Authentic Hadiths contradicting with authentic Hadiths

[muslimforever2012]

Assalamu alaikum.

I was reading Hadiths on bestiality when I noticed something weird:

Translation:  Whoever comes unto an animal, kill him and kill it with him.
Narrator:  Abu Huraira and Ibn Abbas.
Validity and Authentication:  Authentic and undisputed.
Reference:  Sahih Al-Jami'a, page or number: 5938.

Translation:  Whoever comes unto an animal, kill him and kill it with him.
Narrator:  Abdallah Ibn Abbas.
Validity and Authentication:  Authentic and undisputed.
Reference:  Mushkat Al-Masabeeh, page or number: 3509.

Translation:  Whoever goes in unto (has sex with in other words in Arabic) an animal, kill him and kill the animal.
Narrator:   Abdallah Ibn Abbas.
Validity and Authentication:  Chained by Amru bin Abu-Amru.  Both disputed it.  But Yahya bin Ma'een authenticated it.
Reference:   Nile Al-Awtar, page or number 7/288.

Translation:  Whoever you find unto (having sex with) an animal, kill him and kill the animal with him.
Narrator:  Abdallah Ibn Abbas.
Validity and Authentication:  Authentic and undisputed.
Reference:  Sahih Al-Tirmithi, page or number: 1455.

Translation:  Whoever you find unto (having sex with) an animal, kill him and kill the animal with him.
Narrator:  Abdallah Ibn Abbas.
Validity and Authentication:  Authentic and undisputed.
Reference:  Sahih Al-Jami'a, page or number: 6588.

Translation:  Whoever goes in unto (having sex with) an animal, kill him and kill the animal.
Narrator:  Abdallah Ibn Abbas.
Validity and Authentication:  Authentic and undisputed.
Reference:  Sahih Ibn Majaa, page or number: 2094.

Narrator:  Kill the doer and the one who is being done (i.e., two males having sodomy), and who goes in unto an animal.
Narrator:  Abdallah Ibn Abbas.
Validity and Authentication:  Authentic and undisputed.
Reference:  Sahih Al-Targheeb, page or number: 2423.


However, in Sunan Abu Dawood, here is what it said:

Book 38, Number 4449:
Narrated Abdullah ibn Abbas:

The Prophet (peace_be_upon_him) said: If anyone has sexual intercourse with an animal, kill him and kill it along with him. I (Ikrimah) said: I asked him (Ibn Abbas): What offence can be attributed to the animal/ He replied: I think he (the Prophet) disapproved of its flesh being eaten when such a thing had been done to it.

and:

Book 38, Number 4450:
Narrated Abdullah ibn Abbas:

There is no prescribed punishment for one who has sexual intercourse with an animal.

Abu Dawood said that the second narration is more correct.

I don't understand. Can someone explain about multiple authentic Hadiths contradicting an authentic Hadith?

Thanks.

[Sama]

From Multaqa:

11-05-2010, 05:39 AM
Wa'alaykum As'alaam Wa'rahmatullah akhi,

First narration (4449): Shaykh Albani says "Sahih" in Sahih ibn Majah. Is also reported in Musnad of Imam Ahmad and Tirmidhi.

Second narration (4450): Classed as "Hasan" by Albani in Sahih Abi Dawood. Also reported in Tirmidhi.

Abu Dawood (may Allah be pleased him) said relating to the first narration that "it is not strong" and then after quoting the second hadith (4450) says "this narration also proves the weakness of the previous narration".

As for the Fiqh of the ahadeeth then,

Ibn Hajar (may Allah be pleased with him) says that narration (4449) has a defect in it's chain and the second narration in Abu Dawood (4450) is more correct. (Talkhis al-habeer)

Regarding the punishment of such as person:

Hasan Basri said that such a person is the same as one who commits Zina.

Imam Abu Yusuf said that such a person should be punished the same as a person who commits Zina.

Imams Abu Hanifa, Malik and Ahmad said that such a person should be given a discretionary punished and this is the more sound opinion as killing him is not proven.

Ibn Hajar also states this (Talkhis al-Habeer)

As for the animal then,

Imam's Abu Yusuf and Abu Hanifa state that the meat of such an animal should not be eaten.

In another hadith the prophet (pbuh) has said that to slaughter an animal is not premissible lest you do it to eat it. (Talkhis, Muwatta, Abu Dawood in Maraseel).

So this further proves that to kill the animal is not correct.

(Taken and Interpreted from Fiqh ul Hadith - Sharh Al-Durar al-Baheya, P.617/618, Urdu)

And Allah knows best

Hope that helps.



hlatif
11-05-2010, 08:23 AM
Salaam all,

The first narration cannot be Sahih. It has Amro bin abi Amro who has some question marks about his abilities and one main criticism about him is the narration of this hadeeth for this hadeeth does not come from Ikrima except through him.

