What's So Scientific About Hadith?
-
Peace all,
I?ve been reading sunni books on hadith because I?m trying to find information in regards to the classification of ?matn/content? as it?s said as part of their methodology i.e. that matn is one aspect looked at to decipher whether a hadith is sahih or not.
Anyway I?ll share some things I found in a book I was reading ?Studies in hadith methodology and literature? by Muhammad Mustafa Azami.
When reading the book the author mentions that early muslims did not transmit any hadith to others unless approved by their scholars. The only source of hadith knowledge would be sort through the scholars only. I find this problematic because it would assume no one knows anything unless they talk to a scholar, it assumes people never talk about hadith nor spread things they have heard.. The author gives an example of a hadith being wrongly transmitted then finds the source of the wrong transmission (student) though finding the student wouldn?t have stopped the transmission or spread of the hadith.
Another weak point I found was the acceptance of a hadith if the person(trustworthy) repeats the same hadith the exact same way at a later date. I wouldn?t consider recalling a hadith the exact same as valid criticism, would slight different wording totally demoralise the hadith? Even if it had the same meaning. It seems odd to think so. I notice much focus is on the isnad(chain) and words.
Only one example is given in relation to method of criticism of hadith in comparison to Quran.
?We find that this method was used by
Umar in rejecting the hadith of Fatima bint Qais concerning maintenance money for divorced women. This method was also applied byAisha in several cases.? p.56I just thought.. you?re kidding me? Is that it? How do we know Umar rejected such hadith? Is it in hadith? Or hadith commentary? Assuming it?s both or neither and something else. What a poor example to give. I thought it didn?t even explain anything about hadith criticism based on Quran it just mentions an example without a reference of it just Umar recognised a contradiction and rejected it.
Ibn AlQayyim is said to come up with a system of hadith classification and mentions ?contradicts the clear and obvious meaning of Quran? (p.72) cancels out hadith. yet all I seem to see is this is part of classification but let?s look at how great the isnad system is and how complicated it is.
Lastly one point I thought was interesting was the mentioning of hadith booklets being in existence in the early days. He mentions that early booklets of hadith existed containing just mere collections of ahadith of the prophet though ?without any sort of arrangement of the material?p.73 I highlight this because if it?s just a mere saying, words of wisdom it would indicate no use of isnad? He doesn?t say that.. I make this assumption because not enough info is given. Either way it doesn?t seem to appease the mind
He further argues that the original hadith books ?slowly disappeared? because there was no need for them in the 3rd century. they compiled hadiths into categories and made hadith encyclopaedia?s so there was no need to keep them. What an excuse..
Have any of you read anything in regards to hadith matn/content?
I guess their idea of science is mentioning theories.
peace
-
I would say that as a reference for history ahadith are an okay bet. Some non-Muslims rejected the entire corpus of ahadith, but this approach had been rubbished by academia at large, and most of the dissidents have seen redacted their own claims.
It is about the sayings of the Prophets that I am doubtful. As for ahadith attributed to his companions, there's the additional problem of which companion was speaking the truth and who was lying. So much for content, I guess.
-
Okay bet? Sounds like speculation. I wouldn?t really focus on what non-muslims say about muslims they have their own agenda?s.
What I meant about content was just considering whether they would/have formulated a system in which ahadith in confluence of Quran are separately categorised and others in another section. Though I guess obviously not because they have books considered sahih with clear Quranic contradictions.
So it?s like where is this so called scientific content methodology?
history isn?t law.. but it?s something we can learn from. That being said history isn?t all truthful/factual.
Peace
-
As in, hadith as history 'are an ok bet' is just guess work in itself.
The idea of any 'Scientific content methodology' applied to ahadith is an oxymoron.
That could be so, though I?m not looking at it from an outside perspective, I?m looking at it from their perspective. They are saying there is a science behind it, so ok fine. let?s see the science behind it. So all I am saying is this 'science' is poorly executed.
-
Salamun alaikum,
Its as if the word 'science' is lending some sort of legitamacy to the haphazard collection of these 'reports' - even report is a strong word. I was wondering if in the 'science' of hadith classification, what place does the Quran have? Is there any document showing that the quran is consulted at all?
Just got banned (again) from a sunni site for asking that very same question - it was deemed 'too controversial'. There was a post on it referring to the speech of Mohammed being infallible or not, and as one person rightly concluded if he is infallible, then there can be no contradiction in the hadith, but as there are, it throws all the hadiths out! Amazing, and this guy didn't get banned!
Peace
d -
Got banned for asking that? Jeez, people are getting really sensitive. A few months back I got banned from a Christian site for suggesting that Paul might have had pagan interests; and once from a Muslim website just for the choice of my username (the thread was about 'tolerance,' by the way). But mostly because I uproot egos and false identities. Honestly, people are getting sensitive.
