KAJIAN SANAD HADIS, ANTARA JOSEPH SCHACHT DAN M.M. AZAMI
Oleh : Zailani, M.Ag
I. Pendahuluan
Kajian tentang sumber hukum Islam telah banyak dibahas oleh para pakar,
baik di kalangan umat Islam, maupun dari luar Islam. Di antaranya menyangkut
dengan sumber hukum Islam, terutama Hadis Nabi saw. Hal ini dapat dipahami
bahwa Hadis Nabi mempunyai fungsi yang sangat urgen dalam pertumbuhan dan
perkembangan hukum Islam
Di samping fungsi Hadis tersebut secara khusus sebagai salah satu sumber
dalam penetapan hukum, Hadis juga tidak sama dengan al-Qur’an, sebab al-Qur’an
telah ditulis pada masa Nabi dan telah dibukukan pada masa pemerintahan Usman
bin Affan. Sedangkan Hadis baru dibukukan pada akhir abad pertamadan awal abad
kedua hijrah yaitu pada masa pemerintahan Umar ibn Abdul Aziz (61-101 H)1 yang
mana pada masa ini merupakan masa penutup sikap pro dan kontra tentang
penulisan Hadis.
Disebabkan lamanya tenggang waktu antara Rasulullah dengan masa
pembukuan Hadis ini, menjadikan Hadis sebagai sasaran empuk bagi orang yang
tidak senang dengan agama Islam, khsusnya oleh kaum orientalis yang ingin
menginginkan agar umat Islam tidak percaya kepada Hadis, atau paling tidak
membuat umat Islam meragukan sumber hukum Islam yang kedua itu dari hasil
penelitian yang mereka lakukan.
Salah seorang orientalis yang sangat mengguncangkan dunia Islam oleh hasil
penelitiannya adalah Joseph Schacht, salah seorang murid Ignaz Goldziher, yang
mengatakan bahwa sanad Hadis itu merupakan buatan para qadhi yang yang ingin
melegitimasi pendapat mereka dengan menyandarkannya kepada Rasul, atau
kepada tokoh-tokoh yang ada di belakang mereka, yang dikenal dengan teori
projecting back. Makalah ini mencoba untuk melihat teori yang dikembangkan oleh
Joseph Schacht ini, serta bantahan yang dilakukan oleh para tokoh Islam
sesudahnya.
Prof. Dr. Joseph Schacht lahir di Silisie Jerman pada 15 Maret 1902.
Karirnya sebagai orientalis dimulai dengan belajar pilologi klasik, theologi, dan
bahasa-bahasa Timur di Universitas Berslauw dan Universitas Leipzig. Ia
meraih gelar Doktor dari Universitas Berslauw pada tahun 1923, ketika ia
berusia 21 tahun.
Pada tahun 1925 ia diangkat menjadi dosen di Universitas Fribourg, dan
pada tahun 1929 ia dikukuhkan sebagai Guru Besar. Pada tahun 1932 ia pindah
ke Universitas Kingsbourg, dan dua tahun kemudian ia meninggalkan negerinya
Jerman untuk mengajar tata bahasa Arab dan bahasa Suryani di Universitas
Fuad Awal (kini Universitas Cairo) di Cairo Mesir. Ia tinggal di Cairo sampai
tahun 1939 sebagai Guru Besar.2
Ketika perang dunia II meletus, Schacht meninggalkan Cairo dan pindah
ke Inggeris untuk kemudian bekerja di Rasio BBC London. Meskipun ia
seorang Jerman, namun dalam perang dunia II ia berada di pihak Inggeris. Dan
ketika perang selesai, ia tidak pulang ke Jerman, melainkan tetap tinggal di
Inggeris, dan menikah dengan wanita Inggeris. Bahkan pada tahun 1947 ia
menjadi warga negara Inggeris.
Meskipun ia bekerja untuk kepentingan negara Inggeris dan mengkhianati
tanah airnya sendiri, namun pemerintah Inggeris tidak memberikan imbalan
apa-apa kepadanya. Sebagai seorang ilmuan yang menyandang gelar Propesor-
Doktor, di Inggeris ia justeru belajar lagi di tingkat Pasca Sarjana Universitas
Oxford, sampai ia meraih gelar Magister (1948) dan Doktor (1952) dari
universitas tersebut.
Pada tahun 1954 ia meninggalkan Inggeris dan mengajar di Universitas
laiden Negeri Belanda sebagai Guru Besar sampai tahun 1959. Di sini ia ikut
menjadi supervisor atas cetakan kedua buku Dairah al-Ma’arif al-Islamiyah.
Kemudian pada musim panas tahun 1959 ia pindah ke Universitas Colombia
New York, dan mengajar di sana sebagai Guru Besar, sampai ia meninggal
dunia pada tahun 1969.3
Meskipun ia seorang pakar Sarjana Hukum Islam, namun karya-karya
tulisnya tidak terbatas pada bidang tersebut. Secara umu, ada beberapa disiplin
ilmu yang ia tulis. Antara lain, kajian tentang Manuskrip Arab, Edit-Kritikal
atas Manuskrip-manuskrip Fiqh Islam. Kajian tentang ilmu Kalam, kajian
tentang Fiqh Islam, kajian tentang Sejarah Sains dan Filsafat, dan lain-lainnya.
Karya tulisnya yang paling monumental dan melambungkan namanya
adalah bukunya The Origins of Muhammadan Jurisprudence yang terbit pada
tahun 1950, kemudian bukunya An Introduction to Islamic Lau yang terbit pada
tahun 1960.4 Dalam dua karyanya inilah ia menyajikan hasil penelitiannya
tentang Hadis Nabawi, di mana ia berkesimpulan bahwa Hadis Nabawi,
terutama yang berkaitan dengan Hukum Islam, adalah buatan para ulama abad
kedua dan ketiga hijrah.
2. Pembahasan
Dalam mengkaji Hadis Nabi, Schacht lebih banyak menyoroti aspek sanad
(transmisi, silsilah keguruan) dari pada aspek matan (materi Hadis). Sementara
kitab-kitab yang dipakai dalam ajang penelitiannya adalah kitab al-Muwaththa’
karya Imam Malik, kitab al-Muwaththa’ karya Imam Muhammad al-Syaibani,
serta kitab al-Umm dan al-Risalah karya Imam al-Syafi’i. Menurut Prof. Dr.
M.M Azami, kitab-kitab ini lebih layak disebut kitab-kitab Fiqh dari pada kitabkitab
Hadis. Sebab kedua jenis kitab ini memiliki karakteristik yang berbeda.
Oleh karena itu, meneliti Hadis-Hadis yang terdapat dalam kitab-kitab fiqh
hasilnya tidak akan tepat. Penelitian Hadis haruslah pada kitab-kitab Hadis.5
Prof. Schacht menegaskan bahwa Hukum Islam belum eksis pada masa
al-Sya’bi (w. 110 H). penegasan ini memberikan pengertian bahwa apabila
ditemukan Hadis-Hadis yang berkaitan dengan hukum Islam, maka Hadis-hadis
itu adalah buatan orang-orang yang hidup sesudah al-Sya’bi. Ia berpendapat
bahwa Hukum Islam baru dikenal semenjak masa pengangkatan para qadhi
(hakim agama). Pada khalifah dahulu (khulafa al-Rasyidin) tidak pernah
mengangkat qadhi. Pengangkatan Qadhi baru dilakukan pada masa Dinasti Bani
Umayyah.6
Kira-kira pada akhir abad pertama hijrah (+ 715-720 M) pengangkatan
qadhi itu ditujukan kepada orang-orang “spesialis” yang berasal dari kalangan
yang taat beragama. Karena jumlah orang-orang spesialis ini kian bertambah,
maka akhirnya mereka berkembang menjadi kelompok aliran fiqh klasik. Hal
ini terjadi pada dekade pertama abad kedua hijrah.
Keputusan-keputusan hukum yang diberikan qadhi ini memerlukan
legitimasi dari orang-orang yang memiliki otoritas lebih tinggi. Karenanya,
mereka tidak menisbahkan keputusan-keputusan itu kepada diri mereka sendiri,
melainkan menisbahkan kepada tokoh-tokoh sebelumnya. Misalnya, orang Iraq
menisbahkan pendapat mereka kepada Ibrahim al-Nakha’i (w. 95 H).
Perkembangan berikutnya, pendapat-pendapat para qadhi itu tidak hanya
dinisbahkan kepada tokoh-tokoh terdahulu yang jaraknya masih dekat,
melainkan dinisbahkan kepada tokoh yang lebih dahulu, misalnya Masruq.
