Journal Article - Al Shafi by Aisha Musa

Al-Shāfi'ī, the Ḥadīth, and the Concept of the Duality of Revelation
Author(s): AISHA Y. MUSA

Source: Islamic Studies, Vol. 46, No. 2 (Summer 2007), pp. 163-197
Published by: Islamic Research Institute, International Islamic University, Islamabad
Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/20839066 .
Accessed: 22/06/2014 15:12
Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at .
http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp
.
JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide range of
content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new forms
of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.
Islamic Research Institute, International Islamic University, Islamabad is collaborating with JSTOR to
digitize, preserve and extend access to Islamic Studies.
http://www.jstor.org
This content downloaded from 130.113.111.210 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 15:12:59 PM

All use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions
Islamic Studies 46:2 (2007) pp. 163-197
Al-Shafi% theHadith, and theConcept of theDuality

ofRevelation*
AISHA Y. MUSA
Abstract
This article examines al-Sh?fiYs most important contribution to both thefoundations
of Islamic jurisprudence and to Islamic thought in general as we know it today: his
doctrines regarding theHad?th. Al-Sh?fi? laid thefoundations which eventually
establishedHad?th as the second revelatory source of law and guidance. His Kit?b
Jim?* al-'Ilm and al-Ris?lah are the earliest and most important extant works that
established the authority of the Had?th. A close examination of these works
demonstrates the early opposition to the authority of theHadith and the responses
which overcame that opposition. The aim of this examination is to better understand
this crucial contribution to the status o/Hadith in Islam.
<o>
Muhammad ibn Idris al-Sh?fi'?(d. 204/820) occupies a very importantplace in

the history of Islamic doctrine and law.Muslim and non-Muslim scholarsof
Islamic history and law have recognized his contributions and praised his
Al-Shafi'i's status as a aim was to build
accomplishments. legal theorist whose
a comprehensive jurisprudentialsystem iswidely
recognized by both. He is
considered the eponymous founderof one of the four survivingSunn? schools
of law, and has been called the "masterarchitect"of Islamic legal theory.1
Wael
Hallaq has demonstrated that recognitionof al-Sh?fiTs status as the premier
theoristof Islamic jurisprudencecame in latergenerations rather thanduring
his lifetime.2The posthumous nature of his statushas not detracted from it in
*
This article formspart of the discussion in the academy about the authority and authenticity
of Sunnah/Hadith forwell over a century. In view of the subject's vital importance, Islamic
Studieswould be willing to consider publication of other articleson one or the other aspect of it
aswell as comments on thepresent article. Editor.
1
N.J. Coulson, A History ofIslamicLaw (Edinburgh:EdinburghUniversity Press, 1994), 53.
2
Wael B. Hallaq, "Was Al-Shafi'i theMaster Architect of Islamic Jurisprudence?,"International
Journal ofMiddle East Studies,no. 25 (1993), 587-605.

AISHA Y. MUSA
164
anyway. On the contrary,al-Sh?fiTs theories and arguments still form the

bedrock of traditionalSunn? jurisprudence.
Al-Sh?fiTs overall theoryof law has been addressed in detail by scholars
such as Joseph Schacht (d. 1969),N. J.Coulson, Wael Hallaq, Norman Calder,
and JosephLowry, and furtherdiscussion of that is beyond the scope of this
article.This articlewill examine in detail what is perhaps al-Sh?fiTsmost
importantcontributionnot only to the foundationsof Islamic jurisprudence,
but also to Islamic thought in general aswe know it today: thedoctrine he is
said to have articulatedregardingtheHadith. Hallaq recognizes that the status
ofHadith was al-Sh?fiTsmain concern, and thathis greatestachievementwas
in establishingits importanceas an indispensablesource of law.3Indeed, itwas
arguments attributedto al-Sh?fi'?that laid the foundationswhich eventually
established theHadith as the second revelatorysource of law and guidance for
thevastmajority ofMuslims. He laysout his argumentsinKit?b Jim?' a -
and al-Ris?lah, which are the earliest and most important extant works
intendedto establish the authorityof theHadith. A close examinationof those
argumentswill demonstrate the early opposition to the use and authorityof
theHadith as portrayed in theseworks and the responseswhich eventually
overcame thatopposition. The aim of thisexamination is to betterunderstand
thiscrucial contributionto the statusofHadith in Islam.
During al-Sh?fiTs lifetime,themajor collections ofHadith had yet to be
compiled. However, reports about the Prophet (peace be on him) and his
were in circulation. A close examination of the relevant
Companions clearly
-
portions of Kit?b Jim?' a and al-Ris?lah will reveal what al-Sh?fi'I
considered to be the most importantpoints relating to the issue of the
authority of theHadith and also offer some insight into the views of his
opponents.
In his The Origins ofMuhammadanJurisprudence^ JosephSchacht proposes
a chronology of al-Sh?fiTsworks thatplaces thewriting of theRis?lah before
thatofKit?b Jim?' al-(Ilm>which he refersto as TreatiseIV.4Norman Calder
has argued for a radical redatingof both theRis?lah and Kit?b al-Umm (in
which we most often findKit?b Jim?' al-Ilm). Calder suggeststhatbothworks
were produced, not by al-Sh?fi'ihimself,but by adherentsof theSh?fi'? school
in the late third/ninthor early fourth/tenthcenturies, a century after al
Sh?fiTs death.5 Although Calder disagreeswith the traditionallv accepted
3
Ibid., 592-593.
4
Joseph Schacht, The Ongins ofMuhammadan Junsprudence (Oxford: Claredon Press, 1967)
330.
5
Norman Calder, Studies inEarlyMuslim JuHsprudence(New York: Oxford University Press,
1993), 84.

THE HAD/ ,AND THE CONCEPT OF THE DUALITY OF REVELATION
AL-SH?FII,
165
dating and authorship of theRis?lah andKit?b al-Umm, he accepts that "the

Sh?fi'? schoolwas ahead of other schools in devising hermeneutic arguments
thatwould assure the accommodation of the law to a growing setof Prophetic
hadith."6Thus, while he disagreeswith the dating and authorship of these
works, he does not disagreewith their importancein relation to the authority
of theHadith. Joseph Lowry has since offered compelling evidence that
challengesCalder's "sensational redating"7of theseworks and that is "broadly
consistentwith their traditionaldatings and ascriptions."8The questions of
dating and authorship are of secondary importance to the question at hand.
Whether one accepts Schacht's chronology or Calder's regardingdating and
there is no that these works are the earliest extant
authorship, question
articulationsof the arguments thatwould eventually ensure forHadith the
statusand authorityof divine revelationsecond only to theQur'?n.
Belief in a duality of revelation is also central toRabbinic Judaism,and

the concept in both Judaism and Islam sharesmany of the same aspects. In
Judaism,God is said to have revealedboth a "written"and an "oral" law, both
ofwhich were given toMoses at Sinai.9The Written Law is contained in the
Torah scrolls.The Oral Law was recorded in theMishnah and theGemara,
which togethermake up theTalmud. The Talmud and various otherworks
known asMidrash10 servemuch the same functionthat theHadith have come
to serve in Islam. Like Hadith theOral Law contains rulings related to the
details of such issues as ritual purity,prayer,marriage, divorce, etc.,which
are
complement the teachingsof thewritten Torah.11 In Islam, theHadith
understood to have much the same role in relation to theQur'an. Also, like
theHadith, thematerial in theTalmud was passed on orally for an extended
was fiercedebate
period of timebefore being committedtowriting, and there
over the appropriatenessof doing so.12 While there are a number of similarities
between theOral Law in Judaism and theHadith, there is a very important
difference.While the Oral Law in Judaism incorporates the teachings of
various rabbis and sages throughout Jewish history as part of the divine
6
Ibid.
7
Joseph Lowry, "The Legal Hermeneutics ofAl-Sh?fi'i and IbnQutayba: A Reconsideration,"
IslamicLaw and Society,11:1 (2004), 2.
8
Ibid., 41.
9
David Kraemer, aThe Formation ofRabbinic Canon: Authority and Boundaries," Journal of
Biblical Literature, 110: 4 (1991), 613-30.
10
"Oral Law,* The Encyclopedia ofJudaism (New York: Facts on File, Inc., 2006), 367-368.
11
Hermann L. Strack, Introduction to theTalmud andMidrash (New York: Atheneum, 1969),
29ff.
12
Ibid., 12ff.

AISHA Y. MUSA
166
revelation,13 al-Sh?fi'? reserves status for the words, actions, and

revelatory
tacit approvals ofMuhammad (peace be on him) himself.The position of the
Prophet (peace be on him) as thepractical exemplarof how to understandand
implementthe teachingsof theQur'an is central to his argumentfornecessity
of acceptingHad?th as a formof divine revelation.14
Both Kit?b Jirn?*al-'Ilm and theRis?lah contain a detailed discussion of

the religious obligation to follow the Prophet (peace be on him), which
togetherwith al-Sh?fiTs arguments for the duality of revelation would
become the basis for theobligation to acceptProphetic reports.Kit?b Jim?'al
presents al-Sh?fiTs debates with those who reject Prophetic reports
(khabar/akhb?r),either in total,or in part. It is a short treatiseincluded in al
Sh?fiTs Kit?b alUmm. The Ris?lah is a treatiseon the principles of religious
jurisprudence. It is also part of Kit?b alUmm, but has come to us as an
independentbopk aswell. Some parts of eachwork are in the formof debates
between al-Sh?fi'? and unidentified interlocutors,while other parts are
as al-Sh?fiTs own direct statements.
presented
Drawing on theworks of Ab? Bakr Ahmad b. Al-Husayn al-Bayhaq?

(d. 458/1066) and IbnHajar Ahmad b.Ah al-'Asqal?n? (373-852/1372-1448),
Majid Khadduri maintains thatal-Sh?fi'? wrote two versions of theRis?lah, the
firstwhile in Baghdad (194/810-198/814) and the second while in Egypt
(198/814-204/820), and that only the second Ris?lah has survived.15 Kit?b
was inEgypt,
Jim?(al-'Ilm is also believed to have beenwrittenwhile al-Sh?fi'?
but there is some question as to which work was written first.Khadduri leans
toward the view that theRis?lah was "writtenor revised as the last of al
Sh?fiTs works."16
Kit?bJim?cal-Ilm
Kit?b Jim?*al'llm formspart of themulti-volumeKit?b al-Umm. Inmodern
print editions, it is the eighthof thirteentreatisesthatmake up the seventh
volume of theUmm. Perhaps because it is one part of a collectedwork, itdoes
not beginwith the customarybenedictionpraisingGod and invokingblessings
on the Prophet (peace be on him) that normally introduces independent
works. Though it generally comes to us as part of Kit?b al-Umm> an
13
Kraemer, "The Formation ofRabbinic Camon: Authority and Boundaries," 618.
14
Muhammad ibn Idris al-Sh?fi%al-Ris?lah, ed. Ahmad Muhammad Sh?kir (Cairo: al-B?b? al
Halab?, 1940), 78-79.
15
Majid Khadduri, "Translator's Introduction,"al-Sh?fiVsRisala: Treatise on theFoundations of
IslamicJurisprudence,second edition (Cambridge,UK: IslamicTexts Society, 2003), 22-23.
16
Ibid., 37.

AL-SH?Fll, 167
independent version of it was published in Cairo in 1940.17The work is

relativelyshort and consistsof an introductoryparagraph that is followed by
four sections: "The Section Relating The Doctrine of The Group Which
Rejects All [Traditional]Reports" (B?bHik?yat Qawl al-T?'ifab aliati Raddat
al-Akhb?rKullah?); "Section Relating the Doctrine of Those Who Reject
Isolated Reports" (B?bHik?yat Qawl man Radda Khabar al-Kh?ssah); "An
Explanation of the Ordinances of God Most High" (Bay?n Far?'id All?h
Ta'?l?); "Section on Fasting" (B?b al-Sawrr?)"Each of these sectionswill be
examined in detail below to show not only what each section contains, but
also how all four sections fittogetherto showcase thebest andmost successful
argumentsfor the authorityof theHad?th.
The logical organization of thework may not always be readilyapparent
to a readerof the treatise.In his 1999University of Pennsylvania dissertation,
"The Legal-Theoretical Content of the Ris?la of Muhammad B. Idris al
Sh?fi'?," Joseph Lowry describesKit?b Jim?( al-llm as "a short, somewhat
are discussed, and inwhich
rambling dialogue inwhich a variety of topics
order is difficultto discern."18Al-Sh?fiTs sometimes-tortuouslanguage and
However, a closer examination leads to a
styledoes give this initial impression.
differentview. While the work is indeed somewhat rambling, its order
becomes easier to discernwhen we consider thatal-Sh?fiTspurpose inwriting
it is to establishboth the binding scripturalauthorityof theHad?th aswell as
theirnecessity inmatters of religiouspractice and law.
In order to better appreciate al-Sh?fiTswriting style it is importantto
rememberthathe enjoys a reputationas amaster ofArabic prosewho excelled
in theuse of language.19The complex use of language that typifiestheArabic
time was a mark of erudition and eloquence, but to the
prose of al-Sh?fiTs
modern reader it often seems loquacious and verbose. Ibn Hajar al-'Asqal?n?
one of al-Sh?fiTs students as al-Sh?fiTs to an
quotes comparing language
intoxicant or enchantment and saying that they never heard an error from
him. The same author also quotes al-Rabi* ibn Sulaym?n (d. 270/884),who
transcribedand transmittedal-Sh?fiTsworks afterhis death, as saying:
If you saw al-Sh?fi'i and the beauty of his explanations, you would be amazed. If
he had composed these books in the Arabic that he used in debates with us, it
17
Muhammad b. Idr?s al-Sh?fi'I,Jim?' al-'Ilm, ed. Ahmad Muhammad Sh?kir (Cairo:Matba'at
al-Ma'?rif, 1940).
18 . Idr?s al
Joseph E. Lowry, "The legal-theoreticalcontent of the Risala of Muhammad
Sh?fiT (Ph.D. diss.,University of Pennsylvania, 1999), 8.
19
'Abd al-Halim al-Jindi,al-Im?m al-Sh?fil:N?sir al-Sunnab wa Wad? al-Us?l (Cairo: Dar al
Kit?b al-4Arabi li 'l-Tib?'ahwa l-Nashr, 1967), 70.

AISHA Y. MUSA
168
would be impossible to read them because of his eloquence and recondite

expressions. But he was striving tomake his writing clear to themasses.20
Despite his effortsat clarity,al-Sh?fi'fswriting is at times complex and

oratorical. This style probably served him well in debates, but his writing
oftendefies succinct translation.The introductoryparagraphofKit?b Jim?'al
Ilm21 is an example of thisand typicalof al-Sh?fiTs rhetoricalstyle.
I have not heard anyone whom people considered knowledgeable ? or who

?
considered himself knowledgeable dispute thatGod Almighty and Exalted has
made following the command, and submitting to the judgment of God's
Messenger (peaceand blessingsbe upon him) obligatory,in thatGod Almighty
and Exalted has ordained that everyone other than him [theMessenger] only
followhim, and thattheonly saying(qawl) thatmust be adheredto in every
situation are the Book of God or the Sunnah of His Messenger (peace and
blessings be upon him). Everything other than these two is subordinate to them.
Indeed, God theMost High has made accepting reports from God's Messenger
us and for those before and after
(peace and blessings be upon him) obligatory for
us. No one disputes the obligation and duty of accepting reports from God's
Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him), except a faction whose doctrine I
will describe, ifGod Most High wills.... Furthermore, the adherents of kal?m are
clearly divided about affirming the validity of reports from God's Messenger
some others whom
(peace and blessings be upon him); the general public
considers jurists are also divided about it.As for some of them, they are excessive
in followingblindly,inmaking lightof rationalinquiry,inheedlessnessand in
hastening to gain [popular] authority. Iwill give you examples that indicate what
is behind the doctrines of each group of which I am aware, ifGod Most High
wills."22
As the above indicates,refutingtheview of thosewho rejectProphetic

reports is themain purpose ofKit?b Jim?' alllm. In the introductional-Sh?fi'?
sets the tone for the rest of thework andmakes his position clear from the
beginning:Knowledgeable people agree that obeying theMessenger is an
obligation and themajority of people understand that this entails accepting
Prophetic reports. Only a minority disputes the necessity of accepting
Prophetic reportsand even theydifferamong themselveson the issue.
Al-Shafi'? uses theword qawl,meaning somethingthat is said, to referto
"theBook ofGod or the Sunnah ofGod's Messenger," declaring thatone or
theother is the only qawl thatmust be adhered to.This terminologyseems to
20
IbnHajr Ahmad b. cAlial-'Asqalan?,Tawal? -Ta's?sliMa'?l?Muhammad ihnld?s> ed. Abu 1
Fida' 'AbdAllah al-Q?di (Beirut:Dar al-Kutub al-'Ilmiyyah, 1986), 96.
21
Muhammad ibn Idris al-Sh?fi'?,Kit?b Jim?' al-llm, inKit?b al-Umm. ed. Mahmud Matraj?
(Beirut:Dar al-Kutub al-'Ilmiyyah, 1993), 7: 460-483.
22
Ibid., 460.

AL-SH?FI'?,
169
assign to the speech of theMessenger a statusmore or less equal to thatof the

speech of God, foreshadowingwhat will be the centrepiece of al-Sh?fiTs
argument in support of the need to accept Prophetic reports,namely the
concept of duality of revelation.
Al-Sh?fi'i also promises to present examples rather than an exhaustive
description of the positions of those who reject Prophetic reports. The
information al-Sh?fi'?presents in the rest of thework and themanner in
which he presents it serve more as a means of showcasing his views than as a
reporton theviews of his opponents.

In the firsttwo sections, al-Sh?fi'?presents the examples in the formof
debates between himself and an unidentifiedmember of each group, rather
than as an expositorydescriptionof thedoctrinesof thesegroups.The debates
highlighthis own argumentsfor the necessityof acceptingProphetic reports
as an authoritativesource of law and guidance. In the last two sectionsof the
work?Explanation of theOrdinances of God the Sublime, and Section on
Fasting?-al-Sh?fi'? discusses specificdetails of theobligatory religiouspractices
of Islam, in furthersupportof thenecessityof acceptingProphetic reports.He
concludes the Section on Fastingwith a briefdiscussion of two ah?dtth,which
he does not mention elsewhere.The firstis a hadith cited by opponents of
Prophetic reports,inwhich theProphet (peace be on him) says that thepeople
should not adhere to anything thathe has allowed or prohibited because he
only allows or prohibits thatwhich has been allowed or prohibited by God.
In rebuttal,al-Sh?fi'?cites a hadith inwhich the Prophet (peace be on him)
warns against thosewho claim to follow only theBook ofGod.23 This brings
thediscussion back to thepoint atwhich itbegan. Together, all four sections
represent the best and most successful arguments put forward by al-Sh?fi'?.
writes about two groups: thosewho
In the firsthalf of thework, al-Sh?fi'?
reject all Prophetic reports and thosewho reject isolated reports.While al
Sh?fi'? refersto thosewho reject all Prophetic reportsas ahi al-kal?m,he does
not identifyany particular group or individualsby name. Throughout Kit?b
Jim?( al- ,he uses the termshadith and khabar (pi. akhb?r) interchangeably
when referringto Prophetic reports,butmost often the latter.
The firstsection, addressingthe doctrine of thosewho reject all reports,
opens with al-Sh?fi'Fsuse of the genericphrase: "q?la Itq?'ilyunsab il? 'l-'ilm
himadhhab ash?bihi..." (Someone consideredknowledgeable in thedoctrine of
his school said to me...).24 It then continues in the "q?la.... fa qultu..." ("He
said...then, I said....") point, counter-point format, a debate format common in
classical Muslim literature.
23
Ibid., 481.
24
Ibid., 460.

AISHA Y. MUSA
170
A similar format is used in the second section,which deals with the

doctrine of those who reject particular reports from individuals with
specialized knowledge (khabaral-kh?ssah).The introduction to this section
confirms that the debate format is indeed a literarydevice used to frameal
Sh?fiTs recollectionsofwhat he considers themost importantpoints in these
discussions, rather than the record of an actual debate:
I do not remember specific individual or group discussions, or everything that

was said to me or that I answered, so that I might recount them; and I have
already exerted great effort in a thorough examination of everything they

presented as evidence, so I will set down some of the things I said and towhom I
said them.25
What al-Sh?fi'?chooses to present of his opponent's views and how he

chooses to present them in the firsthalf of thework appears to serveprimarily
as an opportunity for him to articulatehis rebuttals.The third and fourth
sections then add furthersupportwith a discussion of religiouspractices that,
according to al-Shafi?I,require thedetailsprovided inProphetic reports.Inmy
investigation,I have chosen to follow the formatused in thework, ascribing
the arguments to al-Sh?fi'? and his opponent. Let us now examine the
arguments themselves in greater detail.
Section 1
The Section Relating theDoctrine of theGroup

WhichRejectsAll fTraditional]
Reports
aliati
(B?hHik?yatQawl al-T?yifah Raddat al-Akhb?r
Kullah?)
Al-Sh?fi'? opens the Section relating thedoctrine of thegroup that rejectsall

reports (traditions: akhb?r) with this statement from a "knowledgeable"
representative of that group:
You are an Arab, and the Qur'an was revealed in the

language of your people,
and you have memorized it. It contains the ordinances that God has sent down.
If someone doubts even one letter that is obscure to him, you demand that he
repent, and ifhe does not repent, you kill him. God Almighty and Exalted has
said regarding theQur'an: an explanation of everything.26
Here, al-Sh?fi'?demonstratesthemost importantdoctrinal foundationsof

his opponents' thinking?the absolute certainty that both sides agree that
25
Ibid., 467.
26
Ibid., 460; Qur'?n 16: 89: "We have sent down to you the Scripture as an Explanation of
everything,aGuide, aMercy, andGlad Tidings toMuslims."

