0
0
The Hadith
In Islam ḥadīth is the term applied to specific reports of the prophet Muḥammad ’s words and deeds as well as those of many of the early Muslims; the word is used both in a collective and in a singular sense. After the Prophet ’s death, his companions collected reports of what he had said and done, and they recounted the reports among themselves in order that the living memory of Muḥammad ’s example might influence the community of believers. As preserved for subsequent generations these reports, or ḥadīth, take the form of usually short, unconnected pieces, each of which is preceded by a list of its authoritative transmitters. Although the reports were originally transmitted orally, some transmitters began early to record them in writing. The compilers were careful not to tamper with the texts as they received them from recognized specialists in ḥadīth transmission, and the collections reflect their spoken origins. The language is direct, conversational, active, often repetitive, with a characteristic use of formulaic expression. The ḥadīth literature is one of the best examples of Arabic prose from the period of the beginnings of Islam.
Hadith (the word may be used as singular or collective) are a central part of Muslim culture. After the Qur’an, they are the most important source of guidance for Muslims.
After two centuries of collecting, transmitting, and teaching ḥadīth, during which the quest for reports became one of the most respected occupations of the Muslim community, scholars intensified the work of codifying the bulk of the material. The ninth century CE produced six massive collections, which have won almost universal acceptance by the Sunnī community as the most authoritative. They are commonly known by the names of their compilers: al-Bukhārī (d. 870); Muslim ibn al-Ḥajjāj (d. 875); Abū Dāʿūd al-Sijistānī (d. 888); Ibn Mājah al- Qazwīnī (d. 887); Abū ʿĪsā al- Tirmidhī (d. 892); and Abū ʿAbd al-Raḥmān al-Nasāʿī (d. 915). Two other collections as well have always enjoyed great favor with the Sunnīs, namely those of Mālik ibn Anas (d. 795) and Aḥmad ibn Ḥanbal (d. 855). These are only the most important examples of the large number of collections that appeared during this period and later, which classified thousands of reports according to the transmission of different authorities.
The Shīʿah use the above collections, but they are selective in their recognition of the companions as valid authorities. In addition, they consider ḥadīth from the imams as fully authoritative. From the standpoint of their particular beliefs, the Shīʿah revere four books as particularly significant, the collections by Muḥammad ibn Yaʿqūb al-Kulaynī (d. 940), Muḥammad ibn Bābūyah al-Qummī (d. 991) and Muḥammad al-Ṭūsī (d. 1068) who compiled two collections.
Providing Clues About Early Islam
As preserved for subsequent generations, hadith take the form of short, unconnected pieces, each of which is preceded by a list of its authoritative transmitters, or those who reported the text. Hadithcover many topics relating to both faith and daily life. In addition to such religious subjects as prayer, purification, and pilgrimage, hadith also address business transactions, inheritance, marriage and divorce, crime, judicial practices, war, hunting, and wine. Using direct language and a conversational style, each chapter of hadith contains anecdotes about how the Prophet dealt with these matters. Muslims use these stories for guidance in dealing with every aspect of their own lives. The hadith are also admired as examples of the richness of Arabic prose from the early Islamic era.
Throughout the history of Islam, the Qur’an and hadith have functioned together to shape the life of the Muslim community worldwide. Hadith provide the basic sources for the biography of the Prophet, filling in details about his personality, family life, and career. Hadith also help Muslims to interpret the Qur’an by explaining the circumstances in which portions of the sacred book were revealed, by supplying the meanings of obscure verses and words, and by providing examples in which the Qur’anic texts were applied to situations in daily life. By the early 800s, hadith had also become officially accepted as one of the sources of Islamic law.
Checking The Sources
Hadith were gathered and transmitted orally for two centuries before being collected in written form and codified. Compilers searched widely for hadith, carefully recording reports exactly as received from recognized experts. They verified the chains of authority and transmission as far back as possible, often to Muhammad himself. These chains of transmission were assessed for their authenticity by examining the number of transmitters, their credibility, and by the continuity of the chains. The nature of the text was also examined. Reports that seemed illogical, exaggerated, or contradictory to the Qur’an were considered suspect.