Langkah selanjutnya, untuk memperoleh legitimasi yang lebih kuat, pendapatpendapat
itu dinisbahkan kepada tokoh yang memiliki otoritas paling tinggi,
misalnya Abdullah ibn Mas’ud. Dan pada tahap terakhir, pendapat-pendapat itu
dinisbahkan kepada Nabi Muhammad saw. Inilah rekontruksi terbentuknya
sanad Hadis menurut Prof. Schacht, yaitu dengan memproyeksikan pendapatpendapat
itu kepada tokoh-tokoh yang legitimit yang ada dibelakang mereka,
inilah yang disebut oleh Schacht dengan teori projecting Back.7
Kemudian dari itu, menurut Prof. Schacht menuculnya aliran-aliran fiqh
klasik ini membawa konsekwensi logis, yaitu munculnya kelompok oposisi
yang terdiri dari ahli-ahli Hadis. Pemikiran dasar kelompok Ahli-ahli hadis ini
adalah bahwa hadis-Hadis yang berasal dari Nabi saw. harus dapat mengalahkan
aturan-aturan yang dibuat oleh kelompok aliran-aliran fiqh. Oleh karena itu,
untuk mencapai tujuan ini, kelompok ahli Hadis membuat penjelasan-penjelasan
dan Hadis-hadis, seraya mengatakan bahwa hal itu pernah dikerjakan atau
diucapkan oleh Nabi saw. Mereka juga mengatakan bahwa hal itu mereka
terima secara lisan berdasarkan sanad yang bersambung dari para periwayat
Hadis yang dapat dipercaya.
Kesimpulan dari teori Prof. Schacht ini adalah baik kelompok aliran-aliran
fiqh klasik maupun kelompok ahli-ahli Hadis, keduanya sama-sama pemalsu
hadis. Karenanya, sebagaimana yang dikutip oleh Ali Mustafa Yaqub, Prof.
Schacht mengatakan : we shall not meet any legal tradition from the prophet
which can be considered authentic. (kita tidak akan dapat menemukan satu pun
Hadis nabi yang berkaitan dengan hukum, yang dapat dipertimbangkan sebagai
Hadis Shaheh.8
Untuk membantah teori yang dikemukakan oleh para orientalis,
khususnya Prof. Schacht, yang meneliti dari aspek sejarah, maka M.M. Azami
menghancurkan teori Schacht ini juga melalui penelitian sejarah, khususnya
sejarah Hadis. Azami melakukan penelitian khusus tentang Hadis-Hadis nabi
yang terdapat dalam naskah-naskah klasik. Di antaranya adalah naskah milik
Suhail bin Abi Shaleh (w.138 H). Abu Shaleh (ayah Suhail) adalah murid Abu
Hurairah shahabat nabi saw.
Naskah suhail ini berisi 49 Hadis. Sementara azami meneliti perawi Hadis
itu sampai kepada generasi Suhail, yaitu jenjang ketiga (al-thabaqah altsalitsah).
Termasuk jumlah dan domisili mereka. Azami membuktikan bahwa
pada jenjang ketiga, jumlah perawi berkisar 20 sampai 30 orang, sementara
domisili mereka terpencar-pencar dan berjauhan, antara India sampai Maroko,
antara Turki sampai Yaman. Sementara teks hadis yang mereka riwayatkan
redaksinya sama.9
Azami berkesimpulan bahwa sangat mustahil menurut ukuran situasi dan
kondisi pada saat itu mereka pernah berkumpul untuk membuat Hadis palsu
sehingga redaksinya sama. Dan sangat mustahil pula bila mereka masingmasing
membuat Hadis, kemudian oleh generasi berikutnya diketahui bahwa
redaksi hadis yang mereka buat itu sama. Kesimpulan Azami ini bertolak
belakang dengan kesimpulan Schacht, baik tentang rekontruksi terbentuknya
sanad hadis, maupun bunyi teks (matan) Hadis tersebut.
Sebagai contoh, Azami mengemukakan Hadis yang artinya di mana Nabi
saw. bersabda : “ Apabila salah seorang di antara kamu bangun dari tidurnya,
maka hendaknya ia mencuci tangannya, karena ia tidak tahu semalam
tangannya berada di mana “. Hadis ini dalam naskah Suhail bin Abi Shaleh
berada pada urutan nomor 7, dan pada jenjang pertama (generasi shahabat)
diriwayatkan oleh lima orang, yaitu Abu Hurairah, Ibn Umar, Jabir, Aisyah, dan
Ali bin Abi Thalib.
Abu Hurairah sendiri kemudian meriwayatkan Hadis tersebut kepada 13
orang tabi’in (generasi kedua). 13 orang tabi’in ini kemudian menyebar ke
berbagai penjuru negeri Islam. 8 orang tetap tinggal di Madinah, seorang tinggal
di Kufah, 2 orang tinggal di Basharah, seorang tinggal di Yaman, dan seorang
lagi tinggal di Syam.
Tiga belas Tabi’in ini kemudian meriwayatkan lagi kepada generasi
berikutnya (generasi ketiga = Tabi’ Tabi’in), dan jumlah mereka menjadi =
tidak kurang dari 16 orang. Mereka tinggal di Madinah (6 orang), Bashrah (4
orang), Kufah (2 orang), Makkah (1 orang), Yaman (1 orang), Khurasan (1
orang), dan Himsh-Syam (1 orang).10 Maka mustahil 15 orang yang
domisilinya terpencar-pencar di tujuh kota yang berjauhan itu pernah berkumpul
pada satu saat untuk bersama-sama membuat Hadis palsu yang redaksinya
sama, atau mustahil pula, bila mereka secara sendiri-sendiri di kediamannya
masing-masing membuat Hadis, dan kemudian diketahui bahwa bahwa redaksi
Hadis tersebut secara kebetulan sama. 16 orang rawi di atas adalah hanya dari
jalur Abu Hurairah. Apabila jumlah rawi itu ditambah dengan rawi-rawi dari
empat jalur lainnya, yaitu Ibn Umar, Jubir, Aisyah, dan Ali, maka jumlah
perawi itu akan menjadi lebih banyak.11
Dengan demikian apa yang dikembangkan oleh Prof. Schacht dengan
teorinya Projecting Back, yang mengemukakan bahwa sanad Hadis itu baru
terbentuk belakangan dan merupakan pelegitimasian pendapat para qadhi dalam
menetapkan suatu hukum, adalah tidak benar, hal ini sudah dibuktikan oleh
Azami dengan penelitiannya bahwa sanad Hadis itu memang muttashil sampai
kepada rasulullah saw. melalui jalur-jalur yang telah disebutkan di atas. Hal ini
membuktikan juga bahwa Hadis-hadis yang berkembang sekarang bukanlah
buatan para qadhi, tetapi merupakan perbuatan atau ucapan yang datang dari
rasul saw. sebagai seorang Nabi dan panutan umat Islam.
3. Kesimpulan
Teori Projecting Back yang dikemukakan oleh Joseph Schacht di atas,
terlihat ada kelemahan-kelemahan yang kemungkinan akan muncul dari teori itu
sendiri. Kelemahan tersebut di anataranya adalah bahwa bila sanad itu
diciptakan oleh seorang qadhi dalam melegitimasi pendapat mereka, maka
mustahil akan terdapat banyak jalur dalam satu sanad Hadis. Kemudian apabila
Hadis itu berasal dari para qadhi, maka tidak akan mungkin antara qadhi yang
terdapat di kufah, umpamanya sama lafaz atau bunyi yang ia ucapkan dengan
qadhi yang berada di tempat yang lain. Sebagaimana bantahan yang
disampaikan oleh M.M. Azami melalui penelitiannya di atas. Wa Allah ‘A’lam.
Catatan Kaki
1. Muhammad Ajjaj al-Khatib, Al-Sunnah Qabla al-Tadwin, Bairut, Daar al-Fikr, 1981, hlm. 373.
2. Ali Mustafa Yaqub, Kritik Hadis, Jakarta, Pustaka Firdaus, 1995, hlm. 19.
3. Abdurrahman Badawi, Mausu’ah al-Mustasyriqin, Bairut, Daar al-Ilmi al-Malayin, 1989, hlm. 252-
253.
4. Ibid, hlm. 253-255.
5. Muhammad Mushthafa Azami, Dirasat fi al-Hadits al-Nabawi wa Tarekh Tadwinih, Bairut, almaktab
al-Islami, 1980, hlm. 398.
