In medicine, you first and foremost have to treat the source of the problem. Treating symptoms is important as well, but if you don’t prioritize the source and, instead, focus on the symptoms, the patient will continue to suffer and the disease will only get worse.
When it comes to those who attack the authenticity of hadith, we have to ask: What is the source of their discomfort with hadith? Of course, we can and should push back against their claims of in-authenticity. That is important. But our effort will be limited, if not wholly ineffective, if we don’t address the root cause.
For example, some attack the authenticity of certain hadith because they view those hadith as unscientific. Arguing the ins and outs of hadith authentication with such people is akin to merely treating the symptoms. If you refute them on one point, they quickly drop the point and move on to the next bizarre claim.
The disease afflicting their minds, however, will continue unabated and in fact it will spread. Why? Because it won’t be long before they see that the Quran also contains many verses that can be seen as conflicting with current-day scientific consensus, and soon they will be rejecting Quran.
In actuality, all the “problems” hadith rejectors have with the content of hadith are also found in the Quran in spades. Those who criticize hadith for being contrary to science, women’s rights, modernist ethics, etc., also must criticize the Quran on those exact same grounds.
Is it any surprise, then, that hadith rejection is the gateway to apostasy? The more consistent hadith rejectors end up rejecting the Quran and leaving Islam. It’s easy to see why. They reject hadith because they have put man-made ideologies — scientism, feminism, liberalism, materialism — above the words of the Prophet ï·º. They try to force Islam to conform to those ideologies and when they discover that it’s impossible, they reject Islam.
This is not something new. The same flawed mentality was found in past deviant groups who abandoned authentic Islam because they viewed some man-made philosophy as the ultimate truth.
The modern philosophies some Muslims are holding onto at the expense of their Islam are also man-made speculative ideologies that eventually will be dumped in the trash bin of history, along with their adherents.
السلام علیکم
What about those scholars who do not accept hadith if it contradicts Quran? As I understand the late Maulana Anwar Shah Kashmiri of British India and late Maulana Dr Fazur Rehman Ansari of Pakistan and Maulana Imran Hosein of Trinidad and Tobago have said that even in Sahih Bukhari there a few hadith that conflict with the Quran.
Is it also true that Imam Abu Hanifa would leave ahad sahih ahadith if they went against clear Quranic injuctions?
Sincere advice: Everything you said above is an incoherent jumble jumping across points of hadith science, interpretation, fiqh, rijaal etc.
I suggest you to sit with a Sunni scholar well versed in hadith and fiqh to firstly understand the basics of hadith sciences, and fiqh and interpretation, and then ask your question to him.
In short, there are no contradictions within the Quran nor between Quran and hadith. Quranic verses and ahadith are always looked at holistically in light of each other.
For the purpose of the comments section of this website, just remember the key words – We look at Quran and hadith holistically and in conjunction with each other.
For the long haul – you’re asking the details of usul ad-deen, which is a science on its own and people spend lifetimes immersed in it!
As for Imran Hossein, he’s not a scholar, but a liar.
Of course Imam Abu Hanifa is one of the imams of the 4 madhhabs of Ahlus Sunnah.
The other names you mentioned just seem to be contemporary scholars from the subcontinent. You need to assess their works in light of the mujtahid scholars of the madhhabs they claim to follow.
Couldn’t agree more. Jazak Allahu khairan.
وعليكم السلام
Imran Hosein is not a scholar. He is a man who always defends genocidal Russia and is an Assadist who seems supports the kuffar in their genocide against the Muslims of Syria.
He is against the Jewish supremacists running the West that are the greater devils
Assad or Russia.
Please publish something on how voting is major shirk… too many muslims are confused about this and are putting their deen at risk… jazakallahu khair
Lmao voting is not shirk we are encouraged to vote in Islam we do not belive in kings we vote for our Muslim leader they should righteous and pious and good hearted where did you get this ignorance from
he was talking about voting in secular democracies, i guess