Does the Quran Authorize Using Hadiths for Islamic Law?
There are two commonly recognized sources of law in Islam: the Quran (the central text) and the Hadith (sayings of the prophet Muhammad). Muslims believe that because the prophet cannot make his own religious laws, every single word spoken by him was divinely inspired by God, such that his speech is treated as a revelation from God outside the Quran.
Syed Waqas, the author of the research paper Revisiting Hadith Problem: Implications of Forged Hadith in a Post-Sharia World stated regarding the hierarchy of Islamic law: “The religious architecture of Islamic faith puts the Qur’an in the foundation and the entire superstructure gets defined through lens of the Qur’anic bedrock.”
So what if it can be argued that the Quran forbids the use of Hadith and Sunnah as a source of religious and Islamic law?
Quran’s Guarantee: Having the Details and Clarification of Everything
The Quran in multiple places states that it has all of the details and clarification of everything related to the practice of Islam:
[12:111] … It (Quran) has not been a fabricated hadith, but instead, it is the affirmation of that which is before you, the detailing of everything, and a guidance and mercy for people who believe.
[16:89] …And We have brought the Book down to you as clarification for everything, as well as guidance, mercy, and good news for the Muslims.
So according to the above verses, the Quran has all the detail of everything one needs to be guided and receive the mercy of God, without anything left out. That means information outside the Quran is not needed for one to practice Islam correctly, because all of the details and explanations are in the Quran itself.
All of this is further evidenced by verses 37:156-157, which says that if someone makes a claim about God, then they need to be able to justify it with clear and obvious authority from scripture.
This also means that if anything outside the Quran is used as a source of Islamic or religious law, there must be evidence that the Quran gives permission for the Muslims to do this. For example, if someone wants to claim that Harry Potter books are a source of Islamic law besides the Quran, he must provide evidence that the Quran allows using Harry Potter books as a source of Islamic law, because the Quran has all the details about how to practice Islam with nothing left out. If he cannot provide proof that the Quran allows following Harry Potter books to be part of Islamic law (also known as Sharia in Arabic), then his claim is incorrect.
It is the same with Hadith and Sunnah. If a person wants to claim that Hadith and Sunnah are a valid source of Islamic law, they must provide evidence that the Quran permits or authorizes following Hadith and Sunnah, otherwise their claim is incorrect. That is because if the Quran has all the details, and if the Hadiths are a valid source of Islamic law, then the Quran must have at least one detail commanding Muslims to follow Hadiths.
So the purpose of this investigation is to look through the entire Quran and see if there are any details in the Quran that command Muslims to follow Hadith and Sunnah, or any other source of law after the Quran. If no such details can be found, then the logical conclusion would be that Hadith and Sunnah are not permitted to be used as a source of Islamic law at all.
The Investigation Begins
To begin with, the Quran has many dozens of verses instructing Muslims to follow it as a source of religious law. But what about verses that instruct to follow Hadiths and Sunnah? Many Muslims believe that the Quranic command to obey the messenger is the justification to follow Hadiths as a source of Islamic law. Let us analyze what obedience to the messenger actually means.
[3:32] Say, “Obey God and the messenger.” But if they turn away, then indeed, God does not like the disbelievers.
The Quran says that God is the only one authorized to make Islamic law (according to verse 6:114 and 42:21). We also know that the prophet was told to say that he only followed what was revealed to him, in multiple verses (6:50, 7:203, 10:15, etc.). Therefore, Islamic obedience to the messenger means obeying only whatever the messenger received from God.
- [6:114] “So shall I seek other than God as a judge, while He is the one who has brought down to you the Book which is detailed?”…
- [42:21] Or are there partners for them who have legislated for them of the religion what God has not given permission for?…
So the question is: what did the prophet Muhammad receive from God? Because if the prophet only received the Quran, then obedience to the messenger means obeying the Quran only. If he received the Quran and Sunnah, then obeying him would mean obeying the Quran and Sunnah. If he received Quran + Harry Potter books, then obeying him would mean obeying the Quran and Harry Potter books. So the interpretation of obedience to the messenger changes depending on what exactly the prophet received from God.
So you can see how the command to obey the messenger, by itself, does not tell us specifically what the prophet received from God. So for Hadith and Sunnah to be authorized by the Quran, there must be a more specific detail within the Quran than “obey the messenger”. That means we must look somewhere else in the Quran for that “magic bullet” specific detail.
The same issue applies to the command in the Quran to “follow” the prophet. The Quran instructs the prophet multiple times to say, “I follow nothing but what is revealed to me.” Therefore, following the prophet only means following what was revealed to him. The question is: what was revealed to the prophet Muhammad? Was it the Quran only, or the Quran + Sunnah, or the Quran + Harry Potter books? The interpretation changes depending on which one is the correct answer. So we have to continue our investigation elsewhere in the Quran to find out exactly was revealed to him.
What Do Verses 53:3 and 53:4 Mean?