6. Joseph Schacht, An Introductionti Islamic Law, Oxford, Clarendom Press, 1964, hlm. 34.
7. Ibid, hlm. 31-32.
8. Ali Musthafa Yaqub, op. cit., hlm. 22.
9. M. M. Azami, Studies in Early Hadits Literature, Indianapolis-Indiana, American Trust Publication,
1978, hlm. 222-223
10. Iibid, hlm. 225-226.
11. Ibid, hlm 227.
Read more!
Friday, June 5, 2009
KAJIAN SANAD HADIS, ANTARA JOSEPH SCHACHT DAN M.M. AZAMI
Wednesday, February 18, 2009
On The Nature Of Hadith Collections Of Imam Al-Bukhari & Muslim
Khalid al-Khazraji, Muhammad Ghoniem & M S M Saifullah
First Composed: 3rd September 1999
Last Modified: 24th August 2005
Assalamu-`alaykum wa rahamatullahi wa barakatuhu:
1. IntroductionOver the years, Christian missionaries have solidified their reputation for embracing zealous new recruits. One fresh addition to this delegation of holy servicemen is the neophyte, Andrew Vargo. More often than not, the missionaries have overlooked the academic backgrounds of these fresh recruits, apparently intoxicated by their impassioned hatred for Islam. Mr. Vargo has recently tried his hand as a student of comparative religion, introducing some of the most fantastic ideas yet to the discourse. Among these ideas is a rather boastful claim concerning the collection of ahadith by the great Muslim scholar, Imam al-Bukhari (d. 256 AH). The highlight of Vargo's claim lies in the following:
In fact, it is difficult, in spite of the Muslim "science" of Hadith to know which traditions are strong or weak! For example, Bukhari collected over 600,000 reports, but kept only 7,397 as true!
This is one of the most popular claims concerning the vast collection of ahadith of al-Bukhari in the Christian missionary literature and comes with fanciful explanations. For example, Anis Shorrosh, a well-known Arab missionary, says:
... Bukhari, collected twenty thousand of them, of which he rejected ten thousand, accounting them untrue. Of the remaining ten thousand he accepted only 7,275, declaring the rest to be untrustworthy. Abu Da'ud accepted as authentic only 4,800 rules out 50,000.[1]
Similarly we find Norman Geisler and Abdul Saleeb claiming that:
...Bukhari, considered to be the most reliable collector, admitted that of the 300,000 hadith he collected, he considered only 100,000 might be true. He then narrowed this number down to 7,275, many of which are repetitions so that the total number is in fact near 3,000. That means that even he admitted there were errors in over 295,000 of them![2]
Nearly a similar statement is repeated by Geisler in his Baker Encyclopedia Of Christian Apologetics to cast doubts on the miracles performed by the Prophet Muhammad.[3] Abdiyah Akbar Abdul-Haqq, on the other hand, labels what al-Bukhari did not include in his collection as "apocryphal".
As to the abundance of the apocryphal traditions, we learn that the famous authority al-Bukhari choose only 7,000 out of a host of 600,000 traditions that were current in his on time.[4]
Similar statements were made by John Ankerberg and John Weldon, who quoted a "Muslim scholar".[5]
Not surprising is the case of Rand Corporation, who have published an interesting report on Islam entitled "Civil Democratic Islam: Partners, Resources, and Strategies". The report has two fold agenda: firstly, to try to create a version of Islam that suits the post-9/11 Western agenda and secondly encouraging creation of divisions in the Muslim society at home and abroad. The Rand Report's recipe to achieve this aim is to encourage and promote the so-called modernist Muslims and play one section of the society against another to split the Muslim society. A small example of it can be seen when the report uses the material from the hadith-rejectors (not surprisingly!) to claim "objectively" that:
Even if that were not the case, objectively speaking, there is little doubt that hadith is at best a dubious, flawed instrument. Consider that Al-Bukhari is the compiler of what is generally considered to be the most authoritative and reliable collections of hadith. He collected 600,000 hadith, examined them for their authenticity, eliminated all but 7,600 of them, deleted some for redundancy, and was left with a collection of about 4,000.[6]
As we shall see, feisty statements such as the above only prove to be self-defeating in the end. This article intends to examine missionaries' thesis in light of the scholarship of Imam al-Bukhari, and thereby ascertain the actual worth of their claim.
To appreciate the broader perspective, we will also include a discussion of Imam Muslim's ahadith collection, insha'allah.
2. Imam Bukhari & The Nature Of His CollectionVargo, Shorrosh, Geisler, Abdul Saleeb, Abdul-Haqq and Benard have practically begged the question for us already - where exactly did Imam al-Bukhari mention that among the 600,000 ahadith in his collection, only 7,397 are to be accepted as 'true'? They maintains the missionary tradition of conveniently omitting any references that would not support their thesis; the mark of a true academicians, indeed! Once again, it is left to the Muslims to enlighten the ill-informed missionaries on this matter.
Imam al-Bukhari's actual words have been reproduced below:
* The two sahih collections did not gather the totality of the authentic ahadith as proved by al-Bukhari's testimony: "I have not included in my book al-Jami` but what is authentic, and I left out among the authentic for fear of [excessive] length.(Footnote 2)"
Footnote 2 says:
He [al-Bukhari] meant that he did not mention all the turuq [parallel chains of transmission] for each and every hadith.[7]
To reiterate this in elementary English, Imam al-Bukhari selected only a few authentic ahadith from his vast collection. However, he left out certain traditions, despite their authenticity, simply to avoid excessive length and repetition in his Al-Jami` (a discussion about which is given below). If anything, the privilege to make such a gesture is highly complimentary to the authenticity of the Islamic traditions. In another tradition, Imam al-Bukhari is also reported to have said:
He said, I heard as-Sa`dani say, I heard some of our companions say, Muhammad Ibn Isma`il said: I selected/published [the content of] this book - meaning the Sahih book - from about 600,000 hadiths/reports. Abu Sa`d al-Malini informed us that `Abdullah Ibn `Udayy informed us: I heard al-Hasan Ibn al-Husayn al-Bukhari say: "I have not included in my book al-Jami` but what is authentic, and I left out among the authentic what I could not get hold of."[8]
The above quotation reflects Imam al-Bukhari's gallant honesty to admit that he was not able to collect each and every authentic tradition that existed in his day. Rather, his Al-Jami` is only a partial collection of authentic traditions, despite its massive volume. Furthermore, it should be clarified for the missionaries that the notion of a partial collection of authentic material is quite different from the notion of a partially authentic collection of material. However, it is not our aim to offer a course on propositional reasoning. Thus, we leave the point with the hope that they will eventually comprehend this piece of preschool logic.
Professor Mustafa al-Azami, who offered a devastating critique of Joseph Schacht's work, again clarifies the misunderstanding of many orientalists on this issue:
Al-Bukhari did not claim that what he left out were the spurious, nor that there were no authentic traditions outside his collection. On the contrary he said, "I only included in my book al-Jami` those that were authentic, and I left out many more authentic traditions than this to avoid unnecessary length." He had no intention of collecting all the authentic traditions. He only wanted to compile a manual of hadith, according to the wishes of his Shaikh Ishaq b. Rahwaih, and his function is quite clear from the title of his book al-Jami` al-Musnad al-Sahih al-Mukhtasar min umur Rasul Allah wa Sunanhi wa ayyamih. The word al-Mukhtasar, 'epitome', itself explains that al-Bukhari did not make any attempt at a comprehensive collection.[9]
Yet, the missionaries seem to be living under the delusion that the 600,000 ahadith of Imam al-Bukhari's collection somehow means 600,000 separate narrations or bodies of text. His sloppy study of this issue becomes clear when one learns that a hadith is comprised of both a text (matn) and a chain of transmission (isnad). In the science of hadith, the same text with ten chains of transmission is regarded not as one hadith but rather as ten hadiths, despite the fact that the text attached to each chain is the same in every case.
