The advocates of hadith are fond of saying that the hadith explains the
Quran without which the Quran cannot be understood. In other words
without hadith they will have to reject the Quran or at least ignore it.
The scholars also say that the hadith they call "Sahih al-Bukhari" is
the best hadith.
But it isn't difficult to prove that the hadith
does NOT in any way explain the Quran, and "Sahih al-Bukhari" is not
worth the paper it is printed on.
For evidence please refer to,
and check all references of "Sahih Al-Bukhari" by Dr. Muhammed Muhsin
Khan, Islamic University, Medina Al-Munawwara which is a nine volume
encyclopedia. Vol. 6 of "Sahih Al-Bukhari" is supposed to contain the
explanation of the Quran (Tafsir). The other eight volumes prescribe
things like drinking camel urine to cure fevers (vol 7, hadith no 590),
burning people and their houses if they do not go the mosque for Fajr
and Isha, (vol.1, hadith no.626), dreaming of undressing women (vol 9,
hadith no.139 and 140), using shoes to garland camels (Vol 2, hadith no
763), and other such UTTER NONSENSE.
Let us focus on vol. 6, the
"explanation" of the Quran by Imam Bukhari. Although the Quran has 114
surahs (or chapters), Bukhari does not explain all the verses of all the
surashs. Surah 2, Al Baqarah, has 286 verses, but Bukhari only provides
hadith for about 50 verses. This is slightly over 20% of Surah Al
Baqarah. Bukhari has left the ulemas groping in the dark over the
remaining 80%.
Al Kauther (Surah 108) is the shortest surah in
the Quran, only 3 verses. However Bukhari "attempts" to explain the
meaning of just one word "Kauther" as sufficient to explain this entire
Surah. Bukhari says; "Kauther" is a river in Heaven. But simply,
"Kauther" means "good in abundance". (Translation by President of
Islamic research, IFAT, Saudi Arabia). This also suggests that Imam
Bukhari did not know Arabic. It is a fact that Bukhari was a Persian
from Bokhara who spoke Farsi. The scholars have no records to show when
Bukhari learned Arabic. More on this later.
The most surprising
part of it is that 28 surahs of the Quran are NOT "explained" at all by
Bukhari. The surah numbers are as follows; 23, 27, 29, 35, 51, 57, 58,
64, 67, 69, 70, 73, 76, 81, 82, 86, 88, 89, 90, 94, 100, 101, 103, 104,
105, 106, 107, and 109. Bukhari puts it away as follows: "no hadith were
mentioned here." According to the scholars the hadith is supposed to
explain the Quran. But they are conveniently silent on the question why
Bukhari ignored 28 Surahs of the Noble Quran!
The scholars insist
that the hadith explains the Quran. Yet they have to do away with 28
SURAHS of the Quran because Bukhari did not bother to explain them.
Therefore,
the boast by the scholars that those who uphold the QURAN only and do
NOT depend on the hadith cannot understand the Quran, falls FLAT on its
face. It's the poor scholars who are in a sad situation. 28 Surahs are missing and none of the other surahs are explained in full by Bukhari.
To
revert to the earlier point that the Persian Bukhari may not have known
Arabic, this is suggested by the way Bukhari has changed the names of
certain SURAHS. By itself this is a strange phenomenon. The scholars
themselves do NOT know why Bukhari did this.
Non-Arabs sometimes
refer to a Surah by its first verse. This is because they may not have
known the Arabic name for the Surah because they are not scholars of the
Quran or simply because they are not Arabs. Bukhari displays the same
characteristics.
An-Naba (Surah 78) is
labelled as Surah "Amma yatasa'alun", this is actually part of the first
verse of the surah. Al Baiyina (Surah 98) is labelled as "Lam Yakun".
Again, the initial verses. Al Takwir (Surah 81) is labelled "Idhash
Shamsu Kuwirat". This is the start of the first verse again. Al Maarij
(Surah 70) is labelled "Sa'ala Sa'ilun".
Such labelling is more
akin to reciters who are not Arabs, who do not know the Arabic language.
