Read on Twitter
When you think you've "got" muslims on hadith by discovering Schacht (d.1969) and Juynboll's common link theory for the first time in 2020, and also thinking that it's some uncontested point lol
Many hadiths have their "common links" as sahaba or The prophet (sws)
Short thread https://twitter.com/delventotime/status/1296313196060573697
Many hadiths have their "common links" as sahaba or The prophet (sws)
Short thread https://twitter.com/delventotime/status/1296313196060573697
First what is a common link?
Here is a diagram, it is the point where isnads "spread out". So in this diagram, the hypothetical hadith in question would have various isnads, but all isnads include and revolve around common link.
Here is a diagram, it is the point where isnads "spread out". So in this diagram, the hypothetical hadith in question would have various isnads, but all isnads include and revolve around common link.
Muslim scholars of hadith have a term similar to this concept: Madār (Juynboll considers this equivalent to common link)
Now here it is being argued the common link is "responsible" for the hadith. That is, the common link is the real source. They made it up.
Now here it is being argued the common link is "responsible" for the hadith. That is, the common link is the real source. They made it up.
Therefore hadiths are not reliable and thus the real source is the common link.
There are two problems here:
1) False assumptions
2) Trying to avoid certain common links
There are two problems here:
1) False assumptions
2) Trying to avoid certain common links
The first is the false assumption, that of dishonesty.
Let us propose a hypothetical. Say we have some hadith with Al-Zuhri as the common link. Al-Zuhri is from the tabieen, meaning he is from the generation that met some of the sahaba, but he did not meet the Prophet (sws)
Let us propose a hypothetical. Say we have some hadith with Al-Zuhri as the common link. Al-Zuhri is from the tabieen, meaning he is from the generation that met some of the sahaba, but he did not meet the Prophet (sws)
So in our hypothetical, Al-Zuhri, the common link of this hadith, narrates it from from a sahabi (which does happen eg: https://sunnah.com/bukhari/3/19 )
So it is established Al-Zuhri quoted a sahabi mentioning a hadith of The Prophet (sws). It is then assumed Al-Zuhri faked the quote
So it is established Al-Zuhri quoted a sahabi mentioning a hadith of The Prophet (sws). It is then assumed Al-Zuhri faked the quote
This assumption is nonsense. The default here is "anyone quoting a sahabi transmitting from the prophet must be lying". It's not even a "skeptical view". A "skeptical view" would be "well I don't know if he lied or not, worst case he lied"
In addition, muslim scholars have methods to determine if a narrator is someone dishonest or not. No it is not about their piety or how much they pray lol
So when we say he's a reliable narrator it is not blind faith
Here is a PDF detailing this: https://www.islamicdiscourseinitiative.com/canon/hadith/in-defense-of-the-hadith-methodebook/
So when we say he's a reliable narrator it is not blind faith
Here is a PDF detailing this: https://www.islamicdiscourseinitiative.com/canon/hadith/in-defense-of-the-hadith-methodebook/
Another problem is that Juynboll argues for "fictitious common links"
For example Nafi'i, the teacher of malik, who appears in many isnads cannot be a common link because Juynboll thinks he is actually fictional person Malik & other scholars invented
For example Nafi'i, the teacher of malik, who appears in many isnads cannot be a common link because Juynboll thinks he is actually fictional person Malik & other scholars invented
Another issue is when you actually examine all the hadith sources, turns out many hadiths have "common links" that are actually sahaba or even The Prophet (sws) himself.
Some examples by Dr.Mustafa Azami from his book "Studies in Hadith methodology and literature":
Some examples by Dr.Mustafa Azami from his book "Studies in Hadith methodology and literature":
Clearly, Abu huraira (ra), a sahabi, is the common link in the above example here.
Another example from Abu huraira (ra) below.
Another example from Abu huraira (ra) below.
Harald Motzki (note: non muslim academic), on page 119-120 of his work "The Origins of Islamic Jurisprudence" also concludes there is genuine material from the companions of The Prophet (sws) in muslim hadith collections. His book has other criticisms as well.
Eg:
Eg:
There are also the responses by Dr. Mustafa Azami titled "On Schacht's Origins of Muhammadan Jurisprudence" (in addition to the book of his I cited earlier, "Studies in Hadith Methodology and Literature")
A useful article as well: https://www.ilmgate.org/analyzing-schachts-theory-and-two-of-his-critiques-azami-and-motzki/
A useful article as well: https://www.ilmgate.org/analyzing-schachts-theory-and-two-of-his-critiques-azami-and-motzki/
Next time don't go "sahih means nothing lol hadith fake" like a child. If you doubt a particular hadith or isnad try to critique it.
I will be linking some other relevant articles I recommend people to read in the below replies, I highly recommend them.
I will be linking some other relevant articles I recommend people to read in the below replies, I highly recommend them.
