Answering Christianity Research Center

Hadeeth and Sunnah.

I consider myself to be closest to the Ahlul-Quran. I was a Quranist for over 10 years and did my best to answer all angles, all questions and all criticisms of Quranists themselves and those who do not find the Quranist position to be valid.  The only reason I am not a Hadeeth rejector in full is because of this following quote of Imam Al-Bazdawi which coincides with most of the Sunnies position on Aaahad hadeeth. 

Imam al Bazdawi (RH) said: “The Wahid provides necessity in actions but not with ‘ilm (certain knowledge), and we explained that mashoor doesn’t provide ‘ilm, so āhād or Wahid certainly does not. The Wahid does, however, have possibility and he who denies this has misguided his mind and himself.”

Please check out the following forum link and related topics for further clarification.

Read more: