The Qur\u2019\u0101n and the Sunnah have served as the primary sources of Islam. Together with the Qur\u02be\u0101n, the statements and actions of the Prophet \ufdfa form the basis of Islamic law and theology. Historically, all Islamic sects have acknowledged the necessity of at least some \u1e25ad\u012bths, even if few, to understand the Qur\u2019\u0101n. Despite their many theological and legal differences, Muslim sects have all drawn from these two primary sources: the Qur\u02be\u0101n, which is considered to be the direct word of God revealed to the Prophet \ufdfa, and the Sunnah, which consists of the words and actions of the Prophet Muhammad \ufdfa inspired by God. In other words, the \u1e25ad\u012bth are reports about what the Prophet \ufdfa said and did. Muslim jurists and \u1e25ad\u012bth scholars use these reports (i.e., \u1e25ad\u012bth) to understand the teachings of the Prophet \ufdfa, which are called the Sunnah. Each \u1e25ad\u012bth is a piece of data about the Prophet \ufdfa; when collected, these data points paint a larger picture which is the Sunnah.<\/p>\n
All Muslim groups consider the Qur\u02be\u0101n to be the most authentic and authoritative source, followed by the Sunnah. Because the Sunnah is needed in order to contextualize the Qur\u2019\u0101n, all Muslim groups have accepted the necessity of following at least some<\/i> \u1e25ad\u012bth alongside the Qur\u02be\u0101n. This view has been held by all known Muslim groups, including all strands of both Sunnism and Shi\u2019ism. This is important because the theory of consensus (ijm\u0101\u02bf<\/i>) holds that it is inconceivable for the entire Muslim community to agree upon falsehood. Whenever all living jurists agreed on a particular formulation of Islamic law, this consensus raised the formulation to an infallible representation of divine will. The possibility of error concerning formulations of law only existed when jurists disagreed. When they agreed on an issue, the fallibility of individual jurists was erased through the supervening principle of the infallibility of consensus. Consensus set boundaries on disagreement in the formulation of the law, and the authority of the Sunnah was outside of those boundaries.[1]<\/a><\/sup>\u00a0Because dissent is the norm in matters of Islamic law, it makes any consensus all the more credible and binding when it occurs. In other words, the unanimity of opinion (ijm\u0101\u02bf<\/i>)\u2014in a religion that has countenanced in its history a\u00a0vast\u00a0<\/i>array of differences\u2014is considered one of the strongest proofs for the formulation of law or creed. \u1e24ad\u012bth, therefore, form a necessary component of the religion (al-ma\u02bfl\u016bm min al-d\u012bn bi \u1e0dar\u016bra<\/i>).<\/p>\n It was not until the nineteenth century that a movement emerged that rejected the entire corpus of \u1e25ad\u012bth and the authority of the Prophet \ufdfa. This rejection of the entire \u1e25ad\u012bth corpus stems from a mistrust in the historical preservation of \u1e25ad\u012bth when compared to the Qur\u2019\u0101n or the fact that many \u1e25ad\u012bth clash with modern sensibilities. In an attempt to bypass any fabrications and \u1e25ad\u012bth that might contain discomfiting material, some have attempted to understand the Qur\u2019\u0101n on its own, without \u1e25ad\u012bth.<\/p>\n Questions about the authenticity of the Sunnah have long been of central importance in the study of \u1e25ad\u012bth. \u1e24ad\u012bth scholars attempted to decipher the Prophet\u2019s authentic statements from the inauthentic ones. Although Muslim scholars differ about the authenticity of certain statements attributed to the Prophet \ufdfa, there have been very few cases in Islamic history where groups completely rejected the authenticity or authority of the Prophet\u2019s statements.[2]<\/a><\/sup> It is primarily in the last two centuries that a group has emerged who completely reject the Sunnah as an authoritative source. They not only reject the Prophet\u2019s statements because they believe them to be inauthentic, but their rejection is based on the belief that the Prophet \ufdfa has no authority beyond delivering the Qur\u02be\u0101n.