They can have no faith until they make thee judge…

Recently in an internet discussion , I put forward this theme to get few alternate views from friends regarding authority of Prophet’s Sunnah in the juridic framework of Islam:

Is there a tendency in history to suggest that there was some activity based phenomena that can be technically called ‘Islamic Law’ in the pre-formative development period in history of Islamic methodology i.e. primarily the greater part of first century.

I had the following statement of Dr. Fazlur Rahman at the back of my mind:

 

Now the overall picture of the Prophet’s biography – if we look behind the colouring supplied by the medieval legal mass – has certainly no tendency to suggest the impression of Prophet as a pan-legist neatly regulating the fine details of human life from administration to those of ritual purity. The evidence, in fact, strongly suggests that the Prophet was primarily a moral reformer of mankind and that, apart from occasional decisions, which had the character of ad hoc cases, he seldom resorted to general legislation as a means for furthering the general Islamic cause.[1]

The idea seemed as an echo of lot of other Orientalists like Snouk Hurgronje, Tyan and Anderson. However it was perhaps a part of Joseph Schacht’s oppugning of Prophet’s authority that Rahman was actually delimitating apologetically. Unfortunately the further thesis of Rahman is tantamount to further asserting the skeptic approach towards the same authority thereby breaking the actual position of Sunnah to crumbs.

The contemporary schools’ methodology besides a new interpretation of Quran also generates a public opinion (which I got in response to the discussion theme) that believes in considerable reduction of Prophetic authority. If one look more closely to such opinions, the belief in Prophetic authority seems no more then mere lip service. The discussion which I refered above gave me further clues into the minds of those who are of the opinion that with the demise of the Prophet we are left with only the methods of his deductive reasoning and the actual deductions are either doubtful or of no use as they cannot stand the test of time. This comparatively new approach if seen in the collective perspective of similar but slightly varied thoughts would be tantamount to arguing that Prophet had not made enough arrangements to dispense the justice according to new norms and thus breached the law that he himself had introduced. If this assertion seems bold and exaggerated to a reader, I again borrow few phrases from Dr. Rahman:

For one thing it can be concluded a priori that the Prophet, who was, until his death, engaged in a grim moral and political struggle against the Meccans and the Arabs and in organising his community-state, could hardly have found time to lay down rules for the minutiae of life. [2]

I dont understand how one would be unjustified to imply an abnegation of systematic legal activities[3] of Prophet. This would consequently lead to denial of the existence of Sunnah of the Prophet, which would logically entails the rejection of validity of whatever may have been described as Sunnah of the Prophet.

Any student of contemporary schools can easily understand that the first causal-link in the above chain of implications is the interpretation of Quranic verses commanding adherence to Prophet’s decisions as a vague guideline for Muslims to observe and not drawing muse from actual decisions of Prophet that are preserved in the form of Hadith. The aim of this piece of writing is not to present a detailed and comprehensive picture of early legal activities to posit a forceful critique of these skeptic opinions. Its just an effort to slightly provide a look at the methodology behind legal activities that took place in the time of Prophet, his dispensing of legal codes and methods of judgment of his companions.

Juridical Administration. For administration of justice, Prophet sent judges to different towns and provinces assigning them with the judicial responsibility. Its hard to imagine that without any systematic legal methodology, a judge can relieve himself easily of his obligations. The methodology behind the activity of Judges of Prophet had complete knowledge of the his decisions in response to different cases and they seldom resorted to their own judgements[4]. Few of his judges were:

• Abdullah ibn Masud
• Abu Musa al-Ashari
• Ali bin Abi Talib
• Amr bin Al-Aas
• Amr Bin Hazm
• Attab bin Asid
• Dihya al-Kalbi
• Hudaifa bin al-Yaman
• Maqal bin Yasar al-Muzani
• Muadh bin Jabal
• Ubai bin Kaab
• Umar bin al-Khitab
• Uqbah bin Amir-al-Juhani
• Zaid bin Thabit

This is not an exhaustive list[5] and even in the city of Basra, there were no less then thirteen judges that took major part in judicial activities of first century. It would be too naive to assume that all these judges just used their understanding of ‘Prophet’s deductive reasoning’ to dispense something as sacred as justice.

