Notes towards a Fresh Perspective on the Islamic Sunna

British Society for Middle Eastern Studies

Notes towards a Fresh Perspective on the Islamic SunnaAuthor(s): John BurtonSource: Bulletin (British Society for Middle Eastern Studies), Vol. 11, No. 1 (1984), pp. 3-17Published by: Taylor & Francis, Ltd.Stable URL: http://www.jstor.org/stable/194803 .

Accessed: 08/05/2014 23:01

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 ofcontent in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and facilitate new formsof scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact [email protected].

.

Taylor & Francis, Ltd. and British Society for Middle Eastern Studies are collaborating with JSTOR to digitize,preserve and extend access to Bulletin (British Society for Middle Eastern Studies).

http://www.jstor.org

This content downloaded from 169.229.32.137 on Thu, 8 May 2014 23:01:38 PMAll use subject to JSTOR Terms and Conditions

http://www.jstor.org/action/showPublisher?publisherCode=taylorfrancis

http://www.jstor.org/stable/194803?origin=JSTOR-pdf

http://www.jstor.org/page/info/about/policies/terms.jsp


NOTES TOWARDS A FRESH PERSPECTIVE ON THE ISLAMIC SUNNA

John Burton

This paper was presented at the First Conference of the School of Abbasid Studies, University of St Andrews, in the summer of 1983.

Goldziher, Schacht and Shafi'i addressed themselves to the same

questions, viz. the 'authenticity' of the Sunna, and the degree of confidence that might be placed in its attribution to the

Prophet. Was the Sunna (a) merely the result of deliberate and fraudulent fabrication perpetrated on a wide scale to supply the documentation needed to sustain the conflicting views of

participants in the political, legal and theological disputes of the second and third Islamic centuries?(1) Or (b) merely the false attribution to the Prophet of the details of disputes over actual practice introduced centrally by the Umayyad caliphs, or

locally by their appointed agents, or by others, during the

Umayyad caliphate?(2) Or (c) the lovingly preserved record of the very words and acts of the Prophet, faithfully handed on by his Companionsto those who came after them, and thereafter cherished from generation to generation?(3)

The Sunna did provide the documentation exploited in the

disputes noted above, but does that necessarily mean that its

origins lie no further back in the history of the Islamic

community? That it is all baseless invention?(4)

Goldziher and Schacht have both emphasized the element of

disagreement that marks the Tradition. Indeed, it was this element of disagreement that enabled them to advance their

hypothesis on the nature and origins of the Sunna. Disagreement is not, however, the invariable characteristic of this Tradition. There is also broad agreement on important questions, and this must be taken into account in any true description of the Sunna, and certainly in any enquiry into 'origins'.

Goldziher traced the factor of disagreement to either simple ignorance -- which would point to lack of early regulations;(5) to disputes determined -- or aggravated - by political motivation,(6) or perhaps indicating differing local traditions and usages;(7) or incompatibility of view-points on theological questions to be attributed, possibly, to differential influences exerted from outside Islam, e.g. by Christian, Jewish or other

contemporary groups.(8)

Schacht, deliberately restricting himself to 'purely legal' discussions, allowed -- in addition to the survival of local differences in commercial practice, for example -- for the continuation in Islam of varying attitudes derived, according to area, from pre-Islamic Arab, Byzantine or Sasanian custom. (9)

Both were clear as to what the Sunna is not. For them, it was not the inherited knowledge of the views and the practice of Muhammad and his contemporaries who had formed the first

generation of Muslims. Both were thus clear as to where the Sunna had not come from, which is understandable, since they were

3



reacting against the Muslim view. Their negative conclusions have, however, almost called a halt to Sunna studies, as though scholars today thought there was little more to add. Some scholars now seem to shy away from the Sunna, not sure how to handle it; some would prefer not to handle it at all, given the

reputation for tendentiousness it has now acquired.(10) Others continue to treat the Tradition as really 'historical' and a reliable source of documentation, even for the first century(ll), as though Goldziher and Schacht had never existed. What one

generally finds, however, is that scholars pick and choose their traditions (I4adiths) accepting and rejecting in the light of current 'received truths'. It really is time that we had a

Theory of Tradition.

To construct a Theory of Tradition, we should have to take

equal account of the three main branches of Islamic literature: the standard medieval collections of the hadith and the basic

fiqh works, together with, in each case, their principal commentaries, and thirdly, the exegetical literature, the tafsir. Note would have to be taken not only of matters which continued to divide the Muslim scholars; one would also have to

probe their agreement on other matters which include not only broad questions and basic principles, but even quite detailed

points. To allow for the study of the evolution of the Islamic discussion of a number of key topics drawn from both 'the purely legal' and 'the purely religious' areas, a section might be cut

through the discussion presented in the three main types of source covering a single topic exhaustively, e.g. ritual prayer; marriage and divorce; inheritance; sale, barter and loans, etc. The enquiry would be pursued until there emerged a conclusion on the relation between the three major types of writings which share a common reliance upon hadiths as their raw material.