Verses 53:3-4 is another pair of verses that are typically used to justify following Hadith and Sunnah. Those two verses state that the prophet is not speaking from personal desire only when he is receiving a revelation known as “it”.
[53:3-4] And he does not speak from the desire. It is not but a revelation that is revealed.
This majority opinion is that the word “it” refers to the speech of the prophet. This causes them to conclude that all of the prophet’s speech is revelation from God. However, this is only an opinion, and the verse does not specify what exactly the pronoun “it” is referring to. Perhaps “it” refers to the Sunnah here, or perhaps it doesn’t, but we can’t tell because it’s not specific enough to make that determination.
So just like the command to obey the messenger, if the verse is not specific enough, then you can’t use it by itself to justify following Hadith. To justify following Hadith and Sunnah, one must look somewhere else in the Quran for a verse that specifically commands to follow Hadith and Sunnah.
Also, we can be absolutely sure that the word “it” in verse 53:4 is not referring to the prophet’s speech. The prophet Muhammad was reprimanded multiple times in the Quran for mistakes that he made. Those mistakes are serious mistakes too, not minor or small mistakes. Here are some examples:
- The prophet prohibiting something God didn’t prohibit (verse 66:1)
- Being too distracted with a rich man and turning away from a blind man who asked for his guidance (80:1-11)
- Keeping information to himself that God ordered to be revealed, out of fear of the people (33:37)
- Taking prisoners of war before defeating the enemy in battle (8:67-68)
So, it is quite obvious that if all of the prophet’s speech regarding religious matters was divine revelation, then he would not have made those mistakes. It does not make sense for God to command His prophet to make a mistake in a revelation outside the Quran, then reprimand him inside the Quran for making that mistake.
Thus, this is concrete proof that the “it” in verse 53:4 certainly cannot mean all of the prophet’s speech and actions. The evidence points towards the word “it” in verse 53:4 to mean only the Quran, unless some other piece of Quranic evidence found elsewhere proves that Hadith and Sunnah are a type of divine revelation besides the Quran.
Revelations Outside the Quran
The Quran documents several instances where the prophet received some revelation outside the Quran. In verse 66:3, the prophet told one of his wives to keep a secret, but she told another of his wives the secret and God revealed to him outside the Quran that she failed to keep the secret.
Another example is when God told Muhammad via revelation outside the Quran to marry the wife of his adopted son Zaid, according to verse 33:37.
However, those revelations applied only to the prophet and some of his companions (such as wives), but not to all Muslims universally for all time, whether present and future. Those revelations were situational revelations, specific to the prophet’s personal life circumstances, rather than revelations for the entire Muslim community, present and future.
The Quran does not give any examples where the prophet received a revelation outside the Quran that applies to Muslims today and in the future.
The mothers of Moses (Musa in Arabic) and Jesus (Isa in Arabic) were given situational revelation outside scripture about their children; Moses’ mom was told to put Moses in a bucket and put the bucket in the river. God revealed to Maryam that she would give birth to a boy as a virgin, and to eat dates and drink from a stream during her pregnancy and avoid talking to any human being for a period of time. Those revelations were specific only to the life circumstances of Maryam and the mother of Moses.
So does this mean that these two women were given a source of law besides the Quran? Is this a justification to follow the Hadith and Sunnah of Maryam and the mother of Moses alongside the Quran? That is obviously not the case.
It’s the same issue with the prophet Muhammad, the situational revelations he received does not automatically mean that Muslims should follow Hadith and Sunnah.
In order to justify Hadith and Sunnah from the Quran, one needs a verse clearly indicating that the prophet was given revelations outside the Quran that apply to all Muslims today and in the future. But the Quran does not have that. It only provides some examples of revelations outside the Quran that applied only to the prophet’s companions at the time.
What is Scripture (Kitab) and Wisdom (Hikmah)?
The Quran says that the prophet was given the scripture (kitab) and wisdom (hikmah) in multiple verses. The majority opinion is that scripture refers to the Quran, and wisdom (hikmah) refers to Hadith/Sunnah.
However, the Quran in verse 2:231 states that the scripture (kitab) and wisdom (hikmah) is one item, rather than two separate things:
[2:231] … Remember God’s blessings upon you and what He has brought down upo n you of the Scripture and the wisdom; He advises you ‘bihi‘ (with it)…
As you can see, the word “bihi” means (with it). If the scripture and the wisdom were two different things, the dual pronoun “bihima” (with both of them) would have been used. In Arabic, the pronouns “huma” and “hima” are used to refer to two separate nouns. But the fact that “bihi” was used here instead of “bihima” proves that the scripture (kitab) and wisdom (hikmah) refers to only one thing, the Quran.
This is further proved by the fact that verse 36:3 calls the Quran “the wise Quran” (Quran al-hakim). So the argument that “hikmah” refers to Hadiths does not have Quranic basis.
- [36:3] By the wise Quran.
