Hadith criticism, Part IV.

For first time readers of this article series I recommend to start here:

For followers: As of this part (IV.), I will not give consecutive numbers to new postings on this subject. It means, all new entries will come as updates of „Hadith criticism, Part IV.“ with the new text put on the top and older entries below it.

Narrator: Abdullah ibn Umar
Umar bought a silk cloak from the market, took it to Allah’s Apostle and said, „O Allah’s Apostle! Take it and adorn yourself with it during the ‚Id and when the delegations visit you.“ Allah’s Apostle (p.b.u.h) replied, „This dress is for those who have no share (in the Hereafter).“ After a long period Allah’s Apostle (p.b.u.h) sent to Umar a cloak of silk brocade. Umar came to Allah’s Apostle (p.b.u.h) with the cloak and said, „O Allah’s Apostle! You said that this dress was for those who had no share (in the Hereafter); yet you have sent me this cloak.“ Allah’s Apostle said to him, „Sell it and fulfil your needs by it„“ (Bukhari, Vol. 2, No. 69)
First of all, this is one of many Ahadith to prohibit something which the Quran has NOT prohibited, while the Quran says „We have not neglected anything in the Book“ (6:38).
Second, the Hadith is in itself irrational: If wearing silk is a sin that condemns people to hell, why does the Prophet send it to Umar to sell it? Anyone who would buy it would „qualify“ for hell.

It becomes even „funnier“…

Narrator: Al-Bara‘ bin ‚Azib
Allah’s Apostle ordered us to do seven things and forbade us to do other seven. He ordered us: to follow the funeral procession. To visit the sick, to accept invitations, to help the oppressed, to fulfil the oaths, to return the greeting and to reply to the sneezer: (saying, „May Allah be merciful on you,“ provided the sneezer says, „All the praises are for Allah,“). He forbade us to use silver utensils and dishes and to wear golden rings, silk (clothes), Dibaj (pure silk cloth), Qissi and Istabraq (two kinds of silk cloths). “ (Bukhari, Vol. 2, No. 331)
Narrator: Anas
The Prophet allowed ‚Abdur-Rahman bin ‚Auf and Az-Zubair bin Al-‚Awwam to wear silk.“ (Bukhari, Vol. 4, No. 171)
Not only that the entire silk prohibiting Ahadith contradict the Quran, these two Ahadith – both from the Sahih of Bukhari – contradict themselves!

Narrator: Jabir ibn Abdullah
While we were in an army, Allah’s Apostle came to us and said, „You have been allowed to do the Mut’a (marriage), so do it.“ Salama bin Al-Akwa‘ said: Allah’s Apostle’s said, „If a man and a woman agree (to marry temporarily), their marriage should last for three nights, and if they like to continue, they can do so; and if they want to separate, they can do so.“ I do not know whether that was only for us or for all the people in general. Abu Abdullah (Al-Bukhari) said: ‚Ali made it clear that the Prophet said, „The Mut’a marriage has been cancelled (made unlawful).““ (Bukhari, Vol. 7, No. 52)
There is no such thing like temporary marriage in the Quran. Even a Prophet is not allowed to make himself a „law maker“ besides God.

Narrator: Anas bin Malik
The people of Mecca asked Allah’s Apostle to show them a miracle. So he showed them the moon split in two halves between which they saw the Hiram‘ mountain.“ (Bukhari, Vol. 5, No. 208)
Narrator: Abdullah
We used to consider miracles as Allah’s Blessings, but you people consider them to be a warning. Once we were with Allah’s Apostle on a journey, and we ran short of water. He said, „Bring the water remaining with you.“ The people brought a utensil containing a little water. He placed his hand in it and said, „Come to the blessed water, and the Blessing is from Allah.“ I saw the water flowing from among the fingers of Allah’s Apostle, and no doubt, we heard the meal glorifying Allah, when it was being eaten (by him)“ (Muslim, Book 39, No. 6728)
This contradicts the Quran that maintains that the Prophet is nothing but an ordinary human being. Neither is he immortal, nor infallible, nor can he perform miracles:
„And they say, `We will not believe in thee until thou cause a spring to gush forth for us from the earth…`Or, thou have a house of gold or thou ascend up into heaven; and we will not believe in thy ascension until thou send down to us a Book that we can read.‘ Say, `Holy is my Lord ! I am but a mortal sent as a Messenger.'“ (Quran, 17:90-93)
„And those who disbelieve say: Why has not a sign been sent down upon him from his Lord? You are only a warner and (there is) a guide for every people. “ (Quran, 13:7)

