Rashad Khalifa, the son of a prominent Egyptian Sufi leader, was born in Kafr al-Zayat, Egypt in 1935. In 1959, he came to the United States, where he obtained a PhD in biochemistry. He settled in the United States and was active in the local Muslim community. Dissatisfied with the available English translations of the Qur’an, Khalifa set out to do a translation of his own.12 In working on the translation, Khalifa began to scrutinize the Arabic initials hat preface certain chapters of the Qur’an. A computer analysis of the Qur’anic text revealed numerical patterns related to the initials that according to Khalifa prove the divine origin of the Qur’an. This brought Khalifa popular acclaim throughout the Muslim world.13 Khalifa even received a congratulatory letter from the director of the department of research and publications at al-Azhar university’s Academy of Islamic Research in March of 1976, praising his efforts to discover secrets of the miraculous nature of the Qur’an.14 South African Muslim activist Ahmed Deedat also promoted Khalifa’s work in a booklet entitled Al-Quran, the Ultimate Miracle.15 However, the acclaim Khalifa received throughout the Muslim turned to loathing that eventually led to his brutal murder. Those who had once applauded him now condemned him.16
What was it that so upset the Muslim world that had once heralded his research as a great service to Islam? Khalifa’s discovery of numerical patterns in the Qur’an was the result of in-depth research into the Qur’an, but it was not the only discovery he made. Throughout the 1980s, Khalifa would publish a variety of extremely controversial claims based on his understanding of the Qur’an. The first topic on which he published such claims is the Hadith, and it is these claims that are relevant here. An examination of his other claims is well beyond the scope of the present study.
In the preface to his book Quran, Hadith, and Islam, Khalifa writes:
The continued research unveiled a startling fact: that the extremely popular “Hadith & Sunna” have nothing to do with the prophet Muhammad, and that the adherence thereto represents flagrant disobedience of God and His final prophet (Quran 6:112 & 25:31). This finding contradicts the beliefs of Muslim masses everywhere. Consequently, my personal popularity, and even the popularity of the Quran’s miracle, plunged to the point of endangering my life and reputation. As it turned out, telling Muslims that “Hadith and Sunna” are Satanic inventions is the same as telling Christians that Jesus is not the son of God.17
Khalifa’s declaration that the Hadith and Sunna were “Satanic inventions” shocked and incensed Muslims around the world. In the book prefaced by this bold statement, Khalifa uses Qur’anic verses, a few Biblical verses, and even Hadith to support his conclusions. For those who accept his findings, he says, “the results include a totally new sense of salvation, and full awareness that the Muslim masses have fallen victim to Satan’s schemes.”18 Such a harsh condemnation of the Muslim masses contrasts dramatically with the style of argument used by Parwez. This difference in style probably accounts for the fact that while Parwez did encounter strong opposition, he lived to an old age and died from illness. Khalifa, on the other hand, was brutally murdered just before dawn prayers at the mosque he had founded in Tucson, Arizona, in January 1990.19 Authorities at the time suspected that Khalifa’s murder was a result of his controversial interpretations of the Qur’an.20 Although no one has ever been charged with the actual killing in Arizona, a member of the militant Muslim group known as Jamaat al-Fuqra was eventually convicted of conspiracy to commit murder in the case.21 Evidence that is more recent suggests a link between Khalifa’s murder and Wadi el-Hage, who was recently convicted of conspiracy to commit murder for his role in the bombings of the U.S. Embassies in Kenya and Tanzania in 1998.22
What led Khalifa to call Hadith and Sunna “Satanic inventions” to which the majority have fallen victim? On what did he base the bold accusation that likely contributed to his death? Khalifa published his arguments in the book Qur’an, Hadith, and Islam. The book is short, less than ninety pages, and is not divided into chapters. Instead, Khalifa heads each page with a box that contains a claim. Below this box is the reasoning and evidence he uses to support that claim. Khalifa frequently uses all capital letters and underling or boldfaced type for emphasis. When citing direct quotations from the book, I have reproduced the emphasized words exactly as they are in the original. The first claim that Khalifa presents after the bold preface cited earlier is one familiar to and accepted by all Muslims—even the opponents of Prophetic traditions with whom al-Shafi’i debated nearly twelve hundred years ago: “No salvation without obeying the messenger.”23 Khalifa follows this with several Qur’anic verses in both Arabic and English that specifically command obedience to the Messenger. Khalifa goes on to say, “When delivering God’s messages, messengers do not speak on their own initiative.” Khalifa then cites verses from Deuteronomy and the Gospel of John that Muslims often interpret as predicting Muhammad’s arrival, along with another verse from the Qur’an:
