The Prophet's "extra-Qur'anic" authority

Assalamu 'Alaykum wa Rahmatullah.

Did the Prophet (s) receive any communication from Allah Almighty outside of the Qur’an and if so where is this “extra-Qur’anic” revelation recorded?

A study of the Qur’an itself shows that Allah Almighty gave specific religious commandments to the Prophet (s) that were sometimes not referred to in the Qur’an until much later, often years after the Muslim community had been enacting those commandments based solely on a directive from the Prophet (s) without any Qur’anic injunction to support it.

I’ll use the incident of the switching of the Qibla from Jerusalem to Makkah as an example to show the validity of such extra-Qur’anic instructions.

Allah Almighty says:

“**We appointed **the qiblah which ye formerly observed only that We might know him who followeth the messenger…” (2:143 - This is Pickthall’s translation. Other translations are posted below).

There is no instruction in the Qur’an telling the Prophet (s) and the community of believers to face the Qibla at Jerusalem in prayer, yet Allah states that He is the one who appointed this Qibla in the first place: *"**We appointed *the qiblah which ye formerly observed…" So how did the Prophet (s) know that Allah had wished him to turn towards Jerusalem if he wasn’t commanded to do so anywhere in the Qur’an?

The point is that the Muslims had been praying towards Jerusalem for at least three years before Allah revealed the verses in Surah al-Baqarah ordering the switch to Makkah. For this three year period there was no mention in the Qur’an that Allah had commanded the Muslims to face Jerusalem, it was only when the Surah al-Baqarah verses were revealed after the migration to Madinah that the community would have realised that in fact it was Allah who initially asked them to pray towards Jerusalem - *"**We appointed *the qiblah which ye formerly observed… " - yet prior to this they were content to face Jerusalem simply because the Prophet (s) had asked them to do so even though there was nothing in the Qur’an to support it.

The initial command to face Jerusalem must have been given to the Prophet (s) outside of the Qur’an and is proof that there is another source of Islamic legislation that we need to refer to. The earliest community of Muslims obviously appreciated this additional extra-Qur’anic legislation. They were happy to carry out the Prophet’s (s) every instruction irrespective of whether that instruction was explicitly mentioned in the Qur’an or not. The switching of the Qibla is a classic case in point. When the Muslims were told to face Jerusalem (they were still in Makkah at the time) no one refused to do so by saying that there is no verse in the Qur’an that tells them to face Jerusalem. No one at that time hinted at the fact that the Prophet’s (s) instructions should first be compared to the Qur’an and if nothing is found in the Qur’an then his instruction should be rejected.

Consequently, it is understood that commands issued by the Prophet himself, even if they might appear to us not to have any Qur’anic precedent, are binding on his community. This extra-Qur’anic revelation came to be recorded in the hadith literature, and if authentically related back to the Prophet (s), these hadith constitute both an authoritative explanation of the Qur’an and a valid basis for Islamic law.

The Prophet Muhammad (s) said: “Verily I was given the Qur’an and something similar to it. There may be a man, his stomach is full and he is reclining on his couch whilst saying: ‘Hold fast to this Qur’an. Whatever you find permissible in it, take it as permissible, and whatever you find in it of prohibitions, consider it as prohibited.’ However, whatever the Messenger of Allah renders impermissible is the same as what Allah renders impermissible.” (Musnad Ahmed, Abu Dawud, at-Tirmidhi, and al-Hakim in al-Mustadrak who authenticated it)

It is only by careful and detailed study of hadith, and the life and example of the Prophet (s) that we can fulfil Allah’s order to obey the Prophet (s). There is little value in Allah instructing us to obey the Prophet (s) and take him as an example to be followed when we do not have any record of what the Prophet (s) said and did!

And Allah knows best.

Iqbal

Masha'Allaah! Brilliant! An excellent explanation - clear and concise.

JazaakumAllaahu khair brother Iqbal wa ahasan allaahu 'aleyk.