Method of Reaching Judgements. The instructions for judges are so evident from history as they were directed to base their judgements on Quran and Sunnah. Letters of Umar to Abu Musa in Basra and Shuraih in Kufa, his advices to judges in general and the advices of Ibn Masud are just few examples. At the same time, the contorversy at the time of Umar’s famous decision of stopping people from doing Tammatu and the statements of Saad and Ibn Umar to give priority to the Sunnah of Prophet are glaring examples of the knowledge and method of reaching judgements at that time[6]. Few more judgements that decribe the necessity for basing judgements on Sunnah of Prophet and reflect upon the method of companions are:

• Abu Bakr put a grandmother on hold for her share in inheritance and relied on Mughira’s report to give her one sixth share rather then exercising his reasoning.[7]
• Umar was unclear about Magians of Hajr and when Abdur Rehmaan Bin Auf informed him of hadith of Prophet, he accepted Jizya from them.[8]
• Usman asked Fura’aia what the Prophet has decided about her Talaaq and based future decisions on that.[9]
• Muaz did not accept any zakat on less then 30 cows and said that he did not hear anything about that from the Prophet.[10]
• Umar asked the pilgrims in Mina about the blood money and Dhahak bin Sufyan told him what Prophet wrote him about that.[11]
• Marwan freed the slave whose hand was about to be cut on stealing a the pith of a palm tree when he heard the hadith regarding it.[12]

The collection of Ahadith are full of such accounts especially the earlier ones like Muwatta of Malik and Musannaf of Abul Razzaq al-Sanani. Judges and governors asked the scholars and did their utmost effort to find an example decision from Prophet himself before basing the judgement on their own opinion. Even the most fearing of them in later generation based their opinions on companions’ decisions and this method continued till the time classical schools of jurisprudence were completely developed. The legal literature of first century was absorbed into the later works and little remains extant today. However the continued research[13] and references to actual books[14] give us ample clues that there were written legal documents that were sent to judges and developed by them.

1. Fazlur Rehman, Islamic Methodology of History, [IRI Edition], p. 10.
2. Fazlur Rehman, Islamic Methodology of History, [IRI Edition], p. 11.
3. It should be correctly appreciated that legal activities in Islamic framework are not merely be taken in the sense of criminal law but also includes functions related to society and individual.
4. A valuable information regarding Prophet’s judgements can derived from Ibn Talla’s Aqdiyat Rasulillah as cited by M.Azami in On Schacht’s Origins of Muhammadan Jurisprudence p. 20
5. The complete list with references can be found in M.Azami, On Schacht’s Origins of Muhammadan Jurisprudence p. 21
6. Malik bin Anas, Muwatta
7. Malik bin Anas, Muwatta, Faraidh
8. Malik bin Anas, Muwatta, Zakat
9. Malik bin Anas, Muwatta, Talaq
10. Malik bin Anas, Muwatta, Zakat
11. Malik bin Anas, Muwatta, Hudad
12. Malik bin Anas, Muwatta
13. For instance Nabia Abbott, Studies in Arabic Literary Papyri: Language and Literature Vol I & II and F. Sezgin’s works.
14. For a detailed handling of these references to early mauscripts in later books see M. Azami, Studies in Early Hadith Literature.

Filed under: Hadith & Sunnah, Traditional Islam

Know thy self…

I repeatedly encounter the same questions when I take some time off to be all alone with myself. Who am I? Where do I come from? What is my true jurisdiction? How to be certain about the extents of my control and the nature of controlled entities? Are their any exhaustive lists or is it all fluid? What comes next? When and how it will all end or will it end at all? What is a coincidence? Are we colligated some how with the complete macrocosm or there are sets of selective connections? Am I liable in individual capacity or there is a collective responsibility that I am bestowed with or both? How do we perceive reality? And do we have all the tools to access all the knowledge that can express the ultimate reality?

These are all very ordinary philosophical questions related to epistemology and existence. Problems with theory of knowledge are multi dimensional. Those who deal formally with these are not sure most of the time what exactly are they trying to achieve. It is like a hypothetical two dimensional world in which the water you drink would fall through on earth. I am no specialist in the field or a difference maker – not even a student. I just aim to learn how to cogitate philosophically so that I can cerebrate about my ‘Self’. The greatest dilemma with my mentation is that I cannot be a true skeptic ever. I have ascertained answers to most of these questions through the revealed knowledge that has reached me and I am still fishing for some yet I can’t come over that addiction which stimulates me to find still more.

It is strange how abundantly the philosophical mind uses the word ‘I’. Knowledge of the self enshrouds all the answers under its cloak. The greatest predicament of the complexity of the brain is that it cannot comprehend the ‘self’ completely. In the end we can’t rely on acquired knowledge; we have to turn to revelation to satiate ourselves because the greatest knowledge we have is that we know nothing.