In the 800s, an authoritative version of hadith was developed. It contained six large collections, which take their titles from the names of their compilers: al-Bukhari (died 870 ); Muslim ibn al-Hajjaj (died 875 ); Abu Daud al-Sijistani (died 888 ); Ibn Majah al-Qazwini (died 887 ); Abu Isa al-Tirmidhi (died 892 ); and Abu Abd al-Rahman al-Nasai (died 915 ). Sunni Muslims accept these volumes as the most authoritative texts and also respect the collections of Malik ibn Anas (died 795 ) and Ahmad ibn Hanbal (died 855 ).|
Shi’i Muslims use these same collections but recognize only some of the Prophet’s companions as valid authorities. They consider hadith from descendants of Muhammad through Ali ibn Abi Talib and Fatimah, as well as those from later imams, to be fully authoritative. From the standpoint of their particular beliefs, Shi’i Muslims consider four hadith collections as particularly important—those of Muhammad ibn Yaqub al-Kulayni (died 940). Muhammad ibn Babuyah al-Qummi (died 991 ), and two collections of Muhammad al-Tusi (died 1068).
Studying the Hadith
By the time the hadith collections had been completed, a science of criticism had developed. Scholars focused on the reliability of the original sources and the accuracy of the transmission from oral to written form. Awareness of possible fabrication, or invention, and false teachings has long been a concern, and it has become a major issue in academic circles since the 1900s. A great deal of literature emerged dealing with many aspects of the hadith, including historical context, the study of difficult words, and explanations of contradictions. While there are some new perspectives based on recently discovered material, Muslims generally depend on hadith treatises and commentaries of past centuries.
Some reform-minded scholars have recently suggested that the refusal of many Muslims to engage in a rigorous examination of hadith literature is blind conformity to the ways of the past. Some writers have composed thoughtful restatements of the ancient manuals, demonstrating a sensitivity and awareness to modern problems. Although this has provoked some controversy, reformists have refrained from attacking the hadith themselves but have simply urged Muslims to be more thoughtful in their acceptance of material attributed to the Prophet.Since the 1990s, hadith scholars have been using computer technology to improve access to the vast amount of material in hadith collections. Specialists have created CD-ROMs that contain some 75,000 hadith, as well as their translations into ten languages.
- 600,000 Traditions
Collecting hadith became one of the most respected occupations in the early Muslim community. The teacher al-Bukhari reportedly spent more than 16 years traveling from his native Bukhara, in Central Asia, to Egypt. On his long journey he consulted with more than one thousand Arab leaders. After hearing more than 600,000 stories of the Prophet, al-Bukhari selected about 7,000 and recorded them in his book Sahih (which means “true” or “valid”). Although some of the material in Sahih is repetitious, there are still over 2,700 separate hadith that cover such topics as the creation, paradise, hell, ritual purification, and prayer.
Science of Ḥadīth Criticism
By the time these collections had been completed a science of ḥadīth criticism had developed, the purpose of which was to determine the authenticity of ḥadīth attributed to the Prophet and to his companions and to preserve the corpus from alteration or falsification. The scholars verified each report with a chain of authorities (sg., isnād), going back, insofar as it was possible, to the Prophet himself. In order to decide on the degree of authenticity of a text, traditionists examined the chains of transmission from three points of view: that of the number of transmitters (sg., rāwī), ranging from a great many persons, representing all generations up to the classical compilers, narrating a single report, so that its authenticity was absolutely assured (a mutawātir ḥadītir), to a limited number of narrators, and even to a single chain (āḥād ḥadīth); that of the credibility of the transmitters, which consideration gave rise to an extensive biographical investigation in which the individual narrators were judged according to their personal qualities and professional achievements (ʿilm al-rijāl, science of the sources of information); that of the continuity of the chains, ranging from an uninterrupted isnād (musnad, supported) going back to the Prophet, to chains presenting various kinds of lacunae.
