This excerpt is taken from the book compiled by Hakim Ajmal Khan Sahib "Recognize Jamaat-e-Islami" .
بسم اللہ الرحمن الرحیم
By: Maulana Muhammad Ismail Gujranwala
الحمد للہ و کفیٰ و سلام علیٰ عبادہ الذین اصطفیٰ
It has been a long time since Maulana Maududi wrote an article titled "The Path of Moderation," which caused some misunderstandings among the general Muslim public regarding Maulana and his group. This issue continued in the newspapers for quite some time, debating what the Jamaat-e-Islami's stance is on the authority of Hadith and the Sunnah of the Prophet. This series of discussions had not yet subsided when Maulana Maududi, upon his release from jail, delivered several speeches at different places. Only Allah knows the intention, but these speeches stirred and intensified the atmosphere.
The journals of Jamaat-e-Islami boldly and vigorously supported their leadership, creating considerable heat. Probably influenced by these circumstances, some Ahl-e-Hadith members posed some questions, the answers to which were published from the pen of Maulana Islahy in
Reference: October 1955 issue of Tarjuman al-Quran
. There may be some difference in Maulana Islahy's tone, but in terms of purpose, his views are not much different from Maulana Maududi's. Both elders think almost alike regarding Hadith.❀ The feelings of Jamaat-e-Ahl-e-Hadith hold a special place, and the path on which these gentlemen have served the art of Hadith and Sunnah for nearly a century has this inevitable result. Jamaat-e-Islami's way of thinking is different from this, so the unpleasant impression of Ahl-e-Hadith towards it was quite natural, and a kind of clash was its natural consequence. How much these answers satisfied the Ahl-e-Hadith questioner is not known, but my impressions are that neither any Ahl-e-Hadith member nor the general Muslim public could be satisfied with these answers, and perhaps even Mujeeb himself might not be satisfied.
"The Path of Moderation" spans nearly thirteen pages. After reading the entire article, it feels as if the learned author himself is not satisfied with what he is writing. Throughout the article, mental confusion is evident. This article can be divided into three parts.
First Part:
In the first part, Maulana agrees with the deniers of Hadith that:
Hadiths are speculative and speculative things are not established, but when does the fact that something is not established mean that it should be rejected?
Reference: (Tafheemaat p. 312)
Therefore, it is not correct to reject Hadith altogether.The statement is:
It is not clear in which language the Maulana is speaking? The Shariah terminology is that unestablished issues should be rejected. Then this statement that "speculative things are not established"—if speculative means mere conjecture, then the statement is correct, but the Holy Quran has used speculative as synonymous with conjecture only when it is opposed to truth [اِنَّ الظَّنَّ لَا یُغۡنِیۡ مِنَ الۡحَقِّ شَیۡئًا]
Reference: Surah Yunus:35
In the Quran, speculative is also used in the sense of established reality:
❀ [وَّ اَنَّا ظَنَنَّاۤ اَنۡ لَّنۡ نُّعۡجِزَ اللّٰہَ فِی الۡاَرۡضِ وَ لَنۡ نُّعۡجِزَہٗ ہَرَبًا]
It is an absolute fact that we can neither overpower Allah on earth nor escape from His presence.
Reference: (Al-Jinn:12)
❀ [الَّذِیۡنَ یَظُنُّوۡنَ اَنَّہُمۡ مُّلٰقُوۡا رَبِّہِمۡ]
They are certain that they will meet Allah.
Reference: (Al-Baqarah:46)
❀ [وَّ ظَنَّ اَنَّہُ الۡفِرَاقُ]
He is certain that the time of separation has come.
Reference: (Al-Qiyamah:28)
❀ [اَلَا یَظُنُّ اُولٰٓئِکَ اَنَّہُمۡ مَّبۡعُوۡثُوۡنَ]
Do they not have certainty that they will be raised?
Reference: (Al-Mutaffifin:4)
❀ [وَ ظَنَّ اَہۡلُہَاۤ اَنَّہُمۡ قٰدِرُوۡنَ]
They became certain that He is capable of it.
