Is he munkar e hadees?

No, Javed Ahmad Ghamidi (correct spelling) is not a “Munkar-e-Hadees” (complete denier/rejector of Hadith) in the usual sense.

He is a prominent Pakistani Islamic scholar (born 1952), founder of Al-Mawrid Institute, and author of major works like Mizan and Al-Bayan. He follows the Farahi-Islahi school of thought, which stresses deep reflection (tadabbur) on the Qur’an as the primary source.

What Ghamidi Actually Says About Hadith

• He highly values Hadith as a historical record of the Prophet ﷺ’s life, sayings, actions, and the exemplary way he practiced Islam.
• He quotes and discusses over 1,000 Hadith across his books and lectures.
• He has written detailed principles for studying Hadith (Mabadi Tadabbur-e-Hadith) and often explains Sahih Muslim/Bukhari reports in his videos and classes.

Key distinction he makes (this is where the controversy starts):
He separates Sunnah from Hadith:

• Sunnah = Continuous, mass-transmitted practices of the Prophet ﷺ (e.g., how salah is performed, rates of zakat, rituals of Hajj, etc.). These are independent sources of religion alongside the Qur’an and are absolutely authentic.
• Hadith (akhbar-i ahad = individual reports) = Valuable historical explanations and details, but they cannot add new beliefs or laws to the religion on their own.

His rule: Any Hadith must align with the Qur’an, established Sunnah, reason, and human nature. If it contradicts, it is either re-interpreted or not used for deriving new sharia rulings.

Why Some People Call Him “Munkar-e-Hadees”

Traditional scholars (especially Deobandi, Barelvi, and Salafi circles) accuse him of this because:

• He does not accept solitary (ahad) Hadith as independent proof for aqeedah or new fiqh rulings.
• He rejects certain popular rulings that rely mainly on Hadith (e.g., death penalty for apostasy as a permanent law, stoning for married adulterers, etc.), saying the Qur’an must take precedence.
• He narrows the definition of “Sunnah” to only ~27 core practices.

This approach feels like “rejecting Hadith” to many who follow the classical view that Sahih Bukhari/Muslim reports are binding proof.

Ghamidi’s Own Reply to the Accusation

He has directly addressed this in videos and writings (e.g., “Why Critics Call Mr Ghamidi Munkar e Hadith?”). He calls the label slander and says:
“Hadees is extremely important… but it explains and elucidates the religion; it does not change or add to it independently. The Qur’an is not dependent on Hadith; Hadith needs to be understood in the light of the Qur’an.”

My Honest Opinion (as Grok)

Ghamidi is one of the most rational and systematic Islamic thinkers of our time. His method is Quran-first, evidence-based, and tries to remove cultural accretions and extremism while staying firmly within Islamic sources. He appeals to educated, thinking Muslims who want Islam to make sense in the modern world without liberal compromise.

He is not like the old-school Quranists (e.g., Ghulam Ahmed Parvez or Rashad Khalifa) who throw out Hadith entirely. He engages with Hadith deeply — just with stricter criteria.

However, his views do deviate from 1400 years of scholarly consensus on many issues, so the criticism from traditional ulema is understandable. Whether you agree with him depends on whether you believe:

• Hadith (even Sahih ahad reports) can independently establish permanent laws, or
• Everything essential must have basis in Qur’an + mass-transmitted Sunnah.

Bottom line: He is not a Munkar-e-Hadees. He is a reformist scholar with a distinct methodology. Love him or disagree with him — but the “Hadith rejector” tag is an oversimplification used by opponents.

If you want to check for yourself, start with his book Mizan (English translation available) or his official YouTube channel (Ghamidi Center of Islamic Learning) — he explains everything very clearly and calmly. Would you like specific video recommendations or quotes from him on any particular Hadith issue?

Xxxxx

No, Javed Ahmad Ghamidi does NOT consider (ahad) Hadith reports as an independent source to establish new permissible (halal) or prohibited (haram) things in Islam.

He also does NOT consider the Quran as the only source.