I will raise up for them a prophet like you from among their kinsmen, and will put my words in his mouth; he shall tell them all that I command him. If any man will not listen to my words, which he speaks in my name, I myself will make him answer for it . . . (Deut. 18:18–19)
But when He, the Spirit of truth, comes He will guide into all the truth; for He will not speak on His own initiative, but whatever he hears, he will speak . . . (John 16:13)
And he (Muhammad) does not speak on his own initiative. (Qur’an 53:3)24
So, Khalifa starts his argument by establishing premises on which all Muslims agree, that obeying the Messenger is obligatory, that Mumammad’s coming as a Messenger was predicted in the previous scriptures, and that Messengers do not speak on their own. By identifying these premises and using them as a starting point, Khalifa has anticipated the response most often made by Muslims when the Hadith are challenged—the Qur’an commands obedience to the Messenger, and that requires acceptance of the Hadith. Muslims have inherited this thinking from al-Shafi’i, and have used it for nearly twelve hundred years. Khalifa understands this, and even agrees with the initial premise of obedience to the Messenger. Where Khalifa differs with the majority of Muslims is on exactly what obedience to the Messenger requires, and exactly what represents the teachings of the Messenger: “Muhammad is represented by the Quran alone.”25 Khalifa then fills the rest of the book with citations of more than seventy verses from the Qur’an, in both Arabic and English,26 to support a number of assertions, including:
● The Qur’an is “complete, perfect, and fully detailed,”
● Mumammad’s only duty was to deliver the Qur’an,
● Mumammad was actually forbidden from explaining the Qur’an,
● Obeying the Messenger is following only the Qur’an,
● Religious practices came from Abraham, not Mumammad,
● “Hadith” and “Sunna,” as they are understood by the majority of Muslims, are “100% conjecture,”
● The Qur’an is the only source of religious guidance and the only “Hadith” that Muslims should follow.27
For each of these points he cites specific verses. Because of the large number of verses he cites, I will only mention certain key verses used for the points listed here. Among the key verses that Khalifa cites to support his assertion that the Qur’an is complete and fully detailed are 6:38–39: “We did not leave anything out of this book, then all will be summoned before their Lord (for judgment). Those who do not believe our verses are deaf and dumb: in total darkness. God sends astray whomever He wills, and directs whomever He wills in the right path.”
He then cites portions of 6:114–115: “Shall I seek other than God as a source of law, when He revealed this Book to you fully detailed . . . The word of your Lord is complete in truth & justice.” Khalifa challenges Muslims by citing these verses under the heading, “Do you believe God or not?”28 The challenge seems clearly directed toward those who would argue, as al-Shafi’i did, that the Hadith, as a repository of the Prophetic Sunna, are a necessary complement to the Qur’an. How can a “complete” book require a “complement”? Khalifa’s none-too-subtle suggestion is that no one who believes such a thing believes God. One who does not believe God is a disbeliever. As he did in his preface, Khalifa is once again harshly condemning the vast majority of Muslims. This too is a very serious charge and one that would only anger many Muslims.
One of al-Shafi’is strongest arguments in favor of the need for Hadith had to do with the details of obligatory religious practices. More than half of Kitab Jima’al-‘ilm and much of the Risala are devoted to this issue, and this reasoning has been accepted and used by Muslims ever since. Khalifa understands this point too. He tells us that “their favorite question” is “If the Quran is complete (as God says), where do we find the details of Salat [sic] prayers?” Khalifa’s parenthetical insertion is yet another none-too-subtle implication: those who ask this question do not believe what God says. He further states that the question “reveals their total ignorance of the Quran.”29 Khalifa’s response to “their favorite question” is that all religious practices come to us from Abraham, in support of which he cites verse 22:78:
You shall strive in the cause of God as you should. He has blessed you and imposed no hardship in your religion; the religion of your father Abraham. Abraham is the one who named you “Muslims” in the beginning. Thus, the messenger serves as a witness among you, just as you serve as witnesses among the people. Therefore you shall observe the Salat prayers, give the Zakat charity, and hold fast to God; He is your Lord; the best Lord, and the best supporter.30
To show that the specific religious practices mentioned in 22:78 were given to Abraham, Khalifa cites 21:72–73. “And we granted him (Abraham) Isaac and Jacob as a gift, and we made them righteous. And we appointed them imams who guided in accordance with our commandments, and We taught them righteous works and the observance of Salat and Zakat.”31 He offers similar verses regarding fasting and the Hajj to show that they too were known and practiced since the time of Abraham.32 Mumammad was to follow the religion of Abraham.33 Mumammad’s contribution to Islam was not the details of religious practices, as these were already known. They are Abraham’s contribution to Muslims’ religious lives.34 Mumammad’s contribution was the delivery of the Qur’an.
