:: this was posted by thabet at 23:17

Wednesday, June 18, 2003

 

Towards a normative Sunnah: IV

This article first appeared on Understanding Islam, under the title "Sunnah and Ahadith - A Comparison". With great thanks, Adis Duderija, the author, has given me permission to reproduce it here. I have only edited the article for clarity, and any other additions I make are clearly marked as an editor's note.

Part IV: Need for Sunnah
The author started this article with a statement that Muslims are facing a big challenge in terms of separating 'historical' from 'normative' Islam. The notion of proper understanding and definition of Sunnah is central to this undertaking.

Having flolowed many discussions on the subject of 'Qur'an only' vs. 'Qur'an and Ahadith' [18], I realised that both 'camps' face certain difficulties in finding the right answer to the problem in question. [19] The former cannot account for the historical continuity [of the practical teachings of Islam - Ed.]. By this it is meant the continual perpetuation of practices such as Sala'h, Adhaan, Janaazah, etc. in the Muslim community. The latter have to deal with the fact that various beliefs as well as practices (often obscure and alien to Qur'anic spirit as well as word [20]), inherent in their accepting of Ahadith literature as an authentic insight into the actions and sayings of the Prophet Muhammad (thus, giving them normative value), have been added to their 'Islamic' worldview.

The dilemma is perhaps best described with the following question often asked by the traditionalists to discredit the views of the 'Qur'an only' groups and defend their own position of indispensable value of Ahadith literature in Qur'anic understanding, thus securing it a position of a primary source of Islamic jurisprudence and Shari'a. The question being: 'How do you perform Sala'h [21] if there were no Ahadith to guide us on these issues?'

Before we attempt answering this question a few words regarding the charater of the Qur'an and Prophet's mission must be elaborated.

Upon a closer analysis of the Qur'an, and the position Prophet Muhammad occupies in it, a close organic relationship between the two cannot be overlooked. The Qur'an was revealed in a socio-cultural mileu of the Prophet's era. Thus it is embeded in a particular place and time. Its gradual revelation (Tadrij) over more than two decades and its graduality in terms of its prescriptiveness (Ahkam - injunctions pertaining to Haram vs. Halaal) speak for the fact that it acknowledged the mentality and the condition of its direct recipients. It chose to operate initially from this given platform and aimed to achieve its objectives in a step-by-step manner. By doing so it did not wish to alienate itself too much, neither from the Prothet himself, nor from the 'character' of the community in which the Prophet was active. Thus, the Qur'an's 'historicity' is imprinted in the very fabric of the nature of its content [22]. The situational and historical character of the Qur'an [23], to use Rahman's terminology, and the character of the Prothet's mission go hand in hand together. This is not suprising since the knowledge of God's directives is naturally received through the God's Prophets.

It is in this context that we must look at a controversial and often repeated Qur'anic formula 'Obey Allah and Obey the Prophet', which so clearly brings the Prophet into the, above-mentioned, close relationship with the Revelation. This phrase has often been misunderstood and manipulated to serve the interests and views of those who were interpreting it, especially the Muslim clergy. [24] Their interpretaion of this verse is as follows: 'Obey Allah' means follow the Qur'an and 'Obey the Prophet' means follow their definition of Sunnah which as we already have outlined means nothing but blind and literal following of Ahadith literature.

This view is both incoherent and historically untenable. It is incoherent because if this really was the case the Prophet himself would have had a religious obligation to make sure that the 'Sunnah' content, as found in the Ahadith literature books, was to be collected, arranged and preserved (i.e. if they were to form a part of the Islamic normative teachings) in the same manner as the Qur'an. In the author's opinion the practical teachings of the Prophet [25] were. It is historically untenable because, as we will find out and as it is commonly acknowledged even by the traditionalist scholars, that Ahadith literature was a product of men of tradition who transmitted, wrote down, arranged and collected it over a period ranging over 150 years (from approx. year 80 -230 AH) and not during the Prophet's time.

Indeed, the only proper understanding of this verse, keeping in mind the close connection and the 'reciprocal nature' of the revelation and the person to whom it was revealed, is a genaral statement that by obeying the Prophet we obey God and vice-versa. Nothing more and nothing less.

