Sacred Forgery Part 4: The Silencing of Conscience — How Dissent Was Branded as Heresy

By Naseer Ahmed, New Age Islam 5 August 2025 This is in continuation of my previous articles: 1. Rewriting the Future: How Political Hadiths Forged our Past 2. The Six Silent Witnesses: How Empire Froze the Hadith and Buried the Qur’an’s Moral Voice 3. The Hadith Methodology and Its Historical Consequences: A Critical Reappraisal While the Abbasid regime institutionalised hadith to mould a theology of obedience, it did not stop there. Anyone who dared to ask questions, invoke the Qur'an against hadith, or propose moral reasoning over textual dogma was systematically marginalised. Thus began one of the most defining eras of religious censorship in Islamic history—one that transformed dissent into deviance, and conscience into kufr. 1. Mu’tazilah: The Rationalists Who Dared to Think The earliest and most systematic opposition to this enforced orthodoxy came from the Muʿtazilah. Far from being Qur'an-deniers, the Mu’tazilites upheld the Qur’an as supreme and insisted that God’s justice and human reason must go hand in hand. They argued that: • God cannot command injustice. • Faith without moral action is hypocrisy. • Human beings are morally responsible for their choices. • Hadith cannot override Qur’anic values. Their rallying cry was simple yet radical: "The mind is a trust from God." And what was their reward? Vilification. Marginalization. Historical erasure. After the failure of the short-lived Mihna (an inquisitorial attempt to impose rationalism), the tables were turned. The rationalists were driven underground, and a new wave of anti-intellectual orthodoxy washed over Islamic discourse. The Qur'an had been defanged. Now, those who used their intellect to understand it were declared heretics. 2. The Rise of the Ash’arites: Rationalism in Chains Once Muʿtazilah were purged, a more state-friendly “compromise” theology emerged—Ash’arism. While preserving some rational tools, it ultimately bent the knee to authority. The Ashʿarites developed ingenious metaphysical gymnastics: • God’s actions (as interpreted by them) are beyond moral evaluation. • What is “good” is only what God commands (as interpreted by them), even if it appears unjust. • Obedience is better than ethical inquiry. This was the intellectual equivalent of putting a velvet glove over an iron fist. It allowed for occasional nuance, but never at the expense of political loyalty. Ash’arism became the theologian’s answer to “Shut up and obey.” 3. Quran-Centric Thinkers: Shunned or Silenced Throughout history, there were always believers who turned back to the Qur’an—not to reject the Prophet, but to restore him as the moral exemplar the Qur’an described. These included: • Early Quranists, who rejected hadith as spurious political intrusions. • Some Sufis, like Ibrahim al-Khawwas or even elements of Rabi’a, who bypassed legalism for spiritual ethics rooted in divine love. • Later reformers, like Shah Waliullah or Sir Syed Ahmad Khan, who saw the Qur’an as a living moral text, not a pretext for medieval legalism. They were branded with the usual arsenal of insults: • "Zindiq" (heretic) • "Muḥdith" (innovator) • "Munkir al-Hadith" (denier of hadith) • "Kafir" (disbeliever) Even those who didn’t deny hadith, but simply prioritised Qur’anic coherence, were deemed threats to the inherited scholastic machinery. 