Apart from the fact that Bukhari was Persian from Bokhara, some
scholars also believe that he was blind since his youth. There's also a
Hadith that's been constructed about Bukhari's blindness, by Ibn Kathir
and Ibn Hajar al Asqalani under biography of Bukhari - Muqadimah Fath al Bari.
The
next question is "WHO WROTE Sahih al-Bukhari?!" It is also necessary to
see how Bukhari handles some of the explanations of the verses - if and
when he cares to explain them.
Some explanations end with a
blank space. Example, vol 6, Hadith no.50 seeks to explain Surah 2:223.
After some narration it continues like this:
"Nafi' added regarding
the verse: 'So go to your tilth when or how you will.' Ibn Umar said;
'It means one should approach his wife in........' " The explanation
ends with a blank space. But not to worry. A footnote completes the
picture. The footnote says "Al Bukhari left a blank space here because
he was not sure of what Ibn Umar had said !." And yet this collection is
known as "Sahih Al Bukhari."
Bukhari also comes up with a very offensive tafsir for Verse 11:5 of the beautiful Surah Hud. The preceding verse 11:4 says "To God is your return and He has power over all things." And quoting Verse 11:5 "Lo!
now they fold up their breasts that they may hide (their thoughts) from
Him. At the very moment when they cover themselves with their clothing,
Allah knows that which they keep hidden and that which they proclaim.
Lo! He is Aware {Al-'Alim} of what is in the breasts (of men)."
Thus, the meaning is crystal clear. We all answer to God. There is
nothing we can conceal from God. Every single thing that we do is in a
clear Record. "Kitaab-un Maubeen". So do not think you can hide anything
from God.
NOW, Here is Bukhari's ridiculous explanation of the
same verse 11:5. in Vol.6 Hadith no. 203: Narrated Muhammed bin Abbad
bin Jaafar that he heard Ibn Abbas reciting: " No doubt! they fold up
their breasts." and asked him about the explanation. He said, "Some
people used to hide themselves while answering the call of nature in an
open space lest they be exposed to the sky, so the above revelation was
sent down regarding them." According to Bukhari, the whole purpose of
this narration was to tell the Sahaba that God could see them defecating
and sleeping in the desert. According to Bukhari's logic then, after
this verse was revealed, the Sahabahs who travelled in the desert lost
all their inhibitions.
Similarly, Bukhari twists Surah Al-Maidah, Verse 5:87 which is "O
you who believe! Forbid not the good things which Allah has made lawful
for you, and transgress not. Lo! Allah loves not transgressors."
To explain this verse, Bukhari first quotes it partially as follows :
"O you who believe DO NOT make unlawful the good things which God has
made for you"
The explanation by Bukhari (Vol.6 Hadith no. 139) is as follows :
Narrated
Abdullah "We used to participate in holy wars conducted by the Prophet
and we had no women with us. So, we said (to the Prophet) "Shall we
castrate ourselves "? But the Prophet forbade us to do that and
therefore he allowed us to marry a woman temporarily by giving her even a
garment, and then the Prophet recited. "O you who believe ! Do not make
unlawful for you...." It contain a footnote "Temporary marriage (Mut'a)
was allowed in the early days of Islam., but later, at the time of the
Battle of Khaibar it was prohibited (God knows it better)." The
uncertainty in the footnote lends total support to the fact that this is
an evil lie against God and the Prophet by Bukhari. The Quran says
NOTHING, neither directly nor remotely, that something as unscruplous as
temporary marriage can ever be made lawful. Is prostitution an excess?
Worse than that it is an evil. Which believer will allow their daughter
to receive "even a garment" as payment for temporarily servicing the
lusts of any man? And Bukhari has the sahabah coolly suggesting "Shall
we castrate ourselves?" Verse 5:87 is such a lovely one, and Bukhari has
ruined the explanation with such gross vulgarity!
In Surah 24:33 (An-Nur) God and the messenger told us:
"And
let those who cannot find a match keep chaste till Allah give them
independence by His grace. And such of your slaves as seek a writing (of
emancipation), write it for them if you are aware of aught of good in
them, and bestow upon them of the wealth of Allah which He has bestowed
upon you. Force not your slave girls to whoredom that you may seek
enjoyment of the life of the world, if they would preserve their
chastity. And if one force them, then (unto them), after their
compulsion, Lo! Allah will be Forgiving, Merciful."