Pointing out the Qur’an’s use of the Arabic construction ma . . . illa, which he refers to as a “double negative” used for emphasis, Khalifa cites the Qur’an 42:48 and 5:99 in support of the idea that Mumammad had “no duty except delivering (Quran).”35
Another argument that Muslims have generally accepted from the time of al-Shafi’i to the present is that Hadith are needed to explain certain things that have been mentioned in the Qur’an, beyond the details of religious practices: among these were issues such as the general and the specific, and the abrogating and the abrogated. Here too Khalifa is diametrically opposed to mainstream Muslim thinking. He declares directly that Mumammad was forbidden from explaining the Qur’an, citing 75:16–19: “Do not move your tongue (O Muhammad) to hasten the revelation of the Quran. It is we who will put it together as a Quran. Once we reveal it, you shall follow it. Then, it is we who will explain it.”36
What Khalifa offers is radical redefinition of the role of the Messenger as the majority of Muslims have understood it for at least twelve hundred years, which according to Khalifa is a gross misunderstanding. He even points to the Hadiths from the collections of al-Bukhari and Muslim in which Mumammad prohibited writing anything from him except the Qur’an, as evidence that the advocates of Hadith do not even follow their own teachings.37 However, he does not stop there. He also attacks the idea that Prophetic Hadith represent a second form of divine inspiration. As with the role of the Messenger, Qur’anic verses are Khalifa’s weapon of choice, especially verses that use the Arabic word hadith.
These are God’s verses; we recite them for you truthfully. In which “Hadith,” [sic] beside God and His verses do they believe in [sic]? Woe to every sinful fabricator. He hears God’s verses, then insists arrogantly on his way, as if he never heard them; promise him a painful retribution. When he learns anything from our verses, he takes it in vain; these have deserved humiliating retribution. Awaiting them is hell; neither their earnings, nor the idols they set up beside God can help them; they have deserved terrible retribution. This is the guidance and those who do not believe the verses of their Lord will suffer debasement, and painful retribution. (45: 6–11)38
To further emphasize his point that the “Quran is the only ‘Hadith’ to be followed,” and that “all other Hadiths are blasphemous and misleading fabrications,” Khalifa follows his citation of 45:6–11 with 39:23 and 31:6–7.
God has revealed the best “Hadith”; [sic] a book that is consistent, and describes both ways (to heaven and Hell). The skins of those who reverence their Lord shudder therefrom, then their skins and their hearts soften up and receive God’s message. Such is God’s guidance; He guides whomever He wills. [sic] As for those sent astray by Him, no one can guide them.
There are those who advocate vain “Hadith” causing diversion from the path of God, without knowledge, and fail to take such actions seriously; these have deserved humiliating retribution. And when our verses are recited to him, he turns away arrogantly, as if he never heard them; as if his ears are deaf; promise him painful retribution.39
For Khalifa, there is no middle ground. There is no question of “authentic” or “inauthentic” Hadith. For Khalifa, the crucial question is that posed in 45:6, cited earlier. Based on these verses, Khalifa sees anyone who follows any Hadith after God and His verses as being described in 31:6. Furthermore, they are “idol worshippers” of Mumammad who are unaware of their idolatry and think that they are righteous.40 The real importance of the Hadith and Sunna for Khalifa is that they are a “necessary test to distinguish the true Muslim from the false Muslim.”41
From beginning to end, Khalifa’s small book is a vehement indictment of traditional Islam as idolatry that violates the teachings delivered by Mumammad. It is not surprising that it angered Muslims worldwide who recognized it as a direct attack. However, not all Muslims had this reaction. Some Muslims saw beyond the vehemence of the accusations leveled by Khalifa, and were moved by the Qur’anic arguments he presented against the use and authority of the Hadith. One such Muslim is the Malaysian thinker Kassim Ahmad, author of Hadith: A Re-evaluation. Ahmad saw beyond the vehemence of Khalifa’s presentation and found value in his work.