The nature of the ḥadīth text (matn) constituted another criterion for testing the authenticity of the material. Scholars suspected reports that were illogical, exaggerated, or of a fantastic or repulsive character, or that contradicted the Qurʿān. They called attention to a common practice of fabricating ḥadīth (waḍʿ) carried out by those who propagated false teachings, but also by teachers of the truth who sought by inventing ḥadīth to expose heresy. Still others spread false ḥadīth for personal advantage or to express zealous piety. A voluminous literature emerged because of concern for the matn: works dealing with the historical context of ḥadīth lexicographical studies of difficult words, the study of texts which were abrogated by other ḥadīth, the explanation of apparent contradictions found in authentic ḥadīth, and the so-called “divine ḥadīth” (ḥadīth qudsī), a category of material in which the Prophet assumed the role of transmitter and reported sayings of God himself. Matncriticism also included discussion by scholars of the comparative value of reporting ḥadīth word for word as opposed to transmitting reports by their meaning only. Both of these tendencies are seen in the collections, and, as a result, many variant readings of texts exist. Although the authority of hadīth in the community is very great, its inspiration is considered to be of a lower degree than that of the Qurʿān, which is believed to be the very word of God.
Muslims use three terms of a general nature to assess the relative validity of ḥadīth texts: ṣaḥīḥ(sound), the most acceptable; ḥasan (good), somewhat below the first in excellence; and ḍaʿīf(weak). Scholars usually apply these terms in a relative way, depending upon the type of criteria that are used to judge the ḥadīth.
Another aspect of ḥadīth science is the technique of transmission. With the passage of time the number of transmitters increased enormously. Measures of control emerged to ensure that ḥadīthwere properly passed on from teacher to students or from scholar to scholar. The manuals describe eight ways whereby people could become accredited transmitters of the ḥadīth material that they learned. These mechanisms of control are applied in cases ranging from a most direct and personal exchange between teacher and student to the situation of a scholar who might discover a previously unknown or neglected written collection by a respected authority, and be authorized to transmit it.
Throughout the history of Islam the Qurʿān and the ḥadīth have functioned together to shape the life of the community worldwide. Ḥadīth provide the basic sources for the biography (sīrah) of the prophet Muḥammad, filling in details regarding events mentioned briefly in the Qurʿān and providing a wealth of information on the personality, the family, and the career of the Prophet. Also Muḥammad ’s example in word and deed, as recorded in the ḥadīth, helps Muslims to interpret the Qurʿān by pointing out the circumstances in which portions of the Book were revealed, by giving the meanings of obscure verses and words, and by recounting incidents in which the Qurʿānic texts were applied to situations in life.
As the record of the sunnah, or example of the Prophet, the ḥadīth literature is one of the sources of Islamic law (sharīʿah). How legal thinking evolved in the community is a complex question, but it is clear that by the early ninth century CEḥadīth were officially accepted as a basic source of law. Many of the collections of ḥadīth are arranged according to the subject matter of jurisprudence ( fiqh), thus showing that these compilations early became the tools of the legal profession.
‘To return to the first function of ḥadīth, that of preserving the record of the Prophet ’s biography, this element is of greater scope than a merely formal sīrah. The vast number of supplicatory prayers, exhortations, theological statements, practical counsels, words of encouragement and comfort, warnings, and predictions contained in the ḥadīth have always served to direct the piety of Muslims, to provide an overall framework for reflection and practice, all the more significant because by it the Qurʿān is, so to speak, embodied and exemplified in the flesh of the Prophet and his companions.
