The authority (ḥujjiyah) of the Prophet’s customary practice (sunnah) is acknowledged unanimously (by ijmā’) amongst Muslims. We have been obligated unequivocally as believers to be obedient to both Allāh and His beloved prophet, our Master Muḥammad ﷺ [al-Nisā 4:59].
The prophetic practice was imbibed to the utmost degree by his illustrious companions (ṣaḥābah) and his noble household (ahl al-bayt), being imprinted firmly within their hearts and proliferated amongst fellow believers in both word and deed.
Narrating what our Master Muḥammad ﷺ said, did or even tacitly approved (effectively comprising every aspect of his life) came to be known as Ḥadīth, and collectively as Sunnah; considered a primary source along with the Qur’ān in Islamic legal theory (uṣūl al-fiqh) used to derivate rulings for life.
This is so because the Prophet’s “very character was the Qur’an.” He was sent by Allah as a ﴾mercy to the worlds﴿ [al-Anbiyā21:107] and to ﴾teach them the book and wisdom﴿ [al-Baqarah, 2:107]. His practice, although posterior to the Qur’ān, cannot be separated from it; for he taught, clarified, expounded on and lived the divine injunctions that were revealed by the Creator to humanity.
As the boundaries of the Muslim polity expanded, and more non-Arab speaking peoples entered the fold of Islam, mistakes began to appear in narrations of Aḥādīthhaving been committed to memory ad verbatim by both the young and old alike. Some of these errors were genuine unintentional mistakes, while others were concocted by hypocrites and renegades with nefarious intentions in order to grant faux-legitimacy to their whims (ahwā’), heterodox innovations (bida’), theological heresies and political interests.
Consequently, scholars arose to defend the rich, prophetic heritage from any corruption, and they worked diligently to differentiate that which was authentically attributable to the Messenger of Allah ﷺ and that which was not. It became the imperative of the day to demand where narrations originated from, who heard from whom, and to ask for the chain of narration for further scrutiny to establish the veracity of reports.
‘Abdullāh ibn al-Mubārak said: “The chain of narration (isnād) is from the Dīn. If it were not for the chain of narration (isnād), anyone would say whatever they wished.”
Hadith-compilations were documented in the second, third and fourth centuries (after hijri), the most famous and reliable amongst them being the Ṣaḥīḥ of Imam al-Bukhārī and the Ṣaḥīḥ of Imām al-Muslim, together known as the Ṣaḥīḥayn. Writing vast biographical dictionaries on narrators and exhaustive critical encyclopaedias regarding Hadith-forgeries and other such works provided Muslims with an arsenal and systematic method to filter dubious attributions to the Prophet ﷺ and subsequently have epistemic confidence in their own tradition.
Multiple factors were considered and extensively revised such as taking into account who relayed the narration and to whom it was related to, the manner of delivery, the number of narrators and recipients for a particular event, and even the content was appraised for. A significant proportion of the literature dealt with definitions of terms and technical nomenclature.
One of these early works was written by al-Ramahurmuzyy (d.360 AH) entitled al-Muḥaddith bayn al-Rāwi wa l-Wā’iyy. Thereafter, al-Ḥākim al-Naysābūri’s (d.405 AH) Ma’rifah ‘Ulūm al-Ḥadīth became a standard work where prophetic narrations were classified into fifty types.
Generations of scholars then added and elaborated on these works such as Abu Nu’aym al-Asfahānī (d. 430 AH), and the polymath al-Khatīb al-Baghdādī (d. 463 AH) in al-Kifāyah fi ‘Ilm al-Riwāyah. Likewise, many condensed these works, commentated upon them, elaborated on that which was obscure and continued to develop the rigorous Ḥadīth methodology until it culminated in the Muqaddimah of ‘Uthmān Ibn ‘Abd al-Raḥmān, better known as Ibn al-Ṣalāḥ (d. 643 AH).
The Muqaddimah became a standard reference work for Hadithists, gaining particular traction for its breadth and detail with scholars par excellence like Badr al-Dīn al-Zarkashi (d. 794 AH), Zayn al-Dīn al-’Irāqī (d.802 AH) and Ibn Ḥajar al-’Asqalānī (d. 852 AH) from the Dār al-Ashrafiyyah cohort in Damascus writing critical notes on the book.
It is of utmost importance that students familiarise themselves with the terminology of the Ḥadīth-experts so they are able to accurately verify and corroborate statements attributed to our Prophet ﷺ, especially in face of the stern warnings of attributing dubious things to him.
Allah says: ﴾O you who have believed, if there comes to you a disobedient one with information, investigate; lest you harm a people out of ignorance and become, over what you have done, regretful.﴿ [al-Ḥujurat49:6].
In a sound report, mass-transmitted in meaning, narrated by Imam al-Bukhari, Imam al-Muslim and al-Tirmidhi on the authority of Mughīrah Ibn Shu’bah: “I heard the Messenger ﷺ say: “Indeed attributing a lie to me is not like attributing a lie to someone else. Whosoever attributes a lie to me, then let him prepare his seat in the hellfire.””
The meticulous manner in which Muslims dedicated themselves to the preservation of the Qur’an and Ḥadīth is of remarkable astonishment. The due diligence in which they did so came to be a distinguishing feature of the Muslims in contradistinction to the ways of the Jews and Christians, manifesting Allāh’s promise: ﴾Indeed, it is We who sent down the Qur’an and indeed, We will be its guardian.﴿ [al-Ḥijr 15:9]. And the systematic process of verifying and dealing with Aḥādīth came to be known as the Principles of Ḥadīth, or Uṣūl al-Ḥadīth.