[3]<\/a><\/sup>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n A more common trend is the rejection of \u1e25ad\u012bth due to doubt concerning the preservation of \u1e25ad\u012bth. There might be a recognition that the Qur\u2019\u0101n requires that the Prophet \ufdfa be followed, but the concern is that his words have not been preserved in a similar manner as the Qur\u2019\u0101n. This argument is based on the assumption that, unlike the Qur\u2019\u0101n, some \u1e25ad\u012bth books contain inauthentic statements that are unreliable and often contain conflicting narrations.<\/p>\n This perspective implies that Muslims are commanded to follow the Prophet \ufdfa but that the reports about him are unreliable. The Andalusian scholar Ibn \u1e24azm (d. 456\/1064) disputes this argument by saying that doubting the authenticity of the entire \u1e25ad\u012bth corpus involves contending that God made it mandatory to obey the Messenger but made it impossible to do so. It does not befit God that He would command Muslims to follow something that is not accurately preserved; otherwise God would be requiring them to follow something that does not exist or to follow a falsified report about the religion.[4]<\/a><\/sup>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n Another reason some people tend to reject \u1e25ad\u012bth is a result of their encountering a \u1e25ad\u012bth that appears to have a problematic meaning or that conflicts with modern sensibilities. \u1e24ad\u012bth literature contain reports that vary in their degree of authenticity. Some are authentic while others are complete fabrications. The science of \u1e25ad\u012bth was established with the aim of separating authentic from the weak and fabricated. There are \u1e25ad\u012bth that are problematic, and these were usually highlighted by early \u1e25ad\u012bth scholars. However, not every apparently problematic \u1e25ad\u012bth is actually problematic. It is often the case that the individual misunderstands or lacks the knowledge to contextualize the \u1e25ad\u012bth. It is important to keep in mind that \u1e25ad\u012bth literature was compiled by scholars for <\/i>scholars. In other words, they were compiled by scholars with other scholars in mind as their main readers, not the untrained layperson. In our current era of information overload, everyone has access to texts and data that can be read and interpreted without consulting experts. Hence, \u1e25ad\u012bth are often accessed without scholarly explanation, in translation, and\/or decontextualized. This results in confusion and doubt concerning the preservation of \u1e25ad\u012bth and whether or not they accurately represent the teachings of the Prophet \ufdfa. It is important to note that access to \u1e25ad\u012bth, or any text, is not the same thing as understanding the text. There are many cases where individuals might reject a \u1e25ad\u012bth simply based on a shallow reading of it.<\/p>\n In his introduction to Bukh\u0101r\u012b\u2019s Adab al-Mufrad<\/i>, Yusuf Talal DeLorenzo argues that very few people are equipped to deal with Bukh\u0101r\u012b\u2019s \u1e62a\u1e25\u012b\u1e25<\/i>, a work that is readily available online in Arabic and translation. He points out that, in traditional learning circles, study of \u1e62a\u1e25\u012b\u1e25<\/i> al-Bukh\u0101r\u012b<\/i> comes only after a student has spent years learning the classical disciplines such as Arabic, rhetoric, literature, the rational sciences of logic, Islamic legal theory, the many Qur\u02be\u0101nic sciences from elocution (tajw\u012bd<\/i>) to Qur\u02bc\u0101nic exegesis (tafs\u012br<\/i>), and study of the principles of \u1e25ad\u012bth. Only after students have demonstrated mastery of these subjects are they allowed to attend the lessons, which were usually given by the most learned and respected of all teachers, on the \u1e62a\u1e25\u012b\u1e25 <\/i>of Bukh\u0101r\u012b.<\/span>[5]<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n DeLorenzo goes on to state that, in the traditional educational scheme, there were many reasons for this postponement. The status accorded to Bukh\u0101r\u012b\u2019s \u1e62a\u1e25\u012b\u1e25<\/i> was so elevated that only those who had mastered the classical disciplines were considered prepared to take on its study. The \u1e62a\u1e25\u012b\u1e25<\/i> is so full of technical nuances related to principles of \u1e25ad\u012bth (u\u1e63\u016bl al-\u1e25ad\u012bth<\/i>) and the biographical handbooks (ilm al-rij\u0101l<\/i>) that a thorough understanding of those subjects is required if they are to be appropriately appreciated. Similarly, unless one has mastered other classical disciplines, there is much learning and meaning that will be overlooked.