Professor Mustafa al-Azami adds:
Now it is clear that when traditionalists give enormous numbers for the traditions, they mean channels and sources of their transmission, and do not mean real numbers of hadith.[10]
Nabia Abbott, a prominent orientalist who conducted an extensive study on hadith literature, observed that the phenomenal growth of the corpus of this literature is not due to growth in content but due to progressive increase in the parallel and multiple chains of transmission, i.e., isnads:
... the traditions of Muhammad as transmitted by his Companions and their Successors were, as a rule, scrupulously scrutinised at each step of the transmission, and that the so called phenomenal growth of Tradition in the second and third centuries of Islam was not primarily growth of content, so far as the hadith of Muhammad and the hadith of the Companions are concerned, but represents largely the progressive increase in parallel and multiple chains of transmission.[11]
Take a highly simplified example of one Companion narrating a single hadith from the Prophet to two students: these students themselves teaching that narration again to two pupils each and so on until we reach the time of al-Bukhari and his contemporaries. We will find that in al-Bukhari's generation at least 16 individuals will be hearing the hadith from their respective teachers. Because each individual chain of transmission counts as a separate hadith, what started out as a single narration transmitted by one Companion only, has evolved within a short period of time to 16 ahadith; an increase of 1600%. The true nature of affairs, however, being far greater, with a far greater number of Companions transmitting a far greater number of narrations to a far greater number of students. This then is the form in which proliferation took place, the dispersion of narrators and chains of transmission. Using the mathematical application of geometric progression, Nabia Abbott concludes:
... using geometric progression, we find that one to two thousand Companions and senior Successors transmitting two to five traditions each would bring us well within the range of the total number of traditions credited to the exhaustive collections of the third century. Once it is realised that the isnad did, indeed, initiate a chain reaction that resulted in an explosive increase in the number of traditions, the huge numbers that are credited to Ibn Hanbal, Muslim and Bukhari seem not so fantastic after all.[12]
The implications of explosive increase in of the isnad is dealt with here.
3. Imam Muslim & The Nature Of His CollectionImam Muslim along the similar lines to that of Imam al-Bukhari , is reported to have said:
The translation of which is:
[...]. Imam Muslim said: "I have not included in my present book any thing but with proof [regarding authenticity] , and I have not left out anything but with proof". He also said: I did not include everything that I judge authentic/Sahih, I only included what received a unanimous agreement, i.e., what fulfilled all the criteria of authenticity agreed upon [by the scholars].
And Muslim has presented [his collection] to the scholars of his time, like Imam Abu Zar`ah, and retained what was void of defect, and left out what had some defect.[13]
From the above quotation, it is clear that Imam Muslim's collection is also a partial collection of authentic material and not a partially authentic collection of material. He followed a certain set of criteria that demanded a proof for the inclusion of each and every hadith in his collection.
4. ConclusionsImam al-Bukhari's collection of ahadith was maintained to be authentic on account of his authority, and it has been maintained as authentic ever since. The missionaries' assertion, that Imam al-Bukhari regarded almost 99% of his own collection as spurious, is among the most rash and foolhardy statements ever dared by Christian missionaries. On the contrary, the 7,397 refers to the number of hadiths that Imam al-Bukhari chose to include in his Al-Jami` and left out many authentic narrations from his vast collection for the fear of excessive length.
Again, according to the Vargo:
In fact, it is difficult, in spite of the Muslim "science" of Hadith to know which traditions are strong or weak!
We should wonder whether the neophyte is as quick to demonstrate the same puerile enthusiasm over the question of his own religious texts. Regardless, we will quote the famous trial of Imam al-Bukhari to show how maqlub[14] (changed, reversed) ahadith can be identified with ease by a scholar of hadith:
The famous trial of al-Bukhari by the scholars of Baghdad provides a good example of a Maqlub isnad. The traditionists, in order to test their visitor, al-Bukhari, appointed ten men, each with ten ahadith. Now, each hadith (text) of these ten people was prefixed with the isnad of another. Imam al-Bukhari listened to each of the ten men as they narrated their ahadith and denied the correctness of every hadith. When they had finished narrating these ahadith, he addressed each person in turn and recounted to him each of his ahadith with its correct isnad. This trial earned him great honour among the scholars of Baghdad.[15]
Finally, it is worth citing a significant trend in modern Western scholarship of the Prophetic traditions of Islam. For the past several decades, criticism of these traditions has been the Orientalist's whipping post, an opportunity to invalidate the traditions of Islam, which culminated in the work of Joseph Schacht, mentioned earlier. However, this position has practically been reversed in recent times, with the advent of academic honesty on the part of Western scholars. Professor John Esposito of Georgetown University has made the following counter-criticism of Schacht's traditional position:
Accepting Schacht's conclusion regarding the many traditions he did examine does not warrant its automatic extension to all the traditions. To consider all Prophetic traditions apocryphal until proven otherwise is to reverse the burden of proof. Moreover, even where differences of opinion exist regarding the authenticity of the chain of narrators, they need not detract from the authenticity of a tradition's content and common acceptance of the importance of tradition literature as a record of the early history and development of Islamic belief and practice.[16]
The position of Esposito perhaps reflects the growing attitude among Western educational institutions that entertain any study of Islam and its traditions. This is simply evidenced by the fact that Professor Esposito has become one of the reigning authorities on Islam in the West, whose textbooks are considered university standards for courses on Islam.
Considering the missionaries' abuse of hadiths to denigrate the Prophet(P) of Islam, it would be too generous to assume that Vargo, Shorrosh, Geisler and Abdul Saleeb "misunderstood" the nature of the collection of Imam al-Bukhari. As for the Rand Corporation's report, their "objectivity" lies in the unverified use of source material. An honest misunderstanding entails at least some understanding of the issue, which doesn't even seem to be their case. Perhaps the Christian missionaries might consider beginning a genuine study of the science of hadith before they embarrasses themselves further.
AcknowledgementsWe would like to thank Abu Hudhayfah for providing us necessary help and allowing us to use his material.
And Allah knows best!
References
[1] Dr. A. A. Shorrosh, Islam Revealed: A Christian Arab's View Of Islam, 1988, Thomas Nelson Publishers: Nashville, p. 22.
[2] N. L. Geisler & A. Saleeb, Answering Islam: The Crescent In The Light Of The Cross, 1993, Baker Books: Grand Rapids (MI), p. 165.
[3] "Muhammad, Alleged Miracles Of", in N. L. Geisler, Baker Encyclopedia Of Christian Apologetics, 2002, Baker Books: Grand Rapids (MI), p. 512.
[4] A. A. Abdul-Haqq, Sharing Your Faith With A Muslim, 1980, Bethany House Publications: Minneapolis, p. 45.
[5] J. Ankerberg & J. Weldon, Fast Facts On Islam, 2001, Harvest House Publishers: Eugene (OR), pp. 50-51.
[6] C. Benard, "Civil Democratic Islam: Partners, Resources, and Strategies", 2003, Rand Corporation, p. 67.
[7] Muhammad Ajaj al-Khatib, Al-Mukhtasar al-Wajiz fi `Ulum al-Hadith, 1991, Mu'assasat al-Risalah, p. 135.
[8] Abi Bakr Ahmad Ibn `Ali al-Khatib al-Baghdadi, Tarikh Baghdad Aw Madinah as-Salam, 1931 (1349 AH), Volume II, Maktabat al-Khanji, Cairo & Al-Maktabah al-`Arabiyyah, Baghdad and Matba'at as-S'adah near the State Department, Cairo, pp. 8-9.
[9] M. M. al-Azami, Studies In Early Hadith Literature, 1992, American Trust Publications: Indianapolis (USA), pp. 305-306.
[10] ibid., p. 306.
[11] N. Abbott, Studies In Arabic Literary Papyri, Volume II [Qur'anic Commentary & Tradition], 1967, University Of Chicago Press: Chicago (USA), p. 2.
[12] ibid., p. 72.
[13] Al-Imam Muhyee ad-Din Abi Zakariyya Yahya bin Sharaf al-Nawawi, Sahih Muslim Bi Sharh al-Imam al-Nawawi, Volume I, 1994/1414, Dar al-Khair, p. 1.
[14] A hadith is known as maqlub (changed, reversed) when its isnad is grafted to a different text or vice versa, or if a reporter happens to reverse the order of a sentence in the text.
[15] S. Hasan, An Introduction To The Science Of Hadith, 1995, Darussalam Publishers: Riyadh (Saudi Arabia) available online, quote taken from here.
[16] J. Esposito, Islam: The Straight Path, 1998, Oxford University Press, p. 81.