Does Being the Quran’s Teacher Authorize Hadith and Sunnah?
Another potential candidate is verse 2:151. An argument that I have heard in a lecture at a mosque in 2025 is that since Muhammad was appointed as the teacher of the Quran, one must follow his Hadiths since God would never appoint an imperfect teacher.
[2:151] As We sent amongst you a messenger from you who recites to you Our revelations, purifies you, teaches you the Scripture and the wisdom, and teaches you what you did not used to know.
However, the idea that God would never appoint an imperfect teacher to teach the Quran is just an opinion. There is no proof to support this opinion. The Quran has the details of everything, with nothing left out (verses 12:111, 16:89). So if the prophet’s interpretation and understanding of the Quran is 100% perfect and without error, there would be a detail in the Quran saying that. The absence of such a detail indicates that the prophet’s interpretation or understanding of the Quran is not guaranteed to be perfect.
God can do whatever He pleases, thus if it is His will to appoint an imperfect teacher to teach the Quran, then it is not something a Muslim should have any problem with. There are many valid reasons to make Muhammad an imperfect teacher. One is to test whether people will reject him because he is a human who makes mistakes. And another valid reason is to test whether people will idolize an imperfect man and overlook his imperfections, simply due to his status as prophet.
Also, is it not offensive to assume things about people that they never said? Let’s say you had a best friend and came to his house one day. You said you didn’t like his cooking very much, and he says, “So that means you hate me then!” Then you become confused, because you never said you hated him, and he only made that assumption without any evidence simply because you were honest and said you did not like his cooking that day when you visited his house.
Likewise, it is probably common knowledge amongst Muslims that it is offensive to God to assume something about Him that He never said, without any evidence to back up their assumption. Thus, the Muslims must understand not to assume without evidence that God would never appoint someone imperfect to teach His book. The prophet was told to say that he is a human like everyone else (18:110), thus while he is infallible in conveying the revelation word for word, the Quran never states he is protected from making mistakes like everyone else in the understanding or comprehension of the revelation.
What Does Verse 59:7 Mean?
There is a quote from verse 59:7 which says, “And thus, take what the messenger gives you, and desist from what he forbids you.” This quote is often used to justify following Hadith and Sunnah, but it is typically clipped out of context from the rest of the verse.
When the whole verse is read, it becomes clear that this instruction only applies to the distribution of the spoils of war. This verse only placed the prophet in charge of distributing the spoils of war after a battle against the “people of the towns”, thus the people with him at the time were instructed to accept whatever distribution of the spoils the prophet said and abstain from whatever the prophet said not to take from the spoils of war.
[59:7] What God reverted upon His messenger from the people of the towns is thus for God and His messenger, and for the relative, the orphans, the needy, and the wayfarer, so that it may not circulate between the rich among you. And you shall thus take what messenger gives you, and desist from what forbids you, and revere God. Indeed, God is Strong in Penalty.
So it is abundantly clear that at least in 59:7, taking what the messenger gives only refers to taking the spoils of war and nothing else.
What Does Verse 4:65 Mean?
Verse 4:65 states that one is not a believer unless they let the prophet judge their disputes and accept the judgement of the prophet. So this is used by many as a justification for Hadith and Sunnah.
However, when the prophet is judging the disputes or disagreements of others, what is he supposed to use to make his judgements? The prophet is not a lawmaker in Islam in his own right, so he is supposed to base his judgements upon revelation from God, of course. This is a concept that is well-understood by Sunnis.
So the question is, what revelations should the prophet base his judgements on? Should the prophet make his judgements based on the Quran alone, or the Quran and some other form of revelation?
The Quran in multiple places only commands the prophet to make judgement between the people with the Quran. The Quran does not mention any other item or revelation for the prophet to judge all people with. If there was another source or form of revelation besides the Quran that the prophet is authorized to use for judging the people’s disputes, the Quran would have mentioned it, because it has all the details needed to practice Islam, with nothing left out of it (verses 12:111, 16:89).
[5:48] And We brought down to you the Book (Quran) with the truth… So judge between them by what God has brought down…
[4:105] Indeed, We have brought down to you the Book (Quran) with the truth, for that you may judge between the people with what God has shown you…
So the command to let the prophet judge the people’s disputes does not authorize following Hadith and Sunnah if the fully-detailed Quran only tells him to judge the people in accordance with the Quran, without mentioning any other source.
The Results of the Investigation
God makes a guarantee in the Quran that it contains all the details and clarifications about how to practice the religion of Islam, without any information left out. If any information (such as whether or not to fly on airplanes, walk 10,000 steps a day, or use computers) is not in the Quran, then it is completely not needed for practicing Islam correctly.
This is why if Hadith/Sunnah were a source of Islamic law besides the Quran, there would have to be at least one detail in the Quran authorizing to follow it. Hence, the investigation was done to determine if any Quranic verse exist that authorize following Hadith and Sunnah.