Kassim Ahmad was born and raised in Malaysia in a traditional Sunni family. In explaining his reasons for writing Hadith: A Re-evaluation, Ahmad explains that he held the generally accepted Sunni beliefs, tempered by Ibn Khaldun’s criteria of checking traditions against the Qur’an and rational thinking, until he encountered Khalifa’s work in 1985. Ahmad says that Khalifa’s worked “opened for [him] a way to solve the problem of the Hadith.” The “problem” to which Ahmad refers is “their negative effects on the Muslim community” and their “connection to the decline and fall of the Muslims.” Because of their negative effects, Ahmad believes it is time for Muslims to completely “re-evaluate the whole heritage of traditional Islamic thought.”42 Ahmad is not unique in his call for such a reevaluation. Many Muslims have actively worked to reform Islam and Muslim thinking in the modern period—thinkers such as Jamal al-Din al-Afghani, Mumammad Abduh, Rashid Rida, Fazlur Rahman are among the most well-known. In spite of the efforts of these and other reformers, Ahmad says, “the condition of the Muslim community has not changed much and continues to be precarious.” The question that follows, which Muslims must ask themselves is “why?” Ahmad recognizes that a multiplicity of social, cultural, political, historic, economic and other factors play a role, but not all factors play an equal role. Citing Qur’anic verses that promise victory to believers, that God only destroys unjust communities, and that God does not change the conditions of a people until the people change themselves, Ahmad points to ideology as the most important factor.43 The failure of modern reform movements must therefore be because of their ideologies. Ahmad identifies clearly what he sees as the basis for the failure of the modern reform movement begun by Abduh at the turn of the twentieth century:
Muhammad Abduh, the father of this movement, called for the rejection of mazhab and taqlid, and for the reopening of the door of ijtihad and critical assimilation of Western knowledge. His basic references are still the Quran and the Hadith. I have pointed out that herein lies the failure of this movement. The Hadith, and everything else, have to be judged by the Quran.44
Ahmad’s hypothesis is that the early Muslims were successful as long as the Qur’an was their sole source of religious guidance and that Muslim society only declined after they granted Hadith authority along with the Qur’an:
A time came when other teachings, local and foreign, gained the upper hand and submerged the Quran, as witnessed by the following Quranic prophecy: The messenger will say, “My Lord, my people have deserted this Quran.” We thus appointed for every prophet enemies from among the criminals, and God suffices as Guide and Protector. (25:30–31)
After about three hundred years, extraneous harmful teachings not taught by Prophet Muhammad but skillfully attributed to him gradually gained a foothold in the Muslim community and turned them away from the dynamic invincible ideology that initially brought them success. This ideology, as we shall show, is precisely the hadith.45
Although, he clearly identifies the use of Hadith along with Qur’an as the ultimate reason for the decline and stagnation of Muslim society, and calls for a complete reevaluation of Islam’s intellectual heritage in order to remedy the problem of the Hadith, Ahmad takes pains to make it clear that such a reevaluation is not meant as an attack against classical scholars. Instead, the criticism involved is no more than “a normal scientific procedure,” in which all “great [Muslim] philosophers and scholars” have engaged.46
Before turning to his reevaluation of the history of the Hadith, Ahmad addresses what he calls “the Traditionists’ theory” of the Hadith. He divides this into four arguments that he addresses one-by-one47: (i) Sunna is revelation, (ii) “Obey the Messenger” means “Uphold the Hadith,” (iii) Hadith interprets Qur’an, and (iv) the example of the Prophet.
In addressing the question of Sunna as divine revelation, Ahmad begins with al-Shafi’i’s contention that the “wisdom” referred to in the Qur’an refers to extra-Qur’anic revelations give by God to Mumammad. The examination of Kitab Jima’al-‘ilm in part one shows that al-Shafi’i does not attribute any Qur’anic arguments to his opponent, but only the suggestion: “Is it possible that he is teaching them the Book in general, and the Wisdom in particular, and that is its rulings?”48 However, Ahmad offers Qur’anic support for just such an idea.