Ḥadīth have continued their multiple functions in the Muslim community through the centuries, and no one today doubts that they retain their place of supreme importance in the religious consciousness of Muslims. The formal study of ḥadīth has continued, too, although, after the period of the classical collections and the codification of rules for judging authenticity and for transmission of reports, the style of research naturally changed. Scholars examined the “Six Books” from every angle, wrote commentaries on them, gathered selected material from them for smaller, more accessible collections, and wrote treatises on all aspects of the science of ḥadīth.
As study of the written collections became more formalized, the place of teaching changed from private homes and mosques to schools dedicated to learning and transmitting the material. Muslim historians describe a certain decline in devotion to ḥadīth research beginning around the twelfth century. It was then that institutes began to be founded called dūr al-ḥadīth (sg., dār; “houses of ḥadīth”); the first was in Damascus, then spreading to many Muslim lands. Until recent centuries, they kept alive a concern for ḥadīth scholarship. In the mid-twentieth century Morocco established a modern Dār al-Ḥadīth in Rabat for graduate study in connection with the university and for research and publication. The modern universities in Muslim countries may include courses on ḥadīth in their departments of sharīʿah, in some of which the methods of the social sciences are beginning to be applied to the study of the literature. Venerable institutions such as Dār al-ʿUlūm in Deoband, India, and al-Azhar in Cairo are centers for ḥadīth studies.
Modern Approaches
In the Arab world, as well as in India and Pakistan, the editing and publishing of ancient manuscripts have been marked features of the present scene. Scholars such as Nabia Abbott and M. M. Azami have opened new perspectives by their investigation of recently discovered material, but, in general, Muslims of today have not gone beyond the treatises and commentaries of ḥadīth scholars from former centuries. A few books are being published on rhetoric in the ḥadīth, continuing an interest that goes back to much earlier times. Ṣubḥī al-Ṣālī (ʿUlūm al-ḥadīth wamuṣsṭalaḥuh; Beirut, 1959) and Nūr al-Dīn ʿIṭr (Manhaj al-naqd fī; ʿulūm al-ḥadīth; Beirut, 1972) are representatives of a number of writers who have composed thoughtful modern restatements of the ancient manuals of ḥadīthscience. They do not propose any radically new course for research, but their works show some sensitivity to modern problems. By far the most serious issue with regard to ḥadīth themselves is the attack on their authenticity. The attack has been made from two main quarters and from two different motivations.
From one side, the Orientalists, headed by Ignácz Goldziher and Joseph Schacht, called into question the attribution of ḥadīth to the Prophet and the reliability of the chains of transmission. They did so in the interest of scientific historical research. Muslims have almost unanimously rejected the orientalists ’ critique, but only a few have gone beyond negative counterattacks. Fuat Sezgin (Buhârîʿnin kaynaklari: hakkinda araştirmalar; Istanbul, 1956) has done original work on the written sources of al-Bukhārī, in partial refutation of the orientalists’ positions. The critics have pointed out that Muslim ḥadīth scholars through the centuries dwelt almost exclusively upon the evaluation of the isnād (chain of authorities) to the neglect of the matn (text). Nūr al-Dīn ʿIṭr takes this criticism seriously in the work cited above, and he proposes a new enterprise of research in which equal attention is given to matn and isnād. He points out that the canons of matn criticism have always existed. Modern research in the direction that he suggests would involve simply the reestablishment of the equilibrium needed in an integral program.
From another side, some Muslim reformers have called ḥadīth into question as a part of their struggle to overcome taqlīd (slavish conformity to ways of the past) and to promote the use of reason. Sayyid Aḥmad Khān (d. 1898) in India, Muḥammad ʿAbduh (d. 1905), Muḥammad Rashīd Riḍā (1935) in Egypt, and others wrote with varying degrees of forcefulness to decry the way traditional Muslim thinking had refused to apply a rigorous critique to the ḥadīth literature. Their writings influenced others, and one, Maḥmūd Abū Rayyah, published a highly critical book in 1958 (Adwāʿ ʿalā al-sunnah al-muḥammadīyah, Cairo) that provoked much discussion in the Middle East. G. H. A. Juynboll has written a useful account (The Authenticity of the Tradition Literature: Discussions in Modern Egypt; Leiden, 1969) of the course of these and other exchanges among the intellectual elite. However sharp the attacks may have been there was no basic opposition to ḥadīth. Critics only wanted Muslims to be more discerning in their acceptance of material attributed to the Prophet. As yet, however, no comprehensive program has emerged for a revival in ḥadīth study along the lines proposed by the reformers.