Reference: (Yunus:24)
Raghib has mentioned a rule regarding certainty:
[الظن اسم لما يحصل عن امارة ومتى قويت الدت الى العلم ومتى ضعفت جدا لم يتجاوز حد التوهم ومتى قوی او تصور القوی استعمل معه ان المشددة وان المخففة الخ]
Zann is the name of knowledge obtained from signs and indications; when these indications are strong, knowledge and certainty are acquired from them, and if they are weak, they are no less than conjecture. When these indications are strong or are believed to be strong, they have their emphatic and abbreviated usages.
It is obvious that it is absolutely wrong to call zann unproven in an absolute sense, and the conclusions drawn from this theory will also be wrong. The actual ruling will be on those signs and indications from which zann is obtained.
Accepting the suspected things entirely is as much a mistake as rejecting them entirely.
Reference: Tafheemaat: p. 314
In the terminology of the Imams of Hadith, "Zann" is the name of a particular level of knowledge. Definitive knowledge is obtained from mutawatir (mass-transmitted) reports. When there are signs of authenticity in the hadiths, the knowledge obtained considering the strength and weakness of these signs is referred to as Zann. The Imams have stated that this knowledge is a cause for action. Furthermore, those Imams who have considered not only the number but also the qualities of the narrators in mutawatir, or those narrations that have the status of "Talaqqi bil-Qubool" (acceptance upon hearing), it is also established that theoretical knowledge can be obtained from them. In other words, this is a kind of Zann from which theoretical knowledge can be derived. The scholar should consider whether something unproven can be a cause for action or whether theoretical knowledge can be obtained from it. The general people of the Quran consider Zann synonymous with conjecture and regard it as unproven. The scholar, due to a slight oversight or negligence, declared every Zann as unproven based on this incorrect usage. When the consequences of this were observed, the decision was made to accept the unproven. [صلت علی الاسد و بلت عن النقد] According to the terminology of the Imams of the discipline, Zann is the name of that level of knowledge which is less than certainty but includes theoretical knowledge and all its levels. Based on these signs, the hadith scholars have defined levels of strength and weakness.
The scholar's advice is that the deniers of Hadith should not reject the entire corpus. (I think the Pro-Wazir party might agree with the scholar's suggestion regarding the deniers of Hadith.)
✿ After this, the scholar states: Rejecting Ahad (solitary) reports will result in the loss of comprehensiveness in religion; the complete system of life in Islam cannot be obtained from the Quran and mutawatir hadiths alone. It is only the Ahad reports that provide us with a magnificent treasury of guidance.
Reference: Tafheemaat p. 316
No matter how apologetic this manner of expression may be, it is correct. There may be gentleness and weakness in the manner of delivery, but what Maulana said regarding the etiquette of disputing with an opponent is appropriate. The manner of delivery can be disputed, but what he said is largely correct.
Second Part:
In the second part, Maulana praises the Imams of Hadith and their services.
He also calls the means of preserving Hadith unparalleled, just like the extraordinary means of preserving the Quran, and praises the principles of the Muhaddithin but expresses dissatisfaction with them.
Thus it is stated:
After all, they were human, and for human knowledge, the limits set by the nature of Allah could not be exceeded by them. Their work was not free from the inherent defects that remain in human actions by nature.
Reference: Tafheemaat p. 318
After this, he criticizes the researchers of Hadith, saying:
The standard by which these (Muhaddithin) consider hadiths to be authentic or weak is exactly the same standard that we (Ahl al-Hadith) also adhere to. For example, give preference to the famous over the rare, the marfoo‘ over the mursal, and the continuous over the disconnected.
Reference: Tafheemaat p. 318
✿ Absolutely right, but the question is that even in the case of mutawatir (continuous transmission), the capital of certainty that exists is still human, and natural limits are set for them as well. If this criticism is correct, then the certainty of the Quran and mutawatir Sunnah should also be considered synonymous with conjecture. In other words, within the natural limits of humans, the existence of certainty is nonexistent. Certainly, these will not be Maulana's personal views, but this is the ultimate conclusion of his reasoning. What Maulana had given with one hand regarding the Imams of Hadith, their efforts, and the science of Hadith, he took back with the other hand; rather, in his view, the word certainty in the vocabulary of humanity is a meaningless word.