The results of the investigation found that no verse in the Quran exists that authorizes Muslims to follow Hadith and Sunnah as a source of law in Islam. Whereas dozens of Quranic verses exist that explicitly commands Muslims to follow the Quran.
Hence, the conclusion is that Hadith and Sunnah are not a valid source of religious law in Islam. We are thus left with the logical conclusion that the Quran alone is where Islamic law comes from, not Hadith/Sunnah, Gordon Ramsay cookbooks, Harry Potter books, Bill Nye the Science Guy, or any other source.
Addressing Counterarguments
To begin with, there may be a wide variety of objections to following the Quran alone, and I will try to discuss as many as I am aware of.
One objection may be, “Where do we find out how many raka’at (units) of Salat we should do?”
The answer is: as many as you want, whether 1, 2, 3, or more. If I ask you to finish your cup of water in the next 30 seconds, I don’t care how many sips it takes you to finish as long as you do the job.
I go over all the steps of the daily Salat as provided in the Quran in another article, but in brief, a unit of Salat according to the Quran starts with standing, then the next position is bowing, and it ends at prostration, and at some point in between, the Quran must be recited. There is no limit to the amount of prostrations or bowing done at each unit. There’s no limit to the amount of units (raka’at) you can do either, and there is no limit to the amount of Quran to recite at each unit; the more you do, the more reward you will get, God willing.
It’s the same with Hajj, we Muslims commonly accept that the minimum number of times to do Hajj is at least once in your lifetime, as there is no set Hajj frequency in the Quran. We Muslims already accept that you can recite as much Quran as you want during the Salat. Thus, flexibility in the amount of raka’at (units), bows, and prostrations should not come as a big surprise.
Another common objection is, how do we find the background or context to verses of the Quran without Hadith?
The answer is that there is no prohibition in using Hadith to derive additional background information to certain verses of the Quran. But the background information is not needed to understand the main point that the Quran is trying to convey.
Verse 66:1, for example, asks the prophet why he prohibited something God made lawful just to please his wives. The background of this verse is not needed to understand the main point of this verse, which is that not even the prophet has the authority to make prohibitions on anyone (including himself) if God did not prohibit it.
Surah al-Masad (or al-Lahab) says that Abu Lahab (Muhammad’s uncle) and his wife are doomed to Hell for what they did, and that no material earnings of theirs in this life could save them. It is not necessary to know who Abu Lahab and his wife is. or what they did, to understand the main point of this Surah, that your wealth and children cannot save you from the Hellfire for doing evil deeds.
Nonetheless, using Hadith for historical background is not the same as using Hadith for Islamic law, rules, and regulations. The Quran does not allow getting Islamic law from unauthorized people, items, or sources, but there is no prohibition against using Hadith for getting additional background into Quranic verses.
Another counterargument is: how can all the scholars, sheikhs, muftis, ustadhs, mullahs, and all others be wrong for 14 centuries?
To answer that question, imagine you are a Christian in the 7th century, and you heard prophet Muhammad teach that Jesus is just a man, and not God or part of a trinity. How would you feel about the Quran and prophet Muhammad contradicting centuries of established church teachings about Jesus being God in human form? If you were a Christian, would you not be confused about how a random 7th century Arab merchant be correct, as opposed to all the Christian scholars and experts who have been teaching Jesus’s divinity and Godhood for 7 centuries?
The Quran commands in many places against rejecting the truth simply because it contradicts what your forefathers, scholars, and relatives taught. This guideline applies to Muslims as well as non-Muslims.
Another counterargument is: where did all the Hadiths come from if the Quran is the only source of Islamic law? Did people make up lies and attribute them to the prophet?
The answer is that we cannot say for sure. There is the possibility of fabrication, whether intentional (due to hidden agendas of narrators) or unintentional (due to lapses in memory from narrator to narrator, just like what naturally happens during the “Chinese whispers” game). There is also the possibility that many Hadiths that have information outside the Quran are authentic accounts of the prophet, but are teachings based on his personal understanding of the Quran, rather than based on divine revelations given outside of the Quran.
But regardless, the task of the Muslim is quite simple: if the Quran says something, accept it without any doubt or hesitation. Verse 2:285 informs us that all believers have responded to God’s commands by saying, “We heard, and we obeyed.” So if the Quran says it has all the details, but does not provide a detail authorizing or giving permission to follow Hadiths and Sunnah as a source of Islamic law, that clearly means Hadith and Sunnah are not a valid source of Islamic law. So a Muslim should very simply accept it and obey by following the Quran alone, then ask all the questions they want afterward.
Contradictions Between Quran and Hadith
Stoning Adulterers to Death
According to verse 4:25, the punishment for married slave women who commit adultery is half of the punishment for free women (i.e. 50 lashes rather than the
100 lashes prescribed in the Quran).
But according to multiple Hadiths, such as Sahih Muslim number 1690, the punishment for the married people who commit adultery is 100 lashes and stoning to death.