THE HAD ITH, AND THE CONCEPT OF THE DUALITY OF REVELATION
AL-SH?RM, 171
believersmust have faithin the textof theQur'?n asGod's scripture,and that

God Himself has declared that the Qur'?n explains everything. The
implication seems clear: the Qur'?n explains everythingand anyone who
doubts that is committing a mortal sin in thinking in the way that the
anonymous rejecter of Hadith has just attributed to al-Sh?fi'? himself.
Moreover, the verse cited implies the completeness and sufficiencyof the
Qur'?n.
Al-Sh?fi'? follows the dramatic opening statementof his challengerwith
on the essential points in the
questions that the latter then asks based
statement.He begins by questioning the typesof distinctionmade by al-Sh?fi'?
among variousQur'?nic injunctions:How can it be permissible to claim that
somethingGod has ordained (shay* faradahu 'llah) is general (c?mm) in one
instance,while it is particular (khass) in another, or that one time the
command (al-amr) is an obligation (fard),while another time it ismerely a
suggestion(dal?lah)}The terms (?mmy khass,al-amr,fard, and dal?lah represent
at
key legal concepts,which al-Sh?fi'?discusses lengthlater inJima(al-'Ilm, and
also in theRis?lah.27By using these terms,al-Sh?fi'?reveals that the concerns
he ascribes to thosewho reject all Prophetic reports are not limited to those
reportsdealingwith matters of belief and religiousdoctrine, but also included
reportsdealingwith expressly legalmatters. It could be argued thatwhat al
Sh?fi'? has presented in this opening essentially exaggerateshis opponents'
objections to the use ofHadith in practical and legalmatters.However, such
an argumentis problematic because of themany indicationsof the existenceof
such objections to theHadith scatteredthroughout the various sources over
the centuries,up to and including the present day.28The evidence of both
earlier and continuingopposition toHadith as a competing source of religious
authority suggests that the opposition to which al-Sh?fi'? is responding in
Kit?bJim?fal-'Ilmwas much as he has portrayed it.
Earlier evidence of opposition to the use of Hadith as a source of
a to be a letter
scripturalauthorityis found in textthatMuslim traditionholds
from theKharijite 'AbdAll?h ibn Ib?d (d. c. 86/705) to theCaliph Abd al
Malik (r. 65/685-86/705) in 76/695.29Cook disagreeswith the dating and
authorship of the letter,arguing for unknown authorship sometime in the
mid-second/eighthcentury.30 The uncertaindating and authorshipof the letter
27 , 460. For a detailed linguisticanalysis of the key religious-legal

Al-Sh?fi'?,Kitab Jama' al-
terminology used by al-Sh?fi'?, Lowry's "The legal-theoreticalcontent of theRisala"
see
28Aisha Musa, "An Examination of Early and Contemporary Muslim Attitudes toward
Y.
Hadith as Ph.D. diss., Harvard University, 2004.
Scripture,"
29
Josefvan Ess, ZwischenHadith und Theologie (Berlin:Walter de Gruyter, 1975), 56.
30
Michael Cook, Early Muslim Dogma: A Source Cridical Study (Cambridge: Cambridge
University Press, 1981), 66-67.

AISHA Y. MUSA
172
does not minimize its import for the early debates over the authorityof the
Had?th, however.Whether itdates from the late first/seventh centuryor the
mid-second/eight century,it predates al-Sh?fi'?;and although the criticismof
the use ofHad?th here is presented as part of an overall attack against Shf?
beliefs and practices, rather than Sunni beliefs and practices, those criticisms
demonstrate a clear objection to the generaluse and authorityof theHad?th.
Key portions of one passage thatCook reproduces inEarlyMuslim Dogma are
particularly significant.In criticizingtheKufans, the lettersays: "wa kharaj?
min hukmi rabbihim wa ittakhadh? -ab?dithadi?an, wa za'am? anna
'indahum 'ilman as?b?hu min ghayri 3l-Qur'?ni"which Cook translatesas:
"They abandoned the judgment of theirLord and took hadiths for their
religion; and they claim that theyhave obtained knowledge other than from
the Koran...."31 This is clearly a criticism of the use of Had?th as an
authoritative source other than the Qur'?n. The same passage also indicates
that the extra-Qur'?nic source is written: "wa ?man? bi-kit?bin laysa min
All?hi katabathu 'l-rij?lubi-ayd?him(f.21lb) thummaasnad?hu il? ras?lAll?hi
(s).nThis Cook translatesas, "They believed in a book which was not from
God, written by thehands ofmen; they thenattributedit to theMessenger of
God."32
The data available in earlyMuslim literaturedoes not allow us to clearly
identifyspecific groups that held such a position. Only a few groups are
mentioned as doing so, and informationon them is limitedand inconsistent.
InKit?b Usui al-Nihal, al-N?shi' al-Akbar (d. 293/906) identifiesa sub-sectof
theAz?riqah called theKh?zimiyyah who "impose only those laws that are
based on aQur'?nic text,or thathave been transmittedby the consensusof all
Muslim groups."He alsomentions an offshootof theKh?zimiyyah called the
Bid'iyyah.33 Several decades after al-N?shi' al-Akbar, in alMaq?l?t al
Isl?miyyah,Ab? -Hasan al-Ash'ar? (260-324/874-936) does not mention the

Bid'iyyah at all, and in his discussion of the Kh?zimiyyah, he does not
attributemti-Hadtth doctrine to them.This might suggestthat the formerno
longerexisted and the latterno longerheld such a doctrine by al-Ash'ari'sday.
However, he alsomentions another group, theHar?ri, towhom he also does
not ascribe zrx?-Had?thdoctrine.Yet nearly half a century later, inKit?b al
Tanb?h wa -Radd al? Ahl alAhw?* wa 3l-Bidaf, Muhammad b. Ahmad al
Malat? (d. 377/988) describes theHar?ri as a groupwho take theQur'?n and
31
Ibid., 9. For thispassage, I have used both Cook's transliterationand translation.
32
Ibid.
33
'Abd Allah ibn Muhammad al-N?shi', Kit?b Usui al-Nihal in Fr?he Mu'tazilitische
H?resiographie, Zwei Werke des N?si'al-Akbar (Beirut: In Kommission bei F. Steiner,
Wiesbaden, 1971), 69.

AL-SH?FI'?,
173
34
not the Sunnah as the basis of their religiouspractices. Such discrepancies
could mean that at differenttimes,and in differentplaces, different members
associatedwith the same groups held differingviews on the use and authority
of theHadith vis-?-vistheQur'?n or it could indicate that the authors of the
various works were working with incompleteor inaccurate information.The
existenceof a number of sects,many ofwhich also contained a varietyof sub
sectsdivided on differentdoctrinal issues,also furthercomplicates attemptsto
clearly identifyexactlywho the earlyQur'?nic scripturalists may have been.
Although it is not possible to easily identify were
who the early scripturalists
with any degree of certainty,the influenceof theirobjections to the authority
of theHadlth is readily apparent in the argumentsof the proponents of the
Had?th. The works of al-N?shi' al-Akbar and al-Malat?,bothwritten long after
al-Shafi'?'s time, clearly indicate the existence of groups that objected to the
use of theHad?th as a source of scripturalauthorityinmatters of religious law
and practice. Therefore,while al-Sh?fi'?has carefullychosen exactlywhat he
presents,and how he presents it,of his opponents' argumentsin order to best
serve his own overall aim, what he presents cannot be dismissed as a straw
man.
After the opening question about the distinction between various

injunctions,al-Sh?fi'?relates the issues that receive the greatestemphasis from
his challenger? doubt and error.His adversarycompares the strictattitude
toward doubting even a single letterof theQur'an to the attitude toward
doubt regardingtheHadith:
I have found that you and those who hold your opinion do not consider anyone
you encounter and prefer (qaddamtum?hu) for his reliability and memory, nor
do I consider anyone I have encountered whom you have encountered, free from
erring, forgetting, or making mistakes in theHad?th. Instead, I have found that
you say about more than one of them: "So-and-so made a mistake in such-and
such aHad?th and so-and-so in such-and-such aHad?th. I have also found that if a
man says about a Had?th by which you have made something lawful or
to a few elite: "God's
prohibited on the basis of something known only
never said that, you or whoever
Messenger (peace and blessings be upon him)
to
related it you has made a mistake, or lied," you do not ask him to repent. You
do nothing more than tell him, "You have said something pernicious."35
The acceptance of such serious errors and doubts regarding theHadith

leads al-Sh?fi'?'s opponent to ask if it is permissible to make distinctions
34
Ab? al-HusaynMuhammad ibnAhmad al-Malatl,Kit?b al-Tanbihwa -Radd 'alaAhl -Ahw?'
wa H-Bida*(Istanbul:Matba'at al-Dawlah, 1936), 42.
35
Al-Sh?fi'?,Kit?b Jim?'al'Ilm, 460.

AISHA Y. MUSA
174
among the rulingsof theQur'?n on the basis ofwhat has been heard from
such reports, giving them the same standing as the Book of God in
determining what is allowed and what is prohibited. Again, al-Sh?fi'?
highlightshis opponent's concern for the use ofHadtth in decidedly legal
issues,adding an explicitreferenceto the statusofHadtth vis-?-vistheQur'?n.
Al-Sh?fi'? responds to his challenger by saying that he and thosewho
agreewith him only accept credible reportsfroma position of certaintybased
on "We do not accept all of them," he says, "rather some of them
comparison.
are more established than others."36
When asked for an example, al-Sh?fi'?cites thevarious typesof evidence
that can be used to convict a man in court?-his confession, evidence, his
refusalto take an oath, or the swearingof an oath by his companion?- each of
which is strongerthan the next.He then explains that there is a variety of
reasons for accepting a particular type.However, he does not clarifywhat
constitutes credible reports or how he arrives at a position of certainty
regarding them.Al-Sh?fiTs response does not satisfy the questioner,who
reiterateshis primary concern, asking al-Sh?fi'?what he would offer as
evidence against one who rejectsHadtth because of the previouslymentioned
problems of error and doubt, and if it is possible to establish a position of
certainty where there is none.
Al-Sh?fi'? declares that for one who knows the language ofGod's Book
and God's rulings (ahk?m), thatknowledgewill lead him to accept Prophetic
reports from trustworthy people. The determining factor, according to al
Sh?fi'?, is the position of God's Messenger. His opponent still seems

unsatisfied and presses al-Sh?fi'? to provide examples thatwould make his
argumentsclearer and strongeragainst thosewho disagreewith him and that
might cause them to renounce theiropinion in favourof his.37
In spite of his adversary'spersistence,al-Sh?fi'?continues to bypass the
questions of error and uncertainty for the time being. Instead, he turns to
somethinghis challengerhas already said in supportof his own position, but
which al-Sh?fi'?thinkshis opponent has still ignored:that it isnot appropriate
to be carelesswith any of the commands of the faith.In thisway, al-Sh?fi'?sets
the stage forhis theological argumentsfor the authorityof theHadtth. These
argumentsdepend on two ideas: obedience to theProphet (peace be on him),
and the concept of two forms of revelation.
Al-Sh?fi'? begins by building his case for the latter?two forms of
?
revelation which is what will eventually lead to defining the former,
obedience to theProphet (peace be on him), as acceptingProphetic reports in
36
Ibid.
37
Ibid., 461.

AL-SH?FI'?,
175
addition to theQur'?n. His arguments laid the theological groundwork for

establishing the sacred authorityof theHad?th. Al-Sh?fi'? begins building the
firstpart of his argumentby citingverse 62: 2 fromtheQur'?n: "It isHe who
has sent amongst the unlettered a from among them, to rehearse to
Messenger
themHis Signs, to sanctifythem, and to instructthem in the Book and
Wisdom, although theyhad previouslybeen inmanifest error."
With the above verse, al-Sh?fi'?opens his discussion on the nature of
revelation,using it to introduce the idea of two typesof revelation received
and preached by theProphet (peace be on him). The crucial question,which
al-Sh?fi'?attributesto his opponent is: "We already know that 'theBook' is
the Book of God. But what is 'theWisdom?"38 Al-Sh?fi'? responds that it is
theSunnah ofGod's Messenger. His opponent thenasks: "Is itpossible thathe
is teachingthem theBook in general,and theWisdom inparticular,and that is
its rulings?"39Al-Sh?fi'? then reiteratesthat itmeans theMessenger's Sunnah
and what theMessenger explained regardingthe obligations of prayer, alms,
fasting,etc. thatGod ordained in general inHis Book. When his opponent
concedes that this is possible, al-Sh?fi'?asserts thatone can only arrive at this
position throughacceptingProphetic reports.
The challenger then asks: "and what if I am of the opinion that it is
reiterationof theWord (takr?ral-kaldm)}"Al-Sh?fi'? responds to thisby asking
his opponent ifhe thinks that since theBook and theWisdom arementioned
they are two thingsor one thing.To this,his opponent replies: "It is possible
that it is as you have described,Book and Sunnah', then they are two things.
But it ispossible that theyare one thing."
Al-Sh?fi'? declares that the firstpossibility? that it is the Book and
?
Sunnah is the most obvious answer, and he asserts that the Qur'an contains
evidence supportinghis position and contradictingthe idea that theBook and
theWisdom are one, citingQur'?n 33: 34: "And rememberwhat is recited to
you inyour homes of theverses ofGod and theWisdom: forGod understands
mysteries and iswell acquainted [withthem]."40
the finest
Al-Sh?fi'? assertsthat thisverse shows that therewere two differentthings
thatwere recited in the houses of the Prophet's wives ? theQur'?n and the
Wisdom. When his opponent asks him how theWisdom was recited,al-Sh?fi'?
says that the recitationmust mean what Muhammad (peace be on him) uttered
of the Qur'?n and also what he uttered of the Sunnah. Without further
as saying that it is
explanation of how this is, al-Sh?fi'?quotes his opponent
clear that theWisdom is somethingother than theQur'?n.
38
Ibid.
39
Ibid.
?Ibid.