. Read more!Wednesday, November 12, 2008
Q&A with Anti Hadeeth
Here are a few common questions raised by Anti Hadeeth and the answers for our good reference. Question 1 I must give credit to this Rahman guy from celcom. He is a very smart. I'm not talking about his interpretation/understanding of the religion, but his cunning move of leading this whole polemic into linguistic issue.I find this very interesting, and can't wait what the other party has to say. The Arabic language is the language of the Quran. It is said so in the Quran 10 times. If one where to try to interpret the Quran, one must be able to understand it in it’s original language. To interpret the Quran in it’s translated form is a sure way of introducing mistakes and misunderstanding of the true meanings of the quran. Question 2 Why muslims are divided? 2.1 Madzhab 2.2 Syiah – Sunnah Muslims are divided because they are also humans. Question 3 Dear Ali Cordoba: Al hadeeth are reports of what the prophet actually said, done or agreed upon. The collection of Al Hadeeth is done since the time the Prophet was still alive. Refer to book from MM Azami. Al Imam Al Bukhari came up with the As Sahih to fit the requirement at that time This may be true but it is not applicable to his book As Sahih. Al Bukhari has also other collections i.e. At Tarikh Al Kabeer, Al Adabul Mufrad and many more. Question 4 There are many scientific and logical errors and contradictions in the Book of Bukhari, as well as the other books. Some examples: Isn’t it a scientific fact that the sun has it’s own orbit and revolves around the center of the universe? Anyways the wording of the hadeeth does not say outrightly that the “sun revolves around the earth” b. According to Hadith no disease is contagious [ This is why it is important to understand Arabic before interpreting the hadeeth. When the Prophet SAW says “no disease is contagious” he was referring to a specific disease plaguing the people of Makkah at that time. He did not speak of it in general terms. But since he is speaking in Arabic, everyone understood it in it’s right context. Please bear in mind that the list of diseases known to the people of Mekkah and Madinah at that time is NOT THE SAME as list of diseases known to us. The Hadeeth was meant for the consumption of the people of makkah and madinah of that time. All this was before we discovered antibiotics. d. 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). If any it only exhibits the miracle of the Prophet Mohd SAW. The hadeeth DOES NOT suggest anyone to drink camel-urine to cure illness. The camel urine drinking incident only happens that one time. e. The Hadith mentions that "fever" is from the "heat of hell" [Hadith 621,622, page 417, vol 7]. Atrocious! That’s because it was a common saying at that time that when someone is having a high fever, he is having a “heat from hell”. It was just a local saying at that time. Nothing to be taken in literal. I have not seen this hadeeth yet. Can u quote me please Sheikh Yusuf Qardhawi in his famous book “Al fatawa al maasirah” has explained this hadeeth. He quoted a research from a Professor in I will have to get back to you on this cause I’ve never met this contradiction of the hadeeth yet. Question 5 bananaeel wrote: Again another confusion caused by ignorance of the Arabic language. Arabs uses the word “seventy” to mean “numerous”. Question 6: Various accusations from Rentap against Abu Hurairah, unsubstantiated, of course. All of the issues raised by Rentap are based on lies and hearsay, including the incident where Umar was allegedly to beat up Abu Hurairah. Refer to this url for more explanation http://www.allaahuakbar.net/shiites/in_defense_of_abu_hurairah.htm Suffice to say that scholars who studies the classical texts in it’s original language have a completely good opinion of Abu Hurairah. Scholars such as: (a)Dr. Mustafa al-Siba'i (founder of the Muslim Brotherhood in Syria), in his thesis, al-Sunna wa Makanatuha fi l-Tashri' al-Islami, (Cairo: 1380/1961); Wallahualam bissawab
Can you kindly clarify a point? Are the hadith what the prophet s.a.w actually said, or are those statements are what some people (like Muslim, Bukhari, etc) said the prophet was presumed to have uttered?
I am of course excepting the hadith qudzi, that is, those referenced in the Quran.
Incidentally the collections of Bukhari are widely viewed to be the most sahih "authentic," but the poor soul was not even born till about 200 years after the prophet's death.
Further, is it true that in the preamble to his extensive collections, Bukhkari humbly declared that he may have omitted some valid hadiths and incldued some false ones?
a.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.
c. 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?
f.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.
g. 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!
h. 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)
Menurut sebuah hadith, (kononnya) Nabi Muhammad bersabda, "Umatku akan berpecah kepada 73 kumpulan dan kesemua kumpulan ini akan masuk neraka kecuali satu kumpulan".
Hadith translation : "My community will be divided into 73 sects and each of them will end up in Hell save one".
(b) 'Abd al-Razzaq Hamza (the head of Dar al-Ahaadeeth in Makka and Imam of Masjid al-Haram),Zulumat Abi Raya amam Adwa' al-Sunna al-Muhammadiya, (Cairo: n.d.); and
(c) the definitive response by 'Abd al-Rahman ibn Yahya al-Mu'allami al-Yamani (the Librarian of Masjid al-Haram), al-Anwar al-Kashifa lima fi Kitab Adwa' 'ala al-Sunna min al-Zallal wa l-Tadlil wa l-Mujazafa, (Cairo: 1378) - may Allah have mercy with them all.
Monday, September 15, 2008
Revealed: UK's first official sharia courts
The article is taken from Times Online. Despite many cynics and nay sayers, the plan is still proceeding. ISLAMIC law has been officially adopted in Britain, with sharia courts given powers to rule on Muslim civil cases. The government has quietly sanctioned the powers for sharia judges to rule on cases ranging from divorce and financial disputes to those involving domestic violence. Rulings issued by a network of five sharia courts are enforceable with the full power of the judicial system, through the county courts or High Court. Previously, the rulings of sharia courts in Britain could not be enforced, and depended on voluntary compliance among Muslims. It has now emerged that sharia courts with these powers have been set up in London, Birmingham, Bradford and Manchester with the network's headquarters in Nuneaton, Warwickshire. Two more courts are being planned for Glasgow and Edinburgh. Sheikh Faiz-ul-Aqtab Siddiqi, whose Muslim Arbitration Tribunal runs the courts, said he had taken advantage of a clause in the Arbitration Act 1996. Under the act, the sharia courts are classified as arbitration tribunals. The rulings of arbitration tribunals are binding in law, provided that both parties in the dispute agree to give it the power to rule on their case. Siddiqi said: "We realised that under the Arbitration Act we can make rulings which can be enforced by county and high courts. The act allows disputes to be resolved using alternatives like tribunals. This method is called alternative dispute resolution, which for Muslims is what the sharia courts are." The disclosure that Muslim courts have legal powers in Britain comes seven months after Rowan Williams, the Archbishop of Canterbury, was pilloried for suggesting that the establishment of sharia in the future "seems unavoidable" in Britain. In July, the head of the judiciary, the lord chief justice, Lord Phillips, further stoked controversy when he said that sharia could be used to settle marital and financial disputes. In fact, Muslim tribunal courts started passing sharia judgments in August 2007. They have dealt with more than 100 cases that range from Muslim divorce and inheritance to nuisance neighbours. It has also emerged that tribunal courts have settled six cases of domestic violence between married couples, working in tandem with the police investigations. Siddiqi said he expected the courts to handle a greater number of "smaller" criminal cases in coming years as more Muslim clients approach them. "All we are doing is regulating community affairs in these cases," said Siddiqi, chairman of the governing council of the tribunal. Jewish Beth Din courts operate under the same provision in the Arbitration Act and resolve civil cases, ranging from divorce to business disputes. They have existed in Britain for more than 100 years, and previously operated under a precursor to the act. Politicians and church leaders expressed concerns that this could mark the beginnings of a "parallel legal system" based on sharia for some British Muslims. Dominic Grieve, the shadow home secretary, said: "If it is true that these tribunals are passing binding decisions in the areas of family and criminal law, I would like to know which courts are enforcing them because I would consider such action unlawful. British law is absolute and must remain so." Douglas Murray, the director of the Centre for Social Cohesion, said: "I think it's appalling. I don't think arbitration that is done by sharia should ever be endorsed or enforced by the British state." There are concerns that women who agree to go to tribunal courts are getting worse deals because Islamic law favours men. Siddiqi said that in a recent inheritance dispute handled by the court in Nuneaton, the estate of a Midlands man was divided between three daughters and two sons. The judges on the panel gave the sons twice as much as the daughters, in accordance with sharia. Had the family gone to a normal British court, the daughters would have got equal amounts. In the six cases of domestic violence, Siddiqi said the judges ordered the husbands to take anger management classes and mentoring from community elders. There was no further punishment. In each case, the women subsequently withdrew the complaints they had lodged with the police and the police stopped their investigations. Siddiqi said that in the domestic violence cases, the advantage was that marriages were saved and couples given a second chance. Inayat Bunglawala, assistant secretary-general of the Muslim Council of Britain, said: "The MCB supports these tribunals. If the Jewish courts are allowed to flourish, so must the sharia ones." Additional reporting: Helen Brooks