Your hearts know in silence the secrets of the days and the nights.
But your ears thirst for the sound of your heart’s knowledge.
You would know in words that which you have always know in thought.
You would touch with your fingers the naked body of your dreams.
And it is well you should…
The hidden well-spring of your soul must need to rise and run murmuring to the sea;
And the treasure of your infinite depths would be revealed to your eyes.
But let there be no scales to weigh your unknown treasure;
And seek not the depths of your knowledge with staff or sounding line.
For self is a sea boundless and measureless.
Say not, “I have found the truth,” but rather, “I have found a truth.”
Say not, “I have found the path of the soul.” Say rather, “I have met the soul walking upon my path.”
For the soul walks upon all the paths.
The soul walks not upon a line, neither does it grow like a reed.
The soul unfolds itself, like a lotus of countless petals.

1. On Self Knowledge, The Prophet by Khalil Gibran

Filed under: Reflections

Contemplations on Sunnah

The contemporary Muslim scholarship asserts that a new definition [1] of Sunnah is pertinent towards all the efforts to decontaminate the domain of normative teachings of Islam from the alien beliefs and practices derived mainly from socio-cultural reforms. This asseveration is usually put forward as an objective thesis that promises to re-gain the lost dynamism of Islamic fabric. Progressive reformation is not an abhorrent notion to the intellect per se, as the character of revelation is strictly eternal. However the need to reformulate the positive lines of conduct suitable to contemporary needs does not demand a new definition of sources either. The issue might not be so significant if the discourses in this regard just purport a modernist linguistic framework rephrasing the religious terminology. It however, re-defines the scope and authority of revealed character of Quran itself as revelation cannot be played with rampantly unless the Prophet’s relationship with it is trimmed down to bare minimum.

The fact that usually escapes the attention in recent times is that the Muslim contemporary thought, in general, draws heavily from the Oriental treatments of the subject that generally represent the skeptical approach towards traditional methodologies. On the other hand, the works largely consonant with the traditional genesis are disregarded even if they strongly target their skeptic coevals [2]. It is always productive if historical methodology connects to the past; however the modern structure it would shape would prove unproductive if it fails to take into account all the alternatives.

Intellectual honesty is perhaps the most important factor in an unbiased presentment of constructs. Blind academic obsession can never contribute much towards reforming a complete religious methodology however it might prove extremely useful in the fields of editing, translating and diligent preparations of concordances and indices. This moral conceit and pedantic obsession is probably displayed at its best in the following words of Ignaz Goldziher:

I truly entered into the spirit of Islam to such an extent that ultimately I became inwardly convinced that I myself was a Muslim, and judiciously discovered that this was the only religion which, even in its doctrinal and official formulation, can satisfy philosophical minds. My Ideal was to elevate Judaism to similar rational level.[3]

Yet he refused to follow his teacher Vembery into an honest declaration of faith. He could not elevate Judaism to the same realism however he managed to come up with thesis such as Hadith being the fraudulent propaganda of rival legal theories of the early second century through academic techniques which had already undermined belief in textual integrity of Hebrew Scriptures. Half a century later, Joseph Schacht attempted to adduce the missing body of proof with the publication of Origins of Muhammadan Jurisprudence (1950). Besides influencing other like minded Orientalists, it had a similar impact upon modern Muslim writers on Islamic Methodology such as Fazlur Rahmaan, A.A.A.Fyzee and few others.

We have no reason to doubt the intentions of Muslim apologetics who took it upon themselves to lay the foundations of reformation of religious methodology as they were awestruck by the alleged shallowness of the medieval theories. Fazlur Rahmaan terms the revelation of this difference between the early and later phases of Islamic developments as a ‘great historic discovery’:

…and this great historic discovery – towards which the Orientalist has contributed so much – can no longer be concealed behind the conventional medieval theory about these principles. It is obvious, therefore, that this work has not only a purely historical value but can be of great practical consequence and can indicate the way for further Islamic developments.[4]

Fazlur Rahmaan was unarguably the first modern voice that raised serious concerns regarding the formative as well as post-formative developments in Islam. He tried to put the missing pieces of puzzle to complete a picture that can be called a start towards the truly progressive Islam according to his understanding.

Sunnah being the sole law giving source besides Quran has remained the focal point of all such discourses. The absolute authenticity of Quranic content remains unchallenged among all except few who are adamant towards doubting all the revealed texts. However contentions regarding definition, scope, content and transmission of Sunnah are a common character of modern religious literature. Its importance is two fold as on one side it carries the complete behavioral approach towards religion and on other it explains the normative law that directs the course of individual actions thereby forming the complete character of society.

