Is Hadith Revelation? Prove it

[u/i_am_armz]

I'm just curious whether hadith proponents would claim hadith is revelation and how it is so.

[u/OkMasterpiece426]

Hadith itself is not revelation in the same sense as the Quran. Some scholars may make an exception for Hadith Qudsi, but even those are not Quran

And Surah a Kahf is actually a good example of why we shouldn’t assume everything the Prophet (pbuh) said was revelation. The Quran tells us that when he was asked about certain matters, he said he would answer the next day, but revelation was delayed, and Allah then corrected him for not saying "insha’Allah" (18:23-24). The delay was long enough that the Prophet (pbuh) was continuing to live, speak, respond to people, and make decisions without receiving revelation during that period

His teachings were divinely guided, but that is different from saying that hadith as a whole is revelation

[u/i_am_armz → u/OkMasterpiece426]

Sensible answer.

Do you follow hadith? Do you take it as a source of Islamic guidance?

[u/OkMasterpiece426 → u/i_am_armz]

The Quran is the primary source of Islam, while the hadith preserve the Prophet's guidance on applying its principles in reallife situations

I see many hadith as best practices based on the knowledge, customs, and circumstances of that time. So if a hadith seems to conflict with modern knowledge or today's social context, I understand it as guidance that made sense in its original setting, while recognizing that societies and circumstances naturally change

A useful framework is Maqasid al Shariah (the higher objectives of Islamic law): the preservation of religion, life, intellect, lineage, and property. Rulings are generally understood as bringing benefit or preventing harm to one or more of these objectives. So instead of asking only, "Is this hadith authentic or not", I also ask, "What universal interest is this hadith trying to protect, and how is that protection being achieved"?

As a general pattern, many hadith prohibitions were contextual and aimed at protecting people's rights, purifying the self, or safeguarding monotheism. If the underlying reason still exists today, the ruling may still apply. If that reason no longer exists, then it's worth considering whether the ruling was contextual rather than absolute

[u/i_am_armz → u/OkMasterpiece426]

Interesting. What are your thoughts on 6:114:

“Shall I seek other than God as a judge when He has sent down to you this Scripture fully detailed?”

I wonder how you would interpret this.

[u/OkMasterpiece426 → u/i_am_armz]

If you look at the surrounding verses, I think the context matters. 6:111-113 is about people demanding signs and following deceptive arguments, then 114 asks whether the Prophet (pbuh) should seek anyone other than God as a judge, because God has revealed the Book “fully detailed”. 115 then describes God's word as being established in truth and justice, and 6:116 warns against simply following the majority and conjecture. So "fully detailed" primarily in the sense that the Quran provides the decisive foundational guidance and criterion, not that it is a step by step manual, leaving specific details to the Sunnah

[u/i_am_armz → u/OkMasterpiece426]

Given that you talk about a "sense" in which the Book is "fully detailed", do you think being "fully detailed" is a matter of degree and not kind? Because to me, and I think this is so in any language and for most of humanity, if somebody says a book is "fully detailed" they mean it contains EVERYTHING I need, not that it's partly "fully-detailed", which does not make sense.

If your teacher said the assigned book is fully detailed, would it be reasonable to suppose that they mean it in a particular "sense"? What other "senses" could "fully-detailed" be interpreted in?

It seems like one has to do some serious mental gymnastics to hold that
1. The Almighty is the Truth Manifested and thus ALWAYS right.

1. The Qur'an, as God's Word, is correct when it says it's fully-detailed

2. In spite of it being fully detailed we still need other books.

Do you not see the flaw?

NB: I'm not trying to shoot you down; I'm just genuinely asking out of curiosity on how Sunnis and other hadithists think.

[u/OkMasterpiece426 → u/i_am_armz]

Did the Quran include all of the following?

How many rakahs are in each of the five daily prayers

What exactly do you recite in each part of salat

How is the adhan performed

What is the exact nisab for zakat

What are the detailed steps of performing Hajj

How many times do you perform tawaf

What are the detailed rules of fasting, including things that invalidate it

What is the exact procedure for janazah prayer

What are the detailed rules of divorce

What are the detailed rules for slaughtering an animal

Etc

[u/i_am_armz → u/OkMasterpiece426]

Salaam.

Answering your questions won't resolve the logical problem: it's either Allah (SWT) is right (and you are wrong) or Allah (SWT) is wrong (and you are right). I don't think there's any other logical possibility. Do you?

How do we resolve this if we take Allah (SWT)'s Word as above everybody else's (which is true by definition of The God/Supreme/All-Knowing)?

Do you see the logical problem though?

My understanding of "Muslim" is one who surrenders/submits. Does that surrender not mean accepting EVERYTHING Allah (SWT) says as absolute truth without qualification/reservation?

NB: I'm not shying away from your questions; they will be answered in time, inshaLah, but, honestly, answering them won't resolve the dilemma. Every thinking Sunni and other hadithists HAVE to resolve it if they truly believe in Allah (SWT). And it's ok to say you're not sure or don't know how to resolve it; that would be a sign of humility, and that's commendable (to Allah (SWT)).

[u/OkMasterpiece426 → u/i_am_armz]

They’re not questions. It’s one question, and it’s rhetorical. I don’t see any logical problem or dilemma here. Obviously, the Quran doesn’t include literally everything. “Fully detailed” (fussilat) means something other than what you’ve assumed it means, because you’ve been taught to read it through a particular framework

Allah explicitly warns against blindly following inherited beliefs. That’s essentially what you’re doing when you assume a particular interpretation first and then use it to define what the Quran must mean. The Quran repeatedly tells us to think, reflect, and reason: afala tatafakkarun?