WasSalaam 'alykum


"No leaf falls except that He knows of it, and no rain drop forms except that He has willed it."

Jazakullahu khair Hasnain for the kind words. I just wanted to give some further translations of verse 2:143 to emphasise the point i was making.

ABDULLAH YUSUF ALI: "We appointed the Qibla to which thou wast used, only to test those who followed the Messenger..."

KHAN & HILALI: "And We made the Qiblah which you used to face, onlt to test those who followed the Messenger..."

N.J. DAWOOD: "We decreed your former qiblah only in order that We might know the Apostle's true adherents..."

T.B. IRVING: "We have only set up the Direction towards which you used to face so We might know the one who is following the Messenger..."

Imam ibn Kathir (d.774H) explains in his Qur'an commentary, Tafsir al-Qur'an al-Adhim (Vol. 1/p.197), that this verse means: "Indeed, We only legislated for you O Muhammad the first direction towards Bayt al-Maqdis and thereafter turned you away from it towards the Ka'bah so as to make clear the state of those who follow and obey you..."

And Allah knows best

Iqbal

A query comes to mind:

If indeed the first 'Qibla' (let's for the sake of this argument continue to suppose that this verse is about the direction one must face to pray) was appointed by the Prophet on divine instruction, what logical objection would those who would "turn back on their heels" have for "turning back on their heels"??

and also when Allah says:

" ... and this was surely hard except for those whom Allah has guided aright;"

How hard is it for hypocrites to change the way they face when they pray??

[QUOTE]
Originally posted by PakistaniAbroad: *
*
... what logical objection would those who would "turn back on their heels" have for "turning back on their heels"??**
[/quote]

Verse 142 shows that the change of direction caught the attention of members of the non-Muslim community at that time. Both Qibla directions were a test for hypocrites, lacking faith. In Makkah, for example, the Makkan hypocrites that had infiltrated the Muslim ranks must have turned to each other in shock when Jerusalem, not their beloved Ka'bah, was appointed as the first Qibla. The same was the case in Madinah, which was inhabited by many Jews, some of whom feigned religion to gain favour with the Muslims. These Jews were themselves tested when eventually the direction was changed from Jerusalem - a place that finds favour in the heart of almost every Jew - to the Ka'bah, a site that housed a Mosque that was held dear by the Arabs. Such people, weak in faith, were also unable to accept the concept of abrogation, or that God might repeal one rule in favour of another.

[quote]
How hard is it for hypocrites to change the way they face when they pray??
[/QUOTE]

Perhaps if there are any hypocrites in this forum they might volunteer themselves and answer this question.

Iqbal

I’m curious, you mention there is another source besides the Quran that the Rasul had of obtaining info from God, correct?

If so, why would the Muslim Ummah not know of it? And doesn’t God realize that somewhere down the line, people would make-up and change the content of hadith to decieve people? So why would God use a secret source to communicate with the Rasul, hide it from the Muslim Ummah, and the Rasul doesn’t even mention an external source (other than his travels up in heaven), and then let us Muslims be confused for a long time (perhaps even now) as to what hadith are factual and which are false?

:confused: - I’m not mocking, as many would like to think. This is, like everything else, and honest inquiry.

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by PyariCgudia: *
**I'm curious, you mention there is another source besides the Quran that the Rasul had of obtaining info from God, correct?

If so, why would the Muslim Ummah not know of it?**
[/quote]

No one is suggesting that the Muslim Ummah doesn't know about it. I answered this in my earlier post when i wrote: "This extra-Qur'anic revelation came to be recorded in the hadith literature."

[quote]
And doesn't God realize that somewhere down the line, people would make-up and change the content of hadith to decieve people?
[/quote]

Many people have concocted verses of the Qur'an to support their point of view. One only has to read ibn Abi Dawud's (d. approx 300H) Kitab al-Masahif for examples of this. Does this mean that we now reject the Qur'an just because someone concocted false verses and Surahs?

