As someone who follows the theoretical doctrines of Salafism, imagine my shock and confusion when I discovered that Salafism in practice diverged sharply from its written doctrine. The more I studied, the more contradictions I uncovered. Rooted in a literal interpretation of Islamic texts, the practice of Salafism prioritizes Hadiths over the Qur’an. Ibn Taymiyya, a thirteenth-century Islamic scholar, in the fifth volume of his book, Al Fatawa Al Kubra (Great Religious Edicts) echoed this approach: ‘The way of the Salaf is to interpret literally the Quranic verses and hadiths that relate to the Divine attributes.’ He rejected metaphorical and contextual interpretations, instead advocating for a literal understanding of God’s attributes. In his words, ‘one is not to state that the meaning of “hand” is power or that of “hearing” is knowledge.’ 

Muhammad Syed Ali, mentions in his 2004 book, The Position of Women in Islam; A progressive view that Imam Shafii, the founder of the Shafii school of jurisprudence was the first and foremost theologian to introduce the idea that the extra-Qur’anic utterances of the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH) were of divine origin like the Qur’an. However, Ignaz Goldziher, A Hungarian scholar of Islam in his 1971 book, Muslim Studies, states that Imam Shafii did not believe a hadith, even if well authenticated, could abrogate the Qur’an. 

In his seminal work, Risala, translated in 1987, Imam Shafii, the founder of the Shafii school of jurisprudence, outlines three ways the Hadith relates to the Qur’an. First, the Hadith reinforces specific Quranic texts. Second, it clarifies general Quranic provisions. Third, it provides guidance on matters not addressed in the Quran. Most Islamic jurists agree on the first two categories, as noted by Muhammad Syed Ali. However, some scholars believe the Prophet (PBUH) only instituted rulings rooted in the Qur’an. Despite this, many Muslims prioritize the hadith over the Qur’an, following the words of Ibn Kathir, a fourteenth-century theologian and historian, in his book, Al Bidayah wa Al Nihayah (1966) where he asserts that ‘…the Sunnah prevails over the Qur’an; the Qur’an does not prevail over the Sunnah.’ 

Adis Duderija, an associate professor in the study of Islam and Society, summed this up in his 2011 book, Constructing a Religiously Ideal ‘Believer and ‘Woman’ in Islam: Neo-Traditional Salafi and Progressive Muslims’ Methods of Interpretation when he stated that in the Salafi Ideology, any Hadith contained in the official, semi-canonical collections clarifies, amplifies and settles the meaning of the Qur’an, not the other way around. This means that when a Hadith contradicts the Qur’an, the Hadith takes priority. The rulings on stoning to death for adultery, and the death penalty for blasphemy and apostasy, ​​​​​​​​​​​​which are completely unfounded in the Qur’an, exemplify this divergence. 

In stark contrast, orthodox scholars like ibn Hajar, Al Nawwawi, Abu Hanifa, Imam Malik, and Imam Shafi’ affirm the Qur’an’s status as definitive knowledge due to its ‘muttawatir’ transmission (mass memorization and transmission without error). In Islamic contexts, muttawatir refers to a text that has been narrated by a large number of people, across multiple chains of transmission, in a way that makes it impossible for them to have conspired to fabricate the report. The Qur’an’s widespread memorization and documentation by diverse individuals across geographical borders render it impeccable and impossible to fabricate. 

Beyond the Quran, other muttawatir transmissions exist, including select Hadiths on practices like prayer, fasting, charity, and pilgrimage. Renowned Hadith collectors like Imam Bukhari did not scrutinize chains of transmission for these Hadiths, confident in their certainty. 

Aligning with these scholars, I firmly believe that relegating the Qur’an to secondary status or equating Hadith with the Qur’an is blasphemous. It is unconscionable to me that a human-compiled body of work, graded ‘Sahih’ (indicating that the hadith has been verified as reliable or authentic) based on isnad (chains of transmission) rather than matn (textual accuracy), could be considered perfect and infallible. This compilation, created over 300 years after the Prophet’s (PBUH) demise, should never be placed on the same level as the Quran, the perfect word of God, let alone given priority over it. 