4. The Politics of Consensus: Manufacturing the “Ijmaʿ” One of the most ingenious tools for silencing dissent was the weaponisation of Ijmaʿ—consensus. But whose consensus? Of scholars selected by the state, schooled in the same theological lineages, and punished if they deviated. This was not the organic consensus of a community, but a bureaucratic stamp of approval: “There is Ijmaʿ that the Caliph must be obeyed.” “There is Ijmaʿ that the Prophet’s companions are above reproach.” “There is Ijmaʿ that all six books of hadith are authentic.” Ijmaʿ became the medieval version of “Case closed.” But behind these so-called “unanimous” rulings were centuries of conflict, suppression, and court-appointed scholars signing off on orthodoxy to preserve their pensions. 5. Irony upon Irony: The Prophet vs the Hadith About Him The bitterest irony of all is that the Prophet Muhammad (pbuh), who is presented in the Qur’an as a liberator of the mind and conscience, was turned into a mouthpiece for anti-Qur’anic rulings: • The man who broke idols is now made to command idol-like obedience to rulers. • The man who was told to “consult the believers in matters” (Qur’an 3:159) is made to embody authoritarianism. • The man who risked his life against tribal lords is made to say, “Obey even the cruellest of kings.” Hadith was not just being used to override the Qur’an. It was being used to reverse it. Conclusion: A Revolution Reversed The Qur’an came to liberate minds, question unjust power, and restore divine justice. The Prophet came to establish that justice, not as a king, but as a Messenger. But under dynastic Islam, that revolution was reversed: • The Qur’an was silenced by selective hadith. • Hadith was curated by rulers. • Rulers were protected by theologians. • Theologians were canonised by consensus. • Dissent was cast out in the name of orthodoxy. The original light of Islam—the Furqan, the clear distinction between right and wrong—was replaced with a maze of narrations, conflicting traditions, and politicised theology. ------- مقدّسجعلسازی: حصہچہارم ضمیرکاگلاگھونٹنا — کسطرحاختلافِرائےکوالحادقراردیاگیا مصنف: نصیر احمد یہمضمونمیرےپچھلےمضامینکاتسلسلہے: مستقبلکیازسرنوتشکیل: کسطرحسیاسیاحادیثنےہماراماضیگھڑا چھخاموشگواہ: خلافتنےحدیثکوکیسےمنجمدکیااورقرآنکیاخلاقیآوازکودفنکیا حدیثکاطریقِکاراوراسکےتاریخینتائج: ایکتنقیدیجائزہ اگرچہعباسیدورِحکومتنےحدیثکواطاعتپرمبنیایکعقیدہتشکیلدینےکےلیےادارہجاتیشکلدی،مگروہیہیںنہیںرُکے۔جوبھیسوالاُٹھاتا،حدیثکےمقابلےمیںقرآنکولاتا،یامتنیجامدعقائدپراخلاقیعقلکوترجیحدیتا،اُسےمنظمطورپرکنارےلگادیاگیا۔یوںاسلامیتاریخکاوہدَورشروعہواجسمیںاختلافکوگمراہیاورضمیرکوکفربنادیاگیا۔ 1. معتزلہ: وہعقلیمکتبجوسوچنےکیجرأترکھتاتھا اسنافذشدہعقیدےکیسبسےپہلےاورسبسےمربوطمخالفتمعتزلہنےکی۔وہقرآنکےمنکرنہیںتھےبلکہاسکیبالادستیکےقائلتھےاورکہتےتھےکہاللہکاعدلاورانسانیعقلایکساتھچلنےچاہئیں۔ انکےبنیادینکاتیہتھے: اللہظلمکاحکمنہیںدےسکتا۔ بغیرعملکےایمان،نفاقہے۔ انساناپنےافعالکااخلاقیطورپرذمہدارہے۔ حدیثقرآنیاقدارکومنسوخنہیںکرسکتی۔ انکانعرہسادہمگرانقلابیتھا: "عقلاللہکیامانتہے۔" اورانکاانعام؟ تحقیر،اخراج،اورتاریخسےمٹایاجانا۔ مختصرالمیعاد "محنہ" کیناکامیکےبعد—جسکےذریعےمعتزلہکانظریہزبردستینافذکرنےکیکوششکیگئی—صورتحالالٹگئی۔عقلیتپسندزیرِزمینچلےگئے،اوراسلامیعلمیروایتپراندھیتقلیدکاطوفانچھاگیا۔ قرآنکوپہلےہیغیرمؤثربنایاجاچکاتھا۔