[6]<\/a><\/sup>\u00a0<\/span>Bypassing a teacher and studying texts directly leads to a limited understanding of primary texts. Delorenzo writes:<\/p>\n The word I recall the shaykh using to describe what results when the unprepared non-scholar attempts to read the hadith literature was <\/i>fitnah, or a trial, in the sense that the person would be so confused and overcome after undertaking such an uninformed and one-dimensional reading of that literature (i.e., in translation without the presence of a shaykh to guide him\/her through the obstacles) that he or she would face a crisis in their religion, a trial of spiritual proportions.<\/span><\/i><\/strong>[7]<\/a><\/sup><\/p><\/blockquote>\n \u1e24ad\u012bth compilations such as \u1e62a\u1e25\u012b\u1e25 al-Bukh\u0101r\u012b <\/i>can be compared to advanced texts that are studied at the graduate level. They are not intended to be read, analyzed, and interpreted without the necessary tools for proper understanding. Studying \u1e25ad\u012bth online or through self-study often produces more confusion than knowledge. In his excellent book, The Death of Expertise, <\/i>Tom Nichols highlights how the internet challenges actual learning. Although people may think they are learning when they search the internet, they are more likely to be immersed in yet more data they do not understand. What often happens online is an avoidance of reading in the traditional sense. Instead of reading with the aim of learning, it often involves reading to win an argument or to confirm a pre-existing belief.<\/span>[8]<\/a><\/sup>\u00a0Doubt concerning \u1e25ad\u012bth has increased over the last several decades because \u1e25ad\u012bth experts who insist on a systematic method of learning and logic cannot compete with a machine that always gives readers their preferred answers. The internet created a space where laypeople are exposed to \u1e25ad\u012bth that would typically only be taught at later stages of Islamic studies. This results in misunderstanding and doubt concerning \u1e25ad\u012bth as accurate and authentic sources of Islam. To remedy this problem, it is important to reexamine the status of \u1e25ad\u012bth in light of the Qur\u2019\u0101n.<\/p>\n What does it mean to follow only the Qur\u2019\u0101n? Can the Qur\u2019\u0101n be understood entirely on its own without relying on any other sources? One of the primary problems of attempting to follow only the Qur\u2019\u0101n is that without any assistance or background from the Sunnah, the Qur\u2019\u0101n loses its meaning. Many of the Qur\u2019\u0101nic injunctions concerning prayer, pilgrimage, and commercial transactions require clarification. The Prophet \ufdfa expounded on these injunctions verbally and demonstrated them in practice. These explanations had the force of law and Muslims understood them to be another form of revelation, which they called the Sunnah. Thus, the Sunnah as a concept came into existence simultaneously with the revelation of the Qur\u2019\u0101n and was part of the process of the creation of an Islamic system of jurisprudence.[9]<\/a><\/sup>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n The rituals of Islam are prominent examples that demonstrate the challenges that ensue when trying to understand the Qur\u02be\u0101n without the Sunnah. Hadith rejecters have arrived at many different conclusions concerning Islamic law and rituals. What does \u1e63al\u0101h <\/i>mean? How often does one perform it, what does one say in it, and how many units does it contain? Muslims also differ over the details of prayer,\u00a0 but the fundamentals of prayer such as the number of prayers per day, the physical format, and certain core elements are agreed upon. \u1e24ad\u012bth rejecters differ significantly with each other on fundamental aspects of the prayer, how it is performed, and the number of prayers each day. They argue that all the details are found in the Qur\u02be\u0101n, but in fact must resort to \u1e25ad\u012bth to understand these rituals in the Qur\u02be\u0101n.