Narrator: ´Amr Bin Maimun
During the pre-lslamic period of ignorance I saw a she-monkey surrounded by a number of monkeys. They were all stoning it, because it had committed illegal sexual intercourse. I too, stoned it along with them.“ (Bukhari, Vol. 5, No. 188)
1. How did ´Amr Bin Maimum know about this „crime“?
2. Prior to Islam Arabs were killing their newborn girls, but this man was able to identify a case of „illegal sexual intercourse“ among monkeys?
3. What happened to the he-monkey, that had committed adultery? Did the „pious“ monkeys stone him as well?
4. What is the purpose of this silly Hadith? To „abrogate“ the Quranic ruling on adultery which is lashing and NOT the death sentence?

Narrator: Abu Hurayrah
(The Prophet) Solomon son of (the Prophet) David said, „Tonight I will go round (i.e. have sexual relations with) one hundred women (my wives) everyone of whom will deliver a male child who will fight in Allah’s Cause.“ On that an Angel said to him, „Say: ‚If Allah will.‘ “ But Solomon did not say it and forgot to say it. Then he had sexual relations with them but none of them delivered any child except one who delivered a half person. The Prophet said, „If Solomon had said: ‚If Allah will,‘ Allah would have fulfilled his (above) desire and that saying would have made him more hopeful.„“ (Bukhari, Vol. 7, No. 169)

Allah’s Apostle said, „(The Prophet) Solomon once said, ‚Tonight I will sleep with ninety women, each of whom will bring forth a (would-be) cavalier who will fight in Allah’s Cause.“ On this, his companion said to him, „Say: Allah willing!“ But he did not say Allah willing. Solomon then slept with all the women, but none of them became pregnant but one woman who later delivered a half-man. By Him in Whose Hand Muhammad’s soul is, if he (Solomon) had said, ‚Allah willing‘ (all his wives would have brought forth boys) and they would have fought in Allah’s Cause as cavaliers. „“ (Bukhari, Vol. 8, No. 634)

Allah’s Prophet Solomon who had sixty wives, once said, „Tonight I will have sexual relation (sleep) with all my wives so that each of them will become pregnant and bring forth (a boy who will grow into) a cavalier and will fight in Allah’s Cause.“ So he slept with his wives and none of them (conceived and) delivered (a child) except one who brought a half (body) boy (deformed). Allah’s Prophet said, „If Solomon had said; ‚If Allah Will,‘ then each of those women would have delivered a (would-be) cavalier to fight in Allah’s Cause.“ “ (Bukhari, Vol. 9, No. 561)

Sulaiman b. Dawud said: I will certainly have intercourse with seventy wives during the night, and every wife amongst them will give birth to a child, who will fight in the cause of Allah. It was said to him: Say: „Insha‘ Allah“ (God willing), but he did not say so and forgot it. He went round them but none of them give birth to a child except one woman and that too was an incomplete person. Upon this Allah’s Messenger (may peace be upon him) said: If he had said „Insha‘ Allah.“ he would not have failed, and his desire must have been fulfilled.“ (Muslim, Vol. 15, No. 4069)