The representation of the principles of Hadith by the Ahl al-Hadith and the followers of Hadith, as Maulana has stated, is absolutely wrong. The Imams of Hadith and their followers never claimed that these principles of criticism are final and that no additions are possible; rather, in our view, the principles of Hadith are a dynamic science, which gradually reached the level where it is today. If any reasonable principle is added to it, there is room for it in the science. However, the complaint is justified that so far, the attempts made to add to it have very weak foundations and it is very difficult to accept them as principles; they are destructive rather than constructive. You and some elders before you have mentioned the term "Dirayah" (understanding), but neither they nor you have discussed its fundamental status. In fact, you yourself do not seem satisfied with it. In short, the encouragement Maulana gave to Hadith and the science of Hadith out of grace was buried by his own blessed hands, and by his own pen, the case of the opponents of Hadith was strengthened. [وماہی بادل قارددة كسرت]
Part Three:
In this part, Maulana highly praises the jurists of Islam, giving them the right that no matter what the principles of the muhaddithin demand, the jurists have the right to act upon weak hadiths, prefer mursal hadiths, and accept munqati' hadiths. Here, Maulana adorns the Qadiani poetry's cloak. He introduces the jurist in such a manner that:
His soul becomes immersed in the Muhammadan spirit, his vision unites with the prophetic insight, and his mind is molded in the framework of Islam.
Reference: Tafheemaat p.324
Then he says:
After reaching this stage, a person is not much dependent on the teacher; he does take help from the teacher, but his decisions do not depend on the teacher. Sometimes he even accepts a poor, weak, munqati' sanad, and criticized hadith, because his vision sees the sparkle of a diamond inside this fallen stone... etc.
Reference: (p.324)
❀ There is no doubt about the high status of the jurists of Islam, but what has been stated on the last pages of "The Path of Moderation" is completely baseless and merely poetic. The matter is only a difference in the method of thinking, neither a diamond nor a jewel. Yet, this palace, which was built on poetic flight, is also grafted to the earth, and it is stated:
"Since this matter is entirely subjective and does not come under any rule, nor can it, therefore there was room for disagreement before, there is now, and there will be in the future as well." ...... Alkh
Reference: Tafheemaat: p.324
Then how did this become a jewel? That is, the method of thinking of the jurists of Islam is also subjective, there is no principle.
Now someone tell us what Maulana has given us in these thirteen pages or what other path of moderation he has shown? The deniers of Hadith ask what the Prophet has bestowed upon us after so much blame? What is the point of distinction between you and us?
Maulana Islahi is an authentic and experienced scholar; he benefited from a thinker like Maulana Farahi, may Allah have mercy on him. In his statements, he has said almost everything that is said in the path of moderation. However, the dispersion of thoughts and ideas was not allowed to become evident at the level of words. But the heat of the atmosphere and the sharp criticisms in the newspapers have affected the mind. At some places, the tone has become quite harsh. Despite natural composure and inherent seriousness, Maulana has said some things that would have been better left unsaid. For a dignified person, stooping so low is not a good example.
A necessary clarification:
The purpose of the present remarks is partly to clarify our own sect and partly to point out the admonitions of those elders and their harmful effects, so that it may become clear whether the correct path is the one adopted by the leadership of Jamaat-e-Islami in support of Hadith and Sunnah, or the correct sect indicated by the Imams of Hadith and the pious predecessors of the Ummah. The breadth and comprehensiveness of Islam are manifested through the way of thinking of these gentlemen or the way of thinking of Ahl al-Hadith. The objectives whose attainment and completion you have been advocating for years can be safeguarded by the sect of Ahl al-Hadith or by your cautious and narrow views.
