Pitfalls in the Quest for Knowledge

 

CHAPTER FOUR

Approaching the
Sacred Texts in a Superficial Manner

Approaching the Qur’ân and Sunnah requires
intellect,probity,experience,and a deep
understanding of the intents and purposes of Islamic Law.It requires
broad knowledge of
the Arabic language and its idioms.Some students,however,possess none
of these
faculties.Moreover,some of them have no aptitude for Islamic Law.They
cannot cope
with uncertainties and multiple possibilities and have not the insight
to derive rulings
from their proper sources.Such people have a tendency to take a single
text and derive
from it all the legal rulings that come immediately to mind,and then
adhere doggedly to
these rulings,hurling at anyone who disagrees with them a number of
unsavory epithets.

There are two closely associated problems here.One
is that of taking an
overly literal
approach to the texts.The other is that of being hasty in drawing
conclusions from them.
Let us look at a few examples of each:

Taking an
Overly Literal Approach to the Texts

First Example:

Take an issue related to Islamic beliefs.The Prophet
(peace be upon
him)said:“If
anyone possesses four qualities,then he is a hypocrite,and whoever
possesses one of
these qualities has within him an aspect of hypocrisy until he gives it
up.They are as
follows:If he is entrusted with something,he betrays his trust.If he
speaks,he lies.If he
makes a covenant,he breaks it.If he gets into a dispute,he acts
sinfully.”Sahîh al-Bukhârî
(33,2279).Sahîh Muslim
(88).
Some people take this hadîth on its face value and ignore all the
other texts dealing with
hypocrisy.In this way,they fall into error.On one occasion,someone went
so far as to
say that the hypocrisy mentioned in the hadîth refers to absolute
unbelief,so that anyone
who breaks a promise,lies,breaches a covenant,or acts sinfully in an
argument is an
unbeliever and is no longer a Muslim!

This person,by making this declaration,has
disregarded hundreds of
passages from the
Qur’ân and Sunnah that indicate that a sinner does not become an
unbeliever on account
of his sins.This is a principle of faith in Islam.Al-Tahâwî
says in his classic treatise on
Islamic beliefs:“The followers of Muhammad (peace be upon him)who
commit major
sins and die without repentance will not remain in the Fire forever as
long as they die on
monotheism,knowing Allah.”This is a point of consensus among all
orthodox Muslims.
This shows us the danger of taking a cursory reading of one text and
ignoring all the
others.

Second Example:

The prophet (peace be upon him)said:“No ablutions need to be made
unless you hear the
sound of flatulence or feel the passage of gas.”Musnad Ahmad
(9712).Sunan al-Tirmidhî (69).Sunan Ibn
Mâjah (508).
If we were to take this hadîth on face value,no one would ever
have to make ablution
except for the stated causes.This is the literal meaning of the
hadîth .But is it the
intended meaning?The answer to this question is:certainly not!A person
who wishes to
pray must make ablutions after going to the bathroom,after waking up
from sleep,and
for other reasons.However,if a person was going to base his
understanding solely on the
literal meaning of the text cited above,he would have to come to that
false conclusion.
This is why the people of knowledge have always emphasized the need to
compile all the
relevant texts on a matter before drawing any conclusions.Ahmad
said:“If we did not
receive a single hadîth in seventy different ways,we would never
have understood it.”He
was referring here not only to different chains of transmission for a
single hadîth,but also
to numerous hadîth on a single topic.

Third Example:

The Prophet (peace be upon him)said:“No one should urinate in still
water and then
bathe in it.”Sahîh al-Bukhârî
(232).Sahîh Muslim (424). Some literalist scholars of the
past have opined that if
a person were to
urinate in a cup then pour the contents of the cup into the water,there
would be no
objection to bathing in it,since the only thing that the hadîth
prohibits is direct urination!You can read about this opinion
and the refutation of it in Ibn
Hazm,al-Muhallâ (1/166)and al-Nawawî,al-Majmû`(1/118).
This is a good example of severely dogmatic literalism.The intent of
the Prophet (peace
be upon him)in this hadîth is perfectly clear.

