Introduction
One of the problems in weak hadith is that even when their intended message is sound, their wording may be imbalanced and problematic.
This is especially clear in weak hadith about encouraging known good deeds and discouraging known evil deeds.
When a hadith claims a deed that is definitely good has a disproportionately large reward, that skews people’s perception of how good that deed actually is. As a result, it might lead people to giving it more importance than other good deeds which are in reality more rewarding than it.
So, even while the intended message (encouraging that good deed) is sound, the wording leads to imbalance.
Similarly, when a hadith claims a certain severity or punishment for a known sin that is disproportionately high, that skews people’s perception of how evil that action actually is. As a result, it might lead people to giving more important to avoiding that sin than sins that are much larger than it.
So, even while the intention of discouraging the sin is good, the way it is done entails a corruption or misunderstanding of the moral balance and compass of Islam.
An example of this is the hadith that claims consuming a dirham of interest is worse than committing zina 33 times.
Authenticity of the Hadith
The hadith is narrated by Ibn Abi Mulaikah from Abdullah ibn Hanzalah from the Prophet (SAW) that, “Consuming one dirham (silver coin) of interest knowingly is worse than committing zina 33 times.” (Musnad Ahmad)
This hadith is munkar and can be found in the Musnad of Imam Ahmad, the Musnad of al-Bazzar, and Mu’jam of Tabarani. However, it is not included in any of the major Sunan because it is munkar.
The hadith is munkar because there are two questionable routes that narrate it from the Prophet (SAW) but three authentic routes that clearly state Abdullah ibn Hanzalah actually narrated from Ka’b al-Ahbar that he said, “I would prefer to commit zina 33 times than to consume one dirham of interest while Allah knows I am consuming that dirham of interest.” (Musannaf Abd al-Razzaq)
The hadith is narrated like this (attributed to Ka’b al-Ahbar) by Abd al-Aziz ibn Rafee’, Bakkar ibn Abdullah, and Ibn Jurayj from Ibn Abi Mulaikah.
The full chain diagram can be accessed here. However, a summarized version of the chains is as follows:
Layth ibn Abi Sulaim was a known weak narrator who mixed up the chains and content of hadith all the time. So, it is not surprising for him to turn a narration of Ka’b into a hadith of the Prophet (SAW) by mistake.
Husain ibn Muhammad was an acceptable narrator but the gharabah (solitariness) of his chain is very concerning since Ayyub al-Sakhtayani and Jarir ibn Hazim were both prolific teachers. Why did no one else narrate the hadith from them if they did narrate the hadith as prophetic?
Most likely, they actually transmitted the hadith from Ka’b but Husain made a mistake.
The reliability of the scholars who narrated it from Ka’b and their numbers make it almost certain that the hadith actually comes from Ka’b. It is impossible to imagine multiple narrators accidentally turning the prophetic hadith into a hadith of Ka’b but easy to imagine how people could turn a hadith of Ka’b into a prophetic hadith by mistake.
This was also the judgement of the major hadith scholars.
Abu Hatim al-Razi was asked about the hadith, and he said, “This is a mistake. Thawri and others narrated it as a statement of Ka’b.” (Ilal of Ibn Abi Hatim)
Imam Ahmad did include the hadith in his Musnad but included the version of Ka’b right after, indicating that he considered the hadith munkar.
Daruqutni included both versions of the hadith and said after the hadith of Ka’b, “This is more accurate than the prophetic version.” (Sunan Daruqutni)
There are other narrations reported from the Prophet with similar words, but they are all likewise weak and munkar. I will not lengthen the article by delving into every one of them.
Others Narrations That Compare Interest to Zina
Ka’b al-Ahbar never met the Prophet (SAW) but was a scholar in the time of the Sahabah. He came from a Jewish background and thus had a lot of knowledge from their scriptures. He is the one who likely claimed that interest is worse than committing zina 33 times in the above hadith.
A similar comparison is reported from Ibn Masud (RA), “Interest is around seventy branches, and the lowest branch is like someone who approaches his mother (incest) according to Islam.” (Musannaf Abd al-Razzaq) The chain of this hadith is to the standard of Sahih Bukhari, but it is a statement of Ibn Masud (RA), not the Prophet (SAW).
Similar is reported with a disconnected chain from Abdullah ibn al-Salam (RA), the Sahabi who converted to Islam from Judaism, and with a weak chain from Ali ibn Abi Talib (RA).
Difference Between Scholarly and Prophetic Statements
When the Prophet (SAW) says something about morality, it is revelation from Allah and binding moral law.
When scholars or even companions say something, they can say it out of ijtihad and based on their assessment of the context and situation.
So, a companion might look at his context and think that everyone understands the evil of zina but underestimates the evil of interest, so he might say “Interest is even worse than zina” not intending a complete moral judgement but instead considering it from a specific aspect. For example, he might think “Interest is war with Allah according to the Quran, but no such thing is mentioned for zina, so from that perspective, interest is worse than zina.” However, this does not mean to be a final or conclusive moral judgement.
It would be a huge mistake to take the ijtihadi statement said in a certain context and say that statement in a completely different context. We live in a time and society that extremely underestimates the evil of zina compared to its actual status. When you make such statements in this context, you will not actually raise people’s fear of interest. On the contrary, you might even lower their fear because they already view zina lightly.
Scriptural Evidence Zina Is Worse Than Interest
There can be no doubt in a person’s mind that zina is worse than interest as a sin in an overall sense even if interest might be worse from specific aspects.
There is an explicit hadith on this topic narrated by Ibn Masud (RA) himself.