As far as Maulana Islahy and Maulana Maududi are concerned, or their reform efforts, I have full respect for them. In recent days, the somewhat journalistic style of writing has created a certain bitterness in the atmosphere, which I naturally dislike. Such acrimony should not arise in the discourse among religiously inclined groups, and the current circumstances are absolutely unfavorable for it. The truth is that the more religious groups quarrel among themselves, the more benefit will accrue to falsehood.
Many reasons can be given for discussing the "sect of moderation" and Maulana Islahy's admonitions, but I have tried to keep the present remarks limited to Hadith and its related matters so that we can understand each other closely on this subject.
I had read the "sect of moderation" many years ago and have read it again now; it contains neither any scholarly or technical merit nor any reformative point. Maulana Islahy has tried to correct some details after many years, but with an admission of lack of knowledge, I must say that there is no cause for satisfaction in it either, and it would be highly appropriate to completely remove these meaningless interpretations.
The Imams of Hadith and jurists, may Allah have mercy on them, have also used Hadith and Sunnah in specific meanings, but where they mention principles and evidences, they consider them synonymous and equivalent. Sometimes in titles and chapters, the word "Khabar" (report) is also used, which is more general than these two, but the intended meaning is the same as what is commonly called Sunnah or Hadith. The deniers of Hadith reject Hadith in this very sense. They criticize and object to Sunnah. Take a look at the summaries and detailed works of the principles of Hadith and principles of Fiqh; they neither create any constriction in the technical meaning of these words nor deviate from their stance. [شکر اللہ مساعیہم] But Maulana Islahī Sahib has completely constricted the meaning of Sunnah.
Sunnah of the Imams in the view of Sunnah:
[1] [السنۃ وہی تطلق على قول الرسول عليه السلام وعلى فعله والحديث مختص بقوله] The term Sunnah applies to both the sayings and actions of the Messenger of Allah ﷺ, whereas Hadith is specific to the sayings of the Prophet ﷺ.
Reference: Talwih ala al-Tawdih p.30 Qawl-e-Keshkar
[2] [يطلق لفظ السنۃ على ما جاء منقولا عن رسول الله ﷺ من قول او فعل او تقرير] The word Sunnah is used for that which is transmitted from the Messenger of Allah ﷺ in the form of a saying, action, or tacit approval.
Reference: Usul al-Fiqh by al-Khudri: p.257
[3] [السنۃ فى عرف المحدثین وجمهور اهل الشرع كل ما صدر عن الرسول ﷺ من قول او فعل او تقرير سواء صدر عنه باعتباره رسولا ام باعتباره انسانا من البشر] In the terminology of the Muhaddithin and the majority of the scholars of Shariah, Sunnah means all that has been issued from the Messenger of Allah ﷺ, whether it is a saying, action, or tacit approval; and whether it was issued from him ﷺ as a Messenger or as a human being.
Reference: Fiqh al-Islam by Hasan Ahmad Khateeb: p.69
[4] [(السنۃ) اما شرعا فهى قول النبى ﷺ وفعله وتقريره] In legal terminology, Sunnah means the sayings, actions, and tacit approvals of the Noble Prophet ﷺ.
Reference: Husool al-Ma'mool: p.22
[5] [اما السنۃ فتطلق فى الاكثر على ما اضيف الى النبى ﷺ من قول او فعل او تقرير فهى مرادفة للحديث عند علماء الاصول] The word Sunnah is mostly used for that which is attributed to the Noble Prophet ﷺ in the form of a saying, action, or tacit approval; therefore, according to the Usul scholars, Sunnah is synonymous with Hadith.
Reference: Tawjih al-Nazar by al-Jazairi: p.3
[6] [اما السنۃ فهى لغۃ الطريقۃ واصطلاحا مرادفة لحديث بالمعنى المتقدم الذى هو كل ما اضيف الى النبى ﷺ] The literal meaning of Sunnah is "way" or "method," while in terminology it is synonymous with Hadith, and Hadith means everything attributed to the Noble Prophet ﷺ.