The stupity of these Ahadith is beyond belief:
1. No man can have sex with 60-100 women in one night.
2. It is inconceivable that God miraculously enables his Prophet to have so much sex.
3. It is inconceivable that the Child is punished through physical handicap just to set an example for a Prophet who forgot to say „Insha´allah“
4. But the most interesting aspect is that one and the same source, Abu Hurayrah, is giving four different numbers for the wives of Suleiman. This is the more disturbing that Abu Hurayrah has transmitted more supposedly „Sahih Hadith“ than Aisha, Ali and Abdullah ibn Umar together. In order to lend him credence Hadith supporters say his memory was photographic and quote yet another allegedly „Sahih Hadith“:
I was a poor man, and used to stick to Allah’s Apostle contented with what will fill my stomach, and the Muhajirin (emigrants) used to be busy trading in the markets, and the Ansar used to be busy looking after their properties. One day I heard Allah’s Apostle saying, ‚Who will spread his Rida‘ (a garment covering the upper body) till I finished my speech and then fold it, (i.e. wear it), in which case he will never forget anything he had heard from me?“ So I spread my garment which I was wearing; and by Him Who sent Muhammad with the Truth, ever since, I have never forgotten whatever I heard from him (the Prophet).
To make it short: The proof for Abu Hurayrahs „unfailing“ (perfect) memory is…HIS OWN CLAIM!
But why then the discrepancies with regards to Suleimans wives? This is a clear case of Hadith contradicting eachother.

Narrator: Abu Hurayrah
The Prophet said, „No prayer is harder for the hypocrites than the Fajr and the ‚Isha‘ prayers and if they knew the reward for these prayers at their respective times, they would certainly present themselves (in the mosques) even if they had to crawl.“ The Prophet added, „Certainly I decided to order the Mu’adhdhin (call-maker) to pronounce Iqama and order a man to lead the prayer and then take a fire flame to burn all those who had not left their houses so far for the prayer along with their houses.“ “ (Bukhari, Vol. 1, No. 626)
The Hadith has to be rejected due to it´s Matn being in clear contradiction to the Quran on following grounds:
The Quran says: „There is no compulsion in religion.“ (2:256)
The Quran does not prescribe any penalty, leave alone the death penalty, for not praying.

Narrator: Jabir ibn Abdallah
While Allah’s Apostle was carrying stones (along) with the people of Mecca for (the building of) the Ka’ba wearing an Izar (waist-sheet cover), his uncle Al-‚Abbas said to him, „O my nephew! (It would be better) if you take off your Izar and put it over your shoulders underneath the stones.“ So he took off his Izar and put it over his shoulders, but he fell unconscious and since then he had never been seen naked.“ (Bukhari, Vol. 1, No. 360)
This one is a good example for a Hadith that is contrary to reason and an insult to the Prophet:
1. Why did not al-´Abbas give the prophet a towel or another piece of textile to protect his shoulder from the stones?
2. Is it seriously conceivable that the Prophet would walk in the public NAKED?
3. Did the Prophet fell unconscious under the weight of his „Izar“?

Narrator: Abu Said al-Khudri
The Prophet said, „Amongst the men of Bani Israel there was a man who had murdered ninety-nine persons. Then he set out asking (whether his repentance could be accepted or not). He came upon a monk and asked him if his repentance could be accepted. The monk replied in the negative and so the man killed him. He kept on asking till a man advised to go to such and such village. (So he left for it) but death overtook him on the way. While dying, he turned his chest towards that village (where he had hoped his repentance would be accepted), and so the angels of mercy and the angels of punishment quarrelled amongst themselves regarding him. Allah ordered the village (towards which he was going) to come closer to him, and ordered the village (whence he had come), to go far away, and then He ordered the angels to measure the distances between his body and the two villages. So he was found to be one span closer to the village (he was going to). So he was forgiven.“ (Bukhari, Vol. 4, No. 676)
Conclusion of this Hadith´s Matn: The man who had killed 100 people was simply forgiven because of being nearer to the village of his destination than to the village of his departure. This stands in grave contrast to the Quran that says: „whosoever killeth a human being for other than manslaughter or corruption in the earth, it shall be as if he had killed all mankind“ (5:32)