For the purpose of illustrating the method proposed, let us consider one aspect of the Islamic fast. We begin from Q.2:183: 'Believers, fasting is [hereby] imposed upon you, as fasting was

imposed upon those before you... a [limited] number of days...' This Qur'anic statement might profitably be compared with the

very interesting Iadith which purports to describe the 'practice' of the Prophet and his associates:(12)

The Companion Mu'adh b. Jabal is said to have stated: The ritual prayer underwent a three-fold series of developments, and the Islamic fast, similarly, passed through three successive stages. The Prophet came to Medina and proceeded to fast three days in

every month. In addition, he fasted on the 'Ashura'.

Subsequently God imposed upon Muhammad the [Islamic] fast,

revealing the verse: 'Believers, fasting is [hereby] imposed upon you, as fasting was imposed upon those before you...'

Now, it remains very much part of 'received wisdom' among Islamists that Muhammad had observed and had imposed upon his followers the observance of the 'Ashura' fast before the adoption of the Ramadan fast. Much has been written in Arabic and in

4



European languages about Muhammad's reasons for adopting, and

subsequently abandoning 'Ashura', and much ingenuity has been

displayed in these studies.(13) In other words, the above -- and the following -- hadiths have found a receptive audience

among our scholars, after having first been accepted by the Muslim scholars. What, then, is the ultimate source of this

general belief that, on his arrival at Medina, at the time of the Hejira, Muhammad had adopted the 'Ashura'fast? Is it, in fact, a general belief, even among the Muslim scholars?

We begin by suggesting that it is improbable that the Mu'adh wording represents the original form of the hadith. The above wording is a technical, not a 'historical' report. The

point it makes is that the 'Ashura' fast had been introduced, not in the Qur'an, but in '.the Sunna of the Prophet.' The hadith, in other words, is a negative exegesis. Two fasts, a fast of three days in every month, and the fast of the 'Ashura have been consciously detached from the words of the Qur'anic passage under examination. They had allegedly been introduced

by Muhammad, on his arrival at Medina, and are thus to be attributed to the Sunna. The hadith, by quoting a Qur'anic passage which imposes a fast obligation upon the believers, focuses our attention upon the wording of that passage: 'Believers, fasting is [hereby] imposed upon you, as fasting was

imposed upon those before you... a [limited] number of days.'

The exegetes show themselves deeply divided in their

interpretation of this one sentence:

Qatada 1: The verse refers to Ramadan. God imposed the Ramadan fast upon those who came before you. [i.e. upon Muhammad and his contemporaries, the "you" referring to the audience here addressed by the exegete.] The Muslims had

originally fasted three days monthly, as they originally had performed only two ritual prayers daily, morning and

evening. Subsequently God imposed the Ramadan fast.(14) Qatada 2: Before the imposition of the Ramadan fast, the Muslims

had been commanded to fast three days in every month --one day in every ten -and to perform two rak'as morning and evening. That was the beginning of the regulation in Islam of the

prayer and the fast.(15)

Alternatively, the verse was held to refer to all prophets and to every pre-Islamic religious group, from the days of Adam to the appearance of Muhammad:

Dahh.ak: From the days of Noah until the time of Muhammad, men fasted three days in every month...(16)

Ibn 'Umar is said to have insisted that the verse refers to Ramadan: The Prophet said, 'God imposed the Ramadan fast upon all previous religious groups.'(17)

Hasan al-Basri: i.e. He imposed upon them all the fast of one

complete month.(18) Tabari: Since the days of Abraham, men have observed the fast of

Ramadan.(19)

5



If 'those before you' referred to 'those immediately before

you', the time-scale should be shortened:

Ibn 'Abbas: The expression refers to ahl al-kitab. Fasting had been imposed upon the Christians, as it has now been imposed upon you, the Muslims. (20)

The technique used by the scholars named thus far is illustrated by Ibn 'Abbas's here adding 'confirmation of this assertion may be found in the Book of God: "Believers, fasting is

[hereby] imposed upon you, as fasting was imposed upon those before you."'(21)

Any allegation that the verse refers to the Christians raises the question of how the contemporary Christians fast. The realization that they observe a period somewhat above thirty days demanded clarification:

The Prophet said, 'Ramadan was imposed upon them. Their king fell ill, and they said, "If God cure him, we'll add ten extra

days." A second king damaged his mouth on a piece of meat, and

they said, "If God cure him, we'll add another seven days." A third king said, "Let us round the number up to fifty and fast in the spring."'(22)

In his exegesis, Suddi offers the following explanation:

Ramadan had been imposed upon the Christians. .Finding the fast onerous in the summer heat, they called a council and agreed to move the fast to the spring, saying, 'We can atone for that by adding an extra twenty days to the fast period.'(23)