Reference: Laqit al-Durar: p.4
[7] [والسنۃ ههنا ما صدر عن النبى ﷺ غير القرآن من قول ويسمى الحديث او فعل او تقرير] Here, Sunnah means that which has been issued from the Noble Prophet ﷺ besides the Quran, whether it is a saying—which is called Hadith—or an action or tacit approval.
Reference: Al-Qawl al-Ma'mool fi Fan al-Usul: p.78
[8] [والسنۃ هى المرويۃ عن رسول الله قولا وفعلا] Sunnah is that which has been narrated from the Messenger of Allah ﷺ in the form of a saying or action.
Reference: Risalah Usul by Zain al-Din al-Halabi 808 AH p.16
[9] [والسنۃ ما ورد عن النبى ﷺ من قول غير القرآن او فعل او تقرير] Sunnah means that which is transmitted from the Noble Prophet ﷺ, whether it is a saying other than the Quran, or an action, or tacit approval.
Reference: Qawa'id al-Usul by Safi al-Din Hanbali 684 AH p.91
[10] [والسنۃ لغة العادۃ وشريعۃ مشترك بين ما صدر عن النبى ﷺ من قول او فعل او تقرير وبين ما داظب عليه النبى ﷺ بلا وجوب] In language, Sunnah means habit, while in legal terminology it also applies to the sayings, actions, or tacit approvals issued from the Noble Prophet ﷺ, and also to those acts which the Prophet ﷺ performed regularly without obligation.
Reference: Ta'reefat by al-Jarjani: p.82
[11] [والسنۃ لغۃ العادۃ وههنا ما صدر عن رسول الله ﷺ غير القرآن من قول او فعل او تقرير كذا فى شرح المختصر] In language, Sunnah means habit, and here it means that which has been issued from the Messenger of Allah ﷺ besides the Quran in the form of a saying, action, or tacit approval. This is also mentioned similarly in Sharh al-Mukhtasar.
Reference: p.66, vol.2, Muslim al-Thuboot
[12] [السنۃ هى قول الرسول ﷺ او فعله] Sunnah means the sayings or actions of the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
Reference: Minhaj by al-Baydawi 685 AH p.61
[13] [وانما اختار لفظ السنۃ دون لفظ الخبر كما ذكره غيرہ لان لفظ السنۃ شامل لقول الرسول وفعله عليه السلام] Unlike others, the word "Sunnah" was chosen instead of the word "Khabar" because the word Sunnah includes both the sayings and actions of the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
Reference: Kitab al-Tahqiq Sharh al-Husami: p.147
[14] [السنۃ شرعا ما نقل عن رسول الله ﷺ قولا او فعلا او اقرارا على فعل] In legal terminology, Sunnah means that which is transmitted from the Messenger of Allah ﷺ in the form of a saying, action, or tacit approval of an action.
Reference: Nuzhat al-Khatir al-Atir: p.236 vol.1
[15] [السنۃ تطلق على قول الرسول وفعله وسكوته وعلى اقوال الصحابۃ وافعالهم الخ] The term Sunnah applies to the sayings, actions, and silence of the Messenger of Allah ﷺ, as well as to the sayings and actions of the Companions, may Allah be pleased with them, etc.
Reference: Nur al-Anwar: p.173
[16] [السنن تنقسم ثلثۃ اقسام قول من النبى ﷺ وفعل منه عليه السلام او شیء رآه فعلمه فاقر عليه] There are three types of Sunnah: a saying of the Noble Prophet ﷺ, an action of the Prophet ﷺ, or an act which he ﷺ saw and was aware of, then continued to maintain and did not disapprove of.
Reference: Ahkam by Ibn Hazm: p.2,6
[17] [يطلق لفظ السنۃ على ما جاء منقولا عن النبى ﷺ على الخصوص مما لم ينص عليه فى الكتاب العزيز] The word Sunnah is especially used for that which is transmitted from the Noble Prophet ﷺ and whose explicit mention is not found in the Glorious Quran.
