What's So Scientific About Hadith?

Meteora

It is probably not unusual to hear the word science being associated with hadith, and vice versa.

I know "science" has many definitions, but I'm not sure in what terms it is applied when speaking of hadith.

Is the "science" basically consisting of trusting in narration A based on the fact it is said to have been transmitted by transmitter A who is said to have recieved it from transmitter B?

Thanks.

aynur

It is probably not unusual to hear the word science being associated with hadith, and vice versa.

I know "science" has many definitions, but I'm not sure in what terms it is applied when speaking of hadith.

Is the "science" basically consisting of trusting in narration A based on the fact it is said to have been transmitted by transmitter A who is said to have recieved it from transmitter B?

Thanks.

Bro,

I think that calling it the "science of hadith compilation" gives it a false credibility. I don't see how it's actually a "science" at all. For example, I know that my husband is extremely trustworthy and honest. But, does that mean something he heard from someone else is 100% accurate? Phrases and wording can be recalled differently or incorrectly unintentionally.

MUNZIR_ALI

It is probably not unusual to hear the word science being associated with hadith, and vice versa.

I know "science" has many definitions, but I'm not sure in what terms it is applied when speaking of hadith.

Is the "science" basically consisting of trusting in narration A based on the fact it is said to have been transmitted by transmitter A who is said to have recieved it from transmitter B?

Thanks.

Study of hadhis?

abdalquran

Meteora, ask Sunni scholars 'who is a sahaba' and you will find a dozen different answers. They cannot even have a unanimous opinion on THAT, let alone on the collections which are continually being revised and regraded. It's not a science, not even pseudo science. When Sunnis tell you 'you just want to interpret Quran according to opinion', ask them 'what on earth was bukhari following then if not opinion'.

Meteora

A Brief History Of Hadth Collection And Criticism A Lecture By Dr. Jonathan Brown

He talks a little on corroboration, which is the step people like Bukhari took to help themselves believe if something came from the prophet, that being figuring out if a narration didn't just come from one person but from many, and that the people are deemed trustworthy by them. The problem is, of course, is that Jonathan Brown isn't aware of and/or considering the fact this so-called "corroboration" took place about 200 years after the prophet's demise. OF COURSE their will be reports roaming around at this time that will be coming from many people, but that does not mean these reports weren't originally transmitted by select liars i.e. those probabably Jews, Christians, or who tried to corrupt the religion after Muhammad re-delivered it. In fact the slide at 1430 in video #2 proves my point well in that people are putting their trust in a companion or companions, actually in people who make claims based on what companions said if the so-called companions even existed. In part 3, he pretty much seems like putting doubt in the hadith at 505 for saying that a hadith can be from the prophet but may just be abused by a sect to fit political agenda or for other reasons, yet he finishes this point without saying what to do about it. He pretty much makes the muslim wonder if what he's following is right or not. laugh

And if we want to talk about corroboration, then why don't we consider the fact many so-called "authentic" hadith do not just stop at "a companion" or "the prophet Muhammad" but actually trace back to the ancient Hebrew scriptures that were corrupted according to the Quran.

The entire first 5 minutes of part 4 shows a lot of Islam is putting blind faith in reports that are claimed to have come from people claimed to be companions of the prophet, then when you consider the student's question at 125 and Brown's answer, then you wonder what everyone else in the class is thinking after the answer given was "a companion is anyone who saw the prophet from afar and/or has reached the age of puberty and/or fought in a battle" and depending on what sect you're in, you will accept one of these definitions. Saleh As-Saleh who I refuted here makes a similar claim to Brown, which is that we know who are hypocrites based on reports, so if I for example had existed back then with a group of followers belonging to me and lived during the prophet's time, and were deemed trustworthy, we could fabricate reports saying so-and-so was a hypocrite and all of the muslims today would believe in it as if it came out of God's mouth. Amazing.

The hadith he gives at 1350 is interesting, though, because if in sunni Islam this is an acceptable hadith, by definition, if a hadith sounds satanic, dumb, Christian, Jewish, Pagan, or all of the above to you, even if it is deemed trustworthy based on arbitrary sunni methods of hadith analyzation then you are not condemned for not believing in it. Yet, we have sunni scholars labeling people kaffirs and apostates when they put doubt in a hadith or several, and often set out to kill them or hire people to do it.

His main point is demonstrated in the last few minutes of the video and that is you get your religion from your scholar...what? Why am I not surprised after hearing this, when I heard my brother say the same thing recently? Your scholar is as beneficial to you as the black rock in Mecca. If your fate seriously relied on whether or not you believe in a scholar or someone you "trust" than this would be your patron and not God.

Finally at 2045 you will see that he is admitting there are contradictory hadith scholars face, and then they have to "figure out" what to do with them. Of course this is so that their entire collection of hadith coming from one source, i.e. transmitter doesn't seem unauthentic or just not fully trustworthy.

