, they would not have done it. You shall disregard them and their
fabrications. This is to let the minds of those who do not believe in the
Hereafter listen to such fabrications, and accept them, and thus expose their
real convictions. " (6:112-113)

Enter the 'Hadith' collectors and narrators...

These were people who could not be satisfied with the words of GOD Alone
and were searching for new gods to replace those that Islam had destroyed.

Bukhari was one such person...

Being born 200 years after the prophet's death (peace be upon him), Bukhari
went to perform a task that none of the native Arabs had dared to do...He
collected the Hadiths under the guise of 'complementing' the Quran, when in
reality his true mission was to undermine and destroy its message with those
of his masters!.

Just like Paul (not Jesus) is the father of today's Christianity, so it is that
Bukhari (and not the prophet) is the true head of what we call 'Islam' in its
present form!.

It is time for Muslims to WAKE-UP and realize that their religion has been
hijacked for the last 1,000 years by the enemies of the prophet, and that
tyrannical and brutal regimes are a model image of what Bukhari and his
colleagues had intended for Islam...They could not destroy the Quran, but
they found another way to distort GOD's great message to mankind.

Will we continue to propagate these lies?.

Or will we take a stand against the idols that wish to discredit GOD & His
Messenger's words?.

Below is a sample of what GOD's enemies have been propagating:

Narrated Hudayfh Ibn al-Yaman: Prophet said: "There will come rulers after
me who do not guide to my guidance and do not practice my Sunnah, and
the hearts of some them are the hearts of Satans but they are in the body of
human." I said: "What should we do at that time?" Prophet (PBUH) said:
"You should just listen to them and obey those rulers. No matter if they hurt
you and take your wealth, you should follow them and obey them."

Reference: Sahih Muslim, Chapter of al-Imaarah (chapter 33 for the Arabic

version), Section of necessity of joining the majority, 1980 Edition, Arabic
version (Saudi Arabia), v3, p1476, Tradition #52.

Beware that our prophet's complaint on judgment day does not include you:

"And the messenger said, 'My Lord, my people have deserted this Quran.'
(25:30)