Hadith Re-defined

1. Dr. Khalifa Did Not Restrict Hadith to “Lies Against GOD”

Some claim Dr. Rashad Khalifa exclusively defined the Arabic word ḥadīth as “satanic lies attributed to Muhammad” or “lies against GOD.” This is incorrect.

While Dr. Khalifa did expose and reject the fabricated religious texts falsely attributed to the prophet—rightly labeling them as corrupt and unauthorized—he did not reduce the word ḥadīth to this narrow meaning.

In fact, the Quran uses ḥadīth over two dozen times in various neutral, positive, and negative contexts. Dr. Khalifa’s own translation reflects this variety. He rendered the word differently based on the context, using translations such as:

• Utterance (4:42) – refers to all statements

• Narration (4:87, 18:6, 56:81) – includes divine and non-divine messages

• Subject (4:140, 6:68) – general discussions or topics

• Dream(s) (12:6, 12:21, 12:101) – Joseph interpreting ḥadīth

• History (20:9, 23:44, 34:19, 51:24, 79:15, 85:17) – stories of the past

• Conversation (33:53) – social speech

• Matter (53:59) – general issues

• Statement (66:3) – where the Prophet trusted his wife with a ḥadīth
  
  

Take Surah 66:3 as a clear example. It says:

"The prophet had trusted some of his wives with a certain statement (ḥadīth)..."

If we impose the erroneous definition—“satanic lies attributed to Muhammad”—this would imply that Muhammad trusted one of his wives with a satanic lie attributed to himself. This is not only illogical but also contradicts the Quran’s language and message.

And most critically, Surah 39:23 directly calls the Quran:

“GOD has revealed the best ḥadīth: a book that is consistent…”

This means ḥadīth does not inherently mean a lie, a fabrication, or a satanic utterance. Instead, it simply means “narrative,” “statement,” or “communication.” Whether it is divine or not depends on context.

2. The Real Reason Behind the Denial of the Correct Definition

So why do some insist on falsely limiting ḥadīth to “lies against GOD”?

Because if they admit the correct definition, they are forced to acknowledge that Dr. Khalifa’s teachings—though sincere and invaluable—are also hadith. And if his teachings are ḥadīth, then they are automatically subordinate to the Quran, which is described as the best ḥadīth in 39:23.

But instead of accepting this clear hierarchy, some have chosen to redefine ḥadīth in a way that exempts Rashad Khalifa’s material from being categorized as such—thus maintaining an artificial elevation of his writings.

But this tactic backfires. It implicitly suggests that Dr. Khalifa’s teachings might be equal to or better than the Quran itself—a claim he never made and would never endorse. In fact, this very implication violates Surah 6:93:

“Who is more evil than one who fabricates lies and claims: ‘I received divine inspiration,’ when no such inspiration was given to him? Or one who says, ‘I can write the same as GOD’s revelations’?” — 6:93

The second part of this verse is critical:  “Or one who says, ‘I can write the same as GOD’s revelations’.”

This is exactly what some are now implying—unintentionally or otherwise—by denying that the Quran is the best ḥadīth and by refusing to admit that Dr. Khalifa’s material is human ḥadīth, not divine revelation. The implication is that Rashad’s work is on par with divine revelation.

This is not reverence. This is idolatry.

Dr. Khalifa always insisted that the Quran is complete, perfect, and fully detailed. He declared his mission was to proclaim the Quran, not to add to it or rival it.

3. Could This Be an Honest Misunderstanding?

Yes, it’s entirely possible that some Submitters have genuinely misunderstood the word ḥadīth due to repetition of incorrect teachings. Many were taught to associate the term only with corrupt collections falsely attributed to the prophet.

They may not yet realize the word has multiple meanings in the Quran, including positive uses—such as the Quran itself being the “best ḥadīth.”

But once presented with this clear evidence, every sincere believer must ask:  Will I correct my course or defend my ego?

The Quran is not vague. Its verses are exact, and Dr. Khalifa’s own translation reflects this exactness.

Persisting in the denial—after being shown the truth—no longer remains an innocent misunderstanding. It becomes a rejection of the Quran’s clarity and a promotion of human commentary as divine standard.

Conclusion: No Rival Hadith to GOD’s Word

There are only two choices:

• Acknowledge that the Quran is the best ḥadīth, and all other ḥadīths—including those by Dr. Khalifa—must be subordinate to it, 

or

• Deny the Quran’s definition of ḥadīth to preserve an artificial authority for human commentary.
  
  

The first choice honors the messenger, the Quran, and GOD.  The second—whether knowingly or unknowingly—violates the Quran, promotes idolatry, and paves the way for equating the messenger's words with the divine revelations of the Quran itself, as a small faction has already begun to do.

There is no third option.