Now we come to another important question, namely that of the extra-dogmatic [26] authority of the Prophet and that fact whether it is warranted or not and in the case of the affirmative what its scope is.

Firstly, nobody can deny Prophet Muhammad's function as one of a model and epitome of moral behaviour and attitudes. We know that this praise is extended to him in the Qur'an as well. He was the living embodiment and a practical example of God's directives. In the Qur'anic verses such as 59:7 and 4:64 [27] the Qur'an mentions necessary intervention of and obedience to the Prophet in the affairs of the community (it must be admitted that the mentioned verses had specific occasions of revelation - first linked to the distribution of booty and second to a concrete internal problem within a Muslim community), which were not religious in nature. In other words, they were not dogmatic and did not pertain to the realm of beliefs. According to Rahman, the Qur'an mentions these incidents solely because of the fact that there were evident differences and skirmishes within the Muslim community, in which the authority of the Prophet as the final judge was put under question. Thus this necessitated Qur'anic intervention. Otherwise the Qur'an would not have got involved in the matter. He further states that the Prophet consequently must have enjoyed authority outside the Qur'anic injunctions. [28] He also adds that, on the other hand, the Prophet always exercised mutual consultation and assertion of his authority in a most balanced and delicate way. [29]

Secondly, another logical reason for the extra-dogmatic authority of a Prophet could be deduced from the fact that God has always chosen human beings as bearers of revelation and not angles. Apart from the obvious reasons for this practice, its wisdom lies in the fact that prophets were supposed to establish societies which would be in line with God's laws (cf. meaning of Islam at the beginning of the article). In order to achieve this they were exponents and role models of their messages, whose general and basic attitudes, sentiments and practical teachings could be absorbed (of couse with the appoval and general sanction of the Prophet) and subsequently perpetuated by their contemporaries and maintained by following generations as part of God's instruction.

However, even if we agreed with the above statements of extra-dogmatic authority of the Prophet, this authority must have been only extended to the most fundamental issues concerning religious, social and moral life of the Muslim community, in line with the character of the Prophet's mission which was that of a political and religious/moral reformer, rather than that of a judge. [30] His role could not have included all the minutest details regarding his private and public life as depicted by the later developed ahadith literature. [31] This assertion is also in line with the title of Uswah-e-Hasanah [loosely, "the best example" - Ed.], given to the Prophet by the Qur'an itself.

The statements above have tried to show that due to the character of the Qur'an and the character of Prophet Muhammad's 'message', and the closely interwoven relationship between the two, a concept of Prophet's authority outside of Qur'an has value. It has also been argued that this principle does not coincide with the traditionalists claim of Ahadith literature as being a credible source of this authority, but that it only refers to basic practical teachings (in contrast to beliefs) of a moral, spiritual or social nature, sanctioned by the Prophet himself as a part of the God's general directives. It is these which can be termed as the Sunnah of the Prophet. This definition closely follows that given by Moiz Amjad which will be reproduced here again. A close look should be given to its wording:

"A set of practical rules/actions, to the exclusion of beliefs, initiated, promoted and performed by the Prophet himself and among all of his followers (in contrast to a few or some, as depicted in Ahadith literature) as part of God's directives to mankind."

The identification of scope, nature of transmission and formation of the elements embodied in this definition of Sunnah will be discussed and compared to the same aspects and mechanisms of the Ahadith literature shortly.

Firstly, however, the question posed at the beginning of this section, regarding performance of Sala'h, must be answered.

Another two points need to be elucidated before a satisfactory answer to the question can be given. Firstly, the concept of Sala'h was known among the Arabs of Hijaz prior to Prophet Muhammad's advent [32] according to Moiz Amjad. [33] For this reason an explanation or an instruction as how to perform the prayer was not necessary. The Prophet was the one who modified [what was neccessary - Ed.] and given it the shape it has now.