I think it is the word 'ulum' which gets translated as 'science'; from there 'ulumul Quran'. As far as their point of view is concerned, the branches dealing with the Quran are called 'tafsir' or 'taawil'. Generally, it involves referencing another verse, the alleged sayings traced back to Muhammad, and the alleged sayings traced back to his companions(?).
-
Walaikum asalam darcus,
What do you mean "what place does the Quran have?"
Just got banned (again) from a sunni site for asking that very same question - it was deemed 'too controversial'. There was a post on it referring to the speech of Mohammed being infallible or not, and as one person rightly concluded if he is infallible, then there can be no contradiction in the hadith, but as there are, it throws all the hadiths out! Amazing, and this guy didn't get banned!
Well I guess it depends on your approach and rules. Hadiths aren't "authentic" to say it is proof of Mohammed's fallibility or infallibility.
Got banned for asking that? Jeez, people are getting really sensitive. A few months back I got banned from a Christian site for suggesting that Paul might have had pagan interests; and once from a Muslim website just for the choice of my username (the thread was about 'tolerance,' by the way). But mostly because I uproot egos and false identities. Honestly, people are getting sensitive.
I think it is the word 'ulum' which gets translated as 'science'; from there 'ulumul Quran'. As far as their point of view is concerned, the branches dealing with the Quran are called 'tafsir' or 'taawil'. Generally, it involves referencing another verse, the alleged sayings traced back to Muhammad, and the alleged sayings traced back to his companions(?).
I wouldn't be surprised you got banned because of your username.. i kinda took offence thinking why would someone identify themselves as 'thegod' but who knows maybe it's your way of remembrance, but personally i don't think it's nice.
hadiths have sayings of companions that just get cut at companions don't link back to the prophet. i think from memory they call it maqtou (cut off). BTW i haven't read much tafsir but i don't seem to see reference of hadith linkage to each and every verse.
My bro was telling me a man by the name Zamakhshari is a famous tafsir scholar but he is a Mutazilate. He was telling me his tafsir is the best or is considered the best in the sunni school of thought however they recognise him as a deviant but consider his work as gold because of his arabic and knowledge..
sounds conflicting but anyway thought it interesting because Mutazilites don't take traditional hadiths like mainstreamer's..
Peace
-
People say hadith is a word of the Messenger s.a.s. other than the Qur'aan. What type of people are interested to take something from the Messenger s.a.s, it is depicted in the Grand Qur'aan
http//haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Arabic%20Text/010.%20Yunus%20alahissalam/Temp%2001%2010.15b.gif
And when Our evident/distinct/Manifest Aaya'at were narrated to them, word by word,
http//haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Arabic%20Text/010.%20Yunus%20alahissalam/Temp%2001%2010.15.gif
those amongst them who do not believe/look for meeting with Us, respond "You come to us with some readable material/book other than this Qur'aan or you change/replace this Qur'aan"
http//haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Arabic%20Text/010.%20Yunus%20alahissalam/Temp%2001%2010.15a.gif
You answer them, "It is not befitting for me that I should change/amend this Qur'aan with my personal perception/intellect/data-information/knowledge saved in the memory .
http//haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Arabic%20Text/010.%20Yunus%20alahissalam/Temp%2001%2010.15c.gif
I only physically follow in letter and spirit that which is communicated to me".
http//haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Arabic%20Text/010.%20Yunus%20alahissalam/Temp%2001%2010.15d.gif
I am afraid of the punishment of Great Day if I were to refuse to accept the word of My Sustainer Lord "http//haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Arabic%20Text/010.%20Yunus%20alahissalam/010.%20A%20Yunus%20alahissalam.htm
Those who relate to him stories/hadith other than the words of Qur'aan are certainly not afraid of the Day. He did not oblige his own tribe, residents of his city with some hadith other than Qur'aan though they kept insisting. Had he obliged them, Allah says they would have made and considered him a great friend, as is the case with hadith people who call themselves "Ashiq Rasool".