The prophetic practice was imbibed to the utmost degree by his illustrious companions (ṣaḥābah) and his noble household (ahl al-bayt), being imprinted firmly within their hearts and proliferated amongst fellow believers in both word and deed.
Narrating what our Master Muḥammad ﷺ said, did or even tacitly approved (effectively comprising every aspect of his life) came to be known as Ḥadīth, and collectively as Sunnah; considered a primary source along with the Qur’ān in Islamic legal theory (uṣūl al-fiqh) used to derivate rulings for life.
This is so because the Prophet’s “very character was the Qur’an.” He was sent by Allah as a ﴾mercy to the worlds﴿ [al-Anbiyā21:107] and to ﴾teach them the book and wisdom﴿ [al-Baqarah, 2:107]. His practice, although posterior to the Qur’ān, cannot be separated from it; for he taught, clarified, expounded on and lived the divine injunctions that were revealed by the Creator to humanity.
As the boundaries of the Muslim polity expanded, and more non-Arab speaking peoples entered the fold of Islam, mistakes began to appear in narrations of Aḥādīthhaving been committed to memory ad verbatim by both the young and old alike. Some of these errors were genuine unintentional mistakes, while others were concocted by hypocrites and renegades with nefarious intentions in order to grant faux-legitimacy to their whims (ahwā’), heterodox innovations (bida’), theological heresies and political interests.
Consequently, scholars arose to defend the rich, prophetic heritage from any corruption, and they worked diligently to differentiate that which was authentically attributable to the Messenger of Allah ﷺ and that which was not. It became the imperative of the day to demand where narrations originated from, who heard from whom, and to ask for the chain of narration for further scrutiny to establish the veracity of reports.
‘Abdullāh ibn al-Mubārak said: “The chain of narration (isnād) is from the Dīn. If it were not for the chain of narration (isnād), anyone would say whatever they wished.”
Hadith-compilations were documented in the second, third and fourth centuries (after hijri), the most famous and reliable amongst them being the Ṣaḥīḥ of Imam al-Bukhārī and the Ṣaḥīḥ of Imām al-Muslim, together known as the Ṣaḥīḥayn. Writing vast biographical dictionaries on narrators and exhaustive critical encyclopaedias regarding Hadith-forgeries and other such works provided Muslims with an arsenal and systematic method to filter dubious attributions to the Prophet ﷺ and subsequently have epistemic confidence in their own tradition.
Multiple factors were considered and extensively revised such as taking into account who relayed the narration and to whom it was related to, the manner of delivery, the number of narrators and recipients for a particular event, and even the content was appraised for. A significant proportion of the literature dealt with definitions of terms and technical nomenclature.
One of these early works was written by al-Ramahurmuzyy (d.360 AH) entitled al-Muḥaddith bayn al-Rāwi wa l-Wā’iyy. Thereafter, al-Ḥākim al-Naysābūri’s (d.405 AH) Ma’rifah ‘Ulūm al-Ḥadīth became a standard work where prophetic narrations were classified into fifty types.
Generations of scholars then added and elaborated on these works such as Abu Nu’aym al-Asfahānī (d. 430 AH), and the polymath al-Khatīb al-Baghdādī (d. 463 AH) in al-Kifāyah fi ‘Ilm al-Riwāyah. Likewise, many condensed these works, commentated upon them, elaborated on that which was obscure and continued to develop the rigorous Ḥadīth methodology until it culminated in the Muqaddimah of ‘Uthmān Ibn ‘Abd al-Raḥmān, better known as Ibn al-Ṣalāḥ (d. 643 AH).
The Muqaddimah became a standard reference work for Hadithists, gaining particular traction for its breadth and detail with scholars par excellence like Badr al-Dīn al-Zarkashi (d. 794 AH), Zayn al-Dīn al-’Irāqī (d.802 AH) and Ibn Ḥajar al-’Asqalānī (d. 852 AH) from the Dār al-Ashrafiyyah cohort in Damascus writing critical notes on the book.
It is of utmost importance that students familiarise themselves with the terminology of the Ḥadīth-experts so they are able to accurately verify and corroborate statements attributed to our Prophet ﷺ, especially in face of the stern warnings of attributing dubious things to him.
Allah says: ﴾O you who have believed, if there comes to you a disobedient one with information, investigate; lest you harm a people out of ignorance and become, over what you have done, regretful.﴿ [al-Ḥujurat49:6].
In a sound report, mass-transmitted in meaning, narrated by Imam al-Bukhari, Imam al-Muslim and al-Tirmidhi on the authority of Mughīrah Ibn Shu’bah: “I heard the Messenger ﷺ say: “Indeed attributing a lie to me is not like attributing a lie to someone else. Whosoever attributes a lie to me, then let him prepare his seat in the hellfire.””
The meticulous manner in which Muslims dedicated themselves to the preservation of the Qur’an and Ḥadīth is of remarkable astonishment. The due diligence in which they did so came to be a distinguishing feature of the Muslims in contradistinction to the ways of the Jews and Christians, manifesting Allāh’s promise: ﴾Indeed, it is We who sent down the Qur’an and indeed, We will be its guardian.﴿ [al-Ḥijr 15:9]. And the systematic process of verifying and dealing with Aḥādīth came to be known as the Principles of Ḥadīth, or Uṣūl al-Ḥadīth.