You can cut 100 lashes in half, but how do you cut a death penalty in half for a slave woman? You cannot, so stoning to death for adultery contradicts the Quran.
Killing the Apostates
Apostates are those who abandon one religion in favor of another. For example, a Christian who becomes an atheist, or a Muslim who becomes a Hindu, is an apostate.
The Quran forbids any compulsion or forcing in the religion. That means a person cannot be forced by anyone to be Muslim or non-Muslim.
In fact, God in the Quran mentions those who leave Islam in several verses, but does not tell people to kill them. The Quran says that the punishment for leaving Islam is up to God, who will carry out the punishment. The Quran never tells the Muslims to kill them or sentence them to death.
Yet multiple Hadiths command to kill any person who has left the religion of Islam, and converted from Muslim to non-Muslim.
If you are threatened with your life for leaving Islam, then this is one of the highest possible forms of compulsion or forcing in the religion, so this is a very clear contradiction with the Quran:
[2:256] There is no compulsion in the religion…
[18:29] Say, “The truth is from your Lord, so whoever wills, let him believe, and whoever wills, let him disbelieve.”…
[10:99] And if your Lord willed, those who are in the earth would definitely have believed, all of them together. So will you force the people until they become believers?
[109:1-6] Say, “O disbelievers…For you is your religion, and for me is my religion.”
[3:86-88] How would God guide people who disbelieved after their faith (apostates), while they witnessed that the messenger is true, and clear proofs had come to them? But God does not guide the people of the wrongdoers. The punishment of those (apostates) is that God’s curse would be upon them, as well as the angels, and the people altogether…
[9:74] .. So if they (apostates) repent, it is better for them. But if they turn away, God will punish them with a painful punishment in the World and the Hereafter…
Abdullah ibn Masud reported Allah’s Messenger as saying, “It is not permissible to take the life of a Muslim who bears testimony to the fact that there is no god but Allah, and I am the Messenger of Allah, but in one of the three cases: the married adulterer, a life for a life, and those who leave his religion (Islam), abandoning the community.” (Sahih Muslim, No. 1676)
Narrated ‘Ikrima: Some atheists were brought to ‘Ali and he burnt them. The news of this event, reached Ibn ‘Abbas who said, “If I had been in his place, I would not have burnt them, as Allah’s Apostle forbade it, saying,
‘Do not punish anybody with Allah’s punishment (fire).’ I would have killed them according to the statement of Allah’s Apostle, ‘Whoever changed his Islamic religion, then kill him.‘” (Bukhari, Vol. 9, Book 84, Number 57)
Punishing One Man for the Sins of Another
The Quran says that a person will not bear the burden of another person, even if both people are relatives. The Quran also states that every person will only benefit from his own efforts.
But one Hadith states that Adam’s son (a very distant relative) bears some of the burden of people who commit murder, a clear contradiction with the Quran.
Also, there is another shocking Hadith saying that on the day of judgement, some Muslims will have sins as high as the mountains, and those sins will be transferred to the Jews and Christians. This clearly contradicts the Quran’s guarantee that no person bears the burden of another.
Narrated ‘Abdullah bin Mas’ud: that the Messenger of Allah (صلى الله عليه وسلم) said: “No soul is wrongfully taken except that some of the burden of its blood is upon the son of Adam, because he was the first to institute murder.” (Tirmidhi, no. 2673, graded Sahih)
Narrated from Abu Moosa (may Allaah be pleased with him) from the Prophet (peace and blessings of Allaah be upon him), who said: “On the Day of Resurrection, some of the Muslims will come with sins like mountains, but Allaah will forgive them and will put them (the sins) onto the Jews and Christians.” (Muslim, number 2767)
[35:18] And no burden-bearer bears the burden of another, and if one who is weighed down calls upon to its carriage, not anything of it will be carried, even if he were a relative…
[53:38] That no burden-bearer bears the burden of another, and that for the human being is not but how he made effort.
Forbidden Foods
The Quran tells the prophet to state that he does not find, in anything that was revealed to him, any forbidden (haram) food except four things: carrion, blood, pork, and things sacrificed in the name of someone other than God.
Yet multiple Hadiths forbid other foods besides those four foods. Those include donkeys, animals with fangs, and birds that have talons.
But if the prophet was told to say he didn’t find in any revelations (wahy) given to him anything forbidden except those four foods, then those Hadiths are clearly not revelations from God.
[6:145] Say, “I do not find in what has been revealed to me that which is prohibited upon an eater who eats it, except if it is carrion, or blood that is leaked, or the flesh of pigs—for indeed, it is impure—or a deviance which was consecrated to other than God.”…
Narrated Abu Tha’laba: “Allah’s Messenger (صلى الله عليه وسلم) forbade the eating of the meat of beasts having fangs.” (Bukhari 7:67:438)
Narrated by Ibn ‘Umar: The prophet prohibited the eating of donkey’s meat.(Bukhari 7:67:431)
Ibn ‘Abbas reported that Islamic Prophet prohibited the eating of all fanged beasts of prey, and all the birds having talons. (Muslim
21:4752)
Missing Verse from the Quran?