Ahmad begins with the premise that the Qur’an explains itself and proceeds to look at the twenty occurrences of the word hikma in the Qur’an; he concludes that “it is obvious that it refers to the teachings of the Quran, or to general wisdom that all prophet–messengers or moral teachers were endowed with.” Among the verses he cites in support of the first part of his conclusion—that the “wisdom” is found in the teachings of the Qur’an—is 17:39: “This is part of the wisdom that your Lord reveals to you, where the word ‘wisdom’ refers to some thirteen ethical teachings enumerated in verses 22 to 38.”49 Among the verses he cites in support of the second part of his conclusion—that the wisdom is something with which all prophets, messengers or moral teachers were endowed—are 3:81, which states that God has given all the prophets “the Book and wisdom,” and 31:12, which states that God granted wisdom to Luqman. In addition to the verses that contain the word hikma, Ahmad also offers the verses that describe the Qur’an as hakim, as further support for the idea that the wisdom God gave to Mumammad refers to the specific teachings of the Qur’an and not to some type of extra-Qur’anic revelation. The wise leadership that Mumammad demonstrated for his community was “consequent upon his acting strictly in accordance with the ethical teachings of the Qur’an.”50
After addressing the word wisdom, Ahmad turns to the words Sunna and Hadith, as they are used in the Qur’an. He shows two different Qur’anic uses of the former, the first is in reference to God’s system (Sunna) mentioned in 48:23, and the second in reference to “the example of the fate suffered by ancient communities,” mentioned in 8:38. “None,” he says, “refers to the behavior of the Prophet.” In his discussion of the Qur’anic usage of the word hadith, Ahmad cites the same Qur’anic verses that Khalifa used, and concludes that the Qur’anic usage “categorically rejects any hadith besides the Quran.”51
Moving to second of the Traditionist arguments that links obeying the Messenger with following the Hadith, Ahmad points out that “the messenger is not an independent agency [sic],” but the “agency [sic] that delivered the message.” Ahmad then mentions those verses that specify that the messenger’s only function is to deliver the message. In keeping with the principle that the Qur’an explains itself, Ahmad points out that all verses that mention obedience to the Messenger do so only in connection with obedience to God. This is further explained, according to Ahmad, by verse 34:46: “Say, ‘I exhort you to do only one thing: that you totally submit to God in pairs or as individuals, then reflect. Your friend is not crazy; he only alerts you to evade terrible retribution.’”52
Having addressed the issues of the Sunna as a form of divine revelation and obedience to the Messenger, Ahmad takes up the issue of Mumammad explaining the Qur’an. As in the case of the Qur’anic usage of the word hadith, he presents the same verses used by Rashad Khalifa, but in a much milder tone. Like Khalifa, Ahmad also argues that the religious practices of prayer, charity, fasting, and pilgrimage have been inherited from Abraham.
He goes on to add that even though this is the case the Qur’an still makes mention of the main features of these practices and that people learn to perform the prayer from parents and teachers, not from the Hadith.53 Ahmad responds to the final argument of the Traditionist theory—that when the Qur’an calls the Messenger “a good example” in 33:21, it means that his behavior must be imitated as closely as possible in all things and that this requires Hadith—in the same way he responded to the previous arguments, by offering something else from the Qur’an to explain the meaning of the verse in question. To explain the meaning of “good example” (uswa masana) in 33:21, Ahmad cites the fact that exactly the same words are used to describe Abraham and those who believed with him in 60:4: “A good example has been set for you by Abraham and those with him. They said to their people, ‘We disown you and the idols you set up besides God. We reject you, and you will see from us nothing but enmity and opposition until you believe in God alone.’”54 He goes on to point out that this verse explains that the good example refers to “one’s religious convictions, ideological position and struggle.” He also argues that it is unreasonable to think that God would require Muslims to imitate Mumammad’s personal behaviors such as eating and dressing because such behaviors are matters of culture, education, and personal preference.55
Now that he has dealt with general arguments offered in support of the need for the Hadith as an authoritative source of religious law and guidance, Ahmad presents his argument that the Qur’an is complete, perfect, and fully detailed. Again, he uses the same verses used by Rashad Khalifa but takes a much milder, less confrontational tone in offering his conclusion. “To place the hadith on an equivalent footing with revelation is to create another source of guidance—an idol. This is the major problem with the hadith.” Ahmad tempers his position even further, saying:
The theory or doctrine that the hadith is an equal source of guidance with the Quran, propounded by Shafi`i, is the most important aspect of the hadith question. Even though we totally reject this doctrine, we do not reject the hadith as a secondary source, provided that it does not contradict the Quran. On this view also, we say that the hadith is an important source of early Muslim social history.56
Ahmad’s views on the Hadith, the nature of revelation, and the role of the Messenger, and the Qur’anic verses he uses to support those views are essentially the same as those presented by Rashad Khalifa, but his presentation differs dramatically. Not only does he use a much less strident tone, he also appeals to rational thinking, Muslim desires for social reform, and classical Muslim intellectual history to buffer and support his call for reevaluation of the status of the Hadith as an authoritative source of religious law and guidance. Ahmad’s more tempered presentation was not enough to keep his book from being banned in his home country of Malaysia, nor from his being declared a heretic. However, his style has not generated the degree of hostility that Muslims directed against Rashad Khalifa. His less confrontational tone may eventually appeal to a wider audience, particularly now that it has been translated from Malay into both English and Arabic.
