—If the narrator confessed that he fabricated the report.52
In addition to these rules of criticism, there is another very important test whereby the trustworthiness of Ḥadīth may be judged, and it is a test the application whereof was commanded by the Holy Prophet himself. “There will be narrators,” he is reported to have said, “reporting Ḥadīth from me, so judge by the Holy Qur’ān; if a report agrees with the Holy Qur’ān, accept it; otherwise, reject it.” The genuineness of this saying is beyond all question, as it stands on the soundest basis.53 That Ḥadīth was in vogue in the time of the Holy Prophet is a fact admitted by even European critics, as already shown, and that the authority of the Holy Qur’ān was higher than that of Ḥadīth appears from numerous circumstances. “I am no more than a man,” the Holy Prophet is reported to have said according to a very reliable report. “When I order you anything respecting religion receive it, and when I order anything about the affairs of the world, I am no more than a man.”54 There is another saying of his: “My sayings do not abrogate the word of Allāh, but the word of Allāh can abrogate my sayings.”55 The ḥadīth relating to Mu‘ādh which has been quoted elsewhere,56 places the Holy Qur’ān first, and the Ḥadīth after that. ‘Ā’ishah used to quote a verse of the Holy Qur’ān on hearing words from the mouth of the Holy Prophet when she thought that the purport of what the Holy Prophet said did not agree with the Holy Qur’ān. The great Imām Bukhārī quotes a verse of the Holy Qur’ān whenever he finds one suiting his text, before citing a ḥadīth, thus showing that the Holy Qur’ān holds precedence over Ḥadīth; and by common consent of the Muslim community, the Bukhārī, which is considered to be the most trustworthy of all collections of Ḥadīth, is called the most reliable of books after the Book of God.57 This verdict of the community as a whole is enough proof that even if the Bukhārī disagrees with the Holy Qur’ān, it is the Bukhārī that must be rejected and not the Book of God. And, as has already been stated at the commencement of this chapter, Ḥadīth is only an explanation of the Holy Qur’ān, and hence also the latter must have precedence. And last of all, both Muslim and non-Muslim historians are agreed that
52 Similar rules of criticism are laid down by Mulla ‘Alī Qārī in his Māudzu‘at, and by Ibn al-Jauzī in Fatḥ al-Mughīth, as well as by Ibn Ḥajar in Nuzhat al-Naẓar.
53 A ḥadīth, however sound the statement it contains and however great the authority on which it is based, is readily condemned as a fabrication by European critics when it does not suit their canons of criticism. Thus Guillaume, after quoting the well-known ḥadīth, which is reported by a very large number of Companions — so large that not the least doubt can be entertained as to its genuineness — “Whoever shall repeat of me that which I have not said, his resting-place shall be in hell.” remarks: “A study of the theological systems of the world would hardly reveal more naive attempt to tread the ṣirāṭ-al mustaqīm” (Tr. Is., p. 79). Referring to the same ḥadīth, the same author remarks: “In order to combat false ḥadīth they invented others equally destitute of prophetic authority” (Tr. Is., p. 78). Such irresponsible remarks ill befit a work of criticism. The genuineness of this report is beyond all doubt, and it has been accepted as such by collectors. It cannot be denied that there are theological systems whose basic principles are the concoctions of pious men, but in Islām the very details are matters of history, and “pious lies” could not find here any ground whereon to prosper.
54 MM. I:6 — i.
55 Ibid., I:6 — iii.
56 On being appointed Governor of Yaman, Mu‘ādh was asked by the Holy Prophet as to the rule by which he would abide. “By the law of the Holy Qur’ān,” he replied. “But if you do not find any-direction therein,” asked the Holy Prophet. “Then I will act according to the Sunnah of the Holy Prophet,” was the reply. And the Holy Prophet approved of it (AD. 23:11).
57 Aṣah al-kutūbī ba‘da kitāb-Allāh.