This Sahih Hadith states that the verse (Ayah) of stoning adulterers to death is missing from the Quran.
Thus, this Hadith claims that the Quran is not complete and has a verse that is absent or gone, thus contradicting the Quran’s guarantee of being complete.
Umar bin Al-Khattab said: “Verily Allah sent Muhammad (صلى الله عليه وسلم) with the truth, and he revealed the Book to him. Among what was revealed to him was the Ayah (verse) of stoning. So the Messenger of Allah (صلى الله عليه وسلم) stoned, and we stoned after him. I fear that time will pass over the people such that someone will say ‘We do not see stoning in the Book of Allah.’ They will be misguided by leaving an obligation which Allah revealed. Indeed stoning is the retribution for the adulterer if he was married and the evidence has been established, or due to pregnancy, or confession.” (Tirmidhi, no. 1432)
[6:115] The word of your Lord (Quran) has been completed, in truth and justice…
[15:9] Indeed, We have sent down the Reminder, and indeed We are Guardians of it.
If a verse of stoning adulterers to death was truly revealed in the Quran, like what this Hadith claims, then where is it?
Guarantee of Paradise vs. Unknown Fate
The Quran instructs Muhammad to say that he does not know anyone’s fate, or what will be done with anyone or even himself.
However, we have Hadith where Muhammad is foretelling that certain people among his followers will go to Paradise.
Think about this carefully: how can the prophet make any guarantee of any person going to Paradise, when in the Quran he was commanded to say that he has no idea what will be done to anyone, or even his own self?
[46:9] Say, “I have not been a novelty among the messengers, and I neither know what will be done with me, nor with you. I follow not but
what may be revealed to me, and I am not but a clear warning.”
The Prophet said, “Verily! 70,000 or 700,000 of my followers will enter Paradise altogether; so that the first and the last amongst them will enter at the same time, and their faces will be glittering like the bright full moon.” (Bukhari Vol. 4, Book 54, Number 470)
Narrated ‘Abdur-Rahman bin ‘Awf: that the Messenger of Allah said: “Abu Bakr is in Paradise, ‘Umar is in Paradise, ‘Uthman is in Paradise, ‘Ali is in Paradise, Talhah is in Paradise, Az-Zubair is in Paradise, ‘Abdur-
Rahman bin ‘Awf is in Paradise, Sa’d bin Abi Waqqas is in Paradise, Sa’eed is in Paradise, and Abu ‘Ubaidah bin Al-Jarrah is in Paradise.” (Tirmidhi, Book 49, Hadith 4112)
A Nation Cannot Succeed With a Woman as Ruler? What About the Queen of Sheba?
To begin with, more than 95% of failed nations in history were ruled or governed by men. So it doesn’t make sense to believe that women cannot lead a nation successfully when the men do not have a great track record themselves.
Secondly, there was nothing in the Quran to suggest that Sheba (Saba in Arabic) was a failed nation. The people of Sheba was ruled by a righteous queen according to the Quran (Surah 27), who sought counsel amongst her advisors before making any decision, just like any good leader would do.
In Surah 27, God stated that she was very skeptical of the offer that prophet Solomon (Sulayman) provided her. That is because, as she correctly states, when tyrant kings invaded a town, they corrupted the land and shamed its people. Historically, this was very true, and this demonstrates her desire to avoid corruption and tyranny when ruling her people.
Among the trait of a good leader is a desire to rule justly and avoid tyranny and corruption, and seek the advice of their advisors rather than making decisions about the nation unilaterally. God demonstrated in the Quran that the Queen of Sheba possessed both of those traits. So by giving the example of the Queen of Sheba, God in the Quran demonstrates that women are capable of governing a nation well, thus contradicting the Hadith quoted below:
During the battle of Al-Jamal, Allah benefited me with a Word (I heard from the Prophet). When the Prophet heard the news that the people of the Persia had made the daughter of Khosrau their Queen (ruler), he said, “Never will succeed such a nation as makes a woman their ruler.” (Sahih al-Bukhari, no. 7099)
Should The Oppressed People Help Themselves, Or Do Nothing?
The Quran tells people to stand up for themselves when their rights are violated, and fight for oppressed people who have no way to escape their oppression.
[42:39] As well as the ones who help themselves when violation befalls them.
[4:75] And why would you not fight in the way of God, and the weakened ones among the men, the women, and the children, the ones who say, “Our Lord, exit us from this town of its wrongdoing people, and make for us an ally from with You, and make for us a helper from with You!”
However, according to a Hadith, a person cannot disobey their rulers even a little. Even if the rulers or people in power unjustly beat people up by striking their backs, or unjustly take wealth from them, or have the hearts of devils, those people must not disobey their rulers and listen to them (Sahih Muslim, no. 1847).
