Sunnah vs. Hadith (Follow Up 2: Criteria for Accepting a Hadith)
Question:
Dear,
Further to our discussion in the context of captioned subject if you say that we will accept only those ahadith that are in line with the preaching of holy quran while muhadseen had set different parameters to judge the authenticity of hadith by assessing the narrators.Their work simplified us to accept or to not accept the hadith. I mean sahih or zaif hadith while in your way its difficult for a lay man to assess/compare the hadith with quran.
Please explain.
Regards
Answer:
Allow me to answer your question in two ways, briefly and in detail:
Briefly:
The Qur'an introduces itself as the clear and comprehensive book of guidance (16:89), the criteria (25:1) and the measure (42:17). The Qur'an also informs us that even the Prophet (pbuh) was being guided by revelation (34:50) and was directed to judge using this Book (5:48). Can you imagine that the Prophet (pbuh) say something that is NOT inline with the Qur'an? And if you find a Hadith that in your understanding is NOT inline with the Qur'an will you dare to attribute it to the Prophet (pbuh)?
In Detail:
Two points before a bit of elaboration:
1. Actually in principle the Muhaddethin (scholars of Hadith) have not set any different criteria. In the science of Hadith there are two categories of evaluation that all scholars of Hadith agree with. These are:
a. Ilm al-Rijal: The science of narrators, where the narrators of Hadith are examined.
b. Ilm al-Diraya: The science of the text of Hadith, where the text of Hadith is examined for any flaws.
It is based on the latter that we read the following in the book al-Kifaya fi Ilm al-Riwayah by Khatib al-Baghdadi which is one of the main reference books of the science of Hadith:
"A khabar-i wahid cannot be accepted which is against sense and reason, is against an established and explicit directive of the Qur’an, is against a known Sunnah or is against a practice which is observed like the Sunnah or its conflict with some conclusive argument becomes absolutely evident." (al-Kifaya fi Ilm al-Riwayah, p. 432)
Therefore when you write: "Their work simplified (for) us to accept or to not accept the hadith", you need to appreciate that the work of our great scholars of Hadith was not exclusive to the science of narrators, it touched the science of the text of Hadith as well.
2. You wrote: " in your way its difficult for a lay man to assess/compare the hadith with quran."
First, as I write above, our way, in principle, is not deviating from the way of our great scholars of Hadith. It is based on the same principle. If there are any differences they are in the area of application, as I will explain later in this writing.
Second, the method of assessing a Hadith needs to be derived on the basis of logic and rationality and not on the basis of what will be easier for layman. It will be the job of the scholars to submit a simplified version of their findings (based on a complicated analysis) to the public.
Third, please note that in comparison, understanding whether a Hadith is or is not inline with the Qur'an is a much easier procedure compared to looking at the narrators of the Hadith. This of course does not mean that one of these criteria suffices without the other one. They are both important and necessary, neither of them will be enough without the other.
**********
After the above introduction, I now try to elaborate on the main point under discussion:
As stated above the scholars of Hadith have considered both the Narrators and the Text of the Hadith to establish the degree of reliability of a Hadith. However it seems that due to the complexity and vastness of the science of Narrators (Ilm a-Rijal) most of the scholarly work and emphasis has been on this aspect of the science of Hadith and that the other aspect (science of Text, Ilm al-Diraya) has been given only a little attention in comparison. Also, due to the extensive value that is given to the status of Hadith, it seems like there have been too much flexibility in places where a Hadith seems to be against or not inline with the Qur'an. Normally in these circumstances, instead of questioning the Hadith or questioning our understanding of the Hadith, the verses of the Qur'an has been interpreted to the benefit of the apparent meaning of the Hadith and this has gone as far as even considering a Hadith to be abrogating a verse of the Qur'an.
So to summarise, in the subject of verifying a Hadith. the approach that I believe in is not at all new and in principle is not differing with the traditional approach. The difference is in the area of application. In this area I feel that we need to fill out the gap that has been developed due to giving most of the attention to the science of Narrators (Ilm al-Rijal), leaving less attention to the science of Text (Ilm al-Diraya). We also need to be more strict in our verdicts when analysing a Hadith from the perspective of the science of Text (Ilm al-Diraya).
Final word is that most times you will find that the results of assessing a Hadith based on Narrators and based on Text are very much inline with each other. If we find that a Hadith has a reliable chain of narrators but then find that it is not inline with the Qur'an, most of the times this is not due to the Hadith being false, but it is due to our understanding of the Hadith being false. In other words, in most cases when a Hadith is found to be reliable from the narrators point of view but not inline with the Qur'an, it is our initial understanding of the Hadith that is not correct and the real meaning of the Hadith is in fact very much inline with the Qur'an. This real meaning emerges after looking at the Hadith in the light of the Qur'an and after collecting all versions of the Hadith and the similar Hadiths on the same subject.
In short we need to verify and understand the Hadith based on the Qur'an and not the other way round.
I hope this is clear.