AISHA Y. MUSA
176
Now thathe hasmade thepoint thattheWisdom referredto in theverses

citedmeans somethingother than theQur'?n, al-Sh?fi'?moves on to develop
the second part of his argument in support of the acceptance and use of
Hadith: obedience to the Prophet (peace be on him). He cites several of the
Qur'?nic verses that order such obedience.41
what themost appropriateresponse is to
His disputant then asks al-Sh?fi'?
thosewho claim that theWisdom is foundonly inwhat God has revealed (i.e.
theQur'?n), so thatwhoever submits to that is obeying theMessenger. Al
Sh?fi'? answers by citingpart of a Qur'?nic verse "takewhat theMessenger
givesyou, and deny yourselves thatwhich he forbidsyou."42
By arrangingthe reporteddiscussion in thisway, al-Sh?fi'?makes a clear
connection between the issue ofWisdom as a second form of revelation other
than theQur'?n and the issueof obedience to theProphet (peace be on him).
Al-Sh?fiTs challenger then agrees that accepting the command of God's
Messenger is an obligation.
Having successfully made thispoint, al-Sh?fi'?poses another question to
his adversary: "Is the obligation on us the same on those before us and after
us?"When he answers "yes," al-Sh?fi'?askshow anyonewho did not seeGod's
Messenger can carryout God's command to obey theMessenger (peace be on
him) except throughProphetic reports.43
Up to this point, al-Sh?fi'?has relied primarily on interpretationof
Qur'?nic verses to convince his adversaryof the obligation to accept the
authorityof theHadith. The interpretationof hikmah as Sunnah is central to
al-Sh?fi'?'s argument. In examining Qur'?n commentaries that predate or are
contemporarywith al-Sh?fi'? in his work in the Ris?lah, where al-Sh?fi'?

presents the same line of argument,Lowry finds thatwith the exception of
commentaryof 'Abd al-Razz?q's b.Hum?m al-San'?n? (d. 211/827) on 33: 34,
no one interpretstheword hikmah as sunnah**My own investigationof early
Qur'?n commentaries reveals much the same However, the
thing.
commentaryofH?d ibnMuhakkam (d. 280/893) does address thequestion of
hikmah and sunnah.H?d ibnMuhakkam was a Kh?rijite commentatorwho
lived during themiddle or late third/ninthcentury.45
Commenting on verses
such as 62: 2,which mention "theBook and theWisdom," he says: "Some of
them say the Book is theQur'?n and thatWisdom is the Sunnah."^ The
41
Qur'?n 4: 65; 4: 80; 4: 63;Kit?b Jim? al?lm, 461-462.
42
Qur'?n 59: 7.
43
Al-Sh?fi'?,Kit?b Jim?'al-Ilm, 462-463.
44
Lowry, "The Legal-theoratical contentof theRisala ofMuhammad B. Idris al-Sh?fi*!,*'
251.
45 to
Al-H?jj ibn Sa'?d al-Sharif,"Introduction" H?d ibnMuhakkam, Kit?b
Tafs?r Allah al*Aziz
(Beruit:D?r al-Gharb al-Isl?m?,1990), 1:13.
46
Ibid., 4: 351.

AL-SH?FI'?, THE HAD/ ,AND THE CONCEPT OF THE DUALITY OF REVELATION
177
wording that IbnMuhakkam uses suggeststhat therewas disagreementabout

the interpretationof hikmah as sunnah in the generations following al-Sh?fi'L
This togetherwith thepaucity of earlierevidence for that idea suggeststhat it
was not a common before al-Sh?fi'Fs careful and forceful
interpretation
articulation.The situation ismuch the same in the case of verse 59: 7, which
al-Sh?fi'?portrays as the decisive evidence that convinced his adversaryof the
need to accept the authorityofHadlth, even thoughhe had previously rejected
allHad?th because of potentially seriousdoubt and error.The key portion of
theverse,which al-Sh?fi'icited iswa m? atakum al-Ras?lfa-khudh?huwa ma
nah?kum (anhufa'ntah? (Take what theMessenger gives you, and deny
yourselves thatwhich he forbidsyou). This phrase actually appears near the
end of theverse. Before looking at the early commentaries,letus consider the
entire verse:
Whatever God has restored toHis Messenger from the people of the towns is for
God and theMessenger, and for the relatives, the orphans, the needy and the
wayfarer, so that itwill not be circulating among those of you who are wealthy;
and take whatever theMessenger gives you, and deny yourselves whatever he
forbids you, and be wary of God; surelyGod is severe in reprisal.47
As with the hikmahverses, themajority of early commentatorsare silent

on 59:7. However, there are three notable exceptions: al-Sh?fi'Fs
contemporaries,Abu Zakariy?' Yah? ibnZiy?d al-Farr?' (d. 207/823), 'Abd al
Razz?q, andH?d ibnMuhakkam. The firstof these,al-Farr?',deals with the
phrase that al-Sh?fi'?has adduced; however, he interpretsit as referringto the
immediatelypreceding phrase: "so that itwill not be circulatingamong those
of you who are rich," explaining that "and takewhatever theMessenger gives
you, and deny yourselveswhatever he forbidsyou" is a command given to the
wealthy.48
The second commentator, 'Abd al-Razz?q al-San'?n? does not comment
on the phrase adduced by al-Sh?fi'L Instead, he focuses firston the opening
phrase of the verse: "WhateverGod has restored toHis Messenger from the
people of the towns is forGod and theMessenger," linking it to 8: 41,which
deals with the spoils ofwar, and furtherexplaining that it also refersto the
jizyah (a tax on the People of the Book), and the khar?j (land tax) collected
from the people of the towns.49Thus, neither of those of al-Sh?fi'Fs
47
Qur'?n, 59: 7.
48
Ab? Zakariyy? Yahy? ibn Ziy?d al-Farr?',Ma'?n? 'l-Qur'?n, ed. 'Abd al-Fatt?h Ism?'il al
Tha'lab? (Cairo: al-Haya'ah al-Misriyyahal-'?mmah Ii 1-Kitlb, 1972), 3:144-145.
49
'Abd al-Razz?q al-San'?m, Tafsir 'Abd al-Razz?q, ed.Mahmud Muhammad 'Abduh (Beirut:
Dar al-Kutub al-'Ilmiyyah, 1999), 3: 298-299.

178 AISHA Y. MUSA
who comment on 59: 7 offers an that suggests

contemporaries interpretation
thatof al-Sh?fi'L
However, evenmore interestingisH?d ibnMuhakkam's commentary,
which differsfrom those of al-Sh?fi'?'s two contemporaries.He begins by
acknowledging that part of the verse used by al-Sh?fi'? to support the
obligation of acceptingHadith was revealed in referenceto spoils ofwar, but
that it later came to referto the totalityof religion (s?ratba'du jamV aldln).
Also, as in the case of his commentson the interpretation of hikmahas sunnah,
it indicatesthat therewas stillat least somemeasure of disagreementabout the
interpretationof 59: 7 for some time afteral-Sh?fi'?'sinsistencethat theverse
proves that obeying theMessenger (peace be on him) requiresmore than
following theQur'?n. If this idea and the interpretationof hikmah as sunnah
did not originatewith al-Sh?fi'?,* he seems to be the firstto have articulated
these ideaswith some degree of clarityand success.
Having thus laid out his primarydoctrinal arguments,al-Sh?fi'?thengoes
on to illustrate furtherthe need for Prophetic reports in addition to the
Qur'?n with examples ofwhat he considersabrogatingand abrogatedverses in
the Qur'an. These verses require clarification, and for al-Sh?fi'?, such
clarificationmust come fromProphetic reports.This finally convinces his
opponent that acceptingProphetic reports is incumbentonMuslims and that
hemust give up his previous position, in favourof thatof al-Sh?fi'?.50
It is only afterhe has convinced his challengerthat theobligation to obey
theMessenger (peace be on him) requires acceptingProphetic reports thatal
Sh?fi'? turnsto other points raisedby his rival in the beginningof thedebate:
the issue of the generalvs. theparticularregardingthe commands ofGod and
the question of certainty. In turning to these issues, al-Sh?fi'? touches on a
specificarea of legal theory.To demonstratethevalidity of the concept of the

general and the specific,al-Sh?fi'?citesQur'?nic verses that contain both that
which is general and thatwhich is specific,among them49: 13:
a
O people! We created you from male and a female, and made you into nations
and tribes, that you may know each other. Verily themost honoured of you in
thesightofGod is themost righteous ofyou.And God has fullKnowledgeand
iswell acquainted[withall things].
He explains that the firstsentence is a general statementwith a general

meaning,
as every person has been created from a male and a female. Then,
*
For amuch earlier instanceof theview thathikmahmeans sunnah see comment of al-Hasan al
Basri (d. 110/728) on Qur'?n 62: 2. Al-Hasan al-Basri,TafeirHasan al-Basri,comp, and ed. Sh?r
(Karachi: al-J?mi'ahal-'ArabivyahAhsan al-'U??m, 1993), 5:155. Ed.
50
Kit?h Jim?'al-'Ilm, 462-463.
See, al-Sh?fi'?,

AL-SH?FI'?,
179
there is somethingparticular in it, in the statement"Verily themost honoured

of you in the sightofGod is themost righteousof you."What isparticular,in
this case, righteousness, applies to some people and not to others.51 His now
formercontender then asks al-Sh?fi'?to explain somethinggeneral forwhich
there is nothing in theBook to indicate itsparticulars.This iswhere al-Sh?fi'?
begins building the practical and legal aspects of his arguments for the
authorityof theHadith. Al-Sh?fi'?points out thevarious religiousduties, such
as prayer and alms that are commanded in theQur'an, while the particular
rules for them are not. He asks his opponent where the particular rules are
found. The answer, of course, is the Sunnah, because there is no text in the
Qur'an.52 This issue?the issue of how to implementspecificreligiousduties

and practices? will turnout to be the strongestandmost persistentcriticism
of thosewho rejectProphetic reports.Al-Sh?fi'?presents it as a point raisedby
his opponent.
His adversary firstemphasizes thathe only held an opinion contrary to
what al-Sh?fi'?has articulateduntil the errorof thosewho hold itbecame clear
to him. He thenmentions two groups: one that does not accept Prophetic
reports because the Qur'an is clear, and the other that accepts reports that are
in agreementwith theQur'an.53 At al-Sh?fi'?'srequest,his rival describes the
serious issues that stem fromthe rejectionof Prophetic reports:
It leads to from one serious issue to another. Then he said:Whoever does [only]
what is required of him [in theQur'an] as salah and gives theminimum as zak?h
has performed his duty. There is no established time for that,whether he prays
two rak'ahs every day, or he said, every few days. Moreover, he says, "Whatever
is not in the Book of God is not required of anyone."54
After highlightingthe issueof religiouspractices, al-Sh?fi'?returnsto the

questions of error and uncertainty that his opponent had stressed in the
beginning of the discussion.However, instead of answering the questions
raised by his adversary regardingerror and uncertainty,al-Sh?fi'?calls into
question his former rival's own standards on these issues. To do so, he uses a
hypothetical legal situation. It is not just any legal situation, but themost
seriouspossible? one which may resultin thedeath penalty:
"I said: 'what do you say about thisman next tome? Is his blood and property
"
sacrosanct?'
51
Ibid., 462.
52
See, ibid., 463.
53
See, ibid.
54
Ibid., 463.