Such Hadith is clearly a contradiction with the Quran which says to stand up for one’s selves when their rights are being infringed or violated, and to resist oppression wherever it exists.
If the prophet Muhammad followed the advice in this Hadith, he would not have migrated to Medina to escape persecution. He would have surrendered to the Quraysh to avoid disobeying them, and stopped preaching Islam.
A Woman Cannot Go Back to First Husband Without Intercourse With Current Husband?
The Quran allows anyone to divorce even if they did not have sexual intercourse with their spouse during the marriage.
However, a Sahih Hadith (graded Sahih on Sunnah.com) states that a woman cannot go back to her first husband unless she has intercourse with her current husband.
So in other words, this Hadith forces a woman to have an unwanted sexual encounter with her current husband if she wants to return to her first one, which is a clear contradiction with the Quran.
It was narrated from ‘Abdullah bin ‘Abbas that Al-Ghumaisa or Ar-Rumaisa’ came to the Prophet complaining that her husband would not have intercourse with her. It was not long before her husband came and said: “O Messenger of
Allah, she is lying; he is having intercourse with her, but she wants to go back to her first husband.” The Messenger of Allah said: “She cannot do that until she tastes his (current husband’s) sweetness.” (Sunan an-Nasai 3414)
[33:49] O you who believed, if you marry believing women, then divorce them before touching them, then there is not any interim of theirs upon them for you to count….
[2:236] There is no blame upon you if you have divorced the women that you neither touch, nor make a (dowry) obligation for….
Hadiths that Contradict History
Fasting During Ashura
According to Bukhari hadith number 2004, the prophet Muhammad found Jews fasting on the 10th of Muharram (Ashura) and asked why. The Jews explained that this is to commemorate the day Musa saved the Children of
Israel from Firaun. The prophet then stated that the Muslims are more worthy of Musa than the Jews, thus commanded the Muslims to do so as well.
This Hadith contradict with historical and theological facts. The first issue is that Jews typically commemorate or celebrate Moses saving the Children of Israel on Passover day according to the Torah itself, which is a feast day and NOT a fast day. Jews do not fast during Passover, and this is more like an Eid day for them.
The second is that the Jewish fasting day occurs on the 10th of the Hebrew
month Tishrei, known as “Yom Kippur” or the “Day of Atonement”. This is the day that Jews atone or make up for their sins with prayer, repentance, and fasting. Yom Kippur is totally unrelated to Moses saving the Children of Israel from Pharaoh.
The person who narrated this factually incorrect Hadith likely confused these two Jewish holidays with one another.
Conquest of Constantinople
A hadith (Muslim no. 2897) states this:
- “The Last Hour would not come until the Romans would land at al-A’maq or in Dabiq. An army consisting of the best (soldiers) of the people of the earth at that time will come from Medina (to counteract them). When they will arrange themselves in ranks, the Romans would say: Do not stand between us and those (Muslims) who took prisoners from amongst us. Let us fight with them; and the Muslims would say: Nay, by Allah, we would never get aside from you and from our brethren that you may fight them. They will then fight and a third (part) of the army would run away, whom Allah will never forgive. A third (part of the army) which would be constituted of excellent martyrs in Allah’s eye, would be killed and the third who would never be put to trial would win and they would be conquerors of Constantinople. And as they would be busy in distributing the spoils of war (amongst themselves) after hanging their swords by the olive trees, the Satan would cry: The Dajjal has taken your place among your family. They would then come out, but it would be of no avail. And when they would come to Syria, he would come out while they would be still preparing themselves for battle drawing up the ranks. Certainly, the time of prayer shall come and then Jesus (peace be upon him) son of Mary would descend and would lead them. When the enemy of Allah would see him, it would (disappear) just as the salt dissolves itself in water and if he (Jesus) were not to confront them at all, even then it would dissolve completely, but Allah would kill them by his hand and he would show them their blood on his lance (the lance of Jesus Christ).”
According to this Hadith, sometime after the prophet, the Roman Empire would land in al-A’maq or Dabiq, which are two Syrian towns, then a major battle because a Muslim army from the city of Medina, Arabia would counter them. A third of the Muslim army would run away, a third would be martyred, and a third would proceed to take away the city of Constantinople from the Romans during the fight.
The first claim in this Hadith that is proven false is that an army from Medina will conquer Constantinople. That is not true. Constantinople was conquered by the Ottoman Empire that came from Anatolia (now modern-day Turkey) in the year 1453, not by an army from Medina like what this Hadith says.
The Hadith states the Roman Empire will invade Amaq and Dabiq and a battle will begin there. But there is no historical record of the Romans ever setting foot in Amaq and Dabiq after Muhammad’s time. There is no record of any battle between a Medinan army and Byzantine Romans in Amaq or Dabiq before Muslims conquered Constantinople, so this is a second claim made by this Hadith that is proven false.