Narrator: Abu Hurayrah
The Prophet said „If a house fly falls in the drink of anyone of you, he should dip it (in the drink), for one of its wings has a disease and the other has the cure for the disease.„“ (Bukhari, Vol. 4, No. 537)
Needless to argue why this Hadith is pure nonsense and an insult to any sane persons intelligence

Narrator: Abu Talha
The Prophet said, „Angels do not enter a house which has either a dog or a picture in it.„“ (Bukhari, Vol. 4, No. 539)
Narrator: Abdullah ibn Umar
Allah’s Apostle ordered that the dogs should be killed.“ (Bukhari, Vol. 4, No. 540)
Narrator: Nafi
Ibn ‚Umar used to kill snakes but when Abu Lubaba informed him that the Prophet had forbidden the killing of snakes living in houses, he gave up killing them.„“ (Bukhari, Vol. 4, No. 530)
These three Ahadith are completely ridiculous:
1. Does the first one imply that people living in a house with a dog and/or pictures will go to hell? If yes, then this is in violation of the Quran that at no points forbids dogs. If no, then it is irrelevant whether Angels enter a house or not.
2. What authority does even a Prophet of God have to order that dogs which are Gods creation should be killed?
3. Why does the same Prophet who orders the killing of dogs forbid the killing of snakes although the latter can pose a great danger?



Celebrating the birthday of Prophet Muhammad

Recently in Yemen a suicide bomber attacked a ceremony of Shia Muslims celebrating the birthday of Prophet Muhammad:

Killing Shias is nothing that radical Sunnis would apologize for and since Shias, contrary to Jews and Christians, have no lobby there will hardly be any outcry or otherwise public condemnation even though the Houthi Shias in Yemen are fighting against Al Qaeda.

What is, however, much more frightening is that instead of condemning the crime or at least keeping silent some Sunni authorities consider the celebration of the Prophets birthday unislamic and forbidden (haram). By arguing in this direction such people at least indirectly „explain“ and justify the attack on the ceremony and side with the perpetrator.

Many islamic websites go at lengths to explain that celebrating the Prophets birthday is not part of the Quran and the Sunnah. Others say it is an innovation (bid´ah) and thus forbidden. Let´s take on these claims one by one:

1. With regards to the Quran one could also say that the exact text of the daily prayers (Salat), it´s times and other detailed aspects are also not part of the Quran. One could confront the extremists with this question: Has the Quran prohibited celebrating birthdays?

2. Declaring something forbidden because it is not part of the Sunnah is a weak argument as the same applies for drugs (Heroin…) as well as medicine (vaccination..). Same with regards to sports or technological innovations. None of this is reported in the Sunnah as being practiced by the Prophet or clearly regulated. Going by this irrationality one could also argue that grapefruits or kiwis are „unislamic“ because the Prophet is not reported to have eaten them. Fact is, anyway, that there is no Hadith where the Prophet explicitly forbade celebrating birthdays.
That the Prophet did not do somethings does not mean that they are unislamic and thus forbidden. For instance, did the Prophet go to school? Did he swim? Did he learn foreign languages?

3. Trying to construct a prohibition for celebrating the Prophets birthday by calling it „forbidden innovation“ (bid´ah) is completely flawed. Celebrating the Prophets birthday is not tantamount to introducing a religious ruling or law. What IS haram is to forbid something which God has allowed or to allow something that God has forbidden. None of this applies to the act of celebrating the Prophets birthday, so the true „innovators“ are those who go as far as to declare such a celebration forbidden.
Declaring such a ceremonial act „innovation“ is as much nonsense as saying that wearing a Lionel Messi jersey while praying or breaking the Ramadhan fasting with rump steak constitutes (unislamic) „innovation“.

What evil can possibly be in Muslims coming together to share food and pray with eachother? What is unislamic in commemorating the Prophet on his birthday and speaking prayers and poems to his remembrance?
Does not the Quran say: „God and His angels send blessings on the Prophet: O ye that believe! Send ye blessings on him, and salute him with all respect.“ (33:56)?

