Prophetic Statements vs. Companions
An important aspect of hadith sciences is differentiating the statements of the Prophet (SAW) from the statements of companions. As we mentioned before, many weak hadith are actually statements of companions wrongly attributed to the Prophet (SAW). So, it is necessary to verify whether a hadith is from the Prophet (SAW) or a statement of a companion.
Someone may ask: If a companion says something about the religion of Islam, are we bound to accept it?
Companions of the Prophet (SAW) learned religious knowledge from the Prophet (SAW) but also extrapolated using the Quran or the Prophet’s statements beyond what they actually said. Some of them, like Abu Hurairah and Ibn Abbas, also learned religious information from Christian and Jewish sources to get more context to stories and verses in the Quran.
All of this means a companion saying something about the religion is not assumed to come from the Prophet (SAW) unless it is shown that the knowledge could definitely only come from the Prophet (SAW). This is the view of many scholars, and I prefer this view because of the numerous examples and evidences of companions getting religious knowledge not from the Prophet (SAW).
Other scholars were more lenient in this regard and assumed statements of companions about the religion must have come from the Prophet (SAW).
Religious Guidance vs. Human Opinions
When the Prophet (SAW) said something about the religion of Islam, there is no difference of opinion that it should be accepted. Allah says ⟪Obey Allah and obey the Messenger⟫.
When the Prophet (SAW) said something about the world without attributing it to Allah or to revelation, a group of scholars said it is not binding to believe in. This is the view I consider strongest because of the following hadith:
Once, the Prophet (SAW) passed by some date trees in Madinah and some people were manually pollinating them. He asked, “What are they doing?”
He was told, “They are taking [pollen] from the males and applying it to the females to pollinate them.”
The Prophet (SAW) said, “I don’t think that has any benefit.” Another narration, “If they did not do that, it would be better.”
So, they stopped doing that, and they did not get much yield that year. When the Prophet (SAW) heard of that, he said, “That was only a thought I had. If it has benefit, they should do it. I am only a man like you, and thoughts can be right or wrong. But, if I say something about Allah, I never lie about Allah.”
In another narration, “If it is a matter of your world, you know better. If it is a matter of your religion, then refer to me.”
Sahih Muslim and Sunan Ibn Majah
There is also a plethora of other evidence including the fact that Allah even criticized the Prophet (SAW) in the Quran for some decisions he made in war or when dealing with people. That is all because the Prophet (SAW) was a human who made human statements and human decisions in matters unrelated to the religion.
In this view, any advice by the Prophet (SAW) on worldly topics including medicine is considered non-binding when there is no evidence it comes from revelation. It is possible the Prophet (SAW) learned it from people in his time.
For example, the Prophet (SAW) said, “Black seed contains healing for every disease except death.” (Sahih Bukhari and Muslim)
This may just be general knowledge based on his experience or what he heard from doctors.
Other scholars believed all statements from the Prophet (SAW) come from revelation.
Even in this view, a statement being correct does not mean it is applicable at all times. So, for example, black seed being a good medicine for the standards of their time does not mean we do not have better medicine today and cannot leave black seeds.
Authenticity and Clarity
There are two aspects to any textual evidence: 1) authenticity, and 2) clarity.
Authenticity can be definitive or non-definitive. The Quran and some hadith transmitted by a lot of Sahih chains are definitive in authenticity. Then, within non-definitive, hadith can be strongly authentic (Sahih) or mediocre (Hasan) or weak.
Clarity can also be definitive or non-definitive. A verse like ⟪Establish prayer⟫ is not definitive in what it means. How many times a day? Is it recommended or obligatory? A hadith like, “Five prayers Allah has obligated in the day,” (Sahih Bukhari and Sahih Muslim) is more clear about the obligation and the number of prayers but still needs elaboration in the times and how to pray.
As such, something can be definitive in authenticity but non-definitive in clarity, while something else can be non-defintive in authenticity (like a Sahih hadith) but definitive in clarity.
That is why it is not simple to say the Quran takes precedence over hadith. It takes precedence if the corresponding clarity is equal. If it is not equal, then they are at a comparable level of strength as pieces of evidence, because the hadith is non-definitive in its authenticity but the Quran is non-definitive in its clarity.
Resolving Difficulties in Hadith
If a hadith is confusing because it seems to contradict the Quran or more authentic hadith, or contradict our sensibilities, or contradict our conceptions of morality, or contradict established science, there is a process to follow.
If it contradicts the Quran or more authentic hadith:
- The scholars checked whether the two have a reasonable interpretation that gets rid of the contradiction. If there was one, they would take that interpretation.
- If there is no viable interpretation, they checked whether it is possible one is an old law that was replaced by the other.
- If that was not possible, they checked whether there is weakness in the hadith. If there is one, they would use that weakness to explain the contradiction. Some people who do not follow any process jump to this step without attempting the first two steps.
If it contradicts our sensibilities or conceptions of morality, we check whether our sensibilities and morality have clear basis in the Quran or authentic hadith (not vague basis):
- If there is clear basis, we follow the steps above about when a hadith contradicts the Quran or more authentic hadith.
- If there is no basis or the basis is very vague, we fix our sensibilities and conception of morality to match the hadith if it is authentic.
If it contradicts science, we check whether the hadith is authentic, whether it is religious guidance or human opinion, and whether the science is strongly proven. If the science is established and strongly proven:
- We check if the hadith is authentic or not. If the hadith is weak, we do not concern ourselves with it.
- We check if there is an interpretation that can fit the science. If there is an interpretation, we take that interpretation.
- If there is no possible interpretation and the hadith is not clear in being religious guidance, we can say perhaps this statement did not come from revelation.
- If there is no possible interpretation and the hadith is religious guidance, we check if there is any weakness in the hadith or in the science. If we find weakness in either, we use that to explain the contradiction.
The above is a summary of the process, but it has to be implemented by someone knowledgeable in science and the science of hadith. It must be done after a careful analysis of the hadith and all its versions.
An example of this process applied to the hadith, “All of the son of Adam is eaten by the earth except the tailbone,” can be seen here: Hadith of the Tailbone – Fussilat Blog.
In summary, we first check the authenticity of the hadith, and we find that it seems to generally be authentic.
Then, we check if there is an interpretation that can fit science, and we find the possible interpretation that the hadith just means one small particle of the backbone is generally preserved in the earth, not the whole of it such that it would contradict our observations of how bodies decompose in the earth.
The context of the hadith is religious, so it seems to come from revelation. Then, assuming we want a solution but do not like the interpretation, we check if there is any possible argument the hadith has weakness, and we find such an argument.
Usul al-Fiqh
The scholars of Islam developed a subject called Usul al-Fiqh which studies the methodology of employing the Quran, Sunnah, legal analogy, and other techniques when deriving the laws of Islam.
This subject has numerous books written on it, and the four schools of thought (Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi’i, and Hanbali) have slightly different views on the exact use of evidence and the exact interaction of hadith with other evidence when deriving the laws of Islam.
The subject discusses:
- What counts as evidence in Islam?
- How to interpret the Arabic of the Quran and Sunnah?
- What level of authenticity in hadith is acceptable when deriving law?
- Are the judgements of companions evidence for law?
- How do hadith compare to the legal precedent of cities like Madinah and Kufa which had a rich tradition of scholarship since the time of the companions?
A person interested in learning how to derive the laws of Islam must study Usul al-Fiqh. Islamic law was not derived by scholars arbitrarily but according to a reasoned process.
And Allah knows best.