The literature is replete with hadiths offering guidance to the Muslims on the timing of the beginning and the ending of the fast of Ramadan. Since the two termini are to be based upon lunar

observation, advice is especially needful in the event that clouds obscure the sky. (24) Muslim anxieties on these matters have been transferred to their predecessors -- 'those before youo'

Ibn 'Abbas: to begin with, the Christians anticipated the beginning of the fast; fearing to mistake the date of the first day, they added a day before the fast. Later, they both anticipated and extended the fast, fearing also to mistake the date of the last day. In this manner they had finally added ten days before and ten days after the fast period. Fearing to mistake the

dates, they ended by straying far from the divine command,

turning a fast of thirty days into one of fifty days.(25)

The Muslim fast used to be three days in every month. That was abandoned on the revelation of Ramadan. (26)

Ibn Mas'ud: The fast of'Ashura' used to be observed before the

revelation of Ramadan. When Ramadan was imposed,'Ashura' was abandoned. (27)

Jabir b. Samura: The Prophet commanded us to observe the'Ashura' fast and he exhorted us and accustomed us to observe it. When

Ramadan was imposed, he neither ordered, nor forbade it, nor

accustomed us to keep the observance of the'Ashura' fast.(28)

6



tA'isha: The Prophet commanded the observance of 'Ashura' before the imposition of the Ramadan fast, following which Ashura' became optional. (29)

We have already noted Ibn 'Abbas's observation that 'those

before you' referred to ahi al-kitab. Confirmation of that assertion might be found in the Book of God. The attribution of

reports to Companions being no more stable than attribution to the Prophet, we find an alternative explanation of 'those before

you' attached to the name of Ibn 'Abbas:

The Prophet came to Medina and found the Jews observing the fast of 'Ashura'. Questioned about that, they replied, 'This is the day on which God granted victory to Moses and the Israelites over Pharaoh. We observe this fast in respect of that great event.' The Prophet told the Jews, 'We are more

closely related to Moses than you.' He ordered his followers to fast.(30)

The Jews replied that Moses had instituted this fast in commemoration of God's deliverance of His Prophet and his

people, and the drowningof Pharaoh and his armed hosts. Muhammad declared, 'We have a greater claim on Moses and a closer relationship with him than you,' whereupon the Prophet fasted and commanded his following to fast.(31)

These reports sowed the seed of the notion that the Prophet had adopted the 'Ashura' fast in direct imitation of the Jews of Medina. The Muslims are also familiar with reports on their

Prophet's supposed predilection for doing the opposite of what the Jews did, and Abu Musa can, in this spirit, report that, since the Jews celebrated this day as a festival (!) the Prophet, to spite them, ordered his followers to observe it as a

fast-day.(32) In one version, Abu Musa's remarks refer to the Jews of Khaybar.(33) The Muslims know of Jews at Medina and at

Khaybar. They never consider the possibility that there might have been some Jews at Mecca.

A further instance of the Prophet's inclination to act

contrary to Jewish practice is reported by Ibn 'Abbas:

The Prophet fasted on 'Ashura' and commanded his followers to observe that fast. They protested that that was a day which the Jews and the Christians magnified, and the Prophet announced that, in that case, in the following year, the Muslims would observe the fast on the ninth. But before that

day came round again, the Prophet had already died.(34)

The Prophet, to whom the divine revelations were coming in an unbroken stream during the twenty-odd years of his holy mission, would surely not have introduced a pious practice on the basis of mere imitation of the Jews, his sworn enemies, and

divinely dubbed 'the enemies of God'. The profound distaste

many felt for such a suggestion, reflected in the above, among a large number of hadiths devoted to mukhalafat al-Yahud, doubtless induced other scholars to seek to break altogether this unfortunate link with Medinese Jewry: (35)

7



'A'isha: The 'Ashura' fast was observed in the Jahiliyya. When Islam came, this fast became optional.(36)

In the Jahiliyya, Quraysh used to observe the 'Ashura' fast, and the Prophet used to observe it [along with his fellow- tribesmen.] When he transferred his seat to Medina, he continued to observe the 'Ashura' and commanded his followers to do so. When the Ramadan fast was imposed, the Prophet announced, 'He who wishes may continue to observe 'Ashura'; he who wishes may abandon it.'(37)

Ibn &Umar: The Prophet himself said, ' Ashura' was a fast-day observed by the people in the Jahiliyya. Any of you who would like to observe it, may do so; any of you who dislikes to observe it, need not do so.'(38) 'Abdullah b. 'Umar made a point of never observing 'Ashura', unless it chanced to fall on a day when he was observing a fast [for reasons unconnected with 'Ashura'.](39)