Tuesday, September 9, 2008
Zaharuddin Rahman Response to Raja Petra's Article on Tudung
Debat Tudung Wanita : Jawapan Kepada Artikel Raja Petra (Malaysia today) The Great Tudung Debate : A Respond to Raja Petra's Article Zaharuddin Abd RahmanThis writing is a response to Raja Petra Kamaruddin about muslim women's aurat in his popular blog (Malaysia today). Source Covering the body is also required of men and women in the desert. It has nothing to do with any religion. So when the verse says 'so that they may be recognised' it actually means the women should not cover their face or head in such a way that the people cannot differentiate them from other Christian and Jewish women who also wear tudung and veils. This means there is no such thing as a tudung to cover your head and face. The verse 33:59 says the following in Arabic: Ya ayyuhan nabi : O you prophet qul li-azwajika wabanaatika : tell your wives, your daughters wa nisaa i mu'mineena : and the believing women yudneena : to lengthen Alayhinna : over them min jalabeebihinna : from their garments/cloaks. There is absolutely NO mention of head or hair or face in this verse. There is no reference to tudung. The reference is to lengthen your garments over your body. This means women must dress decently. UZAR'S COMMENT Unfortunately, you have misinterpret the verse and understanding it out of its context, i assumed that's because you are not examining the whole structure of the verse, besides i think you did not posses adequate knowledges to do so, or maybe you are also very busy with your sumpah declaration and malaysian politic issues. In reality, as a servant of Allah SWT and the follower of Rasulullah SAW, we are taught to always come back to Al-Quran and Al-Hadith to obtain assurance about the permissibility of a matter. Regarding this, Allah SWT said:- يَا أَيُّهَا النَّبِيُّ قُل لِّأَزْوَاجِكَ وَبَنَاتِكَ وَنِسَاء الْمُؤْمِنِينَ يُدْنِينَ عَلَيْهِنَّ مِن جَلَابِيبِهِنَّ ذَلِكَ أَدْنَى أَن يُعْرَفْنَ فَلَا يُؤْذَيْنَ وَكَانَ اللَّهُ غَفُورًا رَّحِيمًا "O Prophet! Tell your wives and your daughters and the women of the believers to draw their cloaks (veils) all over their bodies. That will be better, that they should be known (as a free respectable MUSLIM women) so as not to be molested. "(Al-Ahzab: 59) It is agreed unanimously by ulama that every verse that is revealed to our prophet Muhammad s.a.w is also intended to Muslim except defined otherwise by our Prophet either in his hadis or by other quranic verses. For example: our prophet has more than four wives at a time, it is called "Khususiyat anbiya" which we are not allowed to follow due to Allah's will and many other logical reasons. Therefore, in this case, covering aurat including head, hair, neck and chest is strongly commanded not only for prophet's wives but also to all muslim women. It is not just an Arab's custom due to the sandy desert, but it is indeed a religious commandment. It is also very obvious stated in the above verse where it is mentioned : وَنِسَاء الْمُؤْمِنِينَ Meaning : "the women of the believers" Therefore whoever claims they are muslim, they are obliged to uphold and stick to the decree in the verse. Jilbab is a dress (of similar width to ‘baju kurung') worn by women to cover their bodies. Syeikh Dr Yusof Al-Qaradawi explained that when some women during the Jahiliah period left their houses, they loved to display some parts of their beauty such as the chest, neck and hair until they were being harassed by those wicked men who like to commit zina. Then, the verse above is revealed to command Muslim women to EXTEND (and not only) their jilbab so that the parts that could lead to fitnah will be covered. In this way, they would be identified as women who are protected (‘afifah) and a true MUSLIM WOMEN. As a consequence, they would not be molested. The above verse elucidates that covering the aurat is an emblem of a Muslim. Allah SWT also said: "And anyone who honours the symbols set up by God [shall know that] verily, these [symbols derive their value] from the God-consciousness in the [believers'] hearts " ( Al-Haj : 32 ) Therefore, the main reason (‘illah) for the above ruling is to prevent Muslim women from being molested by wicked men. Attires that display women's beauty or women walking and talking in a seducing manner could arouse a man's sexual desire. Such behavior is an indirect invitation to the male for teasing and molestation. (Adapted from kitab Al-Halal wal Haram fil Islam with slight modification) It's also WRONG to say that "so that they may be recognised and not annoyed' mean face must be visible in order to be recognized. Firstly : Is it acceptable to say that we can only recognised a women by looking at her face? Of course not, we can easily recognized them by many other ways, either by listening to her voice or many other things besides her face. Secondly : Most of the Jahiliyyah womens are not wearing tudung at all and some of them wearing improper veils.( Refer Tafsir Ibn Kathir, 3/285). It is also stated clearly in the hadith narrated by Abu Hurairah, Rasulullah s.a.w. said: "Two are the types of the denizens of Hell whom I did not see: (1) people having flogs like the tails of the ox with them and they would be beating people (unjust rulers); (2) the women who would be dressed but appear to be naked, who would be inclined (to evil) and make others incline towards it. Their heads would be like the humps of the bukht camel inclined to one side. They will not enter Paradise and they would not smell its odour whereas its odour would be smelt from such and such distance" (Narrated by Muslim, Sohih). The JAHILIYYAH womens are said to wear attire but is still naked because they do have cloth on their body but it does not cover the aurat because it is transparent and exposes their skin; like the wearing of many women today. (Al-Halal Wal Haram Fil Islam, Dr Yusof Al-Qaradawi) ‘Bukhtun' in the hadith is a type of camel that has a big hump. Women's hair looks like the hump of a camel when it is pulled and tangled over their head. This shows that Jahiliyyah womens are not covering their head and hair. As for Christian and jews womens who you said wore tudung also at the time of prophet Muhammad s.a.w, you have to provide evidences on that. Besides, do you sure how Christian women exact attire in Mekkah and medina at that time?, Jewish people are too small to take into account and yet we don't know what are their tudung types. The most important, whatever types of thier tudung, we msulim has our own tudung with certain standards and conditions and it is a religious commandment. Although the hadith was revealed thousand years ago, the Prophet s.a.w. was able to warn us of what would happen now. Today there are various saloons that set hair for women with million types of fashion and sadly men are the hair setter at most of these saloons. RAJA PETRA WROTE : 2) "And tell the believing women to lower their gaze and be modest, and to display of their adornment only that which is apparent, and to draw their veils over their bosoms, and not to reveal their adornment save to their own husbands or fathers or husbands' fathers, or their sons or their husbands' sons, or their brothers or their brothers' sons or sisters' sons, or their women, or their slaves, or male attendants who lack vigour, or children who know naught of women's nakedness. And let them not stamp their feet so as to reveal what they hide of their adornment. And turn unto Allah together, O believers, in order that ye may succeed." Surah An-Nur (24), verse 31. Raja Petra Comment : Again there is no mention of head (ru'usa) in this verse or face (wujuh/wajh). Please note the words 'draw their veils over the bosoms'. The arabic is as follows: walyadribna : and strike / cover bi khumurihinna : with their outer garments Ala : over / upon juyoobihinna : their bosoms / breasts Women are told to cover their chests/bosoms/breasts. That is all. This tallies with the earlier verse 33:59 above where the women are told to lengthen their clothes/garments. There is absolutely no mention of head (ru'usa), face (wujuh) or hair. UZAR'S COMMENT FOR NUMBER 1 & 2 : Raja Pete, it is very obvious that you are not analyzing the verse properly. Your simplistic interpretation is incorrect again, Almighty Allah has said :- وَلْيَضْرِبْنَ بِخُمُرِهِنَّ عَلَى جُيُوبِهِنَّ وَلَا يُبْدِينَ زِينَتَهُنَّ Meaning : And tell the believing women to lower their veil and to be mindful of their chastity, and not to display their charms [in public] beyond what may [decently] be apparent thereof.. So you look Pete, why are you only focusing on some words of the verse and didn't give proper attention to the others. You have translated ‘Al-Khumur' wrongly, as that because of your harfiah (word by word)translation and harfiah understanding also, that kind of translation cannot help you in understanding the word correctly. The "al-Khumur" word will provide you the answer on your own created question and false assumption which you said : "There is absolutely NO mention of head or hair". The true meaning of khumur (veil) is anything that is used to cover the head. Meanwhile ‘juyub' (the plural form of jaibun) is the curvature of the breast that is not covered with cloth. Therefore every woman must cover not only their head but also their chest including their neck and ears and all other parts that may lure a male. In order to understand Quranic text correctly, he/she must comprehend and find the exact usage of terminologies and words in Arabic language. A person should also know how a term or word is being used in the Arabic community because Quran is using Arabic language. Therefore it is good to have knowledge on conservative Arab's (especially at the time of prophet s.a.w) way of life before he/she can get the true intended meaning; For this reason, we must refer to the tafseer book by great Muslim scholars to avoid ourselves from false impression. That's also why it's better for those who wish to learn Islam in depth to pay a visit to Arabic countries in order to get some feels and get used