In
other words, do not look for sex outside marriage. If you cannot marry,
it is better to keep chaste. Control your lust. The messenger said do
not force anyone into prostitution, but instead Bukhari says the
messenger set the price for hanky panky at merely a piece of garment.
This is Bukhari's malicious lie against the Messenger. In truth, the
Messenger told his men to control their lusts : Surah 24:30"Say
to the believing men that they should lower their gaze and guard their
modesty, that will be better purity for them, and God knows all that
they do."
If anyone insisted on following their lusts, the Messenger would have told them "And
Allah would turn to you in mercy; but those who follow vain desires
would have you go tremendously astray." Surah 4:27, An-Nissa.
The
Quran is crystal clear. But Bukhari says you can buy a woman for a
price of cloth. I wonder if some of our 'scholars' are secretly
delighted about this. I wouldn't put it past them.
Here is
another Hadith .. totally senseless and insulting !!! It is under "The
book of the Virtues of the Quran". Vol 6, hadith No 503. Narrated Valium
Utham. "I was informed that Gabriel came to the Prophet while Um Salma
was with him. Gabriel started talking (to the Prophet). Then the Prophet
asked Um Salma, 'Who is this ?' She replied 'He is Dihya (Al Kalbi).'
When Gabriel had left Um Salma said; 'By God, I did not take him for
anybody other than him ( i.e. Dihya) till I heard the sermon of the
Prophet wherein he informed about the news of Gabriel.' The subnarrator
asked Utham :
From whom have you heard that ? Utham said 'From Usama Bin Zaid' ".
God
sent Gabriel with the revelations to be delivered to the Prophet.
Therefore Gabriel delivered the revelations to Prophet Muhammed. But
here Bukhari says the Prophet did not know Gabriel had come to him.
Instead he asks his wife !! Is the Prophet's wife supposed to recognize
Gabriel while the Prophet didn't? I don't know why Bukhari and the
Hadith narrators took such delight in mocking our beloved Prophet.
Please see Verses 2:97-98 of Surah Al-Baqrah: "Say,
who is an enemy to Gabriel for he brings the revelation to thy heart by
God's will, a confirmation of what went before. And Guidance and glad
tidings for those who believe. Who ever is an enemy to God and His
angels and prophets, to Gabriel and Michael, Lo..! God is an
enemy to those who reject faith. "
Gabriel
brings the revelations straight to the Prophet's heart (alaiqa Qalbika
bi idhnillah) with God's permission. But Bukhari says Gabriel just
started talking and the Prophet did not know who it was. He had to ask
his wife ..!
Also see Verses 26:192-193 "And lo! it is a
revelation of the Lord of the Worlds, Which the True Spirit has brought
down Upon your heart, that you may be (one) of the warners, In plain
Arabic speech." (26:192-195)
I repeat, Gabriel brought
the revelation straight to the Prophet's heart . But Bukhari says the
Prophet had to ask his wife of Gabriel : "WHO IS THIS?"
Just as
the altered Jewish and Christian Bibles are written by their clerics,
similarly it's counterpart, the concocted / fabricated Hadith, has been
written by the hands of Bukhari WITHOUT THE PERMISSION OF GOD ALMIGHTY.
In Surah Al Baqarah, God Almighty says: Therefore
woe to those who distort the scripture with their own hands then say;
"This is from God" Seeking a cheap gain. Woe to them for distorting the
scripture, and woe to them for their illicit earnings."
As
stated earlier, the Hadith of Bukhari is not worth the paper it's
printed on. By following such ludicrous hadith which clearly taint the
great name of our beloved teacher, Prophet Muhammed (SAAW), we Muslims
have been lost for over 1,000 years now. We can only recall the glorious
days of the Prophet. Little do we realize that during the glorious days
there was NO hadith. There was ONLY the Quran.
God Almighty is
the Greatest. And, peace, love and blessings on the Final Messenger and
Seal of the Prophets, Muhammad bin Abdullah.
Does "Sahih al-Bukhari" explain the Quran?