The identification of the fast of 'those before you' as the 1Ashura' was merely one of a number of alternative guesses at the meaning of the Qur'an's expression. The identification of 'those before you' as the Jews was simply one of a greater number

of alternative exegeses. 'Those before', i.e. before Islam, the Jahiliyya, covers: 1. Jews, Christians and heathen alike; 2. ahl al-kitib -- ambiguous, covering Jews and Christians; 3. those [immediately] before Islam -- equally ambiguous. In addition to Christians [chronologically] the immediately preceding revelation; Jews [spatially] the immediately preceding system, it could refer, as we have seen, to those who preceded the believers addressed by the exegetes i.e. to the first generation of

believers; 4. all previous religious communities founded by prophets: Adam, Noah, Abraham, Moses, Christ -- the whole of

previous human history is grist to the mill of the monotheist commentator.

Abu Hurayra: 'Ashura' commemorates the day on which the Ark

finally came to rest. Noah instituted the observance of this fast in thanks-giving.(40)

All exegesis proceeds from a combination of guesswork and

parti pris. The degree to which the combination has worked to

produce the foregoing results is patent.

One set of hadiths was launched merely to break the link between Muhammad's alleged introduction of a fast obligation in his Sunna, and the practice of the Jews of Medina. Now,

according to traditional Muslim thinking, of the two centres in which the Prophet had pursued his mission, Medina was the scene of his and the Qur'an's 'legislative' function, Mecca that of the Qur'an's eschatological 'unitarian' preaching. Islamic

'legislation' tends, therefore, automatically to be ascribed to the Medinese period of the Prophet's activity. Mention of Medina makes scholars, Muslim and non-Muslim alike, think of the Jews. That leads to the identification of 'those before you', as the

Jews, and to the identification of the fast thought to be

8



referred to in, 'Fasting is [hereby] imposed upon you, as fasting was imposed upon those before you,' as the fast of the 'Ashura'.

The verse's reference to the imposition of a fast, i.e. to

legislation, located the verse in Medina. Simultaneously, the verse's expression 'those before you', it was thought, pointed to an identifiable group, Among several guesses, one referred the expression to the Jews. The guesses were mutually corroborative, leading to questions as to Jewish fasting practice. Hence the mention of 'Ashura' in our exegetical hadiths.

Other interpretations which made 'those before you' refer

either to the Christians, or to the heathen Arabs, simply show a

flight from the reference to the Jews. That those interpretations

were, in fact, counter-interpretations -- and thus posterior to

the reference to the Jews -- may be thought to be implicit in

their very wording. The Christians had 'extended' their fast

in atonement for its unwarranted transfer from the hot season

(r m d) to the cool season; while 'Ikrima rationalizes the quite

extraordinary claim that Quraysh (of all people') had observed

the 'Ashura' fast days in the darkest Jahiliyya (when they were

supposed to be sunk in the crassest paganism) by alleging that

they had been guilty of some heinous crime and had been advised

by some anonymous spiritual counsellor to adopt the 'Ashura'

fast in expiation, and to atone for their sin.(41) Both contexts

use the term kaffara (kippur), thus,perhaps, betraying something of their background. It has also been suggested that in their

adoption of the 'Ashura' Quraysh had perhaps been imitating the

practice of 'those before them'! (42)

Further, we know from our sources that there had been

disagreement among the exegetes as to the function of the 'as'

in 'Believers, fasting is [hereby] imposed upon you as (kama)

fasting was imposed upon those before you.'

Some read this kama as a mere conjunction: 'fasting is

[hereby] imposed upon you, just as fasting was imposed upon those

before you.'(43)

The verse refers merely to the fact of the imposition of an

obligation to fast, parallel to the imposition of an obligation to fast upon other people before the coming of Islam. Such an

exegesis is dull and rather boring, and advances the discussion

of the Qur'anic texts but little.

Much more exciting is an exegesis which sees in this verse

a divine hint as to how Muhammad and his followers had observed

the rite of fasting before the imposition of Ramadan. The

insatiable demand of the Muslims for ever-more minutely drawn

details of the life and practice of their remarkable Prophet led

some exegetes, it would appear, to detach the ma from its ka, thus turning a conjunctive into a relative: 'there is_hereby imposed upon you a fast, just like the fact (ka-alladhi) of

those before you. '(44)

The inquisitive mind of the exegete, forever delving into

9



the quis and the quod of a remarkable book's every allusion, was no less industrious in ferreting out the precise identification of 'those before' and the smallest detail of the manner in which

they had observed the fast.