[10]<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n The rituals are but one example; even the meanings of particular words in the Qur\u2019\u0101n require the Sunnah to be understood. For example, some \u1e25ad\u012bth rejecters such as Edip Yuksel have attempted to translate and understand the Qur\u02be\u0101n using only the Qur\u02be\u0101n.[11]<\/a><\/sup> However, they still rely on extra-Qur\u2019\u0101nic material and \u1e25ad\u012bth tradition because they consult Arabic dictionaries. The earliest Arabic dictionary, Kit\u0101b al-\u02bfAyn <\/i>was written by al-Khal\u012bl b. A\u1e25mad (d. 175\/795). This dictionary and others like it were passed down by the same scholars who preserved \u1e25ad\u012bth.[12]<\/a><\/sup> How do we know the authenticity of this dictionary? It has been ultimately passed down through the same generations that passed down \u1e25ad\u012bth. If scholars gathered en masse<\/i> to fabricate sayings about the Prophet \ufdfa, then everything in Islamic history, including Arabic dictionaries and the Qur\u02be\u0101n, must be similarly suspect to be false and fabricated.[13]<\/a><\/sup>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n The idea that one can use only the Qur\u2019\u0101n to understand and translate the Qur\u2019\u0101n does not work without resorting to extra-Qur\u2019\u0101nic texts. For instance, the word \u1e93ih\u0101r <\/i>is found in chapter 58 verses 2-4. \u1e24ad\u012bth literature defines \u1e93ih\u0101r <\/i>as a husband\u2019s saying to his wife, \u201cYou are like the back of my mother to me,\u201d which was a statement of irrevocable divorce. Yuksel translates \u1e93ih\u0101r <\/i>according to this traditional understanding. However, the verb \u1e93\u0101hara <\/i>does not appear anywhere else in the Qur\u02be\u0101n with this meaning; throughout the rest of the Qur\u02be\u0101n it means to aid or give help.[14]<\/a><\/sup> Jonathan Brown states, \u201cBy the Reformist Translation<\/i>\u2019s stated methodology, the verse should be read, awkwardly if at all, \u2018He did not make your wives to whom you granted aid from as your mothers.\u2019\u201d[15]<\/a><\/sup>\u00a0The Sunnah is therefore necessary in order to uphold the Qur\u02be\u0101n as a meaningful text.<\/p>\n Texts do not speak for themselves; readers always provide context and bring their assumptions to their understanding of texts. The Sunnah is meant to provide context to the Qur\u2019\u0101n to ensure it is interpreted within certain boundaries; without it, the Qur\u2019\u0101n would be decontextualized, vague, and meaningless. When one encounters any text, there is a process of interpretation that takes place, and this is no different for the Qur\u2019\u0101n.<\/p>\n Extra-Qur\u2019\u0101nic\u00a0sources are necessary to understand the Qur\u2019\u0101n. If the Qur\u2019\u0101n is stripped of all context, it becomes a text that is full of vague meanings. For instance, the historical context of the Qur\u2019\u0101n is only found outside of the Qur\u2019\u0101n. The Qur\u2019\u0101n makes no mention of the time period in which it was revealed, it makes references to Badr, Uhud, and Hunayn, and the Prophet\u2019s wives, expecting the reader to know what these are. The Qur\u02be\u0101n presupposes that the reader is aware of the context in which it was revealed.\u00a0There are universal parts of the Qur\u02be\u0101n, such as the nature of God, that can be understood independently of the historical context in which it was revealed. However, there are other parts of the Qur\u02be\u0101n that are bound to the Prophet\u2019s life and historical context. The Qur\u02be\u0101n speaks of Zayd, the companion of the Prophet \ufdfa and it presupposes that the reader knows who Zayd is so that the legal implications of the Prophet\u2019s marriage to Zayd\u2019s ex-wife are understood.\u00a0Without this history, we would not be able to understand the Qur\u2019\u0101n itself.<\/p>\n Early Muslims only knew what constituted the Qur\u2019\u0101n because they relied on the Prophet\u2019s words. They only knew what the Qur\u2019\u0101n is because of his declaring it as such. When the Prophet \ufdfa spoke, how did people around him distinguish between what parts of his speech were his own and which were Qur\u2019\u0101n? This could have only been distinguished by the Prophet\u2019s indication that a particular verse was the speech of God and not his own. One must, therefore, depend on the declarations of the Prophet to know what the Qur\u2019\u0101n is. Otherwise, there is no way to differentiate between the Qur\u2019\u0101n and the Prophet\u2019s words. This means his declaring something as part of the Qur\u2019\u0101n is authoritative and the declaration itself is extra-Qur\u2019\u0101nic. Without it, we would not know what the Qur\u2019\u0101n is.