AISHA Y. MUSA
180
"
"He said:Tes.'
"I said: 'And if two eyewitnesses testify that he killed a man and took his
property and that it is this,which is in his hand?'"
"He said: would killhim in retaliation
and givethepropertythatis inhishand
to the heirs of the victim.'"
"I said: 'Even though it is possible that the two eyewitnesses testified deceitfully
or erroneously?'*
"He said:Tes.'"
"I said: can you permit [taking] sacrosanct blood and property with
'How
certainty, on the basis of two eyewitnesses about whom there is not certainty?,w
"He said: have been commanded to accept eyewitness testimony."'
"I said: 'Do you find a text in the Book of God the Exalted [saying] that you are
to accept eyewitness testimony about killing?'*
"He 'No, but by way
said: of deduction. I have only been commanded it
according to implicitmeaning (hima'na).'"55
Al-Sh?fi'? then asks about various other possible understandingsthat the

implicitmeaning of God's Book may allow. He reports his challenger's
response as follows:
The evidence for this is that if theMuslims have agreed that killing requires two
eyewitnesses, then we hold that the Book carries themeaning upon which they
agree and that theywill not collectively err in themeaning of God's Book, even
if some of them err.56
Here, al-Sh?fi'?portrayshis opponent as someonewho applies a double

standardof certaintywhere certaintyis concerned, challenging the acceptance
of Prophetic reports on the basis of certainty,yet accepting uncertain
under the most serious of circumstances. If potential errors and
testimony
uncertaintyare not used to challenge the reliabilityof eyewitness testimony,
they should not be used to challenge the reliabilityof Prophetic reports.
Instead of confrontingand refutinghis challenger's concern for error and
uncertainty in theHad?th, al-Sh?fi'?focuseson the apparent double standards
and the incoherence it lends to his opponent's position on the question of
certainty.
Al-Sh?fi'? then compares the standardsfor accepting an eyewitnesswith
the standardsforacceptinga transmitterofHad?th (muhaddith),saying:
If you have been commanded to do that based on the reliability of the two
eyewitnesses, according to what is readily apparent, then you accept them
55
Ibid., 464.
56
Ibid., 463-464.

j^oj
according to what is readily apparent, and only God knows the unseen. But we
demand more regarding the muhaddith than we do regarding the eyewitness, for
we allow the eyewitness testimony of people fromwhom we would not accept
even a single hadtth. We find indications of the reliability or errancy of the
muhaddithwith thosewho share [suchqualities]with him among thosewho
have memorized the Book and the Sunnah. This is not possible in the case of
eyewitnesses.57
Al-Sh?fi'? does not explain,nor does he quote his interlocutoras asking,

why the reliabilityor proneness to errorof an eyewitnesscannot be checked
in a similarmanner to that al-Sh?fi'?describes in relation to a transmitterof
Hadtth. It is unclear why he asserts that it is not possible in the case of
eyewitness testimony (l? yumkinhadhdfi -shah?d?t). Perhaps he means that
not all eyewitnesseshave characterwitnesseswho can vouch for them. Instead
of clarifyingthis point, al-Sh?fi'?has his questioner return to several of the
issues raised earlier that al-Sh?fi'?has yet to address: the discrepancy in
some reports at one time, while similar reports at other
accepting rejecting
times, along with the problems of errors and contradictions in the reports
themselves.Of these, al-Sh?fi'?says:58"In what we have said here and in the
book before this,there is evidence against themand others."59
Here in addition to providing a legal aspect to his arguments for the
indispensableauthorityof theHadtth, al-Sh?fi'?also introduces thenext facet
of his argument in support of such authority. In the exchange about the
intrinsicmeanings possible in the Qur'?n, al-Sh?fi'? has portrayed his
opponent as a blind followerof consensuswho says:
We hold that the Book carries themeaning upon which they [theMuslims] agree
and that they will not collectively err in the meaning of God's Book, even if
some of them err.60
This iswhere al-Sh?fi'?concludes the argumentsregardingthe obligation

to accept reports, with his now former
Prophetic namely adversary's
reiteration that he has accepted from al-Sh?fi'? that he must accept such
reports.After some discussion ofwhat al-Sh?fi'?considers other valid sources
of law and judgment,he turnshis attention to theviews of thosewho reject
57
Ibid.
58
The text of each of the editions consulted has this sentence as a continuation of the
as
challenger's statementof his remainingconcerns.But it seems tomake more sense to read this
al-Sh?fiTswords, assuming that 'faqultu' ismissing from the text.In this case, I understand the
book towhich he refersishis IkhtilafalHadlth.
59
Al-Sh?fi'?,Kit?b Jim?'al-'Ilm., 463-464.
60
Ibid., 464.

182 AISHA Y. MUSA
the reportsof isolated individualswith specializedknowledge. It is in Section

Two that al-Sh?fi'?furtherdevelops the argumentsagainst consensus thathe
introducedin the end of SectionOn.
Section 2
Section Relating theDoctrine ofThoseWho Reject Isolated Reports

(B?hHik?yatQawl manRaddaKhabar al-Kh?ssah)
In the previous section, al-Sh?fi'?was arguing for the scripturalauthorityof

the Prophetic Sunnah as a form of divine inspiration,for the necessity of
acceptingProphetic reports,and against thosewho rejectedProphetic reports
completely.To accomplish thishe asserted that theword hikmahused in the
Qur'?n refers to the Prophetic Sunnah as a form of revelation parallel and
complementary to the Qur'?n. Furthermore, he stressed the believer's
obligation to obey theMessenger (peace be on him) and linked thiswith the
acceptance of Prophetic reports,based on what appears at the time to have
been an uncommon, ifnot novel, interpretation of Qur'?n 59: 7.
He then went on to illustrate how reports are necessary as a

Prophetic
source of guidance in both religiouspractice and legalmatters.Here in Section
2, al-Sh?fi'?'sopponents agree that acceptingProphetic reports is incumbent
onMuslims, but theyrejectany report transmittedby only one transmitterin
any one link of the isn?d: in otherwords, any khabaral-kh?ssah.The word al
kh?ssah can have somewhat different meanings, depending on the context in
which it is used. I have translatedit in the titleof this section as "isolated"
because this is how al-Sh?fi'?portrayshis opponent's understanding,saying:
to you, is the acceptance of khabar
"ignorance, according al-infir?d" (lit.
isolatedrepori)!"1
Al-Sh?fi'? summarizeshis opponent's position:
In summary, their doctrine is that no judge or mufti (one entitled to render a

to render an opinion or judgment except from a
religious opinion) is allowed
to be true in its apparent
position of certainty. Certainty iswhatever he knows
aspects and its hidden aspects, about which he calls God as a witness. That is, the
Book, the agreed-upon Sunnah, and whatever the people agree on and about
which they are not divided.... For example, that al-zuhr (the noontime prayer) is
four [units].62
61
Ibid., 469.
62
Ibid., 467.

AL-SH?FI'?, 183
As with thosewho rejectedall Prophetic reports,here too, themain issue

raised by al-Sh?fi'?'sadversary is the question of certainty.Both groups also
to interprettheQur'?n and
relyheavily on consensus in some form in order
render legal judgments. However, thosewho reject isolated reportsrecognize
an agreed-upon sunnah that is valid and binding. For them, consensus also
determineswhich Prophetic reportsare accepted as valid and binding. In his
discussion with the rejecterof all Prophetic reports,al-Sh?fi'?challengeshis
adversary's certainty where the reliability of eyewitness testimony is
concerned. Al-Sh?fiTs challenge is meant to undermine his adversary's
assertion that lack of certaintyis a valid basis for rejectingProphetic reports.
Here, in his argumentsagainst an opponent who rejects isolated reports,al
Sh?fi'?challenges thenotion of consensus in the samemanner.
Al-Sh?fi'? begins his argumentsand highlightsanother aspect of the term

al-kh?ssahby drawing a sharp distinction between the knowledge of the
generalpublic ('Umal-'ammah) and thatof isolated individualswith specialized
knowledge (Him al-kh?ssah).The first,according to al-Sh?fi'?, is thatwhich
everyMuslim knows, such as thenumber of prayersand other religiousduties.
The second (i.e. the knowledge of individualswith specialized knowledge) is
that of the Companions of Muhammad (peace be on him) and their
Successors.By designating theCompanions and theirSuccessors as thosewho
possess such specialized knowledge, he grantsthe opinions attributedto them
inHadith an interpretiveauthority above that of judges and scholars.Al
Sh?fi'? also links such specialized knowledge with the use of analogical
deduction (qiy?s):"Their opinions differgreatlyregardingthat forwhich there
is no proof text (nass) by which they can interpretsomething; and if they
resort to deduction, and analogical deduction permits
analogical
disagreement."63
Al-Sh?fi'? then presents his adversary's view of the various types of

on
knowledge. These include thatwhich is transmittedby the general public
the authorityof the general public, such as the obligatory religiouspractices;
that on which theMuslims agree and on which they report agreement in
previous generations; the specialized knowledge of isolated individuals; and
finally analogical deduction. The second of these includeswhat al-Sh?fiTs
calls "the agreed-upon sunnah" of the community on issues for
opponent
which there is nothing in theQur'?n or the Sunnah of theProphet (peace be
on "That is to say," he explains, "their consensus is not a matter of
him).
opinion, because there is division in opinions."64
"Ibid.
"Ibid.

AISHA Y. MUSA
184
Regarding the specialized knowledge of isolated individuals he says:

"Proof is not establishedon the basis of the specialized knowledge of isolated
individuals unless its transmission is completely safe from error."65 He also
argues that analogical deduction can be applied only when all aspects of the
properties and relationsof two thingsare equivalent and thatdivision such as
al-Sh?fi'? describes is not permitted. "Consensus," he says, "is proof for
everythingbecause there isno possibilityof error in it."66
Al-Sh?fi'i asks his opponent if the second of these? consensus? is not
the same knowledge of the generalpublic he had describedwhich every sane,
adultMuslim, both scholar and non-scholar alike, knows and about which
there is no doubt, such as thenumber of prayers.His adversaryassertsthat it
is not the same thing.The consensus he is talkingabout is the consensus of
scholars that thosewithout knowledge are required to follow,because proof is
establishedon the basis of theiragreement. However, if theyare divided, then
no such proof is established.He furtherasserts that they only agree on the
basis of binding reports and that if they are divided,whether or not they
related a report on which some of them agree, he will accept only those
reports on which there is agreement.Because if there is division as to the
acceptance of a report, there is a possibility of error in it and proof is not
established,according to al-Sh?fiTsopponent, in anymatterwhere theremay
be error.67This attitude is similar to that of al-Sh?fiTs adversary in the
previous section,and al-Sh?fi'?objects to it strongly:
This is authorizing the invalidation of [Prophetic] reports and the confirmation

of consensus, because you claim that their consensus constitutes proof whether
or not there is a [Prophetic] report
regarding it,while their division does not
provide proof, whether or not there is a [Prophetic) report regarding it.68
He then challengeshis adversary:"Who are thoseknowledgeable people,

whose consensus constitutesproof?"69 To which his adversaryresponds: "They
are thosewhom the people of a country appoint as religious legal scholars,
whose opinions theyappreciate,andwhose judgmenttheyaccept."70
Al-Sh?fiTs continueshis criticismof consensus and begins to develop his
argumentby repeatedlyand intenselyquestioninghim: "Do you think that if
there are ten and one of them is absent,or present but not speaking, that the
65
Ibid.
"Ibid.
67
Ibid., 468.
68
Ibid.
69
Ibid.
70
Ibid.