The texts of the Holy Qur'an were regarded by the scholars as not merely conveying general rulings intended to direct the actions of every believer until Judgment Day, but also, since revealed in time to Muhammad at the different stages in his historical mission, as containing precious allusions to the actual conduct of Muhammad and his associates in the days when,

together, they were laying down the foundations of Islamic

practice. Here, therefore, perhaps yet another blank in our

knowledge of the details of the Prophet's earthly life could be filled in from the wording of Q.2:183. The information that would result from this eager quest would have no practical application, nor any significance for the fiqh, since no madhhab teaches that the 'Ashura' fast has remained obligatory for the Muslim. All agree that 'Ashura' is entirely optional, a wholly supererogatory act of devotion whose once-obligatory character --

if, indeed, 'Ashura' had ever been obligatory in Islam -- has now been superseded by the imposition of the fast of Ramadan, Interest,

therefore, in 'Ashura' was somewhat antiquarian. It was wholly exegesis-originated, and, having no practical application, all discussion of 'Ashura' was entirely academic and theoretical. The

impulse to probe deeper and deeper into the precise way in which the Prophet and his followers had observed the fast in its various details came from those who elected to continue its

observance, on a purely voluntary basis.

In precisely the same fashion, a monthly feast of three

days came to be added by the pious to the Islamic list of works of voluntary, supererogatory piety. It is not wajib, but sunna. In the case of the three days' fast, additional appeal to further

Qur'anic statements could be made. Qatada had reported that, before the imposition of the Ramadan fast,the Muslims had been commanded to fast three days in every month -- one day in ten. The three days' fast is nowhere in the literature ascribed to

any identifiable pre-Islamic group, but is throughout regarded as having been wholly and exclusively Muhammadan.

Abu Hurayya: My friend [Muhammad] counselled me to fast three

days in every month. (45) The Prophet said, 'The month of abstention plus the three

days' fast every month is the equivalent of perpetual fasting. ' (46)

Abu Dharr: When the Prophet commanded the fast of three days in

every month, and stated that that was the equivalent of the

perpetual fast, God revealed the confirmation of His Prophet's statement: 'Whoso does one good deed, ten good deeds shall be reckoned to his heavenly account.' (Q.6:160) (47)

Thus, two voluntary Muslim devotions (tatawwu4) have emerged from the exegesis of a single verse: 'Believers, fasting is

[hereby] imposed upon you, as fasting was imposed upon those

10



before you... a [limited] number of days' (ayyam-an ma dudat-in). The expression is plural, and the plural in Arabic is employed in the enumeration.of objects numbering more-than two. Some scholars decided to restrict its use in this context to the bottom of the range; hence their reference to a fast of three

days.

'Ata': In Arabic, one does not refer to a whole month as a

/limited] number of days: ayyam-an nmadudat-in.(48)

Muqatil: ayyam-in ma dudat-in refers precisely to a month, i.e. to the thirty days of Ramadan.(49)

Ibn Hayyan: if these words ayyam-an ma'dudat-in refer to the month of Ramadan, then that is what was imposed. That was the view of Ibn Abi Layla and the host of the exegetes [but, see below.] The expression 'a [limited] number of days' is used to encourage the believers to observe the fast, since the number of days being imposed is countable, and not considerable -- only thirty. Precisely the same expression refers to an inconsiderable number [of days] in other Qur'anic contexts: Q.2:80; Q.12:20. Cf. Q.3:24.

If, however, the words ayyam-in ma'dudat-in imposed the three days' fast -- some scholars say the three days' fast

plus of 'Ashura' -- which had been imposed upon those before us, then that will be what ayyam-in ma'dudat-in refers to. This was the view of Ibn 'Abbas and 'Ata'.

The majority of exegetes, however, took the view that

ayyam-in ma'dudat-in refers to Ramadan. 'Fasting is

[hereby] imposed upon you... a [limited] number of days,' could refer to one day, two days, or any number of days. God adds 'the month of Ramadan' as an explanatory gloss.(50)

The exegetes, in general, were, indeed, disposed -- in the end -- to read Q.2:183-7 as a single context, referring to Ramadan. That had also been the drift of the Mucadh hadith.

According to that document, neither the three days' fast nor the 'Ashura' fast is alluded to in the Qur'an. We did,however, note, that the document took the trouble to cite the Qur'an. It was

not, however, from the Qur'an, but from the exegesis of the

Qur'an, that the reference to these two facts had been extracted. In the texts of the Qur'an (2:183-7) an obligation to fast is mentioned on the page before any reference to timing or length of fast occurs. In the Mu'adh hadith Muhammad had introduced the fast of three days in every month and the fast of 'Ashura' before God imposed upon the Muslims any formal obligation to fast. In both documents, fasting is imposed before the first mention of Ramadan by name.