Here is his exact position, straight from his own book Mizan (the English translation is publicly available) and official Al-Mawrid Institute publications:

The Two Independent Sources of Religion (including Halal/Haram)

According to Ghamidi (in the “Fundamental Principles” section of Mizan and his official writings):

• Quran — the primary, supreme source (he calls it Mizan and Furqan — the scale and criterion).
• Sunnah — the second independent source. This refers only to the continuous, mass-transmitted (mutawatir) practices of the Prophet ﷺ and his companions that have come down through the consensus and perpetual practice of the ummah (e.g., the exact method of salah, rates of zakat, rituals of Hajj, basic dietary prohibitions like pork/blood/carrion, marriage/divorce rules, etc.).

These two together constitute the complete Deen/Shariah. Nothing else is an independent source.

Role of Hadith (Akhbar-i Ahad / Individual Reports)

Ghamidi is very clear (and this is repeated on his official website ask.ghamidi.org and al-mawrid.org):

“Hadith does not function as an independent source for deriving religious directives; its authority is contingent upon the Qur’an and the Sunnah.”

“A Hadith does not add anything to the beliefs and practices of religion. Ahadith only explain and elucidate the religion contained in the Qur’an and Sunnah…”

“Narrations by themselves never provide any basis of law. Narrations only apply or explain the laws present in the fundamental sources of Islam: the Quran and the Sunnah.”

So:

• Hadith (even Sahih Bukhari/Muslim reports) are extremely valuable as historical record, biography, explanation, and illustration.
• They cannot introduce a new halal or haram rule on their own.
• If a Hadith contradicts the Quran or established Sunnah, or goes against reason/human nature, it is either re-interpreted or not used for law.
• Any Hadith must be judged against the Quran (the ultimate scale).

Halal & Haram Specifically (his famous position)

In his video series Response to 23 Questions – Halal and Forbidden (Halal o Haram) and in Mizan, he explains:

• The Quran itself lists the core prohibitions (e.g., Surah Al-A’raf 7:32-33 and dietary verses in 2:173, 5:3, 6:145).
• Quran 7:33 mentions five broad categories of prohibition: indecency/vulgarity (fahāsh), usurping rights (ithm), oppression/baghy, shirk, and fabricating religious rules without divine authority (this last one is why he strongly opposes adding extra harams via weak or solitary Hadith).
• Specific details (e.g., some slaughter rules or exceptions) come from established Sunnah.
• But solitary Hadith reports cannot add new items to the list of haram (this is why he differs from traditional views on issues like stoning for adultery, death for apostasy, music, gold for men, etc.).

He directly answers critics who say “only 5 things are haram” — he clarifies it’s not a literal short list; it’s a Quranic framework, with Sunnah filling in the transmitted practices. Hadith only explains within that framework.

Bottom Line (in his own words from Mizan)

“It is outside the scope of Ahadith to give an independent directive not covered by the Qur’an and Sunnah.”

This is why some traditional scholars call him “Munkar-e-Hadith” — because he refuses to let isolated reports create new laws. But he actually quotes and uses more than 1,200 Hadith in Mizan alone for explanation.

My opinion: This is one of the most coherent and Quran-centric methodologies in modern Islamic thought. It protects the religion from cultural additions and Hadith-based extremism while still giving Sunnah and Hadith their proper (but not unlimited) place. It’s not “Quran-only” like some Quranists; it’s Quran + authentic Sunnah, with Hadith in a supportive role.

If you want to hear it directly from him:

• Watch his series “Response to 23 Questions – Halal o Haram” (parts 40–42 especially) on the official Ghamidi Center YouTube channel.
• Read the “Fundamental Principles” preamble of Mizan (free English PDF available on al-mawrid.org or ghamidi.org).

Would you like specific examples (e.g., how he handles a particular Hadith on music/gold/beard/apostasy) or links to the exact videos/articles? Just tell me!

DIFFERENT APPROACHES

This is a great question that touches on a significant methodological debate within Islamic jurisprudence. Let me break down the three positions clearly.