We know from the Qur'an that it is the role and responsibility of Allah's Messenger (s) to explain the Qur'an (16:44). If this is the case, then where is his explanation to be found? If as Muslims we believe the Qur'an has been preserved, do we mean by this that only the letters and words of the Qur'an are preserved whereas there's no guarantee from Allah that he would also preserve its explanation? What is the benefit of the Qur'an if its explanation and meaning has not been preserved? It makes absolute sense, therefore, that Allah's promise to preserve the Qur'an (15:9) must of a necessity include the preservation of the Qur'an's explanation. Since the Prophet (s) explained the Qur'an it stands to reason that his explanation must be preserved somewhere for all mankind.

[quote]
So why would God use a secret source to communicate with the Rasul, hide it from the Muslim Ummah...
[/quote]

There is no secret source and nothing at all is hidden. It is contained in the works of hadith as i have mentioned.

[quote]
and the Rasul doesn't even mention an external source (other than his travels up in heaven)...
[/quote]

Allah's Messenger (s) did indeed mention this extra-Qur'anic source. He asked us to follow his Sunnah (example) and his example is embodied in the hadith literature where reports show exactly what the Prophet (s) said, did and approved of. Allah's Messenger (s) said:

"I have left amongst you two things which, if you hold fast to them, you will never stray: the Book of Allah, and my Sunnah." (Muwatta Imam Malik & Al-Hakim's al-Mustadrak)

The meaning of this hadith is contained in the Qur'an, in the mention of the Book and Wisdom (2:129, 2:151, 2:231, 3:164, 4:113, 33:34 & 62:2). Imam ash-Shafi'i (d.204H) said: "I have heard the people most knowledgeable about the Qur'an say that the Wisdom is the (Prophet's) Sunnah" (Al-Risalah, Eng. trans., p. 111).

Also, Allah's Messenger (s) said:

"May Allah make joyful that servant who hears my saying, comprehends it and memorises it, then conveys it to one who did not hear it..." (Abu Dawud, at-Tirmidhi, ibn Majah)

[quote]
and then let us Muslims be confused for a long time (perhaps even now) as to what hadith are factual and which are false?
[/quote]

The Science of Hadith alleviates such confusion. It is a very precise tool by which the authenticity of statements ascribed to the Prophet (s) can be ascertained. This science is primarily concerned with the isnad, or the chain of transmitters of a hadith. Even Western Orientalists have admired this Islamic science.

Abbott writes: "Deliberate tampering with either the content or the isnads of the Prophet’s Traditions, as distinct from the sayings of and deeds of the Companions and Successors, may have passed undetected by ordinary transmitters, but not by the aggregate of the ever watchful, basically honest, and aggressively outspoken master traditionists and hadith critics." (Abbott, Studies, Vol.II, p.132)

Montgomery Watt writes: "The chains of transmitters were therefore carefully scrutinised to make sure that the persons named could in fact have met one another, that they could be trusted to repeat the story accurately, and that they did not hold any heretical views. This implied extensive biographical studies; and many biographical dictionaries have been preserved giving the basic information about a man’s teachers and pupils, the views of later scholars (on his reliability as a transmitter) and the date of his death. This biography-based critique of Traditions helped considerably to form a more or less common mind among many men throughout the caliphate about what was to be accepted and what rejected." (Watt, What is Islam? Longman Group Ltd: 1979, pp. 124-125)

Bernard Lewis writes: "But their careful scrutiny of the chains of transmission and their meticulous collection and preservation of variants in the transmitted narratives give to medieval Arabic historiography a professionalism and sophistication without precedent in antiquity and without parallel in the contemporary medieval West. By comparison, the historiography of Latin Christendom seems poor and meagre, and even the more advanced and complex historiography of Greek Christendom still falls short of the historical literature of Islam in volume, variety and analytical depth." (Lewis, Islam in History, Open Court Publishing:1993, p.105)

Professor D. S. Margoliouth says: "... its value in making for accuracy cannot be questioned, and the Muslims are justified in taking pride in their science of tradition." (Lectures on Arabic Historians, Calcutta University:1920, p.20)

And Allah knows best.