The Mu'adh hadith either originated in, or was perpetuated in,circles unaware -- or no longer aware -- of the exegetical origin of the biographical detail that, on his arrival at Medina, and before the imposition of the fast of Ramadan, Muhammad had

required his followers to observe a three days' fast in every month and to keep the fast of 'Ashura'. Exegetical-hadith had

11



thus become sira, or 'historical'-hadith. It did not achieve the rank of wajib, or 'normative'-hadith; for, as we have seen, neither the three days' fast nor the 'Ashura' fast has become

part of the structure of obligatory Muslim duties. But they have both penetrated thus far into the practice as to have long been commended as part of the system of voluntary worship. It is

intriguing to note that Tabari_places_his reliance upon the Ibn Abi Layla, rather than the Mu'adh hadith:

When the Prophet went to Medina, he ordered his followers to fast three days in every month, as a voluntary [tatawwu'] not an obligatory practice. (51)

Tabari: There is no evidence that any fast was imposed upon the Muslims prior to the imposition of Ramadan. Since the days of Abraham, the obligation has been to fast during Ramadan.(52)

For the classical exegete, Muhamm's rasul-ism represented the re-establishment of pristine Abrahamic belief and practice.

Conclusions

Suggestions that had first occurred in the realm of Qur'an- commentary, had found their way into the sira. That is to say, they passed from the exegesis into the realm of 'history' --

they became part of the Sunna. They did not, on that account, become part of the basic data used for the construction of the

system of obligations. The fiqh did not restrict its attention to obligatory duties. It embraced also commendable and desirable acts. The three days' fast and the 'Ashura' fast achieved

acceptance into the fiqh, not as wajib, obligatory duties, but as sunna, or commendable acts of supererogatory piety.

The exegetical view that came to prevail, and that had

already begun to prevail, even in the Mu'adh hadith, was that the whole Q.2:183-7 passage is an integrated unit of revelation

referring exclusively to the 'successive stages' in the gradual development of the fast of Ramadan. This view that 'Fasting is

[hereby] imposed upon you, as fasting was imposed upon those before you... a [limited] number of days...' had always been a reference to the imposition of Ramadan, represents the victory of the blunt exegetical assertion that ayyam-in ma'dudat-in is a reference to a number as considerable as thirty, over the blunt exegetical assertion that, being plural, it is a reference to an inconsiderable number of days, like its sister Qur'anic reference (2:203) -- taken to refer to three days. The 'unsuccessful' assertion that Q.2:183 referred to three days had

not, however, as we see, been eradicated. The Mu adh report shows that the references to the three days' fast and to 'Ashura' had already been detached from the Qur'anic context in which fasting is imposed and were now being attached to the Sunna. It was their relegation to the Sunna that,however, guaranteed their survival. For, with the development of the

12



concept of the Sunna, as a body of fundamental documents existing alongside the Qur'an and, like the Qur'an, transmitted from the earliest Islamic times -- a concept mature, if ill-defined in the time of the Imam Malik(53) -- the scholars would show themselves as indefatigable in the pursuit of the smallest implications of the Sunna, as they had erstwhile shown themselves tireless in tracking down the minutest implications of the Qur'an s utterances. Later, triumphing over both those who would reject it wholesale in favour of the Qur'an source alone, (54) and those who although aware of it, frequently ignored the Sunna of the Prophet in favour of information reaching them from other quarters, the Sunna of the_Prophet, in the hands of its most brilliant advocate, Shafi i, achieved total independence of the Qur'an. Henceforth, the Sunna would come to be regarded as a body of documents, parallel to, but distinct from, and equally sovereign with the Qur'an. (55)

The majority of scholars might come to hold that the three days' fast and the 'Ashura' fast had been abandoned, or even abrogated, on the revelation of the Ramadan fast. But that abrogation would refer only to their quondam obligatory status. Although no longer to be regarded as obligatory duties, the two fasts could be accommodated as commendable acts of piety in the roll of acknowledged supererogatory works of Islamic piety.(56)

At the purely technical level of scholarly argument, serious doubts were expressed as to whether the three days' fast and the 'Ashura' fast had ever, indeed, been imposed upon the Muslims. Thus, the Imam Malik carries the report that the caliph Mu'awiya, in the year on which he came down 'to the Hijaz for the pilgrimage, mounted the minbar on the Day of QAshura' and exclaimed, 'Men of Medina, where are your scholars? I heard the Prophet say of this day, "Today is 'Ashura'. The fast of 'Ashura' was not, however, imposed upon you, the Muslims. But, I myself propose to fast; so, whoever wishes to fast may do so, and whoever wishes not to fast may do so."'(57)

Ibn 9ajar is at pains to explain this assertion of Mu;awiya's. His statement does not throw doubt on the statements from other Companions that the Prophet had commanded his followers to observe the 'Ashura' fast. That is reported to have occurred in the early days of the Hejira. Mu'awiya's conversion to Islam was very late -- several years later than the imposition of the fast of 'Ashura' indeed, years after its observance had already been abandoned. Perhaps what Mu'awiya intended by his remarks is that the 'Ashura' fast had not been imposed by God in the Qur'an -- that it falls outside the scope of the meaning of the verse: 'Believers, fasting is [hereby] imposed upon you, as fasting was imposed upon those before you... '(58) The fast of 'Ashura' had been imposed in the Sunna.

