Title: Are the Reportings in Hadith Confirmed Sayings of the Prophet (pbuh) [1] ? Question: Brother, please realize that Hadith that were collected by the most honorable of men, such as Imam Bukhari and Imam Muslim , are named Sahih for that reason. They are true, and the Sunni Muslims take them to be accurate reporting of the words of the Prophet (may peace be upon him). The science of the Hadith is vast, and requires a lifetime to truly understand. If we took the Hadith merely to be words that are 'ascribed' to him, then much of the Sharia'h would not exist nor have any background. Abu Bakr , being an intimate companion of the Prophet (may peace be upon him), narrated few hadith in light of the fact that he was very close to the Prophet (pbuh). He, and as the other narrators of Hadith , were so in fear of misquoting the Prophet (S), that he only narrated those instances where he knew the entire conversation by heart. Many Hadith were not included in the Sahih just because of the fact that the narrators were not sure of a single word. The Qur'an itself was compiled by the very people who narrate the Hadith , as it was not in written form until the Caliphate of Abu Bakr as-Saddiq . The same people who memorized and narrated the Qur'an word for word, related Hadith word for word. The narrators of hadith were great scholars, who had memorized the entire Qur'an and many other Hadith besides their own. Please take this into account when responding to the Christian. Answer: I have great regard for all the scholars of Islam and I assure you that Muhadditheen [2] are no exception. These people have spent their lives to preserve any and all information that they believed to be reliable, regarding the life, actions and directives of the Prophet (pbuh). But even with my heartfelt regard for them, I am bound by my covenant with the Almighty, which is inherent in accepting Islam as my religion that I must proclaim whatever I hold to be true. I assure you that if anyone points out and convinces me of the error in my judgment, I shall not hesitate in accepting my mistake publicly. I, with due respect, have a difference of opinion regarding the points that you have mentioned. I would like to take each point one by one. You write: " a'h adith that were collected by the most honorable of men, such as Imam Bukhari and Imam Muslim , are named Sahih for that reason. They are true..." Sahih hadith , has been defined by Ibn al-Salaah , one of the most prominent scholars of the field as: " Sahih hadith is one whose chain of narrators does not have a break and is a narration of truthful and careful person from another truthful and careful person, till the end, and is not " Shaaz " (unusual) and neither " mo`allal " (having a problem)." As should be clear from Ibn al-Salaah 's statement cited above, the term " Sahih " does not refer to a hadith collected by a particular "honorable man" like Muslm or Bukhari . The term refers to a hadith that meet specified conditions regarding its chain of narrators. You also write that: "... the Sunni Muslims take them to be the words of the Prophet (may peace be upon him)" I do not agree with you on this point. Although there are some Muslim scholars who consider hadith to be the words of the Prophet (pbuh), but then there are those who do not, just on the basis of its being " Sahih ", take them to be the words of the prophet (pbuh). Ibn al-Salaah writes: "When they say: "Such and such is a Sahih hadith ", it means that its chain of narrators is not broken and the chain fulfills the conditions specified above, but this does not necessitate that the information given in it is absolutely true." The above statement clearly shows that what you have written is not true. You further write: "If we took the Hadith merely to be words that are 'ascribed' to him, much of the Sharia'h would not exist nor have any background." In my opinion, the basis of Shari`ah are the Qur'an and the Sunnah of the Prophet (pbuh) and none of these two sources are dependent on hadith . As far as taking hadith as 'merely' words ascribed to the Prophet (pbuh) is concerned, I do not know, what else can be said about hadith . I shall write the questions that arise in my mind regarding these words, which are 'merely' words 'ascribed' to the Prophet (pbuh) at the end of this response. If you can provide me with satisfactory answers, I assure you, I shall, very open-mindedly, reconsider my point of view. You state: "Many Hadith were not included in the Sahih just because of the fact that the narrators were not sure of a single word." This is a completely unfounded statement. I have just counted at least 22 hadith , included only in the Sahih Bukhari , in which at least one of the narrators is in doubt regarding the exact word, which was narrated to him by the previous narrator. You state: The Qur'an itself was compiled by the very people who narrate the Hadith , as it was not in written form until the Caliphate of Abu Bakr as-Saddiq . Even if your statement regarding the Qur'an not being in written form, until Abu Bakr (ra)'s time is taken to be true, we cannot ignore the fact that the Qur'an was memorized, word for word, by a number of companions of the Prophet (pbuh) on the persuasion of the Prophet (pbuh) himself. The Qur'an was transmitted by the group of the companions of the Prophet (pbuh), as a whole, in its verbal form. I am sure, you are aware of the fact that this is not the case with the transmission of hadith . There are three major differences in the transmission of the Qur'an , as compared to that of hadith : The Prophet (pbuh) himself persuaded his companions to memorize and deliver the Qur'an to those, who were not in his time and presence, no such persuasion is found in the case of hadith ; the Qur'an was transmitted to the next generation by the consensus ( ijmaa` ) and verbal perpetuation of the companions of the Prophet (pbuh), in contrast, hadith is a narrative of one or a few companions of the Prophet (pbuh) only; and the Qur'an was transmitted by the companions verbally, that is the words of the Qur'an were transmitted by the companions, not its meaning, whereas hadith , in most of the cases, was narrated by the narrators as they understood it. They transmitted, with only a very few exceptions, not the words, but the meanings and implications as they perceived, understood and remembered them. In view of these three differences in the transmission of the Qur'an and hadith , it does not seem reasonable to compare the significance and authenticity of the Qur'an with that of hadith . I would like to clarify here that I do not doubt the honesty and integrity of the narrators of the sayings ascribed to the Prophet (pbuh) and neither that of the muhadditheen . My reservation in accepting hadith to be the exact words spoken by the Prophet (pbuh) rather than only words 'ascribed' to him is the fallibility of human beings. The belief that Hadith always consists of the exact words of the Prophet (pbuh) rather than 'words ascribed to the Prophet (pbuh), is based on the principle that: the statement given by a true, honest, understanding and intelligent person is always correct . This principle, as you know, is not true. Human beings - true, honest, understanding and intelligent human beings - can commit very serious mistakes. A person may be absolutely truthful, but how can we be sure that a particular statement that he utters is absolutely true? How can we be sure that he understood the problem correctly? How can we be sure that he stated the problem as correctly as he understood it? How can we be sure that his narration includes all that was significant in the environment in which the statement was originally given? Whatever we find in Sahih Muslim , or Sahih Bukhari is what Muslim or Bukhari , respectively, believed to be correct ascriptions to the Prophet (pbuh). Their decisions, no doubt were based on extensive research, but obviously, they were human beings and like all other human beings, they were not infallible. Today, with the research data available to us, we are in a position to say that one of the major reasons of management problems in various organizations is misperceptions, misunderstandings and miscommunications. Even if we assign only a five percent chance of misunderstanding and misperception for a given person and a five percent chance of miscommunication (which is far below the actual chance for such errors), all narrations ascribed to the Prophet (pbuh) would entail between forty and seventy percent chance of being inaccurate. Please tell me, under these circumstances, how are you so certain that whatever has been ascribed to the Prophet (pbuh) by Muslim , Bukhari etc. are really the exact words of the Prophet (pbuh), rather than 'mere' words ascribed to him? I look forward to your response. 16 th December 1998 [1] This Letter was written in response to my reply to Mr. Katz's Comment regarding the understanding ascribed to the Prophet (pbuh) regarding the ' Quick or Slow Creation - The Implication of "kun fayakoon" in the Qur'an '. [2] i.e. scholars of the science of narratives ascribed to the Prophet (pbuh).