ابجوعقلاستعمالکرتاتھا،وہزندیققرارپاتاتھا۔ 2. اشاعرہکاعروج: عقلکیزنجیروںمیںقید معتزلہکےاخراجکےبعدایکایسا "مطیع" عقیدہابھراجوحکمرانوںکوسازگارتھا: اشعریت۔انہوںنےکچھعقلیاوزاربرقراررکھے،لیکنبالآخراطاعتکومقدمرکھا۔اشاعرہنےپیچیدہماورائیتصوراتپیشکیے: اللہکےافعال (انکےفہمکےمطابق) اخلاقیجانچسےبالاترہیں۔ نیکیوہیہےجسکااللہ (یافقہا) حکمدیں،چاہےوہبظاہرناانصافیہو۔ اطاعت،اخلاقیتحقیقسےبہترہے۔ یہگویاآہنیمٹھیپرمخملیدستانہچڑھانےکےمترادفتھا۔سطحینرمیضرورتھی،مگرسیاسیوفاداریکےاخراجپرنہیں۔اشعریتعالمِدینکےلیے "چپرہواوراطاعتکرو" کاعلمیاندازبنگئی۔ 3. قرآنمرکزاہلِفکر: نظراندازیاخاموشکیےگئے تاریخمیںہمیشہایسےمؤمنینرہےجنہوںنےقرآنکیطرفرجوعکیا—نبیکینفیکےلیےنہیںبلکہانکیاصلاخلاقیسیرتکوبحالکرنےکےلیے،جیساکہقرآنمیںبیانہوا۔ انمیںشاملتھے: ابتدائیقرآنپرست،جنہوںنےاحادیثکوسیاسیدخلاندازیقراردیا۔ بعضصوفیاءجیسےابراہیمالخواصیارابعہبصری،جنہوںنےقانونیشکلوںکےبجائےروحانیاخلاقیاتکواپنایا۔ بعدکےمصلحین،جیسےشاہولیاللہیاسرسیداحمدخان،جنہوںنےقرآنکوزندہاخلاقیپیغامکےطورپردیکھا،نہکہقرونِوسطیٰکےقوانینکےجوازکےطورپر۔ انسبکوروایتیالزاماتکاسامناکرناپڑا: "زندیق" "محدث" (بدعتی) "منکرِحدیث" "کافر" یہاںتککہوہلوگجنہوںنےصرفقرآنیہمآہنگیکواولیتدی،احادیثکےمنکرنہیںتھے،وہبھیموروثیمکتبِفکرکےلیےخطرہسمجھےگئے۔ 4. اجماعکیسیاست: رائےکودبانےکاایکہتھیار اجماع (اتفاقِرائے) کواختلافکودبانےکےلیےایکہتھیاربنایاگیا۔لیکنیہکسکااجماعتھا؟وہعلماجنہیںریاستنےچُنا،ایکجیسےمکاتبمیںتعلیمدی،اورانحرافپرسزادی۔ یہعوامیاجماعنہیںبلکہایکسرکاریمہرِتصدیقتھی: "خلیفہکیاطاعتپراجماعہے۔" "صحابہپرتنقیدنہکرنےپراجماعہے۔" "صحاحستہکیصحتپراجماعہے۔" اجماعگویاقرونِوسطیٰکا "باتختم" بنگیا۔مگرانفیصلوںکےپیچھےاختلاف،جبر،اوردرباریعلماکیطویلتاریخہے۔ 5. ستمبالائےستم: نبیﷺ بمقابلہانپرگھڑیگئیحدیثیں سبسےتلخحقیقتیہہےکہنبیمحمدﷺ،جنہیںقرآننےفکروضمیرکاآزادکنندہبتایا،انہیںخودجبر،اندھیتقلید،اورآمریتکانمائندہبنادیاگیا: جسنبینےبتتوڑے،اسےبتوںکیطرححکمرانوںکیاطاعتکاحامیبنایاگیا۔ جسےحکمتھاکہ "اہلِایمانسےمشورہکرو" (آلعمران 3:159)،اسےایکآمرکےروپمیںپیشکیاگیا۔ جسنےظالمسرداروںکامقابلہکیا،اسےکہاگیاکہ "بدترینحکمرانکیبھیاطاعتکرو۔" احادیثصرفقرآنپرفوقیتحاصلنہکررہیںتھیں،بلکہاسکارخبھیموڑرہیتھیں۔ نتیجہ: ایکانقلابجوالٹدیاگیا قرآناسلیےآیاتھاکہعقلکوآزادکرے،ناانصافیکوچیلنجکرے،اورعدلِالٰہیکوقائمکرے۔نبیﷺ اسعدلکوقائمکرنےآئےتھے—بطورپیغمبر،نہکہبادشاہ۔ مگرسلطنتیاسلامنےاسانقلابکوالٹدیا: قرآنکوخاموشکردیاگیا۔ احادیثکوحکمرانوںنےچُنا۔ حکمرانوںکوعلمانےبچایا۔ علماکواجماعنےمحفوظکیا۔ اوراختلافِرائےکوبدعت،زندقہ،اورالحادقراردےکرنکالدیاگیا۔ اسلامکااصلنور—الفرقان،حقوباطلمیںفرق—احادیث،متضادروایات،اورسیاستزدہعقائدکےدھندمیںچھپگیا۔ A frequent contributor to NewAgeIslam.com, Naseer Ahmed is an independent researcher and Quran-centric thinker whose work bridges faith, reason, and contemporary knowledge systems. Through a method rooted in intra-Quranic analysis and scientific coherence, the author has offered ground-breaking interpretations that challenge traditional dogma while staying firmly within the Quran’s framework. His work represents a bold, reasoned, and deeply reverent attempt to revive the Quran’s message in a language the modern world can test and trust. URL: https://www.newageislam.com/debating-islam/sacred-forgery-part-4-conscience-dissent-heresy/d/136409 New Age Islam, Islam Online, Islamic Website, African Muslim News, Arab World News, South Asia News, Indian Muslim News, World Muslim News, Women in Islam, Islamic Feminism, Arab Women, Women In Arab, Islamophobia in America, Muslim Women in West, Islam Women and Feminism