We must however acknowledge that non believers of his city never attributed to him a single statement/story except Qur'aan about which they had their own opinion.And Great Muslims, of whose position will there be no one till last Day, were frankly told this
http//haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Arabic%20Text/temp%2002%20%202.104a.gif
O you who declare to have accepted!
http//haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Arabic%20Text/033.%20Al%20Ahzaab/33.53.gif
you people do not enter into the houses of the the Elevated and Chosen One except when the permission is given for you for a meal,
http//haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Arabic%20Text/033.%20Al%20Ahzaab/33.53a.gif
unlike such people who wait for its preparation for having come earlier,
http//haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Arabic%20Text/033.%20Al%20Ahzaab/33.53b.gif
but at that time when you are invited thereat you enter into his houses.
http//haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Arabic%20Text/033.%20Al%20Ahzaab/33.53c.gif
Thereafter when you people have eaten the meal thereby you leave dispersing
http//haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Arabic%20Text/033.%20Al%20Ahzaab/33.53d.gif
and do not act like those who keep themselves seated for seeking a hadith/story.
http//haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Arabic%20Text/033.%20Al%20Ahzaab/33.53e.gif
It is certain that this conduct has been causing disconcert/annoyance for the Elevated and Chosen Onehttp//haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Arabic%20Text/033.%20Al%20Ahzaab/033.%20D%20Al%20Ahzaab.htm
-
Salamun alaikum,
Mazhar, I like your treatment of the subject, I had totally forgot 3353, great one.
Sarah, what I meant by 'what place does the Quran have?' is this
- I use the Quran as my criterion and judge religious information (especially including my own reasoning) against it, ensuring that IT is the Criterion I use.
- I would assume that the earliest scholars of sunni islam would have used the Quran as the starting point also as criterion, or didn't they?
I can't seem to find any mention of using the Quran as Criterion, apart from the occasional -"it must not contradict with it", but that is all the mention the Quran gets. I know when I asked that question it earned me an instant ban, and felt that maybe I was getting to the truth that it has in fact been ignored from the start.
Was wondering if anyone had come across something like that. Also, (off topic question) I have a few things I have researched and was wondering if I just post my 'research' in a topic, would that be ok - then to get criticism, make adjustments and then hopefully put on the articles section of the main site?
Peace
d -
Peace d,
Off course Quran is a criterion. it would be silly to assume that the whole sunni/shia world do not use Quran at all unless with reference with hadith. They DO use QURAN as a criterion.
There is alot of 'fiqh' rules in regards to translation etc i don't know it though i know they use tafsir from quran i.e. use quran source to understand quran verse (cross references), they also use hadith to 'further' understand quran and they also use scholarly thought and opinion to come with conclusions.
They got the ideas from the Quran in the first place.. not 'oh this a nice ideology let's adopt it make sure it's not contradictory.. sweet, let's add it!'
Remember everyone (generally) thinks/believes they're right and each have their own justifications. it's up to the individual to distinguish and reason what is or isn't right.
Post your research on the appropriate forum topics, create a new thread. you could pm a moderator to share/add your findings into the article section
peace.
-
Mazhar, I like your treatment of the subject, I had totally forgot 3353, great one.
http//haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Arabic%20Text/023.%20Al%20Momenoon/23.65.gif
"Do not groan today. Indeed you people will not be helped by Us.http//haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Arabic%20Text/023.%20Al%20Momenoon/23.66.gif
Indeed My Aa'ya'at were recited upon you people, word by word, whereupon you people used to turn back on your heels
http//haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Arabic%20Text/023.%20Al%20Momenoon/23.67.gif
as self obsessed of pride arrogant about it/the Book-Grand Qur'aan, you people at night discussed-devised conjectures/random talks for roping away/limiting efficacy.http//haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Arabic%20Text/023.%20Al%20Momenoon/023.D%20%20Al%20Momenoon.htm
And let us watch a video clip of Hereafter,
http//haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Arabic%20Text/025.%20Al%20Furqan/25.28.gif
Woe to me, alas I had not taken such and such person as intimate friend.
http//haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Arabic%20Text/025.%20Al%20Furqan/25.29.gif
Of course he made me forgetful and strayed from the Reminder/Admonition/the Book-, after that it had reached to me;
http//haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Arabic%20Text/025.%20Al%20Furqan/25.29a.gif
and Shai'taan for man has always been a deserter.
http//haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Arabic%20Text/025.%20Al%20Furqan/25.30.gif
And the Messenger said, "O My Sustainer Lord! It is true that My Nation had made this Grand Qur'aan restricted "http//haqeeqat.org.pk/English%20Tafsir%20e%20Haqeeqat/00.Arabic%20Text/025.%20Al%20Furqan/025.%20B%20%20Al%20Furqan.htm
Decision has to be taken today.
-
My bro was telling me a man by the name Zamakhshari is a famous tafsir scholar but he is a Mutazilate. He was telling me his tafsir is the best or is considered the best in the sunni school of thought however they recognise him as a deviant but consider his work as gold because of his arabic and knowledge..
sounds conflicting but anyway thought it interesting because Mutazilites don't take traditional hadiths like mainstreamer's..
Peace
In Muhammad Asad's English translation he mentions Zamakhshari quite a bit in the footnotes.
-
I think 'thegod' answered the question to the title of this thread quite well.