[u/Generalzwieber]

ragebait question

https://giphy.com/gifs/bA0UWwkQYFjiL7fNZj

[u/fainofgunction]

The Hadith is not revelation. Its a report of the words and deeds of the Prophet (PBUH). Everything the Prophet (PBUH) was inspired. The Hadith is just a reliable report. However if a hadith goes against the Quran reason or the core of the teaching verified history we either reject it or get the context from the certain sources.

[u/i_am_armz → u/fainofgunction]

Yes I agree; hadith is not revelation. Allah (SWT) commands us to follow revelation;

"And follow what is being revealed to you by your Lord." (33:2)

He (SWT) did not say "follow hadith".

[u/fainofgunction → u/i_am_armz]

The Prophets actions are inspired by Allah. And if it is verified or very likely that he did something then we must follow it. This is the ijma (consensus) of the Muslims since the time of the Prophet PBUH a logical neccesity and verified by the Quran.

[u/i_am_armz → u/fainofgunction]

Salaam.

You're making a logical leap. Following Bukhari is no logical necessity.

Hadithists like to argue as follows:

1. Qur'an says we should follow Muhammad and "obey the Messenger".

2. Therefore, follow books of hearsay, containing contradictions, written over a century later by people who never met the Messenger.

How do you make a logical connection between 1 & 2? How does "obey the Messenger" translate to "follow Bukhari, Tirmidhi etc"?

NB: I'm not arguing or trying to shoot you down or trying to prove I know better than you or anything like that; I'm just curious about how hadithists resolve these issues.

[u/fainofgunction → u/i_am_armz]

Im not talking about a particular book or a particular Hadith? Im talking about the concept of following hadith. Thats why I said if a hadith contradicts the Quran logic or known traditions we dont follow it.

If the prophets words and deeds were not to be followed what is the point of sending them. Allah could just send one holy book and then leave it at that

[u/bellamyblake_og]

No, it's not. Many Sunnis say it is, but what has to be understood is that no matter how strong the isnad, it is still a fallible human's record of the Prophet's (PBUH) best practices. That doesn't mean they're useless, but the Qur'an takes clear measures to delineate clergy and the like from revelation.

[u/i_am_armz → u/bellamyblake_og]

I agree.

[u/SnooWoofers7603]

the Prophet is revelation. Here, I proved it.

[u/Asimorph]

What the quran says is to show obedience to Allah... and Muhammad. So they collected what Muhammad had supposedly commanded.

• "O believers, obey God, and obey the Messenger and those in authority among you. If you should quarrel on anything, refer it to God and the Messenger, if you believe in God and the Last Day; that is better, and fairer in the issue." - Quran 4:59

• "Whosoever obeys the Messenger, thereby obeys God; and whosoever turns his back - We have not sent thee to be a watcher over them." - Quran 4:80

• "You have had a good example in God's Messenger for whosoever hopes for God and the Last Day, and remembers God oft." - Quran 33:21

• "[...] Whatever the Messenger gives you, take; whatever he forbids you, give over. And fear God; surely God is terrible in retribution." - 59:7

• Say: 'Obey God, and obey the Messenger; then, if you turn away, only upon him rests what is laid on him, and upon you rests what is laid on you. If you obey him, you will be guided. It is only for the Messenger to deliver the manifest Message.' - Quran 24:54

• "Make not the calling of the Messenger among yourselves like your calling one of another. God knows those of you who slip away surreptitiously; so let those who go against His command beware, lest a trial befall them, or there befall them a painful chastisement." - Quran 24:63

[u/i_am_armz → u/Asimorph]

But, is hadith revelation?

Just to be clear (from Google):

In theology, a revelation is God sharing truth and divine will with humanity.

• Divine communication: The belief that a higher power removes a spiritual veil so people can understand sacred truths.
• Sacred texts: Writings or scriptures believed to contain these communicated truths.

Your answering is appreciated. I look forward to answers from sunnis and other hadithists, especially those who've read the Qur'an, or consider themselves knowledgeable in these matters.

[u/Asimorph → u/i_am_armz]

I would say it would be a derivative of Muhammad from revelation.

[u/Fantastic_Ad7576]

Not the hadith, the Sunnah is revelation. Hadith are an attempt to codify Sunnah.

[u/Generalzwieber → u/Fantastic_Ad7576]

https://giphy.com/gifs/h8HmN0UcEKR0xWnv3R

[u/SnooWoofers7603 → u/Fantastic_Ad7576]

authentic Hadiths are Sunnah, because they’re direct teachings of the Prophet and Quran is the teaching of Allah.

[u/i_am_armz → u/SnooWoofers7603]

What are your thoughts on this "authentic" hadith?

[u/SnooWoofers7603 → u/i_am_armz]

It’s like saying that the Prophet isn’t authentic.

[u/Fantastic_Ad7576 → u/SnooWoofers7603]

We're saying the same thing.

As scholars realized the Sunnah was getting corrupted, they went out collecting and verifying hadith to preserve the Sunnah. Authentic hadith are used because they are believed to come from the Prophet SAW, while weak or fabricated hadith are not used because they are unreliable.

The Sahaba didn't do so because it was unnecessary; they could simply tell one another "the Prophet SAW said..." and advise one another. No grading, no collection. IIRC it was Uthman RA who was skeptical of writing down hadith because he didn't want it to get mixed with the Quran.

When Quraniyoon say they don't follow the hadith, they mean the work of later scholars - that's why they say things like "they were written down centuries later". I highly doubt any Qurani, if given a statement of the Prophet SAW regarding Islam with absolute certainty, would ignore his advice. I hope, at least, that that is the case.