Iqbal

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by Iqbal1089: *

Verse 142 shows that the change of direction caught the attention of members of the non-Muslim community at that time. Both Qibla directions were a test for hypocrites, lacking faith. In Makkah, for example, the Makkan hypocrites that had infiltrated the Muslim ranks must have turned to each other in shock when Jerusalem, not their beloved Ka'bah, was appointed as the first Qibla. The same was the case in Madinah, which was inhabited by many Jews, some of whom feigned religion to gain favour with the Muslims. These Jews were themselves tested when eventually the direction was changed from Jerusalem - a place that finds favour in the heart of almost every Jew - to the Ka'bah, a site that housed a Mosque that was held dear by the Arabs. Such people, weak in faith, were also unable to accept the concept of abrogation, or that God might repeal one rule in favour of another.
[/quote]

Excellent.. now can you please tell me why we need to prove some 'extra quranic revelation' theory to make up the above argument? I mean you did well using logic or a little knowledge of history as you believe in it to create this hypothetical scenario.

Point is, if there was extra Qur'anic revelation (from Allah of course) and it contained this injunction, then bring one.. (I only ask for one) .. authentic hadith (which you claim has these extra Qur'anic revelations) in which the Prophet relays this command verbatim from Allah. afterall that's how the Prophet relayed Allah's revelations.

salaam to all,

some time ago, i think mahiwal posted a same sort of argument and the same ayat (2:143-144) in order to show or prove that there is extra-quranic revelation.

like many previous treads,of course, eventually this tread will also end up on the same 'authencity of hadith'-question................

Assalamualaikum! I have a question for you…

If there is extra information then why is Quran described as a complete book of Allah? In what way is it complete then? :confused:

It has been thousands of years! Different scholars have written different kinds of hadiths. Now how do we know what exactly Mohammed(SAW) permitted and what he did not when we don’t have that other source?

it is complete cuz it gives all the basics and **orders/b those who wish to get more details to refer to the Sunnah of the Prophet (pbuh) whose life (deeds and words) have been set as an example....

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by armughal: *
it is complete cuz it gives all the basics and **orders

then what to do with this??

[16:89] ---- and We have revealed the Book to you explaining clearly everything, and a guidance and mercy and good news for those who submit

PakistaniAbroad: Any room left for argument?

[QUOTE]
Originally posted by armughal: *
it is complete cuz it gives all the basics and **orders
* those who wish to get more details to refer to the Sunnah of the Prophet (pbuh) whose life (deeds and words) have been set as an example....
[/QUOTE]

what did you mean when you said "more details"?? were you referring to those things that are only in hadiths and aren't mentioned in the Quran (i.e. extra-Quranic info)? How do you differentiate between an authentic hadith and an unauthentic hadith then since as you say some of the things aren't discussed in Quran?

I thought Sunnah(Mohammed(SAW)'s words and actions) is the explanation of Quran but you guys are making it confusing or should I say trying to mislead others! You're trying to make us believe that Quran isn't a complete book of Allah!!

I'm still waiting for your answer Iqbal1089!

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by PakistaniAbroad: *

then what to do with this??

[16:89] ---- and We have revealed the Book to you explaining clearly everything, and a guidance and mercy and good news for those who submit

PakistaniAbroad: Any room left for argument?
[/QUOTE]

JazakAllah khair....no room left for useless arguements I guess...:)

I'm in the same boat as Corrupt Angel, and Pakistani Abroad.

Here is how I see it. The path that God's Message (ie. Quran) took in 600 something A.D.

God -----------> Angel Gibrail ----------> Rasul. ----------> The People. ------------> Recorded and known to Us today as the Quran.

This message, as stated in the Quran, is COMPLETE.