to the usage of certain word by contemporary Arabs, it can give you some more clue in order to understand Arabic language in the Quran. When Allah swt said "Khumurihinna" , so we must know, in a standard Arabic language what does it mean by "khumur", so the answer is veil which cover their head, hair, ear etc and then, when a person said "khumur" in front of knowledgable arab person, what he will understand?. Of course, it s a veil also. This fact has been told by many great classic Muslim scholar like Imam At-Tabarii ( died 301 H) in his famous tafseer book Jami al-Bayan and also Imam Ibn Katheer . (Tafsir At-Tabari, 18/120 ; Tafsir AL-Quran Al-'Azim, 3/285)) Besides the khumur which is a veil which covers the women head, and juyub which covers womens' neck, breast and chest, the verse also stress on :- وَلَا يُبْدِينَ زِينَتَهُنَّ Meaning : that they should not display their beauty and ornaments except what (must ordinarily) appear thereof".. Do you understand what ‘beauty and ornaments' means in this verse? According to Syeikh Dr Yusof Al-Qaradawi, the adornment mentioned in the above verse refers to anything that is worn to beautify oneself; either natural beauty like face, hair and body; or manmade beautification like dress, embellishment, make-up and others. In the above verse, Allah commanded women to conceal the adornment without any exemption. However, the exemption was "what is apparent". The scholars therefore have differences in opinion about the meaning and extent of "what is apparent" but all of them agreed unanimously that hair and head are included. That is due to the following hadith :- Saidatina Aisyah r.a narrated that her sister Asma' binti Abu Bakar entered the house of the Prophet s.a.w wearing attire made of transparent material that showed her skin. The Prophet s.a.w turned away from her and said: "Hai Asma'! Verily when a woman has achieved puberty, she should not reveal her body except for this and this - showing the face and the palms (hands)." (Narrated by Abu Daud) Although there is a discussion about narrators of this hadith, it is strengthen by many other hadith that allows revealing of the face and the palms if it does not bring any harm (fitnah). (Al-Halal Wal Haram Fil Islam) This hadis also supporting the fact that women head and hair are ‘aurat and must be covered by muslim womens, only the face and palm or hand can be seen by the public. Yes, there is discussion on what is the meaning of "what is apparent" which ALLOWED TO BE SEEN but it is not about hair, neck and head. Ibnu Abbas r.a, one of the great companions of the Prophet (s.a.w.) interpreted "what is apparent" is eyeliner and ring. Anas Bin Malik r.a is also of the same opinion. Therefore, the body parts where the eyeliner and the ring are worn (i.e. the face and the palms) would also be considered as apparent. This also the opinon of the Tabien like Said bin Jubair, 'Atha', Auza'i and others. However, Ummul Mukminin Aisyah r.a, Qatadah and a few others considered bracelet as something apparent. Therefore, the wrist (place of wearing a bracelet) is also considered as apparent if it does not cause any harm (fitnah). Regarding the limit from the wrist to the elbow, it is still under discussion among the scholars; therefore it is better to cover parts between the wrist and the elbow. RAJA PETRA SAID 3) In order to interpret the Quran, we have to go to people who have knowledge about it. In what circumstance the verse was revealed, etc. But not just any scholar who says that they know. Comment : We DO NOT interpret the Quran. May I suggest something much simpler? Why not we just read it? If we look at the Quran in its arabic and then look at the translated words just a little carefully, we will understand it. You DONT EVEN have to know Arabic. For example the arabic word for HEAD (kepala) is NEVER mentioned in any of the verses quoted above. Neither are the arabic words for face and hair. So how do the translators include head, face and hair? Someone must explain this. UZAR'S COMMENT I have responded to this false statement and it's no longer concern us. Do you think that Allah will only use ru'asa to express head and sya'run as hair?.. no you are wrong Mr Pete, for example Allah s.w.t forbids us from saying ‘Ah' to our parents. So it is permissible to say ‘uh' and bull shit to your parent only because it is not mentioned in the Quran?. When Allah forbids ‘ah' so its include all thing that has similar effect and covering not only bad words but also bad behaviour and actions towrd your parent. It is called in Usul Fiqh as Qiyas al-Awla or also can be considered as ‘umum al-lafz will carry all meaning under it. So, women's head and hair falls under the words "al-khumur"in the verse. As simple as that. As for the last part of Raja Petra's article, some of the hadith has been misquoted so i don't need to respond. ‘DON'T JUDGE A BOOK BY ITS COVER' MYTH I always come across with this expression and I believe you are the same. The following are the words of those women who do not cover their aurat who always claim to posess pure and kind hearts although they are wearing indecent outfits which reveal their aurat. "Even women who put on hijaab commit crime nowadays, indulging in adultery, free-mixing and a lot more" A woman share her thought. "In fact, we too are well-behaved, we do not bother others, we do not backbite and we stay away from bad things" The woman added. Is it a sound argument? Is it true that the external appearance does not matter in Islam? Some of them are even one step ahead in their arguments that they reason with the meaning of an authentic hadith of the Prophet, which is: "Verily Allah does not look at your physical being, your outer appearance nor your wealth, but He looks at your heart and your deeds" (Narrated by Muslim). I feel sorry and dishearten looking at those who when arguing, easily throw out hadith in supporting their whims; indeed, they only utilize Islam in the matter that bring benefits to them. An employee was caught playing game during working hours by his employer while he has yet to prepare the document requested by him. The employer thus said, "How are you going to excel in your carreer if this is your attitude towards work." The employee responded, "You may see me outwardly as playing games but my heart is sincere and I performed my duty excellently." Do you think that the employer believe in what his employee had said? Does Allah consider one's heart as pure and good through disobeying His commandments? Indeed, something is only regarded as pure and good by measuring it with the scale of Allah and His Rasul, and not merely with the scale of our minds. If we refer to the scale of Islam, the Prophet SAW had said which means: "Beware, in the body there is a piece of flesh; if it is sound, the whole body is sound and if it is corrupt the whole body is corrupt, and hearken it is the heart" (Narrated by Muslim) Based on this hadith, Islamic scale necessitates that the purity of one's heart is apparent in its first stage, which is one's actions. It means that when one's actions always transgress against the commandments prescribed in Islam, it signifies the filth of one's heart. On the other hand, if the external actions submit to the commandment of Islam, thus it should be considered as good in the first stage, which is the external scale of lay people. Nevertheless, the second stage, which is whether one's intention is for seeking Allah's pleasure or for things such as showing off, we should leave the judgment only to Allah. Therefore, we can judge a book by its cover in certain cases, such as in the case when the fundamentals of Islam are being transgressed; the cover is consequently reflecting what is inside the heart of a person. Judging based on that which is apparent, does go along with the hadith: إنما أنا بشر , وإنكم تختصمون إلىّ , ولعلّ بعضكم أن يكون ألحن بحجته من بعض , فأقضي بنحو ما أسمع , فمن قضيت له من حق أخيه شيئاَ فلا يأخذه , فإنما أقطع له قطعة من النار Which means: "Verily I am only a human being, and you always presented arguments for me to solve. It may be that some of you are better in presenting argument than others. Therefore, I give out rulings based on what I have heard only. He, for whom I have made a ruling that violates the rights of the other party (due to the lack of skill of the person in presenting argument), does not take it. For verily, it will be for him a slice from the slices of hellfire" (Narrated by Abu Dawood, At-Tirmidzi and others; Refer Naylul Awtar, 8/632, no 3920). This hadith clearly shows that a judge in Islam will give a ruling based on the information and the evident proofs presented to him. Similarly, in the case of covering aurat, if one reveals the aurat, it is a sign of transgression against Allah's commands. Thus, how would it be possible for this kind of heart to be perceived as a sound heart in Islam? Women should realize that when the aurat is not covered properly, every single man who looks at it will be held accountable for every single gaze. The woman, on the other hand, is not going to be held accountable for that one sin merely; rather she will be held accountable for all the gazes from men that fell on her aurat. Just imagine how sinful she is for revealing the aurat only in one day. This is based on the Prophet's word: من سن في الإسلام سنة سيئة فعليه وزرها ووزر من عمل بها من غير أن ينقص شيئاً Which means: "Whosoever initiates a wrongdoing, upon him are a sin and the sin of every single person who does it without his sin being reduced even a little..." (Narrated by Ahmad and others-Authentic) Included in the meaning of intiating is that someone intiates the revealing of her aurat in that day causing the man who looks at her to be held accountable. In fact, the woman herself is sinful for every single eye that sets on her aurat. Would this type of heart be considered as pure? After mountains of sins had rusted it? Verily Allah is All Just and the Most Merciful. Rush towards Allah's love and mercy by obeying Him. For those who are hardhearted, no words can be shared except; be certain that Allah is true, His Rasul is true, and Paradise and Hellfire are true. If believe in them, why are the actions speak otherwise? Thanks for you time.