In the 1990s Islamic political and ideological movements were in the ascendancy. The theoreticians of these parties used ḥadīth to support their arguments without taking the time to discuss the problem of how to approach the literature. Among the masses, attachment to the ḥadīth constitutes a veritable ethos, and popular leaders depend on carefully chosen ḥadīth texts to give prophetic authority to their directives.
A few voices give promise of new directions in ḥadīth research. They represent no movement, no school of thought, but their views are respected by many. Fazlur Rahman (d. 1988), a Pakistani who spent many years at the University of Chicago, points out the crucial fact that ḥadīth provide the only access Muslims have to Muḥammad and the Qurʿān. To facilitate this access for the present generation, Fazlur Rahman feels that scholars should study, using modern techniques, the connections between Muḥammad and the early Muslim community, between the evolution of thought and practice and the growth of ḥadīth (see his Islam; 2d ed., Chicago and London, 1979, pp. 66, 67).
The Algerian philosopher Mohammed Arkoun, of Paris, describes ḥadīth as a “cultural expansion” of the phenomenon of Holy Scripture (Qurʿān); as such it is far more than an intellectual achievement. To understand it adequately requires an integrated approach taking into account both the rational development of the community and its creative imagination (see his “The Notion of Revelation: From Ahl al-Kitāb to the Societies of the Book,” Die Welt des Islams28 [1988]: 75–76).
Modern technology has facilitated the cataloging and publication of manuscripts that have lain unused for centuries. Also Muslims are using the computer to gain better physical access to the thousands of reports that make up ḥadīth collections. One of the most concrete results of several recent international conferences on ḥadīth and sīrah has been to put in motion a project to computerize ḥadīth. In 1991M. M. al-Azami reported (“A Note on Work in Progress on Computerization of Ḥadīth,” Journal of Islamic Studies, 2, no. 1 [Jan. 1991]: 86–91) that prototype CD-ROM discs were produced in 1990 containing the material of seven collections of ḥadīth and translations of selected texts in ten languages, seventy-five thousand ḥadīth in all.
Transmission
One of the most important arenas of Muslim women’s religious education across much of Islamic history is the transmission of reports ascribed to Prophet Muḥammad (ḥadīth). Women’s activities in this field fluctuated over time in response to currents in social, political, and intellectual history, and this history is fertile ground for exploring key issues, such as the development of law and ḥadīth as distinct fields of religious learning, methods of ḥadīth education, and the history of the ʿulamāʾ as a social class. This article provides a historical overview and discusses some of the salient characteristics of women’s ḥadīth transmission. The focus here is on Sunnī women’s involvement, which is better documented and more widespread than in Shīʿī communities.
Historical Overview
The trajectory of women’s participation as ḥadīth transmitters over the course of Islamic history is a striking one with dramatic fluctuations. Female Companions (those belonging to the first generation of Muslims) set an important precedent, signaling the acceptability of this type of public role for Muslim women. Depending on the sources consulted, approximately 12 percent to 20 percent of female Companions are credited with narrating reports on the authority of Prophet rMuḥammad. While most of these women are known for narrating only a handful of reports, some were prolific transmitters. Additionally a few female Companions are said to have exercised influence not just in the narration of reports, but also in the derivation of law. ʿĀʾisha bint Abī Bakr (d. 678), the youngest of Muḥammad’s nine wives, who was also reputed to be his favorite one, is among the most prolific of all Companion-Narrators. Ibn Ḥanbal (d. 855) lists close to 2,400 reports on her authority. Umm Salamah (d. ca. 679), another of Muḥammad’s wives, is credited with close to 375 reports. In addition to the well-known legal discernment and rulings of ʿĀʾishah, historical records attest to the contributions of women such as Fāṭima bint Qays, known for asserting her own precedent to influence the outcome of debates about the rights of divorced women.