Reference: Muwafaqat: vol.4 p.3
The concept is abundantly mentioned in the writings of the scholars. The Imams of Islam consider the Sunnah as a legal proof after the Quran, and they understand the Sunnah in the same sense as mentioned in the above references. There are minor variations in some definitions, but the scholars understand the meaning. In these definitions, Hadith and Sunnah are shown as synonymous, and the sayings, actions, and approvals of the Prophet are all included, and it is this meaning whose authenticity is under discussion.
The Imams of Hadith, in the books they wrote about Sunnah, have also mentioned the verbal, practical, and tacit Sunnah. All the books of Sunan testify that Sunnah is mentioned in the same introduced and technical sense, and it is known that these collections of Sunnah and their authors are recognized for their knowledge and excellence in the Ummah. Their viewpoint regarding Sunnah is the same as mentioned in the above statements.
The groups affected by the circumstances, such as Ahl al-Hadith, Ahl al-Quran, etc., are all before Maulana in the critical article he wrote in Tarjuman al-Quran, October 1955, and Maulana wants to demonstrate his superiority over all of them. He states:
Before clarifying the true status of Hadith and Sunnah in religion, I want to briefly explain the difference that I understand between Hadith and Sunnah, which people generally do not consider.
Hadith is any statement, action, or tacit approval that is narrated with reference to the Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him), but Sunnah means only that established and known method of the Prophet (peace be upon him) which he repeatedly practiced, guarded, and generally adhered to.
Reference: Tarjuman al-Quran, October 1955, p.137
This definition of Maulana is neither logical nor customary, however:
[1] Maulana has expressed what he wanted to say openly. In his view, the importance attributed to Sunnah is not given to Hadith.
[2] And the importance is also related to the same meaning of Sunnah which Maulana has assigned to himself or which the Jamaat-e-Islami aims to teach at this time.
[3] It is also clear that this is Maulana’s own terminology regarding Sunnah, which people generally do not consider.
[4] In Maulana’s view, applying Sunnah to any other meaning is not correct; the literal meaning of Sunnah is ‘only’ this (although Maulana differs from the entire Ummah in this regard).
As far as I believe, Maulana is neither a denier of Hadith nor does he reject Sunnah, but the way Maulana has started the discussion, it can open backdoors and provide considerable help to the deniers of Hadith.
[5] Maulana has so narrowly defined Sunnah that it will only relate to a few actions whose proof is continuously from the Prophet ﷺ, such as certain pillars of prayer, but for values like Zakat, perhaps one will have to rely on solitary reports again.
[6] It may be said a thousand times:
“If a person does not accept this (Sunnah) as a source of religion, then I do not accept him as a Muslim.”
The question is, how far does this ‘Sunnah’ extend? Its scope will not go beyond a few actions. The entire Islam will have to be established from somewhere else. Then what is the need for this claim?
[7] The claim is that Islam provides guidance in all aspects of life, but according to the definition you have presented, its scope will be so narrow that some important aspects of life may also be deprived of its guidance. Guidance in political and economic matters is out of the question; even in acts of worship and transactions, Islam’s guidance will be lacking. If the treatment of solitary reports continues like the Mu‘tazilites’ treatment of stepmothers, then in important issues such as Jihad, distribution of spoils, Jizya, wars, and many similar international matters, we will be deprived of Islam’s guidance. The completion of religion will remain a dream with no interpretation. If, like the people of the Quran, an attempt is made to extract necessary rulings from the Glorious Quran and mutawatir Sunnahs, the style of reasoning that will have to be adopted will be no better than political maneuvering.