<\/p>\n When the Qur\u2019\u0101n states, \u201cSurely We have revealed the dhikr<\/i> and We will most surely be its guardian\u201d (Qur\u2019\u0101n 15:9), it includes the Sunnah. Ibn \u1e24azm notes that scholars are in agreement that all revelation is called dhikr. <\/i>He argues that the preservation is not limited to the text of the Qur\u2019\u0101n, but it extends to its meaning as well. If the Prophet\u2019s explanation is needed in order to understand the Qur\u2019\u0101n, then it is necessary that this explanation be preserved as well.[16]<\/a><\/sup>\u00a0Without \u1e25ad\u012bth, the Qur\u2019\u0101n would be a text without meaning, which would mean it was not preserved.\u00a0For example, the verses that address intoxication give contradictory advice:<\/p>\n Without the \u1e25ad\u012bth to provide context, how does the reader know which of these verses was revealed first? Were intoxicants prohibited at first and then gradually allowed except when one was praying or were they allowed at first and then gradually prohibited? The Sunnah provides the necessary context to these verses and others like them. Muslims differ over the interpretation of the Qur\u2019\u0101n, but the Sunnah provides a context that limits the boundaries of interpretation.<\/p>\n Muslim scholars have responded to anti-\u1e25ad\u012bth tendencies by noting that the Qur\u2019\u0101n makes it evident that revelation is not limited to the scriptural revelation of books, but includes the Sunnah as well. The Qur\u2019\u0101n itself makes this evident by highlighting that God \u201crevealed\u201d to certain Prophets who did not have books: \u201cIndeed, We have revealed to you, [O Muhammad], as We revealed to Noah and the prophets after him. And we revealed to Abraham, Ishmael, Isaac, Jacob, the Descendants, Jesus, Job, Jonah, Aaron, and Solomon, and to David We gave the book of Psalms\u201d (Qur\u2019\u0101n 4:163). Because the vast majority of these Prophets did not have books, there must have been a non-scriptural form of revelation. Despite these Prophets not having scriptures, people were still required to obey them. Of the many verses that establish a non-Qur\u2019\u0101nic form of revelation are the following:<\/p>\n And it was revealed to Noah: None of your people will believe except those who have believed already, so be not sad because of what they used to do<\/i> (Qur\u2019\u0101n 11:36).<\/strong><\/p>\n And We revealed to him [Joseph]: Indeed, you shall inform them of their affair, when they know not<\/i> (Qur\u2019\u0101n 12:15).<\/strong><\/p>\n And We gave Moses the Scripture, after We had destroyed the former generations, as enlightenment for the people and guidance and mercy that they might be reminded<\/i> (Qur\u2019\u0101n 28:43).<\/strong><\/p><\/blockquote>\n Moses was given scripture after Pharaoh was destroyed. This means that even when Moses did not have scripture his people were still required to follow him. The Qur\u02bcan also makes no mention of Prophet Noah or Joseph receiving any scripture. These verses established that revelation is not limited to a book but can take different forms. Several scholars have highlighted examples from the Qur\u2019\u0101n that establish extra-Qur\u2019\u0101nic revelation (i.e., \u1e25ad\u012bth\/sunnah). Muhammad Luqm\u0101n al-Salaf\u012b notes that the changing of the qibla<\/i> from Jerusalem to Mecca is mentioned in the Qur\u2019\u0101n. However, the original command to face Jerusalem during prayer is not found in the Qur\u2019\u0101n. Arguing that the decision to face Jerusalem during prayer was based on reason is not convincing, especially while keeping in mind that the Prophet \ufdfa wanted to face Mecca.[17]<\/a><\/sup>\u00a0Additionally, the adh\u0101n <\/i>(call to prayer) is another example of a fundamental ritual mentioned in the Qur\u2019\u0101n only as a sanctioned action without a command to perform it. The command to perform the adh\u0101n <\/i>must have come in the form of extra-Qur\u2019\u0101nic revelation.