Another aspect that carries Sunnah to the core is its peculiar effusion from the person of Prophet that is seemingly not so divine for some in true sense of the word. It is precisely this generally held intentional and sometimes unintentional skepticism towards the character of the Prophetic legal authority that necessitates that the definition and scope of Sunnah should be revisited and subsequently reformed. All the efforts towards reformation [5] cannot impoverish the concept of Sunnah from Islamic methodology altogether as that would largely mutilate the overall scope of religion thereby making it impossible to be followed. However deforming its shape by circumscribing its parameter to a few ritualistic activities can prove absorbing while unalarming to the masses at the same time.

The reader should not comprehend in anyway that I am pointing towards a conspiracy theory that was created by Muslim scholars against their own canonical structure. I am just conjecturing that they apologetically rhymed with the Orientalist perspective which according to contemporary European critics has offered a way of ‘pulling the carpet beneath Islam’ [6]. The modernist theologians sincerely tried to put that carpet back yet the new picture that emerges is not even near to the true Islamic spirit as they fell into believing the primary thesis that mainly rests its case upon rejection of tradition. Fazlur Rahmaan equated the Sunnah as collective Ijtihad and Ijma of the early generation of Muslims. He did not mean to say that it is completely divorced from the Prophetic Sunnah yet he transferred the responsibility of deciding about the actual specific content of the Sunnah from the Prophet to the Muslim community. He describes the first century concept of Suunah as:

…the community as a whole had assumed the necessary prerogative of creating and recreating the content of Prophetic Sunnah and that Ijmaa was the guarantee for rectitude, i.e. for working infallibility of the new content.[7]

He regarded the Hadith literature as a creation of second century which according to him had put the end to creative activity in the religion thereby stopping the progressive reformation.

The responsibility lies with the traditional Muslim scholarship to keep abreast with the works which describe the modernist perspectives rather then repulsively rejecting it. An approach in the new dimension would be to revive the traditional sciences of Hadith so that modern Muslim intelligentsia can appreciate its real place in Islamic Methodology rather then considering it as a mere peace of History.

1. They do not however claim so that a new definition is being coined as they tend to believe that its the actual definition.
2. One example that comes to my mind is of Nabia Abbott who while presenting thirteen very early hadith papyri tried to establish that the so called phenomenal growth of Tradition in the second and third centuries was not primarily the growth of content but represents largely the progressive increase of parallel and multiple chains of transmission.
3. R. Pitai, Ignaz Goldziher and his Oriental Diary (Detroit, 1987) as cited by Zubair Siddique, Hadith literature.
4. Fazlur Rahmaan, Islamic Methodology in History, Preface
5. The difference between ‘revival’ and ‘reformation’ should remain in perspective.
6. Among the most enthusiastic proponents were Protestant missionaries like Samuel Zwemer and Temple Gairdner.
7. Fazlur Rahmaan, Islamic Methodology in History, P 19

Filed under: Hadith & Sunnah, Islam & Modernity

Finding Footsteps in the Mire

Though it was always there in one form or another since the partition, recently our national identity crisis is experiencing new elevations though it is still far from the pinnacle. It is very hard to point a single incident which opened this Pandora box as all the related issues were enshrouded somehow under the cloaks of ideologies not backed by actions and promises that were never kept.

We grew up equating Hindus with Shylock and a perception was built intentionally that they are a race which hates all the Muslims of the world per se. The false percepts also require historical foundations so that strong walls of beliefs can be raised up. As a result we had hammered and negatively excogitated prints of history on our minds. At least it never occurred to my mind while studying Two-Nation Theory in my 10th grade text book that its cornerstones are grounded on very loose soil. The realization came like lightening when I first observed that actions on ground do not match the text book ideology. Indian movies are not allowed to be run in Pakistani cinemas yet every single rent shop in the street is lending cassettes, CDs and DVDs. Shops are full of Indian items and this year Pakistan is importing wheat and sugar from India. At the same time both have had a very long hate-relationship – three major and one minor war plus constant border skirmishes. As a child it was very confusing. Even if one is told that there is something direly wrong with history and historical figures, it is impossible to let go of the holy-image of national heroes. I continued cherishing that image and at the same time I resorted to independent analysis of ‘facts’ that were told.Keeping up with recent development of last four years has helped me conclude that the continued state of ambivalence is about to reach its peak and it is apt to move on a downward course from here. I try here to touch all the milestones quickly.

