At all events, it was a necessary assumption on the part of the early followers, that the Prophet’s words, if not Divine, had Divine authority. As time went by something else strengthened their belief. It is as follows: When the Prophet spoke on a topic – and by necessity he spoke on many topics – the Qur’an did not touch upon it. This meant that Divine Will extended approval to the Prophet filling the gap. In other words, what the latter day Muslims had to be taught as a basic Islamic tenet was simply a matter of fact and necessity for the first generation Muslims. They had to, for all practical purposes treat the Qur’an and the Hadith alike. And, the need remained to the end of the Prophetic carrier. That was because the Qur’an never took up for exposition what the Prophet took up. For instance, the Qur’an spoke on how the Muslims were to Pray when faced up with an enemy in the battle-field. But such occasions were few. Had the Qur’an not spoken on that topic, Muslims would not have been at a great loss. What if they prayed in the regular manner, or did not Pray at all on those rare occasions of war? Yet the Qur’an took up the topic and explained in detail how they were to offer their Prayers on such occasions. On the other hand, the Qur’an did not say a word on how to pray in times of peace: which was the norm, and which was more important to speak of since the Muslims were required to pray five times every day. Obviously, if the Qur’an did not do it, despite the importance of Prayers in Islam, it was because the Prophet had done so, in words and in practice. In fact, the Qur’anic injunctions about how to shorten the Prayers would have been meaningless, had the Prophet not explained how to offer complete Prayers in normal circumstances. If you do not have the fuller version, how are you to comprehend the shorter version? This demonstrates that the Divine Revelation took account of the Hadith. Zakah is another example. The Qur’an did not mention Prayers without mentioning Zakah. It spoke of Zakah and common charities hundreds of times, threatening those who did not pay up with severe chastisement. But it never explained what Zakah meant, what amount of one’s earning was due, when, at what intervals, out of what levels of wealth or earnings, on what commodities, etc. These were details without which mere exhortations or threats of punishment did not serve any purpose. But the Qur’an gave no details whatsoever. Why? For the reason that the Prophet (saws) had spoken and given all the essential details. Once again, a major issue, but the Qur’an did not touch upon it, leaving its followers dependent on the Hadith. Usury is another case in point. The Qur’an spoke of its unlawfulness in such harsh terms as of nothing else. It declared war, with Allah and His Messenger as the combatants, against those who deal in usury. But it did not say what constituted usury, without which the threats were but empty words. But, were they, after the Hadith statements? In short, while the Qur’an dealt with both the major as well as minor issues – but not all – the Hadith too touched upon both the major as well as minor issues: those that the Qur’an had ignored. The two then, complement each other. By not speaking on what the Prophet (asws) had spoken, even if something very important, the Qur’an gave the unmistakable message that the Muslims had to look into the Prophetic words for guidance. His words removed the need for their appearance in the Qur’an, thus, incidentally helping to shorten it. They acquired a permanent character, very similar to those of the Qur’anic statements. Hence the Prophet’s words, “I have been given the Qur’an and something similar to it.”
Posted on: Thu, 20 Mar 2014 05:37:23 +0000
Trending Topics
Recently Viewed Topics
© 2015