The Arabic '3uloom' has been rendered into English as 'science'. Our understanding of science would differ, I reckon, from the understanding of those people who first started to use the word '3uloom' in this context.
If by science we mean 'the testing of hypotheses by experimental work' then clearly the works of the oral tradition collators do not fall under this definition.
If by science we mean 'the corroboration of oral reports by other oral reports' then the works of the oral tradition collators falls, in my opinion, quite nicely under this definition.
It's a matter of definition.
The question then lies; how valid were the techniques and skills used by these collators/historians when they went about seeking to corroborate or negate a statement concerning the generations that came before them, and especially concerning Muhammad the prophet?
-
Peace Uq and all.
I've been reading a few books on hadith. What i have noticed is they all claim the faults of hadith started from the "first fitna" Ali vs Muawaiya (http//en.wikipedia.org/wiki/First_Fitna).
They claim hadiths were written in the time of the prophet as scrolls/booklets however none of them "lasted". let me quote some things i found interesting
"The early students and workers on hadith were followed by many hadith specialists (now known as muhaddithun) who carried on the work begun by their predecessors in various provinces of the Muslim world. Of these major collectors of hadith,
Abd al-malik ibnaruba (d.157/774) in Mesopotamia, al-Awzai (d.159/774) in syria, Muhammad ibnAbd al-rahman (d.159/775) at Medina, Za`ida ibn Qudama (d.160/776) and Sufyan al-Thawri (d.161/777) at Kufa, and Hammad ibn salama (d.165/781) at Basra. As almost all these works are lost, no opinion can be expressed on their plan, method or spirit." (Siddiqi, p.7) however a man by the name Ibn al-Nadim gives a recount about them. who he is no idea but even his work is said to be lost..i emphasis the lack of preservation because it's a common excuse sunni's use that these books of hadith existed but they just wiped out.
Another concerning issue amongst the Sunni scholars is that there is differing opinions on how many ahadith are actually "ahkam" rulings/legal issues or just traditional historical/events (Maghazi). If scholars can't agree on what's a ruling and what's just a practice tradition then what's the point in ahadith and adopting them if consensus is weak? surely God wouldn't want us to forsake our own heritages to adopt another (4913).
This is also interesting.. Ignaz Goldziher studied Muwatta, this is Imam Maliks famous work although he isn?t the most popular in the sunni world he is still one of the 4 ?imams?. He (Ignaz) calls his work ?a corpus juris, not a corpus traditionum.. its intention is not to sift and collect the ?healthy? elements of traditions circulating in the Islamic world but to illustrate the law, ritual and religious practice, by the ijma recognised in Medinian Islam, by the sunna current in Medina, and to create a theoretical corrective, from the point of view of ijma and sunna, for things still in a state of flux.? (p.7-
to me it was basically saying the practices held by muslims there, were what were agreed upon through ijma. Not solely a law found in ahadith but rather portraying the practices of muslims in Medina. Ignaz further criticises the work of Imam Malik by stating that hadiths he has used show no or weak isnad or isnad that gets cut off at companions. Yet muslims.. sunnis blindly adhere to the works of these scholars and limit it to the 4 imams.. without even studying the work.. it baffles me.
Uq as you say all a matter of definition, they can call it a science if they like but when will they back it up with measurable evidence other than "chain"..
Peace
p.s the book is called "Hadith literature its origin, development and special features by Muhammad Zubayr Siddiqi" it's in positive light of ahadith, i haven't finished it though.
-
Peace Sarah,
Modern historians and archaeologists draw heavily on physical and tangible evidence in establishing historical facts, or at least to support ideas they might have of history.
A good example is the hieroglyphics in Egypt which can give us a good idea about the time in which they were written, tangible evidence like this allows history to be 'set in stone' as it were.
An even better example is that of the Magna Carta which sets out in much detail the conditions of England in the 13th century; using this document we can gain real insight into those times and the people of those times.
But even these are subject to human subjectivity and maybe even distortion. Therefore such evidence, as far as I can see, can only support an idea we have about history, I don't see how it can conclusively and absolutely prove it.
Not forgetting that artifacts can also be used as evidence, example, vases with drawings, or plates with inscriptions etc..
This is what I personally would classify as evidence for the purpose of establishing a good idea about people and historical events.
Now, compare that with the oral traditions which we have concerning Muhammad and his generation. These oral traditions were only 'set in stone' a few hundred years after the prophet's death. The oldest documentary evidence we have about Muhammad is not the hadith, but it is in fact the Quran, the oldest manuscripts of which date to a few decades after his death, and some even earlier. Beyond that we have nothing.
If anything, the hadith serve as very good evidence to give us an idea of the time in which they were written, that is, the 8th and 9th centuries.