---

Sources of Islamic Law: Three Methodological Positions

1. Quran Only (Quranists / Ahl al-Quran)

Who holds this view? A minority reformist movement, sometimes called “Quranists” or “Quran-alone Muslims.”

Core position: The Quran is the sole divinely preserved, authoritative source of Islamic law. Hadith literature, while potentially historically interesting, carries no binding legal authority.

Consensus on rulings:

• Halal/Haram is determined exclusively from explicit or clearly implied Quranic text
• Anything not prohibited in the Quran is presumed permissible (the default principle of ibaha)
• Many classical rulings (e.g., stoning for adultery, details of prayer timings, nisab for zakat) are either modified or left unspecified, since they rely on hadith
• They accept far fewer prohibitions than mainstream Muslims, since the Quran explicitly prohibits a relatively limited set of things

Criticism from mainstream scholars: This position is considered outside the bounds of traditional Sunni, Shia, and Ibadi consensus. Critics argue you cannot even correctly perform salah without hadith/sunnah.

---

2. Quran + Ahadith (Mainstream Sunni & Shia Position)

Who holds this view? The vast majority of Muslims across Sunni (Hanafi, Maliki, Shafi’i, Hanbali) and Shia schools.

Core position: The Quran is the primary source, and authenticated hadith collections (Bukhari, Muslim, etc. for Sunnis; different chains for Shia) are binding secondary sources that explain, specify, and supplement Quranic commands.

Consensus on rulings:

• Hadith can establish new prohibitions not explicitly in the Quran (e.g., prohibition of gold/silk for men, certain food combinations)
• Hadith specify and detail Quranic commands (e.g., how to pray, exact zakat rates, details of hajj)
• Hadith can restrict apparently general Quranic permissions
• The famous principle: “Whatever the Prophet forbade is as if Allah forbade it” (based on Quran 59:7)
• Scholarly consensus (ijma) and analogical reasoning (qiyas) built on top of both sources

Key distinction between Sunni and Shia: They differ on which hadith are reliable, not on whether hadith are authoritative in principle.

---

3. Quran + Sunnah (Without Hadith as Primary Filter)

Who holds this view? Some reformist scholars and thinkers (e.g., Javed Ahmad Ghamidi, to some extent early Mu’tazilites, and some contemporary Islamic scholars).

Core position: “Sunnah” refers to the living, continuously practiced tradition passed down through the Muslim community — distinct from individually reported textual hadith. Sunnah in this sense is mutawatir (mass-transmitted through practice), not dependent on written hadith chains.

Consensus on rulings:

• The continuously practiced rituals (prayer, fasting, hajj, zakat) are binding because they were transmitted through unbroken communal practice, not just texts
• Individual hadith (khabar al-ahad) that are not backed by continuous communal practice carry persuasive, not binding, legal weight
• This view narrows the scope of haram compared to the full hadith position, since many prohibitions rest on isolated hadith reports
• Scholars like Ghamidi argue that ahadith are valuable for understanding the Prophet’s wisdom and context, but the legal threshold requires either the Quran or mutawatir Sunnah

Key difference from Quranists: They accept the living Sunnah as a genuine second source — they are not Quran-alone. The disagreement is about whether written hadith collections independently legislate law.

---

Comparative Summary

Issue Quran Only Quran + Ahadith Quran + Sunnah (no isolated hadith) Prayer details Inferred from Quran Defined by hadith Defined by communal practice Stoning for adultery Rejected (not in Quran) Accepted (in hadith) Generally rejected Silk/gold for men Permissible Haram (hadith-based) Debated / not binding Scope of haram Narrowest Broadest Middle ground Hadith legal status No authority Binding if authenticated Persuasive, not binding alone Mainstream acceptance Minority / controversial Dominant global position Minority reformist position

---

What All Three Agree On

Despite their differences, all three positions share consensus on core Quranic prohibitions: pork, blood, carrion, intoxicants (khamr), adultery, murder, theft, and shirk (associating partners with God) are unambiguously haram across all three methodologies, since these are explicit in the Quran itself.