Hastiness in
Drawing Conclusions from the Texts

We will now turn our attention to the problem of
being hasty when
attempting to derive
rulings from the texts.The examples that we will be citing below are in
fact matters of
disagreement between scholars.Our point here is not to support a given
legal position,
but to illustrate the importance of being methodical and deliberate
when dealing with the
sacred texts.

First Example:

There are numerous hadîth in which the Prophet (peace be upon
him)said:“There is no
prayer for one who has not made ablution,and there is no ablution for
one who has not
invoked the name of Allah upon performing it.”Musnad Ahmad
(9050,16054,22152,25894,25896).Sunan Abî
Dâwûd (92).Sunan Ibn Mâjah (392, 393,394).
Numerous scholars have
attested to the
authenticity of this hadîth.Some scholars have understood from it
that ablutions are only
valid if the name of Allah is invoked before performing them.This was
the opinion of
Ishâq b.Râhawayh,one opinion of Ahmad,and the view of a
number of hadîth scholars.

Now,I do not intend to discuss the merits or
demerits of this
opinion,but I would like to
point out the other opinion and the evidence used to support it.

The majority of scholars,including Abû
Hanîfah,Mâlik,and al-Shâfi`î,consider
mentioning Allah’s name before performing ablutions as a preferential
sunnah act and do
not see it as obligatory.This is also one of the opinions related from
Ahmad and the view
of many later scholars including Ibn Taymiyah,as well as the opinion of
most
contemporary jurists.

Should we assume that all of these eminent scholars
took the
hadîth mentioned above and
threw it against the wall,like some rash students today have
insinuated?
In actuality,a few classical scholars did not deem that hadîth to
be authentic.Many of
them,however,did consider it authentic but had a different
understanding of the words
“there is no ablution for one who has not invoked the name of Allah
upon performing it”.
They did not take the hadîth to mean that ablutions without
mentioning Allah’s name are
invalid,but simply that such ablutions are not performed in the best
manner.There is a
decent amount of evidence to support their interpretation.

First of all,there is a hadîth with a good
chain of transmission
in Sunan Abî Dawûd
wherein a man comes to the Prophet (peace be upon him)and asks him how
purification
is to be carried out.So the Prophet (peace be upon him)calls for water
and gives him a
demonstration.He washes his hands three times,washes his face
once,wipes over his
head,traces his wet fingers and thumbs around his ears,and washes his
feet three times.
Then he says:“This is how ablutions are to be made.Whoever adds
anything to this or
leaves anything out has done wrong.”Sunan Abî Dawûd
(116).
The man asking the question was a desert Arab who had no idea
how to
perform
ablutions.Therefore,since the Prophet (peace be upon him)did not teach
him to invoke
the name of Allah,we can safely assume that it is not necessary to do
so.
A second piece of evidence comes from the fact that at least twenty-two
Companions
have described how the Prophet (peace be upon him)made ablutions and
not one of them
mentioned that he invoked Allah’s name.

Another argument offered by the scholars is that a
full ritual bath can
be done in lieu of
performing ablutions,and nowhere is it mentioned that Allah’s name must
be invoked
before taking such a bath.Scholars actually assume that mentioning
Allah’s name is
recommended before performing a ritual bath on the strength of the fact
that the regular
ablutions are performed as part of the bath.

A fourth piece of evidence is that mentioning the
name of Allah is not
given in the verse
of the Qur’ân that spells out to us how ablutions are to be
made.Allah says:“O you who
believe!When you prepare for prayer,wash your faces and your arms up to
the elbows.
Wipe your head with water and wash your feet to the
ankles.”[Sûrah al-Mâ’idah:6]

These arguments show us that the opinion of the
majority of the
scholars is not due to
their pointedly ignoring the hadîth,as some hasty students today
are wont to believe.It is,
in fact,based on sound juristic principles as well as a deeper insight
into the meaning of
the text that takes into account other textual evidence.

Second Example

The Prophet (peace be upon him)said:“When any one of you wakes up from
his sleep,
he should not place his hands in a bowl of water until after he washes
them three times,
because he does not know what his hands might have touched while he was
asleep.”Sahîh al -Bukhârî.Sahîh Muslim
(416).
Some scholars of the past understood from this hadîth that it is
obligatory to wash your
hands after sleeping before you can place them in a bowl of water and
that it is forbidden
to do otherwise.This was one of Ahmad’s opinions on the matter.Some
contemporary
scholars have held this view as well.