After the Institution of Tulu-e-Islam, the Institution of Islamic Culture:
After the denial of Hadith, there are two groups in the country before you. Their method of reasoning is prominent: the Idara-e-Tulu-e-Islam Karachi and the Idara-e-Saqafat-e-Islamia Lahore. The majority among them are deniers of Hadith; those who do not openly deny Hadith have a mental inclination towards denial. There, the fundamental truths of Islam have been explained in such a manner that even the pillars of Islam have not remained safe. Neither prayer exists, nor fasting, neither Hajj nor Zakat, neither Tawheed is intact nor Risalat, neither Qiyamah nor reward and punishment. The entire Islam has almost become synonymous with worldliness. See
Reference: Risalah "Islami Ki Bunyadi Haqeeqatain" by Khalifa Abdul Hakeem], [Maqam-e-Hadith, by Syed Jafar Shah], [Nizam-e-Rububiyat, by Parvez
, etc.Centuries ago, where we stood in support of Sunnah and Hadith, the Imams of Hadith had decisively defeated the Mu'tazila, Kharijites, and other innovative sects. The constructive and destructive efforts of our predecessors had rendered the innovators unsuccessful. The contraction and constriction that Maulana has produced in praise means that we ourselves have abandoned many parts of our claim. If the avoidance of our intellectual leadership continues in this manner, we should admit our defeat. We have voluntarily become estranged from the valuable treasure of the masses. Is this overcautious caution, a result of lack of study, or cowardice and timidity? [اللھم انی اعوذ بک من الجبن]
[9] Perhaps this praise will not achieve the purpose for which this contraction and constriction was adopted. I think the Parvez party among the Ahl al-Quran may temporarily agree with you to some extent by word manipulation; probably their denial of Hadith and your acknowledgment of the authority of Sunnah will not have any significant effect after this praise, only some nominal distinction will remain.
Deviation from the topic of discussion:
[10] This kind of definition is a deviation from the point of discussion. The place of dispute is the same meaning of Sunnah that has been mentioned above from the writings of various scholars. This would mean that we have changed the position of supporting the Sunnah on which we have stood from the best of centuries until today. Such deviation and misguidance was not expected from the respected gentleman.
[11] To prove the practice of the Prophet ﷺ and its continuity, the collection of mutawatir (mass-transmitted) reports is very limited; if one relies on ahad (individual) reports, then from the Maulana’s point of view, it would be affirmation of conjecture by conjecture, and in the first case, the result in the common life would be denial of hadith, because what is found in the books of Sunnah does not satisfy this definition. Also, the Maulana’s comment is as if someone says that I consider Sunnah to be a conclusive proof, but the definition of Sunnah is that a person of the stature of Imam Shafi’i or Imam Ahmad should narrate it from beginning to end. The result of such severe conditions would be tantamount to denial.
[12] According to this definition, fasting on Ashura, which the Prophet ﷺ probably observed only once, the Tarawih prayer which the Prophet ﷺ performed in congregation for only three days in Ramadan, the various forms of Dua al-Istiftah which were practiced at different times, and other practical Sunnahs whose continuity is not established or which are under discussion, how will they be included in this definition? Denying their Sunnah status according to this definition will not be difficult.
[13] In the definition of Sunnah, some scholars include both customs and acts of worship with certain conditions, while others consider only acts of devotion as part of Sunnah. This discussion is worthy of consideration in its own place, but the Maulana’s definition is silent on this matter as well. There is no clause in the definition to exclude continuous customs. At most, this definition can be given the importance that if an act is established according to these conditions, then it will also be Sunnah.
[14] Everyone has the right to define terms, but they cannot replace the established terminology of the Imams. For example, if someone says that in my view, the meaning of Salat is the supreme Lordship, and the Hereafter does not mean the Day of Judgment but rather the concern for tomorrow in this world and the future in life, and the angels mean the miracles of power that have been subjected to man in this world, fasting means only discipline and control over emotions, etc. No matter how useful these things may be in their place, they will not establish the introduced and technical meanings related to fasting, Salat, belief in the Hereafter, and belief in angels. Similarly, a modern terminology regarding Sunnah can be considered to some extent, but it will not solve the disputed issue under discussion. As far as I think, Maulvi Ahmad Deen Amritsari did not deny the commonly known acts and usual Sunnahs from almost the same point of view; he practiced the call to prayer, Salat, and marriage in the same customary way. This is repeatedly mentioned in Burhan al-Quran and its commentary, although Maulvi Ahmad Deen was known to be a denier of hadith. It is hoped that the Maulana will reconsider this method of discussion, because this deviation will not solve the original issue.
