An Example
Hadith
Narrated Anas bin Malik: "A man
peeped into a room of the Prophet. The
Prophet stood up, holding an arrow head.
It is as if I am just looking at him,
trying to stab the man."
Sahih Al-Bukhari Volume 8, Book 74, Number
259.
One Muslim’s Presuppositional
response
The Most Exalted Character does not
accord with this behaviour, especially
from the Prophet of Mercy who was
affectionate and compassionate to the
believers. It would be assumed that the
Prophet would go to this man who had
peeped into his room and would teach him
Islamic conduct and make him understand
that what he did was forbidden. Not to
take an arrowhead and attempt to stab him
and poke his eyes. Probably the man could
have meant well for the room was not his
wives' room. The proof of this is that
Anas Malik was present in it. What a great
accusation this is against the Prophet of
Allah; as it portrays him as an
ill-mannered and hard hearted person who
attacks a person without warning, i.e.,
assaults the man so as to take out his
eye.
Critique
Presuppositionalism assumes an idea
to be true. And, with this beginning
assumption, it judges the truth or falsity
of other claims according to their
correspondence with the initial assumptions.
In the example above, the presupposition
is that Muhammad was a Prophet of mercy who
was always affectionate and compassionate to
believers. It assumes that he was never an
ill-mannered nor a hard hearted person who
would attack without first giving
instruction.
Of course, if one begins with a set of
unquestioned assumptions, then one must
reject all evidence to the contrary. If the
initial assumptions were that Muhammad was
always merciful and compassionate, then it could
never be the case that Muhammad was angered
and desirous to poke a believer’s eye out.
It has to be rejected because the initial
assumptions don’t allow this possibility
to have ever occurred. The idea that such an
event could have actually occurred is never
entertained in the mind of the religious
presuppositionalist.
Presuppositionalism is a form of fideism,
and it protects the religious belief system
from the harsh realities of actual
historical events. Because, if a Muslim were
to accept that Muhammad desired to poke the
person’s eye out, then the Muslim's presuppositional foundation would be
destroyed. It would bring into question the
Muslim’s preconceived ideas about
Muhammad's character. And, if these
preconceived ideas were to be discarded,
perhaps, then Muhammad’s claim to
prophethood would be less certain. This
rarely happens because the believer finds
great comfort and assurance in
presuppositional beliefs.
So, the above hadith is rejected—not on
historical grounds—, but it is rejected
because it does not accord with the believer’s
assumptions about the character of Muhammad.
There is the additional problem that two
contradictory presuppositional belief
systems cannot be adjudicated on
presuppositional grounds. One side assumes
that their belief is true and the other side
assumes a contrary belief to be true. No
matter how much historical evidence either
side gathers, the other side rejects the
historical evidence, because its
presuppositions don’t allow any contrary
evidence to be admitted that would challenge
their initial presuppositions.
Sometimes, presuppositionalists engage in
intellectual (epistemological) hypocrisy.
Being presuppositionalists, they are not
eager to allow their assumptions to be
challenged, but they are eager and willing
to challenge the presuppositions of those
who have a different religion. When they
challenge another religion, they are not
willing to grant the presuppositions of
other religions. They
argue with the opponent as if historical evidence were
necessary to establish the claims of their
opponent's religion. But, they are
not willing to submit their own religion to
the challenge of empirical
historical evidence.
Epistemological hypocrisy is a special
problem for a Muslim who lives in an Islamic
country. In such countries, a Muslim may freely criticize
all religions except Muhammad’s
religion. Because, if a Muslim were to
criticize the sayings or behavior of
Muhammad, the country’s Islamic leadership
could charged him with blasphemy and call
for his public execution. So, for a Muslim,
no matter what Muhammad said or did, it must
never be criticized or become a reason to
question his prophethood. In some Islamic
countries, it is safer to be a hypocrite
than be an honest thinker. Because,
embracing the historical evidence could be a
threat to a person's life.