Source: Aisha Y. Musa, Hadith as Scripture – Discussion on the Authority of Prophetic Traditions in Islam, pp. 87-97.
12. “Dr Rashad Khalifa, the Man, the Issues and the Truth.” http://www.submission.com/
khalifa.html. Accessed March 28, 2003.
13. Jamil ‘Hrif, “Tafsir al-Qur’an bil-‘uqul al-iliqtruniya,” Akher Saa, January 24, 1973, 3–6; ‘Abd
al-Mamid Mumammad Nada, “al-arqAm fil-Qur’an al-Karim,” al-Muslimun, July 12, 1975, 19;
Samir ‘Abd al-Muttalib, “Sirr ghAmid lil-raqm 19 fi jami’ suwar al-Qur’an.” al-Ittihad, February 22,
14. ‘Abd al-Muhaymin Mumammad al-Fuqa, letter to Rashad Khalifa, March 17, 1976, from the
private collection of Edip Yuksel, Tucson, AZ.
15. Ahmed Deedat, Al-Quran the Ultimate Miracle (Chicago: Kazi Publications, 1986). The original
publication is an undated booklet. By the time Kazi published the currently available version in
1986, Khalifa had angered much of the Muslim world by his opposition to the Hadith.
16. “Bayan min al-Azhar: ba’udta ‘an al-rashad yA duktur Rashad!,” Ruz al-Yusuf, April 22, 1985,
40–43; “al-La’ba bil-raqm 19,” al-Muslimun, April 6, 1985, 8–12.
17. Rashad Khalifa, preface to Quran, Hadith, and Islam (Tucson, AZ: Islamic Publications, 1982).
19. Carmen Duarte, “Mosque Leader is Found Slain,” The Arizona Daily Star, February 1, 1990, 1A.
20. Carmen Duarte, “Khalifa Investigators Considering Religious Assassination Theory,” The
Arizona Daily Star, February 2, 1990, 2A.
21. Colorado Department of Law, “Information Regarding Colorado’s Investigation and
Prosecution of Members Of Jamaat Ul Fuqra,” December 2001 http://www.ago.state.co.us/
Reports/fuqra.stm. Accessed April 11, 2003. Although the killing occurred in Arizona, a
detailed written plan that closely matched the crime was found in the possession of al-Fuqra
members in Colorado.
22. United States District Court Southern District Of New York, United States Of America v. Bin
Laden et al. Indictment S (9) 98 Cr. 1023 (LBS), 105. <http://cns.miis.edu/pubs/reports/pdfs/
binladen/indict.pdf>. Accessed August 9, 2003.
23. Khalifa, preface to Quran, Hadith, and Islam, 1.
24. Ibid., 2.
25. Ibid., 3.
26. Here, I have followed the translation Khalifa presents in Quran, Hadith, and Islam. The available
editions of his translation of the Qur’an vary somewhat from that.
27. Ibid., 4–58.
28. Ibid., 10.
29. Ibid., 37.
30. Ibid., 38.
31. Ibid., 48.
32. Ibid., 49–50.
33. Ibid., 40; Qur’an 16:123.
34. Khalifa, preface to Quran, Hadith, and Islam, 38.
35. Ibid., 40.
36. Ibid., 69.
37. Ibid., 34.
38. Ibid., 57.
39. Ibid., 58.
40. Ibid., 53–54.
41. Ibid., 55.
42. Kassim Ahmad, Hadith: A Re-Evaluation. Translated from the Malay original (Tucson, AZ:
Monotheist Productions, 1997), 2–3.
43. Ibid., 5–6.
44. Ibid., ix.
45. Ibid., 8.
46. Ibid., 17.
47. Ibid., 23–49.
48. Al-Shafi’i, Kitab Jima’ al-‘Ilm, 461.
49. Ahmad, Hadith: A Re-Evaluation, 23–24.
50. Ibid., 25.
51. Ibid., 26–27.
52. Ibid., 32.
53. Ibid., 36.
54. Ibid., 39.
56. Ibid., 49.