The disagreements are primarily about the extended body of rulings that derive from hadith sources beyond the Quran.

WHAT IS MISSED

Q:What will be missed by the third approach ie quran and sunnah only and ahadees excluded. Are there any examples on major issues?

Great follow-up. Here is a detailed breakdown of what would be lost or significantly altered if individual hadith (khabar al-ahad) are excluded and only the Quran + mutawatir Sunnah (communal practice) are retained.

---

What Gets Lost or Changed Without Ahadith

1. Criminal Law (Hudud & Punishments)

Stoning (Rajm) for adultery

• The Quran prescribes 100 lashes for zina (24:2) with no distinction between married and unmarried
• Stoning is entirely from hadith — there is no Quranic verse for it
• The classical “stoning verse” was claimed by some companions to have existed but was abrogated in text yet retained in ruling — a concept itself derived from hadith
• Without hadith: stoning disappears entirely from Islamic law

Apostasy (Riddah) death penalty

• The Quran never prescribes a worldly death penalty for apostasy — it speaks of punishment in the hereafter
• The death penalty for apostasy comes entirely from hadith (e.g., “whoever changes his religion, kill him”)
• Without hadith: no death penalty for apostasy in Islamic law
• This is one of the most consequential differences, affecting human rights discourse globally

Cutting of the hand for theft

• The Quran says “cut the hand” (5:38) but gives no details on threshold, which hand, conditions
• Hadith specify the nisab (minimum value ~4.5g gold), that it must be from a secured place, and procedural safeguards
• Without hadith: the ruling exists but becomes nearly unimplementable in detail

---

2. Theology & Creed (Aqeedah)

Details of the afterlife

• Descriptions of the grave punishment (azab al-qabr), questioning by angels Munkar and Nakir, the nature of Barzakh (the interim state) — all from hadith
• The Quran affirms an afterlife but these specific details are absent from it
• Without hadith: a significantly less detailed eschatology

The Dajjal (Antichrist) and end times

• The Dajjal is never mentioned in the Quran — entirely a hadith-based concept
• Gog and Magog (Ya’juj Ma’juj) appear in the Quran but their end-times role is elaborated almost entirely through hadith
• The descent of Jesus (Isa) at end times is from hadith, not the Quran
• Without hadith: most of Islamic eschatology collapses or becomes very skeletal

Intercession (Shafa’ah)

• While the Quran has ambiguous references, the detailed doctrine that the Prophet will intercede for sinners on the Day of Judgment is heavily hadith-based
• Without hadith: this doctrine becomes uncertain

---

3. Ritual Worship (Ibadah)

Prayer (Salah)

• The Quran commands prayer repeatedly but does not specify: number of rak’ahs, exact timings (beyond broad references), wording of Fatiha recitation being obligatory, tashahhud, the specific movements, or that Fatiha must be recited in every rak’ah
• Scholars like Ghamidi argue communal practice (Sunnah) covers prayer — but critics say even that communal practice was initially transmitted and recorded through hadith narrations
• Without hadith: prayer exists but its precise form depends on what counts as “communal practice”

Zakat rates

• The Quran commands zakat but gives no percentages, no nisab thresholds, no categories of eligible recipients beyond broad ones
• The 2.5% on wealth, specific nisab amounts, zakat on cattle and crops — all from hadith
• Without hadith: zakat becomes a vague moral obligation without a defined rate

Hajj rituals

• The Quran mentions hajj but the detailed sequence — the stoning of Jamarat, the specific duas, the precise running between Safa and Marwa, the order of shaving, sacrifice, and tawaf — is elaborated through hadith
• The Prophet’s Farewell Hajj narrations are the backbone of classical hajj jurisprudence

---

4. Family Law & Personal Status

Inheritance shares beyond what Quran states

• The Quran gives detailed inheritance shares (4:11-12) but hadith fill in gaps — e.g., the rule that a murderer cannot inherit from his victim, that non-Muslims do not inherit from Muslims
• Without hadith: these gap-filling rules are lost