[18]<\/a><\/sup>\u00a0The late Indian scholar Habib-ur-Rahman Azami (d. 1992) notes that funeral prayer is similarly mentioned in the Qur\u2019\u0101n, but its legislation is absent from the Qur\u2019\u0101n: \u201cNever pray for any of them who dies, nor stand at his grave\u201d (Qur\u2019\u0101n 9:84). Azami goes on to state:<\/p>\n The verse implies that such funeral services had begun to be performed and that the Prophet used to offer prayers at the burial of the dead before this particular verse was revealed; yet no verse revealed earlier than this one can be cited as enjoining such services or prayers upon the Prophet and the Muslims. It must, therefore, be conceded that the command for the burial service was given through the sunnah.<\/i><\/strong>[19]<\/a><\/sup><\/p><\/blockquote>\n The Qur\u2019\u0101n explains that the Prophet\u2019s job is to teach the Qur\u2019\u0101n: \u201cVerily Allah has bestowed grace on the believers by sending to them a Messenger from among themselves who recites to them His revelations, and purifies them, and teaches them the book and wisdom; although before they were in manifest error\u201d (Qur\u2019\u0101n 3:164). If the Prophet\u2019s authority was limited to delivering the Qur\u2019\u0101n, the Qur\u2019\u0101n would have made that explicit. However, it emphasizes that the Prophet \ufdfa is to teach the Qur\u2019\u0101n and \u201cthe wisdom.\u201d Since one teaches by word and example, there must be a source along with the Qur\u2019an that tells us about the Prophet\u2019s actions. Im\u0101m al-Sh\u0101fi\u02bf\u012b explains that \u201cthe wisdom\u201d must mean the Sunnah. The term \u201cwisdom\u201d cannot refer to the Qur\u2019\u0101n itself, because it is being taught alongside the Qur\u2019\u0101n.<\/p>\n The concept of the Prophet \ufdfa as an expounder on the Qur\u2019\u0101n is advanced by the following verse: \u201cAnd We sent down to you the reminder so that you may explain to people what was revealed to them and so they may reflect\u201d (Qur\u2019\u0101n 16:44). Upon closer examination, we notice that the verse mentions the revelation of two distinct things. First is the reminder (dhikr<\/i>) that was revealed only to the Prophet \ufdfa in order to guide him in explaining the revelation of the Qur\u2019an. Second is that which was already been revealed to the people; i.e., the Qur\u2019\u0101n.<\/p>\n The Arabs of the seventh century excelled in all aspects of the Arabic language. They competed in poetry and delivered eloquent speeches, all of which are the main sources of Arabic literature today. They did not need anyone to translate the Qur\u2019\u0101n for them. Because it was revealed in their mother tongue, the Prophet\u2019s explanation was more than merely the literal meaning. Instead, it must mean that he explained the deeper meanings, implications, and details of the Qur\u2019\u0101nic verses that were not mentioned in the Qur\u2019\u0101n itself. Muhammad Mustafa Al-Azami (d. 2017) writes:<\/p>\n Many of the Qur\u2019\u0101nic injunctions\u2014such as those dealing with prayer, <\/i>zak\u0101t, <\/i>hajj, usury, and other commercial transactions\u2014needed careful explanation. The Prophet, as an expounder of the Qur\u2019\u0101n, must have both explained them verbally and demonstrated them in practice. These explanations had the force of law and came under the heading of the sunnah of the Prophet. Thus, the sunnah came into existence simultaneously with the revelation of the Qur\u2019\u0101n and were part of the process of the creation of an Islamic system of jurisprudence<\/i><\/strong>.<\/span><\/i>[20]<\/a><\/sup><\/p><\/blockquote>\n In over forty different places, the Qur\u2019\u0101n instructs Muslims to obey both God and the Messenger. There is not a single instance where \u201cobey God\u201d appears by itself; it is always coupled with \u201cand obey the Messenger.\u201d There are several cases where \u201cobey the Messenger\u201d appears alone without \u201cobey God\u201d before it.[21]<\/a><\/sup> Those who reject \u1e25ad\u012bth might interpret the command to obey the Messenger as obedience to the Qur\u2019\u0101n. This idea conflicts with other verses in the Qur\u2019\u0101n: \u201cAnd when it is said to them \u2018Come to what Allah has revealed and to the Messenger\u2019, you see the hypocrites turning away from you with aversion\u201d (Qur\u2019\u0101n 4:61). It is important to highlight that the verse does not say \u201ccome to what Allah revealed to the<\/i> Messenger, but rather \u201ccome to what Allah revealed and <\/i>come to the Messenger.