-------------
Related Topics:
- Sunnah vs. Hadith
- Sunnah vs. Hadith (Follow Up 1: Imitating the Prophet - pbuh)
--------------
March 2013
Dear,
Further to our discussion in the context of captioned subject if you say that we will accept only those ahadith that are in line with the preaching of holy quran while muhadseen had set different parameters to judge the authenticity of hadith by assessing the narrators.Their work simplified us to accept or to not accept the hadith. I mean sahih or zaif hadith while in your way its difficult for a lay man to assess/compare the hadith with quran.
Please explain.
Regards
Answer:
Allow me to answer your question in two ways, briefly and in detail:
Briefly:
The Qur'an introduces itself as the clear and comprehensive book of guidance (16:89), the criteria (25:1) and the measure (42:17). The Qur'an also informs us that even the Prophet (pbuh) was being guided by revelation (34:50) and was directed to judge using this Book (5:48). Can you imagine that the Prophet (pbuh) say something that is NOT inline with the Qur'an? And if you find a Hadith that in your understanding is NOT inline with the Qur'an will you dare to attribute it to the Prophet (pbuh)?
In Detail:
Two points before a bit of elaboration:
1. Actually in principle the Muhaddethin (scholars of Hadith) have not set any different criteria. In the science of Hadith there are two categories of evaluation that all scholars of Hadith agree with. These are:
a. Ilm al-Rijal: The science of narrators, where the narrators of Hadith are examined.
b. Ilm al-Diraya: The science of the text of Hadith, where the text of Hadith is examined for any flaws.
It is based on the latter that we read the following in the book al-Kifaya fi Ilm al-Riwayah by Khatib al-Baghdadi which is one of the main reference books of the science of Hadith:
"A khabar-i wahid cannot be accepted which is against sense and reason, is against an established and explicit directive of the Qur’an, is against a known Sunnah or is against a practice which is observed like the Sunnah or its conflict with some conclusive argument becomes absolutely evident." (al-Kifaya fi Ilm al-Riwayah, p. 432)
Therefore when you write: "Their work simplified (for) us to accept or to not accept the hadith", you need to appreciate that the work of our great scholars of Hadith was not exclusive to the science of narrators, it touched the science of the text of Hadith as well.
2. You wrote: " in your way its difficult for a lay man to assess/compare the hadith with quran."
First, as I write above, our way, in principle, is not deviating from the way of our great scholars of Hadith. It is based on the same principle. If there are any differences they are in the area of application, as I will explain later in this writing.
Second, the method of assessing a Hadith needs to be derived on the basis of logic and rationality and not on the basis of what will be easier for layman. It will be the job of the scholars to submit a simplified version of their findings (based on a complicated analysis) to the public.
Third, please note that in comparison, understanding whether a Hadith is or is not inline with the Qur'an is a much easier procedure compared to looking at the narrators of the Hadith. This of course does not mean that one of these criteria suffices without the other one. They are both important and necessary, neither of them will be enough without the other.
**********
After the above introduction, I now try to elaborate on the main point under discussion:
As stated above the scholars of Hadith have considered both the Narrators and the Text of the Hadith to establish the degree of reliability of a Hadith. However it seems that due to the complexity and vastness of the science of Narrators (Ilm a-Rijal) most of the scholarly work and emphasis has been on this aspect of the science of Hadith and that the other aspect (science of Text, Ilm al-Diraya) has been given only a little attention in comparison. Also, due to the extensive value that is given to the status of Hadith, it seems like there have been too much flexibility in places where a Hadith seems to be against or not inline with the Qur'an. Normally in these circumstances, instead of questioning the Hadith or questioning our understanding of the Hadith, the verses of the Qur'an has been interpreted to the benefit of the apparent meaning of the Hadith and this has gone as far as even considering a Hadith to be abrogating a verse of the Qur'an.
So to summarise, in the subject of verifying a Hadith. the approach that I believe in is not at all new and in principle is not differing with the traditional approach. The difference is in the area of application. In this area I feel that we need to fill out the gap that has been developed due to giving most of the attention to the science of Narrators (Ilm al-Rijal), leaving less attention to the science of Text (Ilm al-Diraya). We also need to be more strict in our verdicts when analysing a Hadith from the perspective of the science of Text (Ilm al-Diraya).
Final word is that most times you will find that the results of assessing a Hadith based on Narrators and based on Text are very much inline with each other. If we find that a Hadith has a reliable chain of narrators but then find that it is not inline with the Qur'an, most of the times this is not due to the Hadith being false, but it is due to our understanding of the Hadith being false. In other words, in most cases when a Hadith is found to be reliable from the narrators point of view but not inline with the Qur'an, it is our initial understanding of the Hadith that is not correct and the real meaning of the Hadith is in fact very much inline with the Qur'an. This real meaning emerges after looking at the Hadith in the light of the Qur'an and after collecting all versions of the Hadith and the similar Hadiths on the same subject.
In short we need to verify and understand the Hadith based on the Qur'an and not the other way round.
I hope this is clear.
-------------
Related Topics:
- Sunnah vs. Hadith
- Sunnah vs. Hadith (Follow Up 1: Imitating the Prophet - pbuh)
--------------
March 2013