In the time of Ayyub Khan and Bhutto, Pakistan was the forerunner of Muslim cause – a learner can see making of a constitution admitting superiority of Allah’s law over all the man made laws, hosting Islamic Summit in 1974 and shibboleths like ‘islamic socialism’ and ‘towards islamisation’. Zia’s regime brought ‘Nizam-e-Mustafa’, majlis-e-shura’a, salat, zakat and Usher committees, PLS accounts in banks to Islamize the economy and an Islamic Ideological Council to monitor whether any law is being repugnant to directives of Quran and Sunnah. The syllabus in schools was also Islamised so that children can learn about Hindu wickedness so that they can easily love their country which is the savior of the hypothetical Ummah. Coming governments mainly maintained the status quo except projecting an image of a modern state by Benazir and a radical Islamic state holding an ‘Islamic Bomb’ by Nawaz Sharif. Musharaf started with a forced reversal of policies and projected a cant of ‘Pakistan First’. The state’s influence on media was removed and a modern secular image was projected in the West. Then came the proposed school curriculum reforms by Sustainable Development Policy Institute, partnership in ‘war on terror’ and recent drive of ‘ enlightened moderation’ to modernize madrassas. It would be naive if I don’t mention latest Pakistan-Israel talks among very recent developments.

It would be an otiose exercise if Pakistanis keeping on blaming each other after reading the plethora of ideological variations and policies and plans to project those. It has been 58 years – might not be that much in historical context of national development – but it is certainly enough to get out of indecisiveness about the actual ideological course of a nation.The divisions in society which were in hibernation since long are finally bringing their necks out. The divisions are multi facet and on different levels. Civilian vs Military, Moderates vs Extremists, Radicals vs Forward looking and Religious vs Secular are just to mention a few. What is done however, cannot be undone and those who grew up as blind patriots believing in an Islamic Ideology which was never there in true sense are hard to be put on a cerebrating course. Similarly the ones on other extreme are sure that true Islamic reformation is impractical in modern world hence they resort to pick and choose out of scripture and religious rhetoric; cannot bringing themselves to a course of understanding the real Islam.

Things are really complex as the intellect who was worthy of realizing this mistake is itself bifurcated into two opposite extremes. Both are consistent in promoting their respective ideologies. A modest chunk of Pakistani brain has become convinced that the very creation of a ‘Muslim’ land was a political mileage of Muslim League or may be the result of ‘divide and conquer’ policy of British. It was interesting to read comments like:

Pakistan is not an Islamic State; it is simply a state with Muslim majority

On the other side, Islamic political players are consistent in disagreeing over a viable reformation plan. Unless they put a workable plan on table covering all aspects of society, they cannot claim to be on driving seat of Islamic re-birth. Simply stating that Islamic directives must shape the affairs of state is not enough. One has to have an attractive alternate plan to stir a reasonable debate.

It is obvious that the prevailing ideological impasse, due to political and historical interpretive forgery, is pregnant with two possibilities since 58 years now. Let us wait and see that how many more years it will take to deliver and relieve us of this quandary.

Filed under: Land of the 'Pure', Reflections

Facing Discombobulation

Our generation inherited nothing but confusion from our predecessors. Confusion in all the spheres of life – definition of values, comprehension of realities and most importantly the national identity. Its too dangerous dynamics altogether. A chain of all the illegitimate negatives is easily observable. Confusion bears desperation which yields nothing except disbelief and skepticism. If I trace my memory 15 years back, almost every notion in which I invested my belief in adolescence has been proved delusive somehow.

Multi dimensional delusions harass this generation though three are worth mentioning i.e. historical, scientific and religious. If a person of my age claims absolute clarity of vision, he should understand that his visual modalities are cozening him – he is simply freezed in time and not growing up in a classical sense. It is a stark reality that most of the chronicles we were taught to nurture as a child were proved to be faux if not completely false. If you are prized with the vision of this reality don’t feel jubilant as realism brings along its price. Its a Faustian bargain – you have to put your belief at risk in order to get more.

So what’s the way out. There is none if the desire to hold the dogma supersedes the quest of knowing the truth. But there are few who only sail well against the high tides. They dig out the reality from the delusion and sift the truth from the false. The involutions of the search would certainly differ in context but the principle remains the same. In science, its entrusting the observance – in history, its revisiting the originals – in religion, its conciliation among the revealed and the acquired knowledge cognitively. And instantly you’ll find yourself believing again…

Filed under: Reflections