Now are you guys saying that another message went somehow, thru an angel or not or something/someone else...

God ----------> possible middle source ---------> Rasul ----------> The People ---------> Recorded and Labelled today as Hadith.

You say that the Hadith is proof of this external source. However, how can we accept this claim when there is no mention of this external source (the God -------> possible middle source ---------> Rasul part of the chain) in the Quran (which is of course COMPLETE), and there is no mention of it in the Hadith, and there is no mention of it anywhere else!!!!

And pray tell, why would God communicate with the Rasul, and the Rasul not share with us? Are you saying that the Rasul's position was - "Oh well, I'm getting some additional messages from God, but I'm just not including it with the rest of the Revelation. Instead, I'll just tell people and make it sound like my advice/commands and thus they'll probably be recorded down later as separate from the Quran."????

Islam is practical and logical. So ....where is the logic here?

PCG
Not to start argument or anything like that but I thought the flow was this way. Not much diff. From yours

ALLAH --> The Book (Message) --Angel/Jibrael (The medium) – Prophet (the messenger)--->People (recipient)

People (collected)--> Hadith

[QUOTE]
*Originally posted by PyariCgudia: *
And pray tell, why would God communicate with the Rasul, and the Rasul not share with us? Are you saying that the Rasul's position was - "Oh well, I'm getting some additional messages from God, but I'm just not including it with the rest of the Revelation. Instead, I'll just tell people and make it sound like my advice/commands and thus they'll probably be recorded down later as separate from the Quran."????

Islam is practical and logical. So ....where is the logic here?
[/QUOTE]

PCG
I don’t think prophet was stingy in regards to sharing knowledge granted to him. Anyone who had a question or problem or anything always went to holy Prophet (pbuh) day/night and he always cleared people confusions or problem

And whatever happens after his death cannot be blamed on the holy Prophet because the Quran clearly mentioned Prophet had delivered everything and the religion was complete.

salaam

39:23
Allahu nazzala ahsana alhadeethi kitaban mutashabihan mathaniya taqshaAAirru minhu juloodu allatheena yakhshawna rabbahum thumma taleenu julooduhum waquloobuhum ila thikri Allahi thalika huda Allahi yahdee bihi man yashao waman yudlili Allahu fama lahu min hadin
YUSUFALI: Allah has revealed (from time to time) the most beautiful Message in the form of a Book, consistent with itself, (yet) repeating (its teaching in various aspects): the skins of those who fear their Lord tremble thereat; then their skins and their hearts do soften to the celebration of Allah's praises. Such is the guidance of Allah: He guides therewith whom He pleases, but such as Allah leaves to stray, can have none to guide.
PICKTHAL: Allah hath (now) revealed the fairest of statements, a Scripture consistent, (wherein promises of reward are) paired (with threats of punishment), whereat doth creep the flesh of those who fear their Lord, so that their flesh and their hearts soften to Allah's reminder. Such is Allah's guidance, wherewith He guideth whom He will. And him whom Allah sendeth astray, for him there is no guide.
SHAKIR: Allah has revealed the best announcement, a book conformable in its various parts, repeating, whereat do shudder the skins of those who fear their Lord, then their skins and their hearts become pliant to the remembrance of Allah; this is Allah's guidance, He guides with it whom He pleases; and (as for) him whom Allah
makes err, there is no guide for him.
KHALIFA: GOD has revealed herein the best Hadith; a book that is consistent, and points out both ways (to Heaven and Hell). The skins of those who reverence their Lord cringe therefrom, then their skins and their hearts soften up for GOD's message. Such is GOD's guidance; He bestows it upon whoever wills (to be guided). As for those sent astray by GOD, nothing can guide them.