THE H ADIT H, AND THE CONCEPT OF THE DUALITY OF REVELATION
AL-SH?FI'i,
185
agreement of nine constitutes proof?"
"If I were to say, 'No.'?"

"What ifone of themdied or losthismind? Can nine renderan opinion?"
"If I were to say,Tes.'?"
"Likewise, iffiveof themdied, or nine?Can one renderan opinion?"

"If I were to
say,'No.'?"
"In whatever you say there is contradiction."
At thispoint, al-Sh?fiTs opponent declares: "Enough of this!"71 Having
frustratedhis adversaryon thequestion as to how many scholarsmust agree to
constituteconsensus, al-Sh?fi'?continueshis criticismof consensus by bringing
up an issueon which Muslim scholarsdisagree,whether or not aMuslim may
simplywipe over his shoes inwashing forprayer.His opponent asserts that
one should not do so becausewhen there is disagreement,he should go back
to thebasic principle and that is ablution.72
"Do you say the same about everything?"73 al-Sh?fi'?asks.
When he replies in the affirmative,al-Shafi'Ibrings up another issue on
which there is disagreement: "What about thenon-virginadulterer (al-z?n?al
Would you stonehim?"74
thayyib)}
When he again replies in the affirmative,al-Sh?fi'?asks him how he can
stone him when there are scholarswho claim thathe should be whipped on
thebasis of the command inQur'an 24: 2:
The woman and theman guilty of adultery whip each of them a hundred lashes;
let not compassion move you in their case, in amatter prescribed by God, ifyou
believe in God and the Last Day: and let a party of the believers witness their
punishment.
"How can you stone him," he asks, "instead of going back to the basic
principle that his blood is sacrosanctunless they agree that [shedding] it is
lawful?"75
His rivalnow assertsthathe looks upon the opinion of "themajority" of
scholars as proof, and not to that of "theminority." Al-Shafic? asks him to
define "theminority" and "themajority." However, he insiststhathe is not
This leads al-Sh?fi'?to say:
able to define them.76
It seems that you want to make this doctrine absolutely undefined. Therefore,
when you accept an opinion about which there is disagreement you say it is
71
Ibid.
72
See, ibid., 468.
73
Ibid.
74
Ibid.
75
Ibid.
76
See, ibid.

AISHA Y. MUSA
186
according to themajority. But ifyou want to reject an opinion, you say: "They
"77
are theminority.
Justas al-Sh?fi'?has portrayedhis opponent in theprevious discussion as

someonewho applies a double standardwhere certaintyis concerned,here he
accuses his opponent of the same thing regardingconsensus. Thus, in both
sectionshe attemptsto undermine thepositions of his adversarieson both the
generalprinciples of certaintyand consensus,by highlightingtheirown faulty
adherence to theseprinciples.
There is a significantdifferencein how al-Sh?fi'?proceeds in this latter
discussion, however. In the previous discussion, al-Sh?fi'? portrays his
opponent asmore persistent in pressing the issuesof doubt and error,which
al-Sh?fi'? bypassed until later in the discussion. In this later discussion,
however, he seems to switch roles. Although he indicates that he has
thoroughly frustratedhis opponent on the issue of consensus, he continues
thisUne of argument at great lengthbefore turningto the topic of accepting
isolatedProphetic reports.In both cases, al-Sh?fi'?is using thepositions of his
adversaries as a for articulating his own positions. He has structured
platform
each section to emphasize hismost importantpoints.Here, al-Sh?fi'?is seeking
to undermine consensus as a basis of decision-making by highlighting the
confusion thatexistsover thenature of thevery idea of "consensus." If thereis
no agreement on constitutes can it be used as a
exactly what consensus, how
basis formaking decisions aboutwhich Prophetic reportsto accept andwhich
to reject.This discussion differs
markedly fromthediscussion of consensus in
theRis?lah, where al-Sh?fi'?nuances the concept and establishes it as a valid
source of law.78 The differences between what al-Sh?fi'? argues here and what
he argues in theRis?lah must be considered in lightof the different
purposes of
each work. Unlike theRis?lah, Kit?b Jim?' al- is not a treatiseon the
foundations of jurisprudence (usiilal-fiqh).Rather, it is a response to those
who opposed the use of reports from the Prophet (peace be on him) as a
source of law. In it, al-Sh?fi'?addresses the arguments of both thosewho
opposed all reportsas a source of law, and thosewho opposed only theuse of
single-individualreports.Both of these groups relied heavily on consensus in
some form in interpretingtheQur'?n andmaking legal judgments.So, it is in
the context of his being against the doctrines of the opponents of Prophetic
reports thatal-Sh?fi'?dealswith thenotion of consensushere.
After dealingwith thequestion of consensus,al-Sh?fi'?finallyturnsto the
issue of isolated reports,askinghis antagonist: "Bywhat do you consider the
77
Ibid., 469.
78
Al-Sh?fi'?, al-Ris?lah, 471-465.

AL-SH?FIM, THE HAD/ ,AND THE CONCEPT OF THE DUALITY OF REVELATION
187
Sunnah of God's Messenger, peace and blessing be upon him, to be

confirmed?''79
His rival answers that theSunnah ofGod's Messenger is confirmedin one
of threeways:
a report transmitted by the general public on the authority of the general
public;
the uninterrupted multiple transmission of a report (taw?tur al-khabar)-*0
and
when a singleindividual
Companion relatesa rulingon the authorityof
God's Messenger (peacebe on him) on which no one is known to have
disagreed with him.81
An absence of disagreement,according to al-Sh?fiTs opponent, indicates

consensus.82 Al-Sh?fi'I has no objection to the firstof these,which is the same
as the firstcategoryof knowledge described by his opponent at the beginning
of their discussion. It is the second and thirdmeans of confirming that
somethingisSunnah thatconcern al-Sh?fi'L
He challenges his adversary to define theminimum standardby which
taw?turconfirms the validity of a Prophetic report.He explains that if,for
example, four individuals in differentplaces relate a single story on the
authorityof theProphet (peace be on him) that each learned froma different
source, and if their storiesagree, there is no possibility of error.83
Al-Sh?fi'?
seeks clarificationof his opponent's position by asking if the fourmust be
from differentplaces in order for a report to have sufficientfrequencyof
repetition. "Yes," his opponent replies, "because if they were in one place, it
would be possible for them to conspire in thematter of the report.But that
would not be possible iftheywere in differentcountries."84
which he sees as an insultto those
Al-Sh?fi'? is shocked by this statement,
considered leaders in the religion, in both the earlier and latergenerations.Is
his opponent impugningthe reputationsof every trustworthytransmitter of a
report,each ofwhom establishedthevalidity of the reporton thebasis of the
merit of the transmitterbeforehim all theway back to theCompanions of the
79
Ibid., 473.
80
For a succinct classical definitionof this typeof report seeWensinck's translationof al-Nasafi
in TheMuslim Creed: Its Genesis and Historical Development, 2nd edition (New Deli: Oriental
Reprint, 1979), 263.
81
Al-Sh?fi'i,Kit?hJim?fal-Tlmt474.
82
Ibid., 473-474.
83
See, ibid., 473.
84
Ibid.

AISHA Y. MUSA
188
Prophet? "For this," he says, "is themethod with which you find fault."85
When his opponent claims thatthis isnotwhat he has said, al-Shafi'?tellshim
that his only
recourse is to evasion or withdrawal.86 Once more, he has
portrayedhis adversaryas inconsistent,even hypocritical in theviews he uses

to accept or reports. Once more, his opponent declares in
reject Prophetic
frustration:"Enough of this!"87
Turning to the thirdmeans that his opponent wants to use for the
validation of Prophetic reportsgives al-Sh?fic?theopportunity to present even
more consensus on any but the most
arguments against the idea of basic issues.
He stressesthe differencesof opinion found in all areas of theMuslim world,
from the time of the Prophet's Companions until his own day. These
arguments take up the rest of this section of thework.88Al-Sh?fi'? ends this
sectionby saying:
Until today, judgesandmuftisdifferin some of the judgmentsand religious

opinions they render; and they do not render judgments and religious opinions
except according to what they think is permitted to them. In your view, this is
consensus. How can there be consensus when there are differences inwhat they
do? God knows best.89
Although al-Sh?fi'? recounts this latteropponent's frustrationseveral times

throughout the discussions,he does not report thathe persuaded him to give
up his position in favour of that of al-Sh?fi'?,as he did with the previous
opponent. However, unlike the previous opponent, this one already agrees
with al-Sh?fi'?on theneed to accept at least thoseProphetic reportson which
there is consensus among Muslims. What this adversary rejects is isolated
reports on which he does not find consensus among Muslims.

Justas he didwith his previous opponent, al-Sh?fi'?calls intoquestion the
validity, the consistency,and even the sincerityof the grounds on which this
opponent rejects isolated reports.In both cases, al-Sh?fi'fs taking theoffensive
in thisway proves much less effectivethan his use of Qur'?nic arguments.
Using theQur'?n appeals to the ultimate source of authority that both al
Sh?fi'?and his adversariesrecognize.Calling intoquestion the consistencyand
even the sincerityof his opponents' argumentsrepresentsdeveloping standards
of trustworthinessthatwill prove crucial to the isn?d system,bywhichHaditb
will eventuallycome to be judged.
authenticity
85
Ibid.
86
See, ibid.,473.
87
Ibid., 474.
88
See, ibid., 474-477.
89
Ibid., 477.

189
Sections 3& 4
An Explanationofthe
OrdinancesofGodMostHigh
onFasting
(Bay?nFaraidAll?hTa'?l?)ScSection
(BabalSawm)
The remaining sections,Explanation of theOrdinances ofGod theSublime, and

Section on Fasting are much shorter and contain additional supporting
argumentsthat are not presented in thepoint-counterpointdebate formfound
in sections 1 and 2. Al-Sh?fi'? opens section 3 with an idea thathe expressed
early in his discussion with the representativeof those who rejected all
Prophetic reports: the ordinances inGod's Book are of two kinds: those that
He has clarified in the revelation itself,and those thatHe has explained
through thewords ofHis Messenger (peace be on him).90The second type
necessitates acceptance of Prophetic reports. He repeats the section of Qur'?n
59: 7 that convinced his firstopponent that the revelation calls forobedience
to the Prophet (peace be on him) beyond what is in theQur'an.91 He then
offersmore examples of the details of the ritual prayers and alms that are
taken from theHadith rather than theQur'an. Section 4 contains a similar
discussion on thedetails of fastingand pilgrimage.In thisway, al-Sh?fi'?again
emphasizes one of themost frequentand persistentargumentsmade for the
necessity of Prophetic reports:without such reports it is impossible to have
uniform religiouspractices.92
Al-Sh?fi'? also takes the opportunity to present some other ideas that are
importantto the question of the authorityof theHad?th afterthe discussion
on At this point, without al-Sh?fi'? mentions a hadith
pilgrimage. preamble
reported to him by Sufy?nb. 'Uyaynah (d. 198/814.) that seems to prohibit
the acceptance of Prophetic reports: "The people must not cling to anything
on my
authority.... (l? yumsikanna alnas (alayya hi shay'...)." Though he says
that thishadithhas been reported to him "with its chain of transmitters"(hi
isnddihi)he does not include thechain.93
Al-Sh?fi'? criticizes such a use of the above hadith on several grounds.
First, he says that it ismunqati, that is, it does not go back to the Prophe
(peace be on him) in an unbroken chain of transmitters. Because he does not
include the chain of transmitters, we do not know where the break occurs.
Nevertheless, al-Sh?fi'?is reluctantto rejectany hadith,preferringto findways
90
See, ibid., 477.
91
Qur'?n 59: 7 reads:Take what theMessenger gives you, and deny yourselves thatwhich he
forbidsyou.
92.See, al-Sh?fi%Kit?b Jim?*a - ,481.
93
See, ibid.