Secondly, common sense would tell us that Prophet must have performed the ritualistic prayer (Sala'h) in his time as it is highly improbable that this was an invention of later generations, since during the 10 years which the Prophet spent in Madinah, his Companions must have seen him being engaged in it on many, many occasions. Not only that, they would have participated in it too. This practice was than passed from generation to generation up until the present times. [34]

Thus, even if there was no written documentation or oral accounts of how to perform a ritualistic prayer (i.e. Ahadith), one could still be able to perform it simply by means of observation/ mimicking/copying movements of an older generation which acted as a transmitter of this practical teaching of the Prophet. Now let us turn to the question of formation and nature of transmission of Sunnah and Ahadith.

Notes
[18] I cannot say 'Sunnah' because the proponents of the view 'Qur'an and Ahadith' identify the Ahadith literature with the Sunnah of the Prophet, which in author's opinion is wrong as the following parts of the article will try to demonstrate.

[19] I acknowledge that these descriptions have been imposed externally and do not necessarily represent the actual perceptions of the people 'belonging' to them. They were used here for the purposes of simplicity and clarity.

[20] This will be thoruoghly analysed in the already refered to upcoming article by the author

[21] Even if we agreed that there are various meanings to the word Sala'h as they occur in the Qur'an, some of which are not necesseraly related to the act of worship that is commonly understood as Muslim ritualistic prayer, the fact the Qur'an does refer to timings of prayer and the historical proof of Prophet performing ritualistic set of motions as a part of the worshipping of God (which have been passed on from generation to generation), points to the fact that there was a notion of prayer during the time of the Prophet Muhammad. This point will be made more clear as we gain a better understanding of the word Sunnah as argued by the author.

[22] This is, of course, not to say the it did not entail universal, basic truths which transend space and time.

[23] By this expression it is meant that a majority of verses in the Qur'an are a direct or indirect response to specific, concrete situations/frames of mind (physical or pshycological/mental) the Prophet and the early Muslim community were experiencing during his mission, e.g. verses pertaining to battles of Uhud, Badr; Zainab's marriage to Zaid; accusation of Aish'a's chastity; and many, many others. This situational character of the Qur'an and its subsequent need for contextualisation was also recognised by the Orthodox 'Ulama which materialised in the emergence of a seperate Islamic science of Asbab al-Nuzul ('occasions of revelation') and Tafseer (exegesis). However, the results of these disciplines are rather chaotic, accoring to Fazlur Rahman (see his work Islam and Modernity).

[24] As this makes them the supposed 'custodians of traditional knowledge' and only authority capable of its interpretation, as stated in Ahadith literature.

[25] This issue wil be discussed in the headings of this article entitled 'Formation and transmission of Ahadith' and 'Formation and transmission of Sunnah'.

[26] By this is it postulated whether Prophet had authority on matters outside the realm of beliefs/dogma as outlined in the Qur'an.

[27] Qur'an 59:7: 'So take what Aposlte assigns to you and deny yourselves that which he withholds from you' (Yusuf Ali); 'And whatever the messenger gives you take it, but whatever he forbiddeth, abstain (from it)' (Pickthall); Qur'an 4:64: 'We have sent not an Apostle but to be obeyed in accordance with the Will of Allah' (Yusuf Ali); 'We sent the Messenger save that he should be obeyed by Allah's leave' (Pickthall).

[28] Fazlur Rahman, op.cit., p. 86.

[29] Ibid., p.87

[30] The ad-hoc and situationally determined juristic activity of the Prophet is also evident in the Ahadith literature.

[31] Compare this statement with the definition of the Sunnah by Moiz Amjad (Understanding Islam).

[32] This claim has value, in the authors mind, since it must not be forgotten that Arabs are, like Jews, a Semitic people, and that the concept of ritualistic prayer would not be alien to them. In fact, many peoples belonging to other 'religions' such as Buddists, Sikhs and Hindus have a concept of a ritualistic prayer.

[33] http://www.understanding-islam.com

[34] The differences in some aspects of the ritualistic prayer can be accounted for by the fact that Prophet himself did not fix an exact form, but at times himself perofmed it slightly differently. Some companions must have adopted or seen only one style while the others a slightly different style, which were than passed onto the following generations.