Although the following verse refers to allowed and forbidden food it still gives guidance regarding how to deal with „do´s and dont´s“:
„But say not – for any false thing that your tongues may put forth,- „This is lawful, and this is forbidden,“ so as to ascribe false things to God. For those who ascribe false things to God, will never prosper. “ (16:116)

„What think those who invent lies against ALLAH of the Day of Resurrection ? Surely, ALLAH is Gracious towards mankind, but most of them are not thankful.“ (10:60)

„My Lord has only prohibited indecencies, those of them that are apparent as well as those that are concealed, and sin and rebellion without justice, and that you associate with Allah that for which He has not sent down any authority, and that you say against Allah what you do not know. “ (7:33)

It is by no means obvious in how far the verse above could contain the celebration of birthdays as part of the „catalogue of prohibitions“. At the same time a pious Muslim has no reason to assume that Allah has „forgotten“ anything as the Quran clearly says:

„…WE have left out nothing in the Book…“ (6:38)
„Shall I seek other than Allah for judge, when He it is Who hath revealed unto you (this) Scripture, fully explained ? …“ (6:114)
„And the word of thy Lord has been fulfilled in truth and justice. None can change HIS words…“ (6:115)

Extremists argue that music and singing are prohibited in Islam, but again this is untrue. With no word does the Quran prohibit music. This is what it says:
„And assuredly We gave David grace from Us, (saying): O ye hills and birds, echo his psalms of praise! “ (34:10)
This refers to Prophet David singing his Psalms in praise of God, while the hills echoed the melody and the birds accompanied it with harmonic twitter.

While there are very few Sahih Hadiths that seem to indicate that music instruments are forbidden in Islam, there are at least three Sahih Hadith that indicate the opposite:

„That the Prophet said to him‘ „O Abu Musa! You have been given one of the musical wind-instruments of the family of David .‘ “ (Bukhari, Vol. 6, No. 568)

„The Prophet (ﷺ) came to me after consuming his marriage with me and sat down on my bed as you (the sub-narrator) are sitting now, and small girls were beating the tambourine and singing in lamentation of my father who had been killed on the day of the battle of Badr. Then one of the girls said, „There is a Prophet amongst us who knows what will happen tomorrow.“ The Prophet (ﷺ) said (to her),“ Do not say this, but go on saying what you have spoken before.““ (Bukhari, Vol. 5, No. 4001)

„On the days of Mina, (11th, 12th, and 13th of Dhul-Hijjah) Abu Bakr came to her while two young girls were beating the tambourine and the Prophet (ﷺ) was lying covered with his clothes. Abu Bakr scolded them and the Prophet (ﷺ) uncovered his face and said to Abu Bakr, „Leave them, for these days are the days of `Id and the days of Mina.“ `Aisha further said, „Once the Prophet (ﷺ) was screening me and I was watching the display of black slaves in the Mosque and (`Umar) scolded them. The Prophet (ﷺ) said, ‚Leave them. O Bani Arfida! (carry on), you are safe (protected)“ (Bukhari, Vol. 2, No. 987)

Another popular „argument“ of Salafis is that celebrating the Prophets birthday means copying Christians and again that copying Non-Muslims means being one of them. But then what about using AK-47s, firing RPGs or building IEDs? Are these not all acts of „copying Non-Muslims“?

The biggest danger to Islam today is the rise of Wahhabism and Salafism, two extremist „sub-ideologies“ whose supporters consider themselves superior to anyone (including Muslims). They engage in an „exclusivist-narcissistic“ self-perception that takes on fascistoid dimensions climaxing in takfirism, the act of declaring other Muslims „unbelievers“ or „apostates“ (murtadd).
The result is that these people go as far as either directly committing violence against their opponents (including unarmed civilians of all ages and sexes) or they consider violence against their mentioned adversaries at least as lawful (halal).