I am surprised that Albani classified it as Sahih, but it may have had a different isnad.



Wa Alaikum Assalam

There are several things to take in perspective:

1- Saying that the first hadeeth is not authentic does not mean that there is no punishment. It just means that this particular punishment is not authentic.

2- The hadeeth, although not authentic and not worked with by the vast majority of the scholars is still a reflection of the thought process of some of the Salaf.

3- The second hadeeth saying there is not a prescribed punishment does not mean that the ruler should not perform a punishment. It just leaves the punishment to the ruler to decide, basically in the category of Taazir and not a prescribed punishment by the hadeeth.

So, the way I understand the opinions of the above scholars is that they believe that such a person should be punished, but the punishment had never been to kill the person or the animal and anything lower than that is valid.

I hope this helps and take care brother

[AhmadFarooq]

I think the original question had less to do with the punishment for Bestiality and more related to the fact of how can there be completely contradictory narrations, while all of them are still considered as "Authentic" or "Sahih"?

[QuranSearchCom]

As'salamu Alaikum dear brothers,

The last narration that brother muslimforever2012 is not a Hadith.  It is an opinion of Abdullah ibn Abbas and not even Al-Abbas himself, and it is a lone narration.  This has the following possiblities:

1-  Abdullah ibn Abbas misunderstood.

2-  Or it was a lie or misunderstaning put on the mouth of Abdullah ibn Abbas.

3-  Or during the early days of Islam, bestiality was not yet forbidden as the pagan Arabs did apparently practice it.  But it then later got prohibited.  The narration is probably a partial one that had more context to it.  It was probably referring to that period.


Anyway, the early Muslims were Commanded by Allah Almighty to ASK THE PEOPLE OF THIKR OF MOSES if they know not.  The Glorious Quran mentions two THIKRS: Moses' (the Law) and Muhammad's (the Quran)), and we know that the Thikr of Moses prohibits it.  Not only that, but Muslims in the Glorious Quran are only allowed to have sex with their AZWAAJ (wives or from their right hand posessions).  For ample proofs, please visit:

www.answering-christianity.com/lesbian_rebuttal.htm#bestiality
www.answering-christianity.com/bestiality.htm

In the first link, I have given the following three types of answers:

1-  Using the previous Mosaic Law.
2-  Using the Noble Quran and the Hadiths (Sayings of Prophet Muhammad).
3-  Using the Noble Quran only.

For the third one, I asked Sam Shamoun the following:

Am I allowed to have sex with a pig in Islam?


Also visit:

What parts of the Bible and Hadiths do Muslims believe are closest to the Truth, and Why?
www.answering-christianity.com/warning.htm

Take care,
Osama Abdallah

[Albarra]

It makes no sense that Abdullah Abbas said that there is no punishment for animals. Really? Can a Muslim have sex with a pig?

Why does Islam punish people for adultery and fornication?

Generally, if a human has sex with an animal, the human can get sick or infected.


In sahih bukhari and Muslim, Muhammad (phub) drank wine, but other Hadith said to punish people who drink alcohol.

In addition, some Sahih Hadith are contradicted with the Qur'an.


 

[AhmadFarooq]

From what I understand, no prescribed punishment does not mean there is no punishment, it only means that a specific punishment has not been defined.

In contrast to crimes such as fornication, adultery, thievery, murder etc. whose punishments or recompenses have been prescribed, bestiality's punishment (according to this narration) has not been defined in the Qur'an or Hadeeth. As far as I know, similar is the case of alcohol consumption for Muslims. In such circumstances, the judge defines Taziri (discretionary) punishments for the crimes according to his best understanding.

[muslimforever2012]

So do we have to accept the other 6 Hadiths commanding death to the one who does it, or ibn Abbas' opinion that there is no prescribed punishment? The first Hadith also has Abu Huraira in the chain.

[Dr Tazeen]

There is no contradiction.

https://sunnah.com/abudawud/40/115

First of all, its hasan....not sahih...Prioitize what is sahih.

Secondly,personal opinion of any respectable Companion r.a of Our Holy Prophet Muhammad s.a w w comes after the ruling of Prophet s.a.w.w.....never before Him

We have to obey Allah and His Messenger...so a direct ruling,given by Prophet Muhammad s.a.w.w ,noted at several occasions and which is authentic as well should be more considerable if you have any different personal opinions, noted less (single narration )and that of lesser authenticity.. ( hasan )

Brother Osama has mentioned the possible reasons as well, for the difference seen in that narration

[Dr Tazeen]

https://sunnah.com/abudawud/40/114

Thats the direct rule by Prophet Muhammad s.a.w.w

[AhmadFarooq]

And yet most Muslim jurists over the centuries have, in their rulings, opted for discretionary punishments instead of the capital punishment for such crimes. (Legal status of bestiality in Islam#The Punishment)