Resetting the Relationship Between Revelation and Tradition in Islam: Restoring the Balance

The umma is experiencing trials and tribulations because it "disconnected" from Allah by "disconnecting" from the Book of Allah. The umma "disconnected" from the Book of Allah when it neglected the Book of Allah and turned to books of traditions. Allah says He loves those who put their trust in Him. To turn from revelation to tradition is to trade revealed knowledge for reports of persons. Allah said He does not change the condition of people until they first change what is in themselves (13: 11). The turn was triggered by politics. It transpired with the emergence of despotism, and furnished a justification for it. Hawkish rulers endeavoured to bypass restrictions on wars of territorial enlargement. Accordingly, they tasked ulama to render lawful what Allah prohibited. The ulama rendered wars of aggression into a pillar of Islam through the weaponization of jurisprudence, through recourse to the teaching of "abrogation" and by treating tradition as "revelation from God." The former cancelled all verses of reconciliation, while the latter established tradition as a binding precedent. The turn from revelation to tradition was assisted by the repression of reason. It was also assisted by misinterpreting the meaning of hikma, meaning wisdom, as the tradition of the prophet. The turn from revelation to tradition was a paradigm shift of epic proportions. It replaced the revelation-centric paradigm with a tradition-centric paradigm. The re-orientation, that resulted in a disorientation, was "justified" by the assertion that tradition, too, is revelation. The treatment of tradition as "revelation from God" embedded a duality into the epistemology of Islam. But is it possible to endorse a duality of revelation into religion without also endorsing a duality of divinity? The teaching of dual revelation corrupted the knowledge of revelation. Traditions were treated as "revelations from Allah." This encroached upon tawhid. The prophet prohibited recording his sayings. Yet hawkish rulers, in defiance of the prophet's prohibition, asked ulama to record the traditions. Anti-rationalism plunged Muslims into confusion. Due to the resulting backwardness, anti-rationalism also rendered the umma vulnerable to external assaults. Reason was subordinated to tradition. Even revelation was subordinated to tradition. Thus, the relationship between revelation and tradition in Islam also requires attention. For tradition eclipsed revelation. This is an aberration. This reversal is expressed in the perceptions that "tradition judges revelation" and that "revelation requires tradition more than tradition requires revelation." Perceptions that treat the rulings of persons as more authoritative than the rulings of God reflect scriptural shirk. The reversal of the relationship between revelation and tradition encroaches on the pre-eminence of revelation. It represents a breakdown of traditional exegesis and jurisprudence. Tradition went from being mere reports from the past to being treated as "revelation," a "judge" of the Book of Allah, "abrogating" and even "replacing" parts of the Book. Treating tradition as "revelation from Allah" enabled tradition to supersede and replace parts of revelation. The result is legislation where reports of persons replace revealed rulings. This transpired with the punishments for adultery, apostasy and blasphemy. These punishments do not merely defy the Book of Allah; they result in miscarriages of justice, and attribute an unjustified aura of harshness to the sharia and Muslims generally. Hence, the relationship between revelation and tradition requires being reset. Tradition must be subordinated to revelation. The teaching of abrogation was used to transform the religion of reconciliation into an agenda of territorial expansion and global conquest. Shirk tainted exegesis as well as jurisprudence. The politicization of research reduced it to the rank of political propaganda. These aberrations require attention.