Following the Companion generation, women’s involvement as transmitters declined dramatically, staying low or nonexistent for nearly two and a half centuries in the generations immediately after the Companions. However, their participation was welcome anew beginning around the mid-tenth century. The Ayyūbid and Mamlūk eras (c. tenth to sixteenth centuries) witnessed high levels of women’s active engagement as students and acclaimed teachers of compilations of ḥadīth in a range of subjects, including law, history, and asceticism. Though women’s presence in this arena declined again during the Ottoman period and thereafter, this decline was less severe, and ḥadīthlearning persists as an important field for women’s religious learning up to the modern era.
Contrary to popular understanding, Islamic law does not proscribe women’s religious learning. On the contrary the pursuit of religious knowledge is strongly encouraged for both sexes. In this respect Muslim women, particularly of early and classical Islam, appear to have been better positioned than women of other major religious traditions, such as Hinduism, Judaism, and Christianity, each of which restricted women’s access to religious learning. Islamic law, on the other hand, does regulate areas that influence women’s mobility and public participation such as male-female interactions and women’s travel when unaccompanied by male guardians. While these prescriptions may negatively influence women’s access to education, the correlation is not constant or predictable. The widespread involvement of women as students and teachers of ḥadīth during the classical eras belies the notion that Islamic legal norms concerning travel and interaction between the genders unilaterally hampered women’s access to education. Women’s successful engagement in this arena, as well as their marginalization during some eras of Islamic history, has various causes. For example, the professionalization of ḥadīth learning, beginning around the eighth century, led to a contraction in opportunities for women. In the classical era the popularization of ḥadīth learning, particularly after collections such as the Ṣaḥīḥs of al-Bukhārī and Muslim received recognition and widespread authority, created new opportunities for women to learn and teach ḥadīth. These historical developments are examined in greater detail in some of the works cited in the bibliography below.
Methods And Curriculum Of Ḥadīth Study
Ḥadīth transmission prevailed as an accommodating area for women’s religious learning due to its flexible and less formalized methodologies of learning and teaching and also due to the fact that, unlike fields such as law and theology, it did not require long periods of tutelage between teachers and students. Memorization and the faithful reproduction of individual reports or compilations were the primary skills required of most ḥadīth transmitters. Knowledge of Arabic, its morphology, syntax, and grammar, were desirable but not absolute prerequisites. Indeed, for the generation of female Companions, they only needed to have met the Prophet and have relayed information about their interaction to knowledge-seekers eager to model their behavior according to the Prophet’s practices. While women of subsequent generations were likely literate, especially since they tended to belong to families of the scholarly elite, they would not all have received advanced training in areas such as law, exegesis, or theology. In this regard it is important to note that women excelled primarily in the reproduction or faithful transmission of texts, but were not similarly recognized in the commentarial tradition of ḥadīth scholarship. This area required a more complex understanding not just of Arabic, but also of history, law, Qurʾānic exegesis, and theology. While women of the educated elite were exposed to these areas of education, they were nonetheless not known for authoring works that required them to creatively draw on their knowledge to produce authoritative interpretations.