Jafar

Simple Answer NOTHING

What's so scientific about "Celebrities Gossip Shows"?
And the celebrities being mentioned has been DEAD for OVER 1400 YEARS!

Salam / Peace

SarahY

The thing that baffles me about hadith is the science of it (yes the science of it). Remember science deals with things it can answer, testable hypotheses. Just because hadith is a ?science? it doesn?t make it a scientific law, principle or fact. It?s more like scientific theory.

It relies on sayings transmitted from companion to companion. Their authenticity of such ahadith is gauged upon the companion?s character. How is this derived, other than information of them in hadith? So it?s using faulty/weak tools to strengthen its authentication based on ?companions? info in hadith. Like for example i recall a hadith in which Abu Huraira isn?t praised in good light, then why isn?t his credibility shattered? The authenticators don?t seem to have consistency in following the science of hadith.

Anyway, that?s just one aspect.

Why is it a science because of the lengthy notable aspects

What authority is it ? a companion or successor from companion
Whether the chain of reporters are broken or not (not quite sure how they do this)
How many reports there are i.e. if it?s more it?s mutawatir
Whether the content (matn) and the reporter is reliable i.e. no contradictions.. obviously the sunni and the shia world have failed to comprehend what contradiction means.

There may be more to it than this.. i?d need to look it up. Remember a science is about recording testable information. These can be testable.

Salam

Edit note Modified by request (spelling error)

Meteora

The hadith defaming Abu Huraira are liked by the Shiites and hated by the Sunnis. Therefore, to the Sunnis it's not reliable and I'm sure at one point a sunni fabricated a hadith, its isnad (transmission chain), and whatever else to preserve false pagan sectarian Islam i.e. sunnism.

SarahY

The hadith defaming Abu Huraira are liked by the Shiites and hated by the Sunnis. Therefore, to the Sunnis it's not reliable and I'm sure at one point a sunni fabricated a hadith, its isnad (transmission chain), and whatever else to preserve false pagan sectarian Islam i.e. sunnism.

Possibly, however when there are numerous claims? or diff sources? Besides if you read hadith of Abu Huraira he gives his own opinion of his understanding... not many people notice that. Anyway he was just one example he is said to only have spent 2-4 years with the prophet (if it's disputed whether it's 2 or 4 what kind of accuracy is this?). Abu Huraira ain't the only one on the hadith list..

So if the claim is unreliable so be it, there are other issues within hadith

Meteora

Possibly, however when there are numerous claims? or diff sources? Besides if you read hadith of Abu Huraira he gives his own opinion of his understanding... not many people notice that. Anyway he was just one example he is said to only have spent 2-4 years with the prophet (if it's disputed whether it's 2 or 4 what kind of accuracy is this?). Abu Huraira ain't the only one on the hadith list..

So if the claim is unreliable so be it, there are other issues within hadith

The sunni's will tell you this is insignificant info because Abu Huraira spent most of his time with the companions and not the prophet. Yeah, like that means anything (and I'm talking about the fact sunni's tell this to people, not that we know any of these assumptions are correct).

MUNZIR_ALI

Simple Answer NOTHING

What's so scientific about "Celebrities Gossip Shows"?
And the celebrities being mentioned has been DEAD for OVER 1400 YEARS!

Salam / Peace

bravo exactly.

SarahY

The sunni's will tell you this is insignificant info because Abu Huraira spent most of his time with the companions and not the prophet. Yeah, like that means anything (and I'm talking about the fact sunni's tell this to people, not that we know any of these assumptions are correct).

I just did a search in Bukhari for the fun of it. There are only 2 hadiths I can find in relation to Abu Huraira?s memory; 1 praising it and another not.

If you?re interesting in reading

a bit weird logic, though in praise of him

003.034.263 - Sales and Trade - - - -
Narrated Abu Huraira
You people say that Abu Huraira tells many narrations from Allah's Apostle and you also wonder why the emigrants and Ansar do not narrate from Allah's Apostle as Abu Huraira does. My emigrant brothers were busy in the market while I used to stick to Allah's Apostle content with what fills my stomach; so I used to be present when they were absent and I used to remember when they used to forget, and my Ansari brothers used to be busy with their properties and I was one of the poor men of Suffa. I used to remember the narrations when they used to forget. No doubt, Allah's Apostle once said, "Whoever spreads his garment till I have finished my present speech and then gathers it to himself, will remember whatever I will say." So, I spread my colored garment which I was wearing till Allah's Apostle had finished his saying, and then I gathered it to my chest. So, I did not forget any of that narrations.