190 AISHA Y. MUSA
to reconcile apparent contradictions. Therefore, he argues further that even if

it can be confirmed to have come from the Prophet (peace be on him), it
contains the prepositional phrase 'alayya (on me), rather than 'anni {from
who understands this to
me/on my authority).This is significantfor al-Sh?fi'?
mean that people are not to adhere to those things thatwere specifically
ordained by God for theProphet (peace be on him) and no one else, such as
takingmore than fourwives.94Al-Sh?fi'? also cites another hadith reported to
him by Sufy?n ibn 'Uyaynah:
Let me not find any one of you who receives a command or prohibition fromme
rechning on his couch and saying, "We do not know about this.We follow what
we findin theBook ofGod, AlmightyandExalted.95
This time he includes the complete chain of transmitters. Altogether, these

things indicate for al-Sh?fi'?that the earlierhadith cannot be understood as a
prohibition of accepting Prophetic reports.96 After dealing with the above
hadith, he turns again to his most successful arguments against thosewho
rejectedall Prophetic reports,reiteratingthe same portion ofQur'?n 59: 7 and
4: 65.97Here, too, al-Sh?fi'?also returns to the idea that is central to his
position: duality of revelation. To support the idea that the Prophet's
commands and prohibitions outside of the Qur'?n were also inspiration
(wahy)fromGod, he cites threeQur'?nic verses:
But when Our Clear Signs are recited unto them, those who rest not their hope
on theirmeeting with Us, say: "Bring us a Reading other than this, or change
this," say: "It is not forme, ofmy own accord, to change it: I follow naught but
what is inspired unto me: if I were to disobey my Lord, I should myself fear the
Penalty of a Great Day." "Follow what you are taught by inspiration from your
Lord...." "He who obeys theMessenger obeys God...."98
Next, he cites a hadith inwhich theProphet is said to have declared thathe has
neither neglected to command anythingcommanded byGod, nor to prohibit
anythingprohibited byGod.99 So he endsKitdh Jima*al-llmwhere he began,
with two ideas that form the theological basis for the authority of the
Hadith ? obedience to theProphet (peace be on him), and the concept of two
94
See, ibid.
95
Ibid.
"Ibid.
97
Ibid.
*
Ibid., 482-483; Qur'?n 10:15, 6:106, 4: 80.
"
Kit?bJim?'al-'Ilm, 482-483.
See, al-Sh?fi'?,

AL-SH?FI'?,
191
forms of revelation? that together require accepting Prophetic reports in

addition to theQur'?n.
A brief discussion of religious laws and practices that are ordered in the
Qur'?n, but the details of which are taken from theHadith, reinforcesthe
need to accept theHadith in practicalmatters. For al-Sh?fi'?,consensus is not
sufficientas a basis for decision-making in these areas. The means for
determining the appropriate details of required religious practicesmust be
somethingmore consistentand reliable than consensus.That source isHadith,
which are the repositoryof theProphetic Sunnah and a second formof divine
revelation.When looked atwith thisunderstanding,theorder and logic in the
Jim?cal-llm becomes clear.Al-Sh?fi'?begins by settingout what he sees as the
strongest arguments of his opponents. He then presents his own broad,
doctrinal arguments.He thenmoves fromhis doctrinal argumentsto issuesof
legal theory and then specific religious practices.At each step, he adduces
examples to illustratehis points, and then ends thework with more examples
and reiterationof his key arguments.Perhaps the greatestweakness of the
Jim?( al'ilm as a book is thatal-Sh?fi'?attackshis opponents repeatedlyand at
great length on the concerns they have raised regarding the acceptance of
Hadith ratherthan addressingthose concernsdirectly.
TheRis?lah
Like Kit?b Jima' al-llm, the Ris?lah is written in al-Sh?fi'Fs characteristic
language and style,but the formatof the twoworks differs.The Ris?lah is
divided into threeparts.Each part containsdiscussions relatingto the issueof
the position and authority ofHadith, along with other issues.Only what
relates to the authorityof theHadith will be dealtwith here.
The main ideas that al-Sh?fi'?presented inKit?b Jim?'al-llm in the form
of debates are presented in amore developed form,as generalprinciples in the
Ris?lah. However, in the subsectionentitled: "Defects in theTraditions" (B?b
al-llal fi -Had?th),in the section on Traditions, he uses the familiardebate
formatused in the firsthalf ofKit?b Jim?(al-llm.Here, too, al-Sh?fi'?does not
identifyhis challenger,again using instead the generic phrase: "q?la li q?'il..."
(a speaker said to me...).100
In Part One, al-Sh?fi'?emphasizes the religious obligation of following
the Sunnah of God's Messenger (peace be on him) and its importance in
relation to various religious practices, such as prayer, alms, fasting,and
pilgrimage,etc., as he did inKit?b Jim?(al-llm, but here he goesmuch further
in stressing the importantposition in which God has placed the Prophet
100
Al-Sh?fi'?, al-Ris?lahypassim.

AISHA Y. MUSA
192
(peace be on him).101Part Two contains the subsection on defects in the

traditions, followed by a detailed treatmentof apparently contradictory
ah?dith.This part endswith a chapteron singularreports (khabaral-w?hid),a
term al-Sh?fi'? seems to use synonymouslywith isolated reports (khabaral
kh?ssah)}02Part Three beginswith furtherdiscussion of singularreports,after
which al-Sh?fi'? ends the work with discussion of other principles of
jurisprudence.
The Ris?lab's opening section begins with the customary invocation,

praisingGod and seekingHis help, alongwith theMuslim testimonyof faith,
or shah?dah.A briefdiscussion of the religiousstateof humanity at the timeof
Muhammad (peace be on him) follows.Next, al-Sh?fi'?sets the stage for the
topic of Sunnah andHadith by stressingMuhammad's role and importanceas
God's Messenger and the cause of humanity's religiousandworldly gain.103
In the second chapter of the Ris?lah, al-Sh?fi'?deals with the various

related meanings of the word albay?n (clear declaration, explanation,
elucidation, information).These correspond roughly to the categories of
knowledge discussed inKit?b Jim?''al-7lm:
What God has declaredin thetextof theQur'?n,

The Prophet's explanations of the text,
What theMessenger established (m? satina Ras?l Allah) in the absence of a

nasshukm).104
God (minm? layslill?hf?hi
textualrulingfrom
He devotes a separate section to each category,citing specificexamples from

religious laws and practices.Of course, all but the first category require
acceptingProphetic reports.
As in Kit?b Jim?( al-'Um, the two central ideas are obedience to the
Prophet (peace be on him), and the recognition of two forms of divine
revelation.Having already stressedMuhammad's importance and role as
God's Messenger, al-Sh?fi'?furtherdevelops his argumentsabout thenature of
theMessenger's authorityby citing theQur'?nic verses that linkbelief inGod
to belief inHis Messenger, including:"Only those areBelieverswho believe in
God and His Messenger: when they are with him on a matter requiring
collective action, theydo not departuntil theyhave asked forhis leave...".105
101
See, ibid., 17.
102
See, ibid., 369 ff.
103
See, ibid., 17.
104
Ibid., 21-22.
105
Ibid., 75;Qur'?n 24: 62.

AL-SH?FP?,
193
He does the same regarding the question of obedience by citing two

further Qur'?nic passages:
It is not fitting for a Believer, man or woman, when amatter has been decided by
God and His Messenger, to have any option about their decision: if anyone
disobeys God and His Messenger, he is indeed on a clearly wrong Path.

O you who believe! Obey God, and obey theMessenger, and those charged with
authority among you. If you differ in anything among yourselves, refer it toGod
and His Messenger, ifyou believe inGod and the Last Day: that is best, and most
suitable for final determination.106
InKit?b Jim?(al-cIlm, thosewho rejectedall Prophetic reports suggested

thatobeying theMessenger (peace be on him)meant obeying only theQur'an,
which God had sentdown to him, and thatwhen theQur'an mentioned the
Book togetherwithWisdom, theWisdom was the specificrulingsof theBook.
Al-Sh?fi'? counteredwith arguments that theWisdom had to be something
other than theQur'an. He develops those argumentsfurtherhere. Establishing
the status of the Sunnah as a formof divine revelation is crucial ifhe is to
overcome the suggestionsof thosewho deny the authorityof theHadith.
Early in theRisdlah, he sets the stage for thisargument:"Inwhat we have
written in this book, mentioning God's blessing upon worshippers with
knowledge of theBook and theWisdom, thereis proof that theWisdom is the
Sunnah of God's Messenger."107What al-Sh?fi'? refers to is the section,
Elucidation ofGod'sMaking Following theSunnah ofHis ProphetObligatory in
His Book, where he says: "God hasmade itobligatory for thepeople to follow
His revealed inspiration(wahyih)and the sunnahs (sunan)ofHis Messenger."108
In support of theview that theSunnah is a formof divine revelation,he cites
seven verses from the Qur'an in which the Book and theWisdom are
mentioned,109 and then explains:
So God has mentionedthe Book, which is the Qur'an, and He has mentioned
Wisdom. I have heard those with whom I agree among the people who have
knowledge of theQur'an say thatWisdom is the Sunnah of God's Messenger.

?
This seems to be what He has said but God knows best ? because theQur'an
ismentioned andWisdom is put after it; and God has mentioned His favouring
?
His creatures by teaching them the Book and Wisdom. So, it is not possible
but God knows best ? that theWisdom here can be said to be other than the
Sunnah of God's Messenger.110
106
Ibid., 79;Qur'?n 13: 36,4: 59.
l07M-Sh?fi%al-Ris?hh, 32.
108
Ibid, 76.
109
Qur'?n 2:129,151; 3:164; 62: 2; 2: 231; 4:113; 33: 34.
noAl-Sh?fi% al-Ris?Uh, 78.

AISHA Y. MUSA
194
This line of argumentechoes and expands upon the reasoning al-Sh?fi'?

used inKit?b]im?(al- to convince thosewho rejectedall Prophetic reports
thatGod had given inspirationto theProphet (peace be on him) beyond just
the revelation of theQur'?n. In addition to the verses inwhich Wisdom is
to mean the Sunnah, al-Sh?fi'i presents other verses that suggest to
interpreted
him that everythingtheProphetMuhammad (peace be on him) said and did
was the result of divine inspiration.
He touched brieflyon this idea near the
end ofKit?b Jirn?'al-llm, but develops it furtherhere in theRis?lah. As in
Kit?b Jim?( al'Ilm he citesQur'an 6: 106: "Follow what you are taughtby
inspirationfromyour Lord: there isno god butHe: and turnaside fromthose
who join godswith God."111
He also cites several similar verses as well:
O Prophet! Fear God, and do not obey the rejecters and the hypocrites. Indeed,
God knowing, wise. Follow thatwhich comes to you by inspiration from your
Lord: forGod iswell acquainted with what you do.
Then We put you on the rightway, so follow it, and do not follow the desires of
those who do not know.
O Messenger! Deliver what hath been sent down to you from your Lord. If you
do not, you will not have conveyed His Message. God will defend you from the
people. Indeed, God does not guide the rejecters.