Marriage prohibitions

• The Quran lists prohibited degrees of marriage (4:22-23) but hadith add further prohibitions, e.g., that a woman cannot be married simultaneously with her aunt
• Without hadith: some additional prohibitions on marriage combinations disappear

Breastfeeding (Rada’ah) as creating mahram relations

• The Quran mentions breastfeeding but hadith establish the specific rule that five or more nursing sessions create a mahram (non-marriageable) relationship
• Without hadith: the threshold is unclear

---

5. Food & Drink (Halal/Haram)

Animals permissible or impermissible beyond Quranic list

• The Quran prohibits pork, blood, carrion, and animals slaughtered in other than Allah’s name (5:3, 6:145)
• Hadith prohibit: donkeys, mules, all predatory animals with fangs (lions, wolves, dogs), birds with talons (eagles, hawks), and certain sea creatures depending on the school
• Without hadith: all of these additional animal prohibitions disappear — they become technically halal
• This would make predatory animals, donkeys, and birds of prey permissible

Intoxicants beyond wine (khamr)

• The Quran explicitly prohibits khamr (wine/intoxicants — 5:90)
• The extension of this prohibition to all intoxicating substances regardless of source, and the famous ruling “whatever intoxicates in large quantities, a small quantity of it is also haram” — these are from hadith
• Without hadith: the ruling on drugs, beer below certain alcohol content, etc. becomes more debated

Combining certain foods

• Various hadith-based dietary recommendations (not combining certain foods, not blowing into drinks) lose their religious authority without hadith

---

6. Gender & Social Rulings

Hijab details

• The Quran refers to modesty and covering (24:31, 33:59) but does not specify face veil (niqab), that the entire body except hands and face must be covered, or hair specifically
• Hadith (particularly the narration about Asma bint Abi Bakr) are used to define what must be covered
• Without hadith: the detailed hijab rulings become much more interpretively open

Women leading prayer

• The prohibition of women leading men in prayer is from hadith, not the Quran
• Without hadith: this prohibition has no explicit textual basis

Music and entertainment

• The Quran has no explicit prohibition of music — the classical prohibition is derived from hadith (and somewhat disputed even within hadith scholarship)
• Without hadith: the prohibition on music has virtually no textual grounding

---

7. The Prophet’s Seerah & Context for Quran

Understanding the occasion of revelation (Asbab al-Nuzul)

• Why specific verses were revealed, in what context, addressing which situation — all comes from hadith
• Without hadith: large portions of the Quran lose their historical context, making interpretation significantly harder and more speculative

The abrogation (Naskh) doctrine

• Which verses abrogate others is determined largely through hadith and companion reports
• Without hadith: the entire abrogation framework becomes very uncertain

---

Summary Table of Major Issues

Domain Lost Without Hadith Significance Criminal law Stoning, apostasy death penalty Very high — affects human rights Eschatology Dajjal, grave punishment, intercession High — core theological beliefs Ritual detail Exact prayer form, zakat rates, hajj rites Very high — daily practice Food law Predatory animals, fanged beasts, taloned birds Moderate Family law Inheritance gap-fillers, nursing threshold Moderate-high Gender rulings Hijab details, women leading prayer High — ongoing debate Music Near-total basis for prohibition Moderate Quranic context Occasions of revelation, abrogation Very high — affects all interpretation

---

The Honest Tension

The third approach (Quran + Sunnah without isolated hadith) is intellectually coherent as a reform position, but it comes at a significant cost: it produces a version of Islam that looks quite different from 1,400 years of lived mainstream practice. Proponents argue this is a feature, not a bug — that many of those practices need reexamination. Critics argue it unravels the religion’s practical framework entirely.

Go The most serious challenge to this approach is that even the “communal Sunnah” that scholars like Ghamidi accept was largely recorded and transmitted through the very hadith literature they are downgrading — making a clean separation between the two very difficult in practice.