And not in praise.. this is along hadith so just read the highlighted part

008.076.577 - To make the Heart Tender (Ar-Riqaq) - - - -
Narrated Abu Huraira
Some people said, "O Allah's Apostle! Shall we see our Lord on the Dayof Resurrection?" He said, "Do you crowd and squeeze each other on looking at the sun when it is not hidden by clouds?" They replied, "No, Allah's Apostle." He said, "Do you crowd and squeeze each other on looking at the moon when it is full and not hidden by clouds?" Theyreplied, No, O Allah's Apostle!" He said, "So you will see Him (your Lord) on the Day of Resurrection similarly Allah will gather all the people and say, 'Whoever used to worship anything should follow that thing. 'So, he who used to worship the sun, will follow it, and he whoused to worship the moon will follow it, and he who used to worship false deities will follow them; and then only this nation (i.e., Muslims) will remain, including their hypocrites. Allah will come to them in a shape other than they know and will say, 'I am your Lord.' They will say, 'We seek refuge with Allah from you. This is our place;(we will not follow you) till our Lord comes to us, and when our Lord comes to us, we will recognize Him.

Then Allah will come to then in a shape they know and will say, "I am your Lord.' They will say, '(No doubt) You are our Lord,' and they will follow Him. Then a bridge will be laid over the (Hell) Fire." Allah's Apostle added, "I will be the first to cross it. And the invocation of the Apostles on that Day, will be 'Allahukka Sallim, Sallim (O Allah, save us, save us!),' and over that bridge there will be hooks Similar to the thorns of As Sa'dan (a thorny tree). Didn't you see the thorns of As-Sa'dan?" The companions said, "Yes, O Allah'sApostle." He added, "So the hooks over that bridge will be like the thorns of As-Sa-dan except that their greatness in size is only known to Allah. These hooks will snatch the people according to their deeds.Some people will be ruined because of their evil deeds, and some will be cut into pieces and fall down in Hell, but will be saved afterwards, when Allah has finished the judgments among His slaves, and intends to take out of the Fire whoever He wishes to take out fromamong those who used to testify that none had the right to be worshipped but Allah.
We will order the angels to take them out and the angels will know them by the mark of the traces of prostration (on their foreheads) forAllah banned the f ire to consume the traces of prostration on the body of Adam's son. So they will take them out, and by then they wouldhave burnt (as coal), and then water, called Maul Hayat (water of life) will be poured on them, and they will spring out like a seed springs out on the bank of a rainwater stream, and there will remain one man who will be facing the (Hell) Fire and will say, 'O Lord! It's(Hell's) vapor has Poisoned and smoked me and its flame has burnt me; please turn my face away from the Fire.' He will keep on invoking Allah till Allah says, 'Perhaps, if I give you what you want), you will ask for another thing?' The man will say, 'No, by Your Power, I will not ask You for anything else.'

Then Allah will turn his face away from the Fire. The man will say after that, 'O Lord, bring me near the gate of Paradise.' Allah will say (to him), 'Didn't you promise not to ask for anything else? Woe toyou, O son of Adam ! How treacherous you are!' The man will keep on invoking Allah till Allah will say, 'But if I give you that, you may ask me for something else.' The man will say, 'No, by Your Power. I will not ask for anything else.' He will give Allah his covenant and promise not to ask for anything else after that. So Allah will bring him near to the gate of Paradise, and when he sees what is in it, he will remain silent as long as Allah will, and then he will say, 'O Lord! Let me enter Paradise.' Allah will say, 'Didn't you promise thatyou would not ask Me for anything other than that? Woe to you, O son of Adam ! How treacherous you are!' On that, the man will say, 'O Lord! Do not make me the most wretched of Your creation,' and will keep on invoking Allah till Allah will smile and when Allah will smilebecause of him, then He will allow him to enter Paradise, and when he will enter Paradise, he will be addressed, 'Wish from so-and-so.' He will wish till all his wishes will be fulfilled, then Allah will say, All this (i.e. what you have wished for) and as much again therewith are for you.' "

Abu Huraira added That man will be the last of the people of Paradiseto enter (Paradise).
Narrated 'Ata (while Abu Huraira was narrating) Abu Said was sitting in the company of Abu Huraira and he did not deny anything of his narration till he reached his saying "All this and as much again therewith are for you." Then Abu Sa'id said, "I heard Allah's Apostle saying, 'This is for you and ten times as much.' " Abu Huraira said, "In my memory it is 'as much again therewith.'

Of only two hadiths (in Bukhari) about Abu Huraira's memory.. it's kind of a weak claim that he has some extraordinary memory, don't you think?

Salam.

SarahY

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 by Aisha in several cases.? p.56

I 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

thegod

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.

SarahY

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

thegod

What sounds like speculation?

The idea of any 'Scientific content methodology' applied to ahadith is an oxymoron.

SarahY

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.

thegod

There is enough outside evidence to support many claims of Arabic history found within Arab traditions itself. Read some qualified literature regarding the matter.

There is probably a science, but at the best it remains at a theoretical level.

darcus

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

thegod

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(?).