And thus,We have sent a spirit of inspiration to you by Our command. You did
not know what the Book or Faith was, butWe have made it a
Light by which
We guide whom We will among Our servants; and indeed you guide to the
Straight Path.112
Along with theseverses, al-Sh?fi'?also quotes two of the same ah?dith thathe
included inKit?b Jirn?*al-llm.The firstis that inwhich theProphet (peace be
on him) reportedly said that he had not neglected to command
anything
commanded by God, or to prohibit anythingprohibited by God. The second
is thatwhich warns against rejectinga command or prohibition fromhim,
while claiming to follow onlywhat is in theQur'?n.113He again cites the latter
of thesewhen a questioner asks him for evidence against thosewho relate a
contradictoryhadith, inwhich theProphet (peace be on him) reportedlysaid:
"Compare whatever comes to you on my authoritywith theBook ofGod. If
it agreeswith it,I said it. If itdiffersfromit,I did not say it."114
111
Ibid., 85.
112
Ibid., 85-86; Qur'?n 33:1-2, 45: 18, 5: 67, 42: 52.
113
114
Ibid., 224.

THE HADITH, AND THE CONCEPT OF THE DUALITY OF REVELATION
AL-SH?FI'l,
195
Al-Sh?fi'? firstinformshis questioner that thishadith is froman unknown

transmitterand also suffersfrom a broken chain of transmitters.115 As in the
case of a similarhadith,he mentioned inKit?b Jim?*al-llm, al-Sh?fi'?does not
offerany specific informationon the chain of transmitters. However, unlike
the other discussion, thewording of thishadithdoes not offer themeans by
which al-Sh?fi'? can reconcile it with his position. Therefore, he simply
dismisses it.He then cites the previouslymentioned hadith on the need to
acceptProphetic reports in supportof his own position.116
Although they are presented in theq?la...fa-qultuformatin his treatment
in the Ris?lah on the question of defects in the hadith, al-Sh?fi'?does not
primarily call into question the consistency or sincerityof the questioner.
Perhaps this is because his hypothetical adversary is not an opponent of the
Hadith.117Alternatively, perhaps it is an indication that this version of the
Ris?lah was written afterKit?b Jim?' al-llm, and representsa better-thought
out
approach.
Al-Sh?fi'fs questioner asks about the existenceof the ah?dlth that agree
with theQur'?n and those that disagreewith it as well as the ah?d?th that
contradict each other. Al-Sh?fi'? explains that every sunnah of the Prophet
(peace be on him) agreeswith theQur'?n, or clarifies it. The things in the
Sunnah thatare not based on a textin theQur'?n are obligatory because of the
command to obey theMessenger (peace be on him). Al-Sh?fi'? explains that it
is also necessary to know the abrogating and the abrogated, as well as the
general and the specificin both theQur'?n and theHadith in order to see that
there are really no contradictionsbetween theHadith and theQur'?n, or
between differentah?dith.m
Al-Sh?fi'?'s discussion of isolated reports in the Ris?lah lacks the
relentless, confrontational tone of the same discussions in Kit?b Jim?' al-llm,
perhaps for the same reasons, either because he is not even hypothetically
an opponent of such reports, or because he wrote this work at a
addressing
later time.Here, the questioner asks al-Sh?fi'?for theminimum requirements
thatmake an isolated reportacceptable.He explains that it requiresonly one
person to have heard it directly from one other person in a chain reaching
back to theProphet (peace be on him); but that each personmust be known
to be pious, reliable in hismemory, able to relatea reportword-for-word;and
115
See, ibid., 225.
116
See, ibid, 225-226.
117
See, ibid, 210-240.
118
Ibid, 210-223. It may be noted that al-Sh?fi'? does include detailed discussions of the
abrogating and the abrogated, aswell as various typesof ab?dith that are the cause of disputes
elsewhere in the Risalah, but an examination of them is beyond the scope of the present
discussion.

196 AISHA Y. MUSA
any idiosyncrasies in the quality of his speechmust be known in order to

avoid confusion in the transmission.119
Though the tone of theRis?lah differsfromthatofKit?b Jim?' al-'Ilm, al

Sh?fiTs explanations are the same. The answers he gives on the question of
defects inHadith do not answer the concerns raised by his hypothetical
? but
adversaries perhaps they are not meant to do so. Al-Sh?fi'? has taken
greatpains to challenge thevalidity and consistencyof those concerns.What is
important to al-Sh?fi'?,in both Kit?b Jim?' al-'Ilm and in theRis?lah, is to
establish the authorityof theHadith as the second revelatory source of law
and guidance forMuslims. To this end, he has developed arguments that
linked obeying the Prophet (peace be on him) with acceptingHadith.
Convincing others of the need to obey theMessenger (peace be on him) was
not difficultbecause this is called for in theQur'?n and even theopponents of
all Prophetic reports accepted that.What theydid not acceptwas the use of
extra-Qur'?nicmaterials that theyfounddoubtful at best. Therefore, al-Sh?fi'?
has focused on developing argumentsto convince others that thewords and
actions of the Prophet (peace be on him), beyond the Qur'?n, were also
divinely inspired and protected from error?a second form of revelation.
Once this idea was established, itwould naturally link the acceptance of
Prophetic reportswith the obligation to obey theMessenger (peace be on
him).Over time, this is exactlywhat occurred.This linkageultimatelyassured
theHadith's authority,side-by-side
with theQur'?n's.
The firstthingal-Sh?fi'?does in the introductiontoKit?b Jim?' al- is
give equal status to theBook ofGod and theSunnah of theMessenger (peace
be on him): "the only speech (qawl) thatmust be adhered to in every situation
is theBook of God or the Sunnah ofGod's Messenger...."120The grantingof
such status to Prophetic reports is also the primary complaint of al-Sh?fiTs
makes a distinction
hypothetical adversary.121 Neither between written and
oral narration; instead, they focus on the role and authority of Prophetic
reports.Neither al-Sh?fi'?nor his opponent disagrees thatProphetic reports
are extra-Qur'?nic.The centralquestion forbothmen is the
permissibilityor
even the necessity of such extra-Qur'?nic material. The imagined representa
tive of the opponents of Prophetic reportsquestions itspermissibility, while
al-Sh?fi'? insists on its necessity.Without the Prophetic reports, al-Sh?fi'?
argues,how can one practice one's religion?He does not find thedetails in the
Qur'?n, so he must turn his attention to other than the Qur'?n,
something
119
120
Kit?b Jim?'al-'Ilm, 462.
See, al-Sh?fi'?,
121
Ibid., 460.

AL-SH?FI'?, 197
and that somethingis theSunnah.122

In spite of the ongoing opposition, the concept of duality of revelation
continued to develop alongwith the compilation ofHadith collections.The
proponents of theHadith as a necessary and authoritativesource of law and
Hadith the statusof a scripturethat
guidance eventually succeeded in securing
complements rather than competes with the Qur'?n. The arguments
championed by al-Sh?fi'?in the late second and early thirdcenturiesafterthe
Hijrah are still used today, some twelve centuries later.Al-Sh?fi'Fs focus on
developing Qur'?nic arguments in support of the Sunnah as a form of
revelation was crucial to his success. It was not to attempt to reconcile
enough
the problematic content of particular ahadith. Itwas necessary to provide a
distinctlyQur'?nic argument in favourof the authorityof theHadith. This is
exactly what al-Sh?fi'? has done in Kit?b Jim?' al-llm. The successful
articulationof argumentsto establish thedoctrine of duality of revelationand
the statusof theHadith as the repositoryof the Prophetic Sunnah, has had
impact and implications in Islam farbeyond the sphereof jurisprudenceand
al-Sh?fi'?'s systematic conception of the nature of law. The Hadith has
influencedall the religious sciences.Moreover, ithas also played a crucial role
in thebeliefs and practicesofMuslim individualsand communities throughout
history, informingnot only individualbehaviour and understanding,but also
shapingpolitical, social, and ethicalworldviews.
122
See, ibid., 462.


Journal Article - Al Shafi by Aisha Musa

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Journal Article - Al Shafi by Aisha Musa

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Journal Article - Al Shafi by Aisha Musa

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

Al-Shāfi'ī, the Ḥadīth, and the Concept of the Duality of Revelation

Author(s): AISHA Y. MUSA

This content downloaded from 130.113.111.210 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 15:12:59 PM

Al-Shafi% theHadith, and theConcept of theDuality

Muhammad ibn Idris al-Sh?fi'?(d. 204/820) occupies a very importantplace in

This content downloaded from 130.113.111.210 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 15:12:59 PM

anyway. On the contrary,al-Sh?fiTs theories and arguments still form the

This content downloaded from 130.113.111.210 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 15:12:59 PM

dating and authorship of theRis?lah andKit?b al-Umm, he accepts that "the

Belief in a duality of revelation is also central toRabbinic Judaism,and

This content downloaded from 130.113.111.210 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 15:12:59 PM

revelation,13 al-Sh?fi'? reserves status for the words, actions, and

Both Kit?b Jirn?*al-'Ilm and theRis?lah contain a detailed discussion of

Drawing on theworks of Ab? Bakr Ahmad b. Al-Husayn al-Bayhaq?

This content downloaded from 130.113.111.210 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 15:12:59 PM

independent version of it was published in Cairo in 1940.17The work is

This content downloaded from 130.113.111.210 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 15:12:59 PM

would be impossible to read them because of his eloquence and recondite

Despite his effortsat clarity,al-Sh?fi'fswriting is at times complex and

I have not heard anyone whom people considered knowledgeable ? or who

As the above indicates,refutingtheview of thosewho rejectProphetic

This content downloaded from 130.113.111.210 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 15:12:59 PM

assign to the speech of theMessenger a statusmore or less equal to thatof the

reporton theviews of his opponents.

This content downloaded from 130.113.111.210 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 15:12:59 PM

A similar format is used in the second section,which deals with the

I do not remember specific individual or group discussions, or everything that

already exerted great effort in a thorough examination of everything they

What al-Sh?fi'?chooses to present of his opponent's views and how he

The Section Relating theDoctrine of theGroup

Al-Sh?fi'? opens the Section relating thedoctrine of thegroup that rejectsall

You are an Arab, and the Qur'an was revealed in the

Here, al-Sh?fi'?demonstratesthemost importantdoctrinal foundationsof

This content downloaded from 130.113.111.210 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 15:12:59 PM

believersmust have faithin the textof theQur'?n asGod's scripture,and that

27 , 460. For a detailed linguisticanalysis of the key religious-legal

This content downloaded from 130.113.111.210 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 15:12:59 PM

Isl?miyyah,Ab? -Hasan al-Ash'ar? (260-324/874-936) does not mention the

This content downloaded from 130.113.111.210 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 15:12:59 PM

After the opening question about the distinction between various

The acceptance of such serious errors and doubts regarding theHadith

This content downloaded from 130.113.111.210 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 15:12:59 PM

Sh?fi'?, is the position of God's Messenger. His opponent still seems

This content downloaded from 130.113.111.210 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 15:12:59 PM

addition to theQur'?n. His arguments laid the theological groundwork for

This content downloaded from 130.113.111.210 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 15:12:59 PM

Now thathe hasmade thepoint thattheWisdom referredto in theverses

contemporarywith al-Sh?fi'? in his work in the Ris?lah, where al-Sh?fi'?

This content downloaded from 130.113.111.210 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 15:12:59 PM

wording that IbnMuhakkam uses suggeststhat therewas disagreementabout

As with the hikmahverses, themajority of early commentatorsare silent

This content downloaded from 130.113.111.210 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 15:12:59 PM

who comment on 59: 7 offers an that suggests

specificarea of legal theory.To demonstratethevalidity of the concept of the

He explains that the firstsentence is a general statementwith a general

This content downloaded from 130.113.111.210 on Sun, 22 Jun 2014 15:12:59 PM

there is somethingparticular in it, in the statement"Verily themost honoured

Qur'an.52 This issue?the issue of how to implementspecificreligiousduties

After highlightingthe issueof religiouspractices, al-Sh?fi'?returnsto the