I think that taking sunnah and seerah as sources of religion are unjustified. Neither one has been guaranteed by the revelation, i.e, the Qur’an.

When you look at sura an-nisa, and see the command ot take the messenger’s decision as a source of law, ayat 55-65, or thereabouts, there is nothing that indicates that we should accept unrevealed reports for establishing what the messenger intended for us or ordered us.

The utility of having the prophet on hand must have been wonderful for the companions, and I long for that closeness in my heart, but the reality is that we don’t have him with us in that way now. God bless the messenger.

We have solid material, that is the Qur’an, and we have dubitable material, which is everything else. I hope that the selection criteria for hadith have been good, and that the good hadith are good and that people are acting with good action, but there is no guarantee there. Man-made sciences of hadith are not reliable and we should not canonise hadith on the basis of these scientific efforts.

Humans make errors, so why introduce error into the religion? The sahih hadith are the 2% that were acceptable.

Where I live its guava season. There are a lot of farms with worms in the guava. Would you eat 2 guava fruit that were claimed to be good, if they were selected from a batch in which 98 had worms and only these 2, it was claimed, were worm-free?

I hope my contribution is useful. I do not want to harm my brothers in any way. I want the very best for all believers and I worry about our condition.

Abdullah Reed

My point being that I appreciate the intellectual gymnastics this article presented, But the fact that it would entail Seerat un Nabi as impracticable and irrelevant to Muslims like me, makes me hold back my judgement, and hence I do not agree with you.

I do not disagree either. I’m confused. Could you elaborate, please?

Jazakallahu Khair

“On examination, details of the story can be challenged. It can be demonstrated that the assertion that 600 or 800 or 900 men of Banu Qurayza were put to death in cold blood can not be true; that it is a later invention; and that it has its source in Jewish traditions. Indeed the source of the details in earlier Jewish history can be pointed out with surprising accuracy.”

http://jews-for-allah.org/2009/03/04/did-prophe…

Could anyone suggest a good book to read on methodology in Islamic Sciences (particularly Hadith)…?

Abdullah, I hope your well. Your point is well taken it has its place as defined by the principles of usul. Waqi, (social reality) is not a source of legislation (shar'iah) as is posited by the esteemed Dr. Tariq Ramadan but rather its understanding is key to soundly implementing rulings and fataawa.

The problem that has emerged in the contemporary thought of Islamic Movement and it is a real problem for it lacks scholarly grounding is to comprehend Seerah in light of “Hakimiyyah” a concept which is riddled with issues. So we have an understanding of the Sources of Islam which is removed from the guidance of Islamic sciences here.

Fact is that we are not in the Meccan age that age is long gone, nor we are in the Madinan age. We are however living in the post Revelation age. And this age as others falls under the purvey and guidance of Shariah. Without sound principled scholarship it is not possible to understand the relationship between Shariah and life.We need a tarbiyah similar to that of the Meccan period but not a fiqh for for the Meccan period.

Allahu Al'am
Abul-Hussein (Yusuf Rios)

Ibn Kathir's approach in combining Seerah with Hadith is in my opinion, the best. It is the broadest and references as much possible, however with the current English versions, the language used is very ambiguous at times. You do get a more complete, fuller and clearer picture of the Sunnah, and nothing from the life of the Prophet salallahu alayhi wasalam or his Sunnah is “censored,” whereas with the Zad you get a more nuanced, detailed view.

With “Compilations,” (Hadith canons) you get a sense of randomness and disorder because not everything is connected (What was the compiler thinking in putting this hadith here?) or as well defined or explained as much as it is with “Critical Research,” like in Z'ad al Maad. I personally think their should be more of a feasible, easy to understand hybrid between the two, with reference to Hadith Commentary and Explanations, which is something I think isn't given as much attention. That's something that would make it easier for laymen like myself to understand and comprehend fully. Get the whole picture and make it as detailed and nuanced as humanly possible, so one can't say, “What about this hadith? You forgot about what this might mean,” which could lead to disputes. For this, I think we might need another Imam Bukhari !

Jazaka Allahu khayran for the analysis. 🙂

Indeed such interpretation has grave consequences but the intellectual honesty calls upon the writer of this piece to piece together the political realities in our world now. Unfortunately, there are scholars who are deep-rooted in knowledge but fail to know the waki' or political reality or just turn a blind eye to it.