\u201d This makes it evident that the Qur\u2019\u0101n and the Messenger are two separate things, each of which is authoritative in and of itself.<\/p>\n One of the most famous verses used by Muslim scholars to establish the authority of the Prophet \ufdfa is chapter 4 verse 49: \u201cO you who believe, obey Allah and obey the Messenger and those in authority among you. If you differ in anything, then refer it to Allah and His Messenger if you believe in Allah and the last day; that is better and the best interpretation.\u201d<\/p>\n Ibn al-Qayyim (d. 751\/1350) explained that the word \u201cobey\u201d is only mentioned before the words Allah and the Messenger. It is absent before \u201cthose in authority,\u201d making obedience to them based on the condition that it conforms with obedience to God and the Messenger. It then goes on to say that if a dispute arises, it should be referred to God and His Messenger. The only way that disputes can be taken back to the Prophet \ufdfa after his death is by returning to the Sunnah and Hadith.[22]<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n How does one refer to God and His Messenger? One might argue that this verse was limited to the time of the Prophet \ufdfa when people could have physically referred to him. Ibn \u1e24azm convincingly explains that this interpretation is untenable because the same cannot be said about God. In other words, if the term \u201crefer\u201d means meeting and consulting with the Prophet \ufdfa, this cannot be the case with God because doing so with God is impossible. He goes on to explain that the command \u201crefer\u201d in this verse means to return to the speech of God which is the Qur\u2019\u0101n, and the speech of the Messenger that is only available in the form of \u1e25ad\u012bths. There is nothing in this verse that indicates the necessity of meeting the Messenger. What is meant by referring to him is to return to the words of God and His Messenger, not their beings.[23]<\/a><\/sup>\u00a0<\/span><\/p>\n Another part of the Qur\u2019\u0101n maintains that the Messenger is a legislator: \u201cIt is not befitting for a believing male or believing female, if Allah and His Messenger decide a matter, that they have a choice in the matter. And whoever disobeys Allah and His Messenger has gone astray into manifest error\u201d (Qur\u2019\u0101n 33:36). Commenting on this verse, Muhammad Taq\u012b Usman\u012b says:<\/p>\n Here, the decisions of Allah and the Messenger both have been declared binding on the believers. It is worth noting that the word \u2018and\u2019 occurring between \u2018Allah\u2019 and \u2018His Messenger\u2019 carries both conjunctive and disjunctive meanings. It cannot be held to give conjunctive sense only, because in that case it will exclude the decision of Allah unless it is combined with the decision of the Messenger\u2014a construction too fallacious to be imagined in the divine expression. The only reasonable construction, therefore, is to take the word \u2018and\u2019 in both conjunctive and disjunctive meanings. The sense is that whatever Allah or His Messenger, any one or both of them, decide a matter, the believers have no choice except to submit to their decision.<\/i><\/strong>[24]<\/a><\/sup><\/p><\/blockquote>\n Mu\u1e25ammad Ism\u0101\u02bb\u012bl al-Salaf\u012b explains that the Qur\u2019\u0101n notes that Muslims must not separate or distinguish between God and His Messengers: <\/i>\u201cSurely those who disbelieve in Allah and His messengers and wish to separate between Allah and His messengers and say: We believe in some and disbelieve in others, and desire to take a course in between that. These are truly unbelievers, and We have prepared for the unbelievers a disgraceful punishment\u201d (Qur\u2019\u0101n 4:150-151). What does it mean to separate between God and His Messengers? God and His Messengers are not one in their being; God is the Creator and the Messengers are part of His creation. Therefore, separation does not mean split up in their beings, because it is obvious that the two are completely different and separate. Rather it refers to separating between them with regards to obedience or stating that one will obey God but not the Messengers.