Classification of Ḥadīth
Introduction:
When a Hindu is told that Ayodhya is the birthplace of Rām, his heart overflows with love and reverence for that land, and he becomes restless to perform rituals of worship there. He regards it as a religious matter, forgetting that before it can be treated as a religious issue, it is first a historical one. That is to say, it requires investigation: are there in fact authentic historical proofs establishing the link between Ayodhya and Rām?
In Cairo, beside al-Azhar, lies the Mosque of al-Ḥusayn, where the head of al-Ḥusayn (may Allah be pleased with him) is claimed to be buried. Shīʿī visitors, in excessive devotion, circumambulate this artificial grave. O that they would only enquire into the question: since al-Ḥusayn was martyred in Karbalāʾ, why should his head be interred here? And this is not the only such instance: hundreds of Shīʿī claims are bereft of historical proof.
Imām Sufyān al-Thawrī (d. 161 AH) is known as Thawrī because he was from the clan of Thawr ibn ʿAbd Manāt. Yet in some Indian compilations it is related that he was called Thawrī because once, upon entering the mosque, he stepped in with his left foot, and a voice from the unseen called out “Yā Thawr” (O bull!). From that day, it is said, this title became his. Once I mentioned and criticised this tale in the guest house of Nadwa. A senior teacher objected that a great Indian saint had also recorded this incident in his book.
The question arises: why do such venerable men persist in repeating such fabrications? The answer is that they regard them as means of imparting adab. But before being a lesson in adab, such a tale is history, and it must be assessed by historical criteria, not by the standards of morality or etiquette.
Definition of History:
The study of the past in relation to man is called history. In Arabic the other word for history is khabar. In the Qurʾān, history is also termed ayyām, dhikr, tadhkīr and tadhkira. Shams al-Dīn al-Sakhāwī defines history as: “It is a science that examines events of time with respect to their specification and determination; rather, concerning all that has occurred in the world.”
To study the past means to become acquainted with events and reports, to understand their causes and reasons, and to investigate and verify them. Ibn Khaldūn, the philosopher of history, says: “History in its inner reality is an investigation and analysis, explaining occurrences and their origins; it is knowledge of how events happen and why.”
History as a Genus:
History is a genus, and among its species are the accounts of kings and rulers, chronicles of nations and peoples, biographies of individuals and personalities, their discourses and sayings, and the evolution of sciences and arts. Hence Ibn Khaldūn states: “History is the report of human society which is the civilisation of the world, and what arises in that civilisation of various states: such as savagery and sociability, group solidarity, and the transformations of peoples, and what follows from this of kingship, dynasties and their ranks; and what mankind achieves through their actions and endeavours of livelihoods and crafts, sciences and industries, and all other conditions arising in civilisation.”
Imām al-Bukhārī named his books on rijāl as al-Tārīkh al-Kabīr, al-Tārīkh al-Awsaṭ, al-Tārīkh al-Ṣaghīr. To designate the books of rijāl as tārīkh and akhbār is the common practice of the muḥaddithūn. This also proves that history is a genus which comprises many species.
Is Ḥadīth a Part of History?
From the above it is clear that history is a genus, and ḥadīth is one of its species. The explanation is as follows:
The Companions (may Allah be pleased with them) saw the Prophet (peace be upon him) performing wuḍūʾ and ṣalāh; they followed him in these actions as sunna. They heard his sayings and made them part of their lives. They witnessed his campaigns and expeditions, studied his qualities, and traced his sīra.
One may ask: what benefit is there in establishing that ḥadīth is history? The answer is this: the scholars agree that “judgement upon a thing is a branch of conceiving it correctly.” Accurate knowledge of a thing requires knowing both its genus and its distinguishing characteristics. Without knowledge of its genus, one cannot have reliable understanding; without knowledge of its distinguishing features, one’s understanding will be flawed.
Why did fabricated, weak and denounced ḥadīths spread among Muslims? Because when such reports were narrated, the sanctity of the word ḥadīth compelled people to accept them. Many scholars too were afflicted with this problem. When someone tells you that four rakʿas of non-emphasised sunna are to be prayed before ʿIshāʾ, you act on it immediately. But you ought to have known that before being a sunna this is a historical claim. You should investigate: is there historical evidence that the Prophet (peace be upon him) ever prayed four rakʿas before ʿIshāʾ, or encouraged it?
This is one example among hundreds. Whenever a ḥadīth comes before you, first consider its generic characteristic: is it, historically, an authenticated report?
What is said here of ḥadīth applies also to the miracles and sayings attributed to saints. If you are told that such-and-such saint used to fly in the air, do not bow your head in love and reverence, but ask: what is the historical evidence for this? And when sayings are attributed to saints, it is not enough that they be wise sayings; their attribution itself makes them history. Your duty, as an honest historian, is to investigate them.
—
Disclaimer: This article was translated by AI. Original post: https://t.me/DrAkramNadwi/6811