On the other hand,according to most
scholars,including Abû
Hanîfah,Mâlik,al-Shâfi`î,
and Ahmad in another one of his opinions,doing so is merely
recommended.Should we
assume that these eminent scholars simply tossed this hadîth
behind their backs or that
they just did not care very much about the command of the Prophet
(peace be upon him)?
Some brash young students today are actually saying such things about
them.

These scholars are as far removed as you can get
from such
accusations.They merely
took into account a number of factors which demonstrate that the
command given in the
hadîth is indicative of preference,not obligation.Let us consider
the following:

First of all,there is the reason cited by the
Prophet (peace be upon
him)for the order that
he gave.He said:“…because he does not know what his hands might have
touched while
he was asleep.”Now,the ruling about impurity in Islamic Law is that
unless you are
certain that there is some impurity upon something,you are not
obligated to wash it.
Suspicions are not enough to make a washing obligatory.Therefore,it
would not be
obligatory on a person to wash his hands after waking from sleep for
the reason that the
Prophet (peace be upon him)gave.This leads us to believe that the
command to wash the
hands is meant merely to encourage a preferable act.
Another indicator that we are not dealing here with an obligation is
that the Prophet
(peace be upon him)said we should wash our hands three times.In Islamic
Law,if
impurities are removed after only one washing,then one washing is
sufficient.

A third indicative factor is that there is another
authentic
hadîth that goes:“When one of
you wakes up,he should rinse his nose out with water three
times,because Satan spends
the night in his nasal passages.”11 In this case,consensus has been
established among all
scholars save Ibn Hazm that rinsing the nose is not obligatory.

All of these factors support the idea that the
hadîth encourages
washing the hands after
waking from sleep and does not obligate it.

I would like to repeat here that I am not saying all
this to support
one opinion over
another.You are free to agree with these opinions or disagree with
them.Someone might
say that it is obligatory to mention Allah’s name before making
ablutions or feel that it is
obligatory to wash one’s hands upon waking.There is nothing wrong with
this.My only
purpose in bringing up these issues is to show how dealing with texts
requires
understanding and knowledge of how to deal with numerous pieces of
evidence and
diverse indicative factors.I also wished to highlight the necessity of
referring back to the
discussions of people of knowledge when investigating any issue.This
allows the student
to choose the opinion that convinces him on the basis of knowledge and
probity,not
merely on a cursory reading of a single text.Then,whatever position you
choose in these
matters is acceptable,because you have a precedent for your choice
among the earlier
scholars.

A Look at the
Zâhirî (Literalist) School
of Law

It is appropriate at this point to discuss the great
Zâhirî
scholar Ibn Hazm.No doubt,he
was a great jurist with a number of great works to his credit.The most
important of these
is his legal encyclopedia entitled al-Muhallâ,a substantial work
of law containing
numerous insights.However,it also contains its share of errors and
mistakes.All works
of such scope do.

The problem is that some students read
al-Muhallâ and become
totally enamored of Ibn
Hazm.Ibn Hazm has a very assertive style of writing,especially when it
comes to
refuting his opponents’use of analogous reasoning.His specialty is
showing how his
opponents contradict themselves.Some students become enthralled by this
style and end
up judging by his decisions in all matters,whether or not his opinion
agrees with that of
the majority of the scholars.They accept from him even his strangest
rulings.

This behavior is incorrect.For this reason,I feel
that a beginning
student should not read
al-Muhallâ,but should start with other books that are more
comparative,more balanced
in their treatment of the issues,and less confrontational.In this
way,the student will
develop a broad perspective and learn the proper way in which matters
should be
discussed.I recommend the works of scholars like Ibn `Abd al-Barr,Ibn
al-Mundhir,Ibn
11 Sahîh al -Bukhârî (3052).

Qudâmah,and Ibn Taymiyah.Afterwards,the
student will be more
prepared to read
whatever reputable books he chooses.