CRITICISM OF HADITH AUTHENTICITY ON CONTEMPORARY ISLAMIC THINKERS

Erwin Hafid, M. Mahmuddin
{"title":"CRITICISM OF HADITH AUTHENTICITY ON CONTEMPORARY ISLAMIC THINKERS","authors":"Erwin Hafid, M. Mahmuddin","doi":"10.24252/jis.v9i2.31696","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Islam knows two primary sources in its legislation, first, the holy Qur’an and the second, Hadith, however, there is a significant difference in the inventory system of both sources. This study aims to discuss about how are the modern Islamic scholars’ perspectives on the Hadith authenticity. The method used is qualitative. Qualitative methods are used to examine natural objects, where researchers become key instruments. In addition, data collected are triangulated (combined), data analyses are inductive, and the results of qualitative research emphasize meaning rather than generalization. The interaction of moslems with the Prophet’s Hadith is very dynamic. The attention of it was not very big at the beginning of Islam because the Prophet was still alive and lived around them at that time as the living Islam (the source of everything), but in the period after the Prophet’s death, the attention to the Hadith increased rapidly. The contemporary Islamic thinkers assume that the Hadith scholars have not given great attention to matan criticism as what in sanad has. The critic opportunity is still opened on the Prophet’s authenticity by using internal criticism (matan of Hadith), as long as using the right methodology as the Hadith scholars have explained.","PeriodicalId":131094,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Islam and Science","volume":"49 1","pages":"0"},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2023-01-09","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Islam and Science","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.24252/jis.v9i2.31696","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Islam knows two primary sources in its legislation, first, the holy Qur’an and the second, Hadith, however, there is a significant difference in the inventory system of both sources. This study aims to discuss about how are the modern Islamic scholars’ perspectives on the Hadith authenticity. The method used is qualitative. Qualitative methods are used to examine natural objects, where researchers become key instruments. In addition, data collected are triangulated (combined), data analyses are inductive, and the results of qualitative research emphasize meaning rather than generalization. The interaction of moslems with the Prophet’s Hadith is very dynamic. The attention of it was not very big at the beginning of Islam because the Prophet was still alive and lived around them at that time as the living Islam (the source of everything), but in the period after the Prophet’s death, the attention to the Hadith increased rapidly. The contemporary Islamic thinkers assume that the Hadith scholars have not given great attention to matan criticism as what in sanad has. The critic opportunity is still opened on the Prophet’s authenticity by using internal criticism (matan of Hadith), as long as using the right methodology as the Hadith scholars have explained.
当代伊斯兰思想家对圣训真实性的批判
伊斯兰教的立法有两个主要来源,一是神圣的古兰经,二是圣训,然而,这两个来源的清单系统有很大的不同。本研究旨在探讨现代伊斯兰学者对圣训真实性的看法。所使用的方法是定性的。定性方法用于检验自然物体,研究人员成为关键工具。此外,收集的数据是三角化的(组合),数据分析是归纳的,定性研究的结果强调意义而不是泛化。穆斯林与先知圣训的互动是非常活跃的。在伊斯兰教创立之初,人们对圣训的关注并不大,因为当时先知还活着,他是活的伊斯兰教(万物之源),生活在他们周围。但在先知死后的一段时间里,人们对圣训的关注迅速增加。当代的伊斯兰思想家认为,圣训学者并没有像《圣训》那样,对《圣训》的批评给予极大的关注。只要使用正确的方法,正如圣训学者所解释的那样,通过内部批评(圣训的matan),对先知的真实性进行批评的机会仍然是开放的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信