RAJA PETRA WROTE :In the article there was a sentence stating: "Apparently, the tudung was 'decreed' for only the Prophet's wives and not for all women..." So I've have looked into the Quran and found some things.
"O Prophet! Tell thy wives and thy daughters and the women of the believers to draw their cloaks close round them (when they go abroad). That will be better, so that they may be recognised and not annoyed. Allah is ever Forgiving, Merciful." Surah Al-Ahzab (33), verse 59. Comment : Firstly, see the words 'so that they may be recognised and not annoyed'. This means at least the face must be visible. It is wrong to say that other women at that time (non Muslim Arabs, Jews, Christians) did not wear the tudung. The truth is that the Jewish and Christian women wore far more conservative tudung than the Muslim women. 
Reply to Observer in Malaysia Today pt 2
Continuation of my reply to the article "Replying ANTI ANTI Hadeeth ". This Observer dude is also trying to confuse the Arabic behind the verse An-Nur 31. Observer says: The way I see it, human face IS located between their heads and chest. What are u ranting about here, Observer? Observer is trying to change the meaning of the Quran as well. He says: Noticed that he wants to deny COMPLETELY the fact that An Nur:31 INSTRUCTS the covering of “Juyub”(cleavages) with “Khumur/Khimar” (head cover). After trying to cloud and confuse the explanation by going ring around the rosy, Observer finally comes to this conclusion. And how does he do it? He denies the part “Walyadrib bikhumur” in An Nur:31 Observer depicts the trait of a classic loser. When cornered, change the rule of the game. In short, the man is as confused as a monkey in a library. And the explanation provided by Quinary is much more elegant and steeped in intellectual tradition. Observe: Observer also demonstrate his confusion about Al Hadeeth. He asks: “Secondly you are accusing people of being anti hadeeth. Can you please explain exactly what you mean by 'anti hadeeth' ? Which hadeeth are you talking about? Do you have a complete collection of all the hadeeth? Is there such a thing as a complete collection of hadeeth in the first place? Please be honest. My friends at IKIM are still resolving that the hadeeth collections of Abu Dawud and Ibn Majah are incomplete. Tell me how can anyone reject something that is incomplete?” Anyone and their uncle knows the meaning of Al Hadeeth and Anti Hadeeth. Go back to Sekolah Rendah Agama and learn the meaning. You must’ve missed that part way back when you were in Sekolah Agama. Next, Observer asks about the meaning of “Jumhur Ulama”. He says; “About khimar you say "Jumhur ulama' picked the second definition as the correct one." What do you mean by jumhur ulama? Please tell us EXACTLY (I really mean EXACTLY) how many ulama were involved in deciding on this particular jumhur. What were their names? Who classified them as ulama? What were the names (EXACTLY) of the people who classified these ulama as ulama? ont simply say 'Jumhur ulama' to mislead the people. Give us the EXACT details of the ulama as well as their jumhur”. The reason why Observer ask stupid question like this is because he doesn’t know what Jumhur Ulama is but he’s already rejecting it. The simple explanation is “jumhur” means “majority” or “most”. In other words, in a specific issue, scholars or ulama will comment on the issue or problem and majority of them supports a specific outcome. It’s been in existence for a long time. And we refer to the books or opinions expressed orally. It’s not a big problem at all except for ignoramus like Observer.
“You say that the 'khumur' is a cloth used to cover the head. Then you say that this same cloth must be pulled over the chest. If the women are required to do this, then along the way there is someting called their 'face' which is located between the head and the chest.”
“Since you talk about grammar and arabic language, the subject of this statement is covering over the breasts (ala juyubihinna) or 'tutup dada'. Dont twist the grammar ok.”
“My response :
This depends largely on what is the interpretation of the word khumur. I am not sure whether this friend of Raja
"all such pieces of cloth which are used to cover the head. It is a piece of cloth which is used by a woman to cover her head."
Imam Abu'l-Fida ibn Kathir said: "Khumur is the plural of khimar which means something that covers, and is what is used to cover the head. This is what is known among the people as a khimar."
So linguistically, khimar does not only mean something to cover, it is commonly used at that time to refer to head cover (tudung). So now we can see that khimar can be used as :
As for IKIM collection of Abu Dawud and Ibnu Majah, it’s really weird as the collection has been confirmed a long time ago and there is hardly any issue. Maybe the IKIM people are not really competent OR Observer just don’t understand what the IKIM people are doing. I would bet on the latter.
An Observer that is not so Observant: A Reply to Article in MalaysiaToday (pt 1)
A person by the name of “An Observer” commented on an article I posted entitled “Answer on MTODAY Article on Tudung from Quinary". An apparently, it is published in the anti Islam website, MalaysiaToday. “Dear Anti Anti Hadeeth, Firstly you are NOT a woman. You are lying. You are Abdul Rahman aka Cabearth aka Tulang Besi. You are the owner of the website ANTI ANTI HADEETH http://antiantihadeeth.blogspot.com/. I do not know why the people like you who claim to be Muslims like to tell so many lies. “ “I believe that you have outdone Imam Ghazali, Imam Syafie, Imam Abu Hanifa, Imam Hambali, Imam Maliki, Imam Jabar al Karuti and all the other Imams and ulama because none of them has said that whether a woman covers her head or does not cover her head is her personal choice and 'does not affect our aqidah'.” My problem with this statement is that it is a lie. If one were to open Imam Syafiee’s book “Al Umm”, clearly he stated the “compulsion” of wearing “hijab” for women. In fact, all of the Al Imam Al Arbaah ( the four Imam) says states the same fact? It’s funny where u get this nonsense from? Then he went on rambling: “For your information, the ulama say that the hair on the head is considered part of the woman's aurat. And it is part of the aqidah for a woman to cover her aurat. Since her hair is aurat, then she must cover her hair. And since her hair grows on her head, she must therefore cover the head. Covering the aurat is definitely part of aqidah. How can you say that it does not affect our aqidah?” It’s clear that Observer don’t know the difference between Aqidah and Ibadah. The entire subject of Aurah is not an issue related to Aqidah(creed) but it reflect Observer’s level of knowledge of Islam. Third, Observer also says refered to an Orientalist from It’s either Particia is making a false claim or Observer is not very observant. But, it’s the trait of people like Observer and Raja Petra. Their main reference is Western, Christian and Jewish Orientalist. They rely upon these people blindly for their source in understanding Islam. The fact that people like Observer have no ability to understand Arabic confirms the fact that he doesn’t refer to scholars of Islam at all except through Western, Christian and Jewish Orientalists eyes. Little does people like Observer know, Orientalist contradicts each other. If Patricia Crone says that Prophet Mohd’s existence cannot be confirmed, another Orientalist name Nabia Abbott confirms the existence of Al Hadeeth and even linked directly to the Prophet. Nabia says: [quote] ... the traditions of Muhammad as transmitted by his Companions and their Successors were, as a rule, scrupulously scrutinised at each step of the transmission, and that the so called phenomenal growth of Tradition in the second and third centuries of Islam was not primarily growth of content, so far as the hadith of Muhammad and the hadith of the Companions are concerned, but represents largely the progressive increase in parallel and multiple chains of transmission.[11] [11] N. Abbott, Studies In Arabic Literary Papyri, Volume II [Qur'anic Commentary & Tradition], 1967, [/quote] A reference to the article by Patricia Crone shows that she relies heavily on PHYSICAL EVIDENCE to support her work But, at the same time she didn’t study the “papyrus” or “manuscripts” plus various oral traditions that is abundance and great in numbers. It is probably because Patricia Crone is not trained enough to read and understand Classical Arabic and as such she is unable to appreciate the massive and abundance evidence Now Nabia Abbot chooses to study the abundance of evidence and she confirms the existence of Prophet Mohd SAW thus making Particia looking like an idiot. In addition, another orientalist, J Robson, wrote a book entitled “The Isnad of Muslim Tradition” actually proving the soundness of the Isnad system. (End of Part 1)In truth, it is written by a blogger name Quinary. She wrote her response entitled “Raja Petra's The Great Tudung Debate - My Response”. But, because the observer is not so observant, he missed out this fact. I, in fact, mention the name Quinary in the title and at the bottom of the article.
Second point, the Observer says that :