Muhammad Ali Syed’s argument in his book cited above, strongly supports my stance. He points out that even Bukhari, in his esteemed book, prioritized isnad (chains of transmission) over matn (textual accuracy) when evaluating hadith authenticity. This oversight led to the inclusion of hadiths contradicting the Quran. 

A crucial but ironical consideration is a “no-hadith” Hadith, where the Prophet (PBUH) reportedly forbade Muslims from writing down his words, saying, ‘Do not write from me anything except the Qur’an…’ (Sahih Muslim). Imam Shafi’i’s Ar-risala further emphasizes this, quoting the Prophet’s (PBUH) reported saying: ‘Compare what purports to come from me with the book of God. What agrees with it, I have said; what disagrees with it, I have not said.’ 

The Prophet’s (PBUH) caution in another report is evident: ‘If you hear a narration from me… and you see it as close to you, then I am most deserving of it. If… you see it as far from you, then I am the furthest from it’ (Sahih, Musnad Ahmad). The intent was clear: prevent people from equating his reported sayings with the Qur’an’s message. 

As a Muslim, I consider it blasphemous to attribute perfection to any book other than the book revealed by God. For me, a Hadith’s authenticity is rooted in its compatibility with the Quran’s letter and spirit, alongside its prior grading as authentic. Scholars have established various criteria for authenticating hadith, ranging from inclusive (Hanbali) to cautious (Maliki and Hanafi). 

Experts of the Sunnah often summarize their approach in five key points: a reliable isnad (chain of narration) with transmitters of good memory and morals; each transmitter must demonstrate intelligent grasp and unimpeachable morals; these qualities must apply to every person in the chain; the narration itself must not be aberrant (contradicting the Quran, etc.); and finally narration must be free from faults rendering it unacceptable. 

Even Sahih-graded Hadiths must be tested for compatibility with the Quran. Imam Malik bin Anas sanctions this right for every Muslim. Notably, collectors of authentic Hadiths, including Imam Bukhari, acknowledge their fallibility, recognizing only God as infallible. Thus, every Muslim has the right to question everything and everyone, including jurists and Hadith collectors, to reaffirm their faith and conviction. 

The attribution of infallibility to Hadiths in Sahih Bukhari is problematic. The Salafi approach to Hadith authentication relies solely on the chain of transmission (isnad), neglecting textual accuracy (matn). This oversight has led to the validation of discriminatory Hadiths that perpetuate the subjugation and degradation of women. 

An example is the Hadith claiming that no nation ruled by a woman will prosper, which is surprisingly marked as authentic in Sahih Bukhari. This Hadith was narrated by a single narrator who had previously been publicly flogged for slander. Moreover, this narrator claimed to be the sole recipient of this declaration from the Prophet Muhammad (PBUH). Most notably, the narration did not surface until 25 years after the Prophet’s death, during a Muslim civil war where Aisha (RA), the wife of the Prophet, led an army. The timing of this narrator’s claim raises significant doubts about the Hadith’s authenticity. 

Despite these red flags, this Hadith was included in Sahih Bukhari and has been used for centuries to justify the exclusion of women from leadership positions. In stark contrast, the Qur’an presents a positive portrayal of a Muslim queen who successfully ruled a large kingdom, without any mention of women being inherently unfit for leadership. 

The Salafi approach to resolving contradictions between Hadith and Qur’an relies on theological literalism. Basic principles like contextual interpretation, logical reasoning, analogical deduction, and the principle of Maslaha (public good) are disregarded. Actions are deemed good solely based on literal textual interpretations, with no distinction between the letter and spirit of the law. In essence, their approach is ‘follow the rules’ without considering logic or context.