Malik's use of the Mu'awiya hadith is immediately followed by one showing 'Umar ordering the fast of 'Ashura'. Perhaps both documents, taken together, tend to show that the Medinese were somewhat assiduous in their observance of this fast.

13



The purely technical argument is pursued by Shafi'i who insists on re-interpreting even those hadiths which spoke of the

imposition of the fast of 'Ashura' before the revelation of the fast of Ramadan, at which point, '^shura' was abandoned (turika)

becoming entirely optional. For he is adamant that in these

reports, the word turika is not to be taken to mean 'it was

abandoned', in the sense that it ceased to be obligatory. On the contrary, the word means, 'it was never taken up', in the sense that it had never been declared by the Prophet to be

obligatory. The fast of 'Ashura' had never been part of the structure of obligatory duties imposed upon the Muslims. Its observance had always been entirely optional.(59)

Thus,having reached the end of its exegetical usefulness, the 'old' three days' fast-motif had been nudged sideways into the 'historical' sunna, dragging with it its companion, the 'Ashura' fast.

We had thought that we had found grounds for arguing that the original references to 'Ashura' -- which is nowhere referred to in the Qur'an -- had arisen from the exegesis of the

expression 'those before you.' There was also the fact that the three days' fast had accompanied the mention of 'Ashura' in the Mu;&dh hadith, itself a comment on the Q.2 fasting pericope. In the report, the two fasts are thus found simultaneously in

literary association and in 'historical' dissociation with the

exegesis of Q.2:183: 'Believers, fasting is [hereby] imposed upon you, as fasting was imposed upon those before you.'

The implication appears to be that the reports point to at least two phases in the history of Islamic exegesis. If that be the case, then here is at least one instance in which part of the Islamic Sunna is to be seen emerging from the efforts of the Muslims to reach an understanding of the verses of the Holy

Qur'an. There had been a stage in the exegesis which might be described as 'atomistic' in approach. That is to say, that

before the Q.2:183-7 passage came to be treated as a unit of

revelation dealing exclusively with the fast of Ramacan, its verses had been separated out, the individual phrases, such as

'those before you', 'as fasting was imposed' -- 'just like the

fast that was imposed upon those before you,' being treated each in isolation, as each was required to give up its full meed of

meaning to the investigators.

If, as we suspect, our reports are more exegetical than

'historical', they are mere academic exercises which cannot be

relied upon to yield usable information on actual historical

'practice'. We may now cease to concentrate our attention upon the question of the 'authenticity' of the Sunna, in the sense of

its alleged historical connection with the person of the Prophet, or with the persons of his contemporaries, the Companions, or

with those of their immediate successors.

Insofar as the discussions we have here reviewed set out

from a starting-point provided by the Qur'anic texts, to that

extent, it set out from documents coming down from the time of

14



the Prophet and his contemporaries. To be sure, the

participants in our discussion were not contemporary with the

Prophet, although the 'raw material' on which they exercised their ingenuity undoubtedly reached them from Islam's earliest

beginnings. It is in this sense, then, that I raised the question of whether the origins of the Islamic Sunna lay no further back than the scholarly disputes of the second and third Islamic centuries.

Exegesis is a notoriously imprecise and subjective discipline. To the differences of opinion thrown up by the different approaches of the Muslim exegetes to the texts of their sacred Book it should prove possible to trace many of the different opinions reflected in the accumulated masses of

hadith-reports which came to be further reflected in the widening

gap between the opinions expressed on a host of questions large and small that gave rise to the emergence of the regional madhhabs .

This, it will be noted, is the reverse of the conclusions

reached by both Goldziher and Schacht. The latter, although prepared to concede that the Islamic Sunna contained 'an ideal element' -- i.e. a purely abstract and academic element -- may be said to have been inclined to disregard the role of the

exegesis in the generation of hadiths and thus, in the creation of Muslim opinions.

NOTES

1. I.Goldziher, Muslim Studies, ed. by S.M.Stern and trans.

by C.R.Barber and S.M.Stern, vol.2, London, 1971, p.19 and

passim. 2. J.Schacht, The Origins of Muhammadan Jurisprudence, Oxford,

1950, passim. 3. Abu (Abdullah Muhammad b. Idris al-Shafiti, K.al-Umm,

7 vols., Bulaq, 1321-4, passim, and especially VII, 250f. 4. Goldziher's vocabulary was at times unrestrained:

'falsification[s]': pp.44, 51, 78; 'fabrication[s]':

pp. 49, 81, 106; see also the title of Chapter 4; 'inventions'/'invent': pp.44, 49, 52, 78ff., 81-2, 106;

'forgeries': p.54; 'lies': p.55; 'tendentious lies' p.44; 'fictions': p.87; 'fake': p.126.