He asked the Prophet (SAW) what sin was greatest in the sight of Allah. The Prophet (SAW) said, “That you set up a rival unto Allah even though He created you.” When asked what was the next greatest sin, he said, “That you kill your son fearing that he will eat with you.” When asked what was the next greatest sin, he said, “That you fornicate with the wife of your neighbor.” (Sahih Bukhari and Muslim)
There is an explicit ranking of sins in this hadith, and the Prophet (SAW) does not mention interest before zina.
Whenever Allah mentions zina in the Quran, he mentions it right next to murder itself, which is known as the greatest sin after shirk.
Allah says ⟪And those who do not invoke with Allah another deity or kill the soul which Allah has forbidden [to be killed], except by right, and do not commit unlawful sexual intercourse. And whoever should do that will meet a penalty.⟫ (25:68)
This is similar in verse 60:12.
In fact, sometimes, Allah places zina before murder, like in 17:32, and 6:151.
Allah says ⟪Say, “Come, I will recite what your Lord has prohibited to you. [He commands] that you not associate anything with Him, and to parents, good treatment, and do not kill your children out of poverty; We will provide for you and them. And do not approach immoralities – what is apparent of them and what is concealed. And do not kill the soul which Allah has forbidden [to be killed] except by [legal] right. This has He instructed you that you may use reason.”⟫ (6:151)
Allah places killing of your children first, then zina, then general murder.
That is sufficient scriptural evidence to prove zina is much worse than interest. It is, in reality, one of the big three major sins alongside disbelief and murder.
Rational Evidence Zina Is Worse Than Interest
There is also more than enough rational evidence to prove zina is worse than interest.
Firstly, Zina is a misuse of the body Allah gave us as human beings, exploiting what was supposed to be with the institution of marriage in a demented way. Interest is an exploitation of the institution of business, making money with nothing but money in a twisted way.
Sins of the body are worse than sins of wealth.
For example, murder or hurting someone (which affect their body) is worse than stealing or robbery (which affects their wealth).
Similarly, a person has more responsibility to take care of his body than he has to take care of his wealth. A person is forbidden from committing suicide or every hurting his body intentionally and the state would stop them from doing so while a person who destroys his money can do that to himself.
Additionally, the person who sacrifices his body for the sake of Allah (and dies) attains a much greater status than someone who donates his money for the sake of Allah.
All of that shows that sins of the body are generally much worse than sins of property. The same ostensibly applies to zina and interest.
Secondly, zina has much worse individual consequences in the world than interest does. If someone commits zina, they risk bringing an illegitimate child into the world who will have no relation to his father for all his life. That is objectively a worse consequence than interest, which is limited to its own transaction.
Thirdly, zina has much worse societal consequences than interest does. If zina becomes prevalent, the institution of marriage falls apart which is the foundation of society. On the other hand, interest becoming common in society affects people’s wealth and transactions. That is a terrible consequence but is not comparable to the falling apart of marriage. If interest leads to the exploitation of the poor, zina leads to the exploitation of women in a much worse way whether directly (like prostitution) or indirectly.
Fourthly, the fitrah of Muslims testifies that zina is worse than interest.
What does it mean for a sin to be worse?
Sins are of different types and have different dimensions. Some sins are against people, while other sins are against Allah Himself. Some sins have long-term consequences, while other sins do not have any consequences.
As a result, when a comparison is made between two sins, it can be in terms of weight or in terms of consequence or in terms of fixability.
The weight of a sin is: If someone commits this sin and dies without repenting and Allah does not forgive Him, how much punishment will he face for that sin?
The consequence of a sin is: How much worldly consequence will this sin have?
The fixability of a sin is: How easy is it to repent or fix yourself after the sin?
Generally speaking, sins against Allah are greater in weight but easier to fix, while sins against people are smaller in weight but harder to fix.
Sins against Allah are greater in weight because Allah is greater than people, and sins against Him are more evil than sins against people. This is why the worst sin in Islam is shirk, which is the worst disrespect of Allah imaginable.
Sins against Allah are also easier to fix because Allah is forgiving and merciful. So, as long as someone is alive and repents, Allah is eager to accept repentance. On the other hand, the fixability of sins against other people can depend on how forgiving those people are and might require you to take them out of the situation your sin put them in. This is a much more difficult requirement.
So, from a complete perspective, shirk is the worst sin without doubt, especially when you die without having repented from it. However, it would not be incorrect to say murder is worse than shirk from the perspective of fixability.
In the same way, many sins have specific punishments or warnings associated with them that other sins do not have. For example, Allah says that anyone who deals in interest is at war with Allah! There is no similar warning for other sins, even murder or zina. As a result, it is possible for someone to say interest is worse than those sins from that specific perspective, not in a complete sense.
Warnings Are Contextual
Scholarly warnings are contextual. They take into account the situation and mindset of people to encourage them to good or discourage them from evil. It would be unwise and irrational to take a warning given in one context into another context which makes that warning harmful instead of useful.
As a result, even if early scholars like Ibn Masud (RA) compared interest to zina from a perspective to emphasize the evil of interest, they did so knowing the context of their time. They probably understood that people knew the evil of zina. They especially knew the evil of incest. But, because people did not truly understand the evil of interest, they discouraged them through a comparison to something they knew.
In our time, zina is an extremely underestimated sin. Even if people understand it to be sinful, they often do not understand its greatness or that it is close to murder in weight. That is because of the prevalence of liberalism and the associated harm principle which claims evil is only when you harm people. Zina is a crime that does not directly cause physical harm to anyone.
In this context, it is irresponsible and incorrect to say interest is worse than zina. Rather than emphasize the evil of interest, it only waters down the evil of both interest and zina. It is necessary to emphasize the evil of both zina and interest, and that cannot be through this comparison.
But, Allah knows best.