45:6
Tilka ayatu Allahi natlooha AAalayka bialhaqqi fabi-ayyi hadeethin baAAda Allahi waayatihi yu/minoona
YUSUFALI: Such are the Signs of Allah, which We rehearse to thee in Truth; then in what exposition will they believe after (rejecting) Allah and His Signs?
PICKTHAL: These are the portents of Allah which We recite unto thee (Muhammad) with truth. Then in what fact, after Allah and His portents, will they believe?
SHAKIR: These are the communications of Allah which We recite to you with truth; then in what announcement would they believe after Allah and His communications?
KHALIFA: These are GOD's revelations that we recite to you truthfully. In which Hadith other than GOD and His revelations do they believe?

filhaal:
i think these ayats speak for themselves. GOD has sent us the BEST 'hadith' in the form of the QURAN and there is no room for other hadith!!

[QUOTE]
Originally posted by PakistaniAbroad: *
**Excellent.. now can you please tell me why we need to prove some 'extra quranic revelation' theory to make up the above argument? I mean you did well using logic or a little knowledge of history as you believe in it to create this hypothetical scenario.
*
[/quote]

This is not a hypothetical scenario at all. The Qur'an describes the "factual" change of the Qibla from Jerusalem to Makkah. The appropriate verses also describe that it was Allah Himself who first issued the command to face Jerusalem. That command is no where to be found in the Qur'an yet the entire Muslim community - unless you want to rewrite the history books as well - acted on it based solely on a directive from the Prophet (s) without any Qur'anic precedent. That proves the "extra-Qur'anic" authority of the Prophet (s) and the willingness of the earliest Muslims to accept that authority. So i repeat, this is not hypothetical at all.

[quote]
Point is, if there was extra Qur'anic revelation (from Allah of course) and it contained this injunction...
[/quote]

I think you are about to get your knickers in a twist here. But firstly, do you accept that it was Allah who appointed Jerusalem as the Qiblah as per verse 2:143?

[quote]
then bring one.. (I only ask for one) .. authentic hadith (which you claim has these extra Qur'anic revelations)...
[/quote]

It is interesting that you ask for an "authentic" hadith. Do you therefore accept that there are in fact authentic hadith which accurately describe the words and deeds of Allah's Messenger (s)? I could simply reply and say that to prove my argument a hadith in this instance is not necessary since the Qur'anic evidence i cited suffices to confirm my point of view. If there is a hadith, it doesn't necessarily add any extra weight to the fact that Allah appointed the first Qiblah through "extra-Qur'anic" revelation as i have shown. And if there isn't a hadith, the point is still proven. So your request for an authentic hadith is decidedly premature, you have to first accept that "extra-Qur'anic" revelation did take place. So, did it?

If you aren't prepared to accept this, then you need to take one step back and disprove the argument i've put forward. Asking for a hadith, if you think about it, is incidental right now since the absence of a hadith wouldn't disprove my argument about the existence of "extra-Qur'anic" revelation to the Prophet (s). All that the absence of a hadith might show is that either that hadith was not retained by subsequent generations or that the Prophet (s) withheld such "extra-Qur'anic" revelation. Therefore, in trying to show that a hadith does not exist, you have avoided the central issue that i raised and that is that "extra-Qur'anic" revelation did take place. The time for hadith will come later, first deal with this issue...

[quote]
... in which the Prophet relays this command verbatim from Allah. afterall that's how the Prophet relayed Allah's revelations.
[/QUOTE]

You appear to have a rather restricted understanding of how Allah's final Prophet and Messenger, Muhammad (s), conveyed the revelation. The corpus of hadith literature describes, among other things, the Prophet's (s) statements, actions and tacit approvals - these were all methods through which he (s) enacted and conveyed the message that he was entrusted with. So you are wrong to insist on a "verbatim" hadith. But more on hadith later....

Iqbal

[QUOTE]
Originally posted by CurruptAngel: *
**It has been thousands of years! Different scholars have written different kinds of hadiths. Now how do we know what exactly Mohammed(SAW) permitted and what he did not when we don't have that other source? *

[/QUOTE]

We do have that source, refer to my earlier reply to PyariCgudia.

Iqbal