The pedagogy of ḥadīth learning varied considerably depending on the age of the student and his/her historical contexts. Historical records indicate that girls and women either studied texts in domestic settings with their relatives (often their male guardians) or attended assemblies for learning ḥadīth. These assemblies were at times coeducational and were held in a variety of locations including madāris, mosques, mausoleums, and private homes. In the classical era very young girls (some of them infants) were brought into the presence of learned aged shaykhs and shaykhas to receive certification (ijāzas) to transmit traditions on their authority. These children would be expected to learn and master the works later on in life and transmit them accurately. The practice of granting al-ijāzah to youth (both male and female) by elderly teachers was one means of assuring shorter chains of transmission back to Muḥammad or to the compiler of a given work. This custom appears to have proliferated in the Mamlūk period and was particular to ḥadīth learning among both men and women. Another feature of ḥadīth learning which rendered it more amenable to women’s participation was that there does not appear to have been a set curriculum or course of study that needed to be mastered in order for a woman to excel in this arena. As mentioned earlier, advanced knowledge of Arabic was likely particularly for acclaimed female transmitters of the classical eras. However, women could attain enviable reputations in this arena on the basis of their transmission of a limited number of works, particularly if those works were major collections, such as the Ṣaḥīḥs of al-Bukhārī or Muslim.
The practice of ḥadīth transmission has evolved considerably in the modern period. The oral rendition of texts is no longer the primary means for guaranteeing their authenticity and accurate transmission particularly as printing methods have evolved to minimize errors in reproduction of these texts. Nevertheless the oral performance and memorization of ḥadīth collections, especially the Ṣaḥīḥ compilations, persists as a means of accruing spiritual blessings (barakāt). In this vein Muslim women continue to devote themselves to the study and teaching of ḥadīth and its auxiliary sciences. The Madrasat al-Ḥadīth al-Nuriyya in Damascus attests the persistent importance of this area of learning. Devoted to teaching women the sciences of ḥadīth, law, and Qurʾān, the school was established in the early twenty-first century, and fulfills the needs of scores of both full-time and part-time matriculants. Moreover, as in the early and classical periods, women thrive outside of institutional frameworks and continue to avail themselves of informal networks of learning throughout the Muslim world in order to acquire mastery as ḥadīth scholars.
Women And Gender In The Hadith
“Ḥadīth (pl. aḥādīth)” refers to the collected reports of the Prophet Muḥammad’s words and deeds as recounted by his wives and Companions. The ḥadīth are in the form of stories, reports, or traditions, and serve a variety of functions in Islamicate culture and Islamic jurisprudence: some lend context to broad Qurʾānic mandates, or provide commentary on the specific doctrines revealed in the Qurʾān, while others deal with the mundane aspects of everyday life and conduct, providing a window into the normative practices of the Prophet and his Companions. The collection and transmission of ḥadīth in this way has assisted Muslims in modeling their own lives after the example, or sunnah, set by the Prophet during his lifetime. Ḥadīth are therefore an important basis for Islamic law and jurisprudence, second only to the Qurʾān.
Aḥādīth were primarily preserved orally until the systematic, written compilation of aḥādīth began in earnest in the ninth and tenth centuries. These written collections, which Orientalists often refer to as the Prophetic “Traditions,” were recorded in six canonical compendia, all of which were compiled by men. Even so, nearly 15 percent of all aḥādīth in these official volumes can be sourced to the Prophet’s wife, ʿĀʾishah (612–678), whose contribution to ḥadīth collections outweighs even that of that of ʿAlī, the Fourth Caliph and the first male convert to Islam. As the Qurʾān and the sunnahform the two principle sources of Islamic law, Islam is one of very few living religions to include women’s voices in canonical texts, in legal source material, and among the voices of “official” history.
In spite of the inclusion of female transmitters, the ḥadīth include a spectrum of attitudes about gender and women, some of which are problematic from a contemporary perspective. The traditions include a report of the Prophet characterizing women as the most harmful temptation left to the Muslim community. In another ḥadīth, angels are said to weep when a woman leaves her husband sexually frustrated. Other aḥādīth assert that women are morally or religiously defective, sources of fitnah, unclean, bound to obey their husbands unquestioningly, and intellectually unfit for political rule.