Hadiths that Contradict Science
Fever Comes from Heat of Hellfire?
Bukhari hadiths 3262, 3263, 3264, 3265, and 3266 state that fever comes from the heat of Hellfire. This is false, as fevers come from a rise in body temperature due to immune system activity if disease-causing bacteria or viruses invade the body, not Hellfire.
Semen Versus Vaginal Discharge?
In Sahih Muslim, number 315, it says that during intercourse, the body fluids of a man and woman are competing. If the male’s white substance wins against the female’s yellow vaginal discharge, the child will be male, but if the female’s yellow substance wins against the male’s white substance, the child will be female.
This is of course scientifically false, as the biological sex (male and female) only depends on whether the sperm that reaches the egg contains an X or Y chromosome. If the sperm has an X-chromosome, the baby will be female. If the sperm has a Y chromosome, the baby will be male. Vaginal discharge is not involved in deciding whether the baby will be born male or female.
Also, there is zero competition between semen and female discharge when a female is fertile and able to get pregnant. In fact, vaginal discharge from the woman’s cervix (also known as cervical mucus) helps sperm swim to the egg to impregnate a woman by providing extra lubrication, rather than compete against it.
Incorrect Embryology
According to Bukhari no. 6594 and other Hadiths, a person exists as a “nutfah (drop of semen)” in the womb for 40 days, then an alaqah (leech-like entity) for another 40 days, then a mudghah (lump that looks like it was chewed, having teeth marks) for another 40 days.
But if you look at images of a human embryo as it grows in the mother, it becomes an “alaqah” (looking like a leech) by day 7.
By day 25 or 26 it starts having the mudghah (chewed) appearance (looks like teeth marks due to having the somites that will eventually form the backbone)
By day 44 the chewed appearance (mudghah) disappears because the somites aren’t visible anymore
You can find images easily of the human embryo at various stages (from day 1 to day 56) at www.ehd.org/developmental-stages
So in conclusion, the sperm-drop (nutfah) definitely does not take 40 days to become an alaqah, unlike what this Hadith says. The time period in which the nufah becomes an alaqah is much shorter than that (7 days).
Secondly, unlike what this Hadith says, the embryo transforms from the alaqah stage to the mudghah stage somewhere between day 7 and day 26, which is almost 20 days rather than 40 days.
And lastly, this hadith says the embryo stops being a mudghah after 120 days, but the mudghah stage evidently ends more quickly than that (after day 44).
The Wings of Flies Have Cures for Disease?
Bukhari no. 5782 says that when a fly lands on one’s drink, the person should submerge the fly fully before taking it out and drinking the liquid again, because one wing contains the disease and another wing contains the cure.
The truth is that flies eat rotten meat from dead animals. Thus, both of their wings will contain germs or disease-causing bacteria from the dead animals and rotten meat that the flies like to eat. There is no scientific proof that any wing of the fly contains any kind of cure or medicinal properties.
When Does the Sun Prostrate?
A Hadith from Bukhari (no. 3199) states that the sun prostrates itself beneath the throne of God when it sets, and stands up from prostration during sunrise.
However, the sun is always visible in some part of the world. If it is night in one part of the world, it is daytime in the other part of the world.
So if the sun is in a state of prostration at night when it is invisible, but it gets up from prostration during the daytime when it is visible, how does that work? If it’s night time in the United States right now, but daytime in Bangladesh right now, is the sun currently prostrating, or is the sun currently standing up and not prostrating?
The sun cannot be doing both acts at the same time (prostration and standing), so this Hadith is a contradiction in both science and logic.
Marketing Hadith Advertising Ajwa Dates
There is a Hadith advertising Ajwa dates, which are a kind of date grown in Madina.
The false marketing claim here is that the prophet said those who eat 7 Ajwa dates in the morning are immune to poison and magic on those days. (Bukhari, no. 5779)
Has anyone ever scientifically tested this to see if it is true? Did anyone ever eat 7 dates in the morning before poisoning themselves with snake venom or some other kind of toxin, to see if the poison has any effect?
Conclusion
The main takeaway from this article is that Hadiths are not an authorized source of law in Islam.
The second takeaway is that many Hadiths which are believed to be Sahih (authentic) by scholars either contradict the Quran, contradict historical facts, or contradict science. This casts doubt on the idea that Sahih Hadiths are revelations from God.
The issue is that more Muslims need to be aware of this, and start practicing Islam from the Quran alone. That is why this mosque is named Masjid at-Tajdeed (the Mosque of Revival).
The singular goal of this masjid is to worship God correctly. One of the ways we try to worship God is by teaching and practicing Islam correctly. Hopefully, with our combined efforts, we can help promote a worldwide return of the Muslims to, “the Quran, the whole Quran, and nothing but the Quran,” as a wise man once said.
We pray to God to guide us to the truth, and to use us as a means to guide everyone to the truth.
Leave a Reply