[25]<\/a><\/sup><\/p>\n In this article, I set out to demonstrate two important points that establish the absolute necessity of \u1e25ad\u012bth in Islam. First, without the context provided by \u1e25ad\u012bth literature, the Qur\u2019\u0101n itself loses all meaning. Previous attempts to understand the Qur\u2019\u0101n completely stripped of the context provided by \u1e25ad\u012bth literature have been unsuccessful because they always resorted to \u1e25ad\u012bth, even if a few. This is because the Qur\u2019\u0101n, by its nature, was intended to be read within the context in which it was revealed and is closely bound to the life of the Prophet \ufdfa. While some people claim to follow only the Qur\u02be\u0101n, the Qur\u02be\u0101n\u2019s nature is such that it requires the reader to consult with the Sunnah.<\/p>\n Second, the authority of the Prophet \ufdfa and the obligation to follow him were not invented by Muslim scholars. Rather, the Qur\u2019\u0101n makes it unequivocally clear that there were two forms of revelation: the Qur\u2019\u0101n and the Sunnah. It also establishes the role of the Prophet \ufdfa as a teacher, legislator, and expounder on the Qur\u2019\u0101n.<\/p>\n [1]<\/a>\u00a0Bernard Weiss, \u201cInterpretation in Islamic Law: The Theory of Ijtih\u0101d,\u201d\u00a0<\/span>The American Journal of Comparative Law<\/em>,<\/span>\u00a02:26 (1978), 201.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n [2]<\/a>\u00a0This group was mentioned by al-Sh\u0101fi\u02bf\u012b in his\u00a0<\/span>Kit\u0101b al-Umm<\/em>,\u00a0<\/span>but he makes no mention of names. Several scholars have discussed who this early group was. See Muhammad Mustafa al-Azami,\u00a0<\/em><\/span>On Schacht\u2019s Origins of Muhammadan Jurisprudence<\/em>\u00a0<\/span>(Oxford: Oxford Centre for Islamic Studies and The Islamic Texts Society, 1985), 73-74. Also see \u02bfAl\u012b Ibn \u1e24azm,\u00a0<\/span>Al-I\u1e25k\u0101m f\u012b U\u1e63\u016bl al-A\u1e25k\u0101m<\/em>\u00a0<\/span>(Cairo: Ma\u1e6dba\u02bbat al-\u02bb\u0100\u1e63ima, 1968) 254-257. Jil\u0101l al-D\u012bn al-Suy\u016b\u1e6d\u012b,\u00a0<\/span>Mift\u0101\u1e25 al-Janna fi-l-I\u1e25tij\u0101j bi-l-Sunna<\/span><\/em>\u00a0(Cairo: Id\u0101rat al-\u1e6cib\u0101\u1ffea al-Munayriyya,\u00a01974), 3-4.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n [3]<\/a>\u00a0For more information on these groups, see Daniel Brown,\u00a0<\/span>Rethinking Tradition in Modern Islamic Thought<\/em>\u00a0<\/span>(Cambridge: Cambridge University Press, 1999). Among the most famous responses to the rise of Qur\u2019\u0101n-only movements in the Muslim world, see Mu\u1e63taf\u0101 al-Sib\u0101\u02bf\u012b,\u00a0<\/span>Al-Sunna wa Mak\u0101natuha f\u012b al-Tashr\u012b\u02bf al-Isl\u0101m\u012b<\/em>\u00a0<\/span>(Cairo: D\u0101r al-Sal\u0101m, 2006); \u02bfAbd al-Ghan\u012b \u2018Abdl al-Kh\u0101liq,\u00a0<\/span>\u1e24ujjiyyat al-Sunna<\/em>\u00a0<\/span>(Virginia: al-Ma\u02bbhad al-\u02bb\u0100lami lil-Fikr al-Isl\u0101mi, 1994).<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n [4]<\/a>\u00a0Ibn \u1e24azm,\u00a0<\/span>Al-I\u1e25k\u0101m f\u012b U\u1e63\u016bl al-A\u1e25k\u0101m<\/span><\/em>, 121-124.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n [5]<\/a>\u00a0Yusuf Talal DeLorenzo,\u00a0<\/span>Imam Bukhari\u2019s Book of Muslim Morals and Manners<\/span><\/em>\u00a0(Alexandria: Al-Saadawi Publications, 1997), i-iii.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n [6]<\/a>\u00a0Y. DeLorenzo,\u00a0<\/span>Imam Bukhari\u2019s<\/span><\/em>, ii.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n [7]<\/a>\u00a0Y. DeLorenzo<\/span>, Imam Bukhari\u2019s<\/em><\/span>, ii-iii.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n [8]<\/a>\u00a0T. Nichols,\u00a0<\/span>Death of Expertise<\/em>,\u00a0<\/span>115-120.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\n [9]<\/a>\u00a0M.M. Azami,\u00a0<\/span>On Schacht\u2019s Origins<\/span><\/em>, 20.<\/span><\/p>\n<\/div>\nReasons for \u1e25ad\u012bth rejection<\/b><\/h2>\n
The necessity of had\u012bth<\/b><\/h2>\n
\n
The Sunnah as revelation<\/b><\/h2>\n
The Prophet \ufdfa as a teacher<\/b><\/h2>\n
\u201cObey God and obey the Messenger\u201d<\/b><\/h2>\n
Conclusion<\/b><\/h2>\n
\n