These misogynist aḥādīth, however, make up a very small portion of the seventy thousand total. Many of them further conflict with dozens of aḥādīth that clearly bestow full humanity upon women, urge husbands to deal with their wives with gentleness, affirm that the Prophet accepted the testimony of a woman as equal to that of a man, elevate mothers above fathers, indicate that many Muslim women went unveiled during the Prophet’s lifetime, and make it clear that the Prophet himself often answered to and asked counsel of his wives.
As Fatima Mernissi and Khaled Abou El Fadl have also noted, many of the most problematic aḥādīth for women are sourced to Abū Hurayrah (603–681), a convert to Islam who became a Muslim three years before the death of the Prophet. In spite of his late conversion, Abu Hurayrah is responsible for transmitting more of the Prophet’s traditions than most of the companions, including those who had lived with or known the Prophet for decades. Abū Hurayrah appeared to be a controversial figure even when he was alive, and other Companions would frequently correct him or note that he was contradicting himself. According to one report, the Prophet’s wife ʿĀʾishah summoned him to come and see her, and she told him, “Abū Hurayrah! What are these reports from the Prophet that we keep hearing that you transmit to the people! Tell me, did you hear anything other than what we heard, or see anything other than what we observed?” He is reported to have responded, “O mother, you were busy with your kohl and with beautifying yourself for the Prophet, but I—nothing kept me from away from him.” (Abou El Fadl, 2001, p. 216). These and other issues initially led jurists to regard Abū Hurayrah as an unreliable source. Subsequently, however, political issues factored into classical Sunnī jurists’ categorization of Abū Hurayrah as reliable.
Women factor into ḥadīth literature as historical figures in addition to being transmitters. Although the Prophet’s wives never achieved the status of the Prophet himself, they eventually attained a lofty status in the annals of “official” Islamic history as “Mothers of the Believers.” Classical hagiographers, however, frequently presented the Prophet’s wives as petty, jealous, or irrational creatures on the one hand and examples of ideal womanhood on the other. The Prophet’s wives were thus positioned as archetypal figures who glorified domesticity at best, and legitimated the continued subjugation of all women at worst.
In the late nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, social reformers such as Zaynab al-Ghazālī (1917–2005), Moḥammad Ḥusayn Haykal (1888–1956), and Bint al-Shati (1913–1998) reframed ḥadīth literature, presenting the Prophet’s wives as models for the modern Muslim woman to emulate. Other reformers, the most notable of whom may be Shaykh Muḥammad ʿAbduh (1849–1905), further suggested that all Muslims were implicitly authorized to rely on their own intellectual faculties when engaging in textual interpretation, initiating a wave of scholarship that revisited the ḥadīth as a source of women’s liberation rather than a justification for their subjugation and relegation to the domestic sphere.
Decades later contemporary intellectuals and academics have continued this tradition of self-authorized epistemology, turning to Qurʾān and ḥadīth literature to advocate for women’s rights within an Islamic framework. Scholars such as Asma Barlas (2002) and Barbara Stowasser (1994) have argued that these misogynist aḥādīth, rather than the Qurʾān, are responsible for introducing misogyny into the normative practices of Islam, as well as into the epistemological assumptions grounding Islamic jurisprudence. Wiebke Walther (1981) further points out that some of the objectionable aḥādīth include anecdotes about towns that had not even been founded during Muḥammad’s lifetime, suggesting that ḥadīth literature captured various attitudes in opinions within the broader Muslim community, in addition to recording the sunnah of the Prophet.
At present ḥadīth are still considered an important source of revelation, and Sunnī compendia continue to regard Abū Hurayrah—and his gendered aḥādīth—as reliable.
The Hadith
621 – 007c
https://discerning-Islam.org
Last Update: 04/2021
Copyright © 2017-2021 Institute for the Study of Islam (ISI) | Institute-for-the-study-of-Islam-org | Discerning Islam | Discerning-Islam.org | Commentaries on Islam | © 2020 Tips Of The Iceberg | © 1978 marketplace-values.org | Values In The Marketplace | are considered “Trade Marks and Trade Names” ®️ by the Colorado Secretary of State. All Rights Reserved.
