|
Why the prophet Muhammad is innocent
of the fabricated hadith that fills the hadith books
Millions of Muslims all over the world have been brought up to believe that the
collections of hadith by Bukhari and Muslim provide the authentic
words and teachings of the prophet Muhammad. These two collections have been
labelled 'sahih' (authentic). The majority of these hadith portray a chain of
narrators in a chinese whispers
fashion attributing sayings to the prophet (e.g. A said that B said that C said .......
that G said, that the prophet said). Often the chain extends to seven names or even
more,
yet for some reason the hadith advocates still deemed these hadith to be authentic
and infallible! It is thus taken for granted that every person
in the chain is totally honest and accurate in their narration. How did they come to
this conclusion?
Well, the
hadith advocates have devised a very simple criteria for the assesment of
any hadith. To them, the validity of any hadith was dependant on
the integrity of the narrator! They will tell
us that hadith no 374 (for example) is a
genuine hadith
because the
narrator has
been checked
for good
character!!!
Bearing in
mind that
these
narrators
lived 14
centuries ago,
we may
inquire: who
were they
checked by?
contemporaries of their
time? hadith
guru's today?
or who?
Needless to
say, the claim
to endorse the
integrity of
someone who
lived 14
centuries ago
whom we have
never seen or
heard of
(except from
the hadith
books
themselves) is
a very naive
practice to
say the least!
No! bin this
farcical
process, this
criteria should
have been
discarded a
long time ago.
It is medieval
and totally
unscientific. It
seems absurd
that the
obvious
criteria (and
actually the
only reliable
one), by which
to test the
authenticity of
any hadith
was ignored!
Since the
authenticity of
the Quran,
being the un-corrupted
word of God,
is not a matter
of dispute to
any Muslim,
then it would
make much
better sense
to assess the
authenticity of
any hadith by
determining
whether this
hadith is in
harmony with
Quranic truth
or whether in
fact it is in
violation of
Quranic truth.
Scholars
should have
been checking
the content of
the hadith
itself rather
than the
farcical
character
reference of
the narrator.
It must be
stressed here
that testing
the
authenticity of
any hadith is
not for the
purpose of
approving the
hadith as a
source of
religious law.
The reader of
the Quran is
well aware
that God
sanctions the
Quran to be
the sole
source of law
(6:114).
Testing the
authenticity of
hadith is only
of historic
purposes and
for the benefit
of those who
wish to
research the
life of the
prophet. After
all, and as we
shall see
later, the
prophet
himself
prohibited his
people from
writing or
documenting
his hadith,
which makes
the whole
collection of
hadith books
a very
dubious
matter indeed.
Consequently,
and if we try
to apply the
only logical
criteria for
testing the
hadith (its
compliance
with the
Quran) we are
immediately
faced with
serious
contradictions
between a
large number
of hadith on
one hand and
between the
Quran on the
other hand.
However, if
we accept that
the prophet of
God would
never have
taught
anything that
violates or
contradicts
the Quran,
then the only
possibility
would be that
these 'hadith'
that are
attributed to
the prophet
are indeed
lies and
fabrications
that the
prophet is
innocent of.
For a start we
have two
different
hadith that
contradict one
another very
clearly:
In the first
hadith it is
reported that
the prophet
said to his
people shortly
before his
death:
"I have left
you the Quran
and my
sunna"
Yet in another
hadith the
prophet
commands his
people quite
the opposite:
"Do not write
down anything
of me except
the Quran.
Whoever
writes other
than that
should delete
it" (Ahmed,
Vol. 1, page
171.....also
Sahih Moslim
)
Historical
evidence
indicates that
the second of
these hadith is
the more
genuine one.
In accordance
with the
instructions
left by the
prophet as per
the second
hadith, we find
that for the
first 150 years
to 200 years
after the
death of the
prophet the
writing of his
hadith was
prohibited.
The absence
of any
documented
hadith for two
whole
centuries
confirms that
the prophet
never left his
people with
anything but
the Quran.
We know that
out of the
major hadith
collections
authorised
today, that of
Al-Bukhari
was the first
to be written.
But Al-Bukhari was
born in the
year 194
After Hijrah,
thus for two
whole
centuries the
believers did
not have any
hadith or
sunna for the
prophet to
follow, they
only had the
Quran. For
more details
about the
history of
hadith please
see the
following
page: History
of hadith
The aim of
this research
is to
demonstrate
numerous
examples of
the very clear
contradictions
between
various hadith
that are
described by
the hadith
scholars to be
"sahih"
(authentic)
and between
the Quran.
This will
hopefully
demonstrate
to the reader
how the
prophet of
God
Muhammad
(pbuh) is
totally
innocent of
the thousands
of fabricated
hadith that
are falsely
attributed to
him.
Important
Note: It has
been the habit
of the corrupt
Muslim
scholars and
the
worshippers
of hadith to
try to
discredit
anyone who
questions the
authenticity of
hadith, they
would
immediately
accuse him of
not believing
in the prophet
Muhammad
and other
equally
unfounded
accusations!
However, if it
can be proved
that these
hadith which
they call
"sahih"
contain an
abundance of
contradictions
with the
Quran, then
this research
in actual fact
becomes a
genuine
defence of the
integrity and
purity of the
prophet
Muhammad
and not the
contrary. This
research aims
to prove that
the prophet
Muhammad
would never
have
preached nor
taught
anything that
contradicts
the Quran,
and this would
automatically
exonerate him
from all such
fabricated
hadith.
It is not
possible to
detail all the
contradictory
hadith as their
number is
immense, so
the following
are a good
selection of
these glaring
contradictions, and for
convenience
purpose they
have been
placed in
groups.
.
|