5. Op.cit., 77-8. 6. Ibid., 52-4. 7. Ibid. 81, 85. 8. Ibid. 59-60, 79. 9. Op.cit., 83, 95, 99-100, 182, 186.

10. Cf., e.g., P.Crone & M.Cook, Hagarism, Cambridge U.P.,

1977, p.3. 11. Cf., e.g., S.D.Goitein, Studies in Islamic History and

Institutions, Leiden, 1966, pp.90-110. 12. Jalal al-Din &Abdul Rahman b. Abi Bakr al-Suyuti, al-Durr

al-manthur, 6 vols., Bulaq, [n.d.], I, 176. Cf. Sulayman b.al-Ashcath al-Sijistani, (Abu Da'ud) Sunan, 2 vols., [in 1], Cairo, A.H. 1348, I, 84.

15



13. Cf. above, note 12 and, e.g, K.Wagtendonk, Fasting in the Koran, Leiden, 1968. See EI1 and EI2 s.v. Ashura'

14. Durr, I, p.177. 15. Ibid., 198. Cf. Abu Jacfar Muhammad b. Jarir al-Tabari,

Jami al-bayan 'an ta'wil ay al-Qur'an, ed.Shakir, 15 vols., Cairo, 1954-, III, 412, cf. ibid., 501.

16. Durr, I, 177. 17. Ibid. 18. Ibid, 19, Tabari, III, 412-3; cf. ibid., 417. 20. Purr, I, 176f. Cf. Tabari, IIX, 412 (from Mujahid). 21. Durr, I, 177. 22. Ibid., 176, (quoting ibn Hanzala; Nahhas; Tabarani). 23. Tabari, III, 411, and cf. ibid., 501-2. 24. Malik b. Anas, Muwatta', 2 vols., Cairo, A.H. 1348, I, 211. 25. Durr, I, 177; Tabari, III, 410. 26. Durr, loc.cit. Tabari, III, 414. 27. Muslim b. al-Vajjaj, Sahih, 4 vols., [in 2] Cairo, fn.d.]

III, 148. 28. Ibid., 149. 29. Ibid., 147. 30. Ibid,, 149, 31. Ibid., 150, 32. Ibid. 33. Ibid. 34. Ibid., 151. 35. Ahmad b. cAli b. Muh.ammad al-4Asqalani, Fath ai lBari,

17 vols., Cairo, 1378/1959, V., 149-51. 36. Muslim, III. 37. Ibid., 146; cf, Muwattat' I, 279. 38. Muslim, III, 147. 39. Ibid., 148. 40. Abu al- Abbas Ahmad b. Muhammad al-Qastallani, Irshad

al-sari, 10 vols., Bulaq, A.H. 1305, III, 422. 41. Fath al-Bari, loc.cit, 42. Ibid. 43. Muhammad b. Yusuf b. 'A!i b. al-Hayyan,al-Bahr al-muhit,

8 vols., Riyad, 1969, II, 48. 44. Muhammad b. Ahmad al-Ansari al-Qurtubi, al-Jazumi

li-ahkam al-Qur'an, 20 vols., [in 10] Cairo, 1369/1950, I, 274f.

45. Irshad, III, 410. 46. Abu Abdul Rahman Ahmad b. Shu ayb al-Nasa'i, Sunan,

8 vols., [in 4] Cairo, 1348/1930, IVL 218f. 47. Abu 'Abdullah Muhammad b. Yazid b. Maja, Sunan, 2 vols.,

Cairo [n.d.], I, 522. 48. Tabari, III, 414. 49. Purr, I, 177. 50. Bahr, II, 30f. Note that Ibn Hayyan reports from

'Abdullah b. Mas4ud the 'variant reading' ayyam-un matdudat-un, which makes the phrase an apposition to

ai-siyam in kutiba 'alaykum al-siyam, while placing it in the same nominative case as the: immediately added gloss

16



shahru Ramadan. Here, the entire Q.2 passage refers solely to the Ramadan fast.

51. Tabari, III, 419. 52. ibid., 412f; cf. ibid., 417. 53. See Muwatta', e.g., I, 146, 201, 231 (and passim). 54. Umm, VII, 250f. 55. Risala,ed. Shakir, Cairo, 1358/1940, 72f., 88, 91-3,

103. 56. Abu al-Hasan Muhammad b. 'Abdul Hadi al-Sindi, Hashiya

tala Sunan al-Nasa' (.f, above note 46), II, 193. 57. Muwatta', I, 220. 58. Fat4' al-Bari,loc.cit. Note that the thread linking the

three days' fast and the 'Ashura' to the interpretation of the wording of Q.2:183 (already attenuated -- see note 51 above) has now finally been severed.

59. Ikhtilaf al-hadith, margin Umm, VII, 102-4.

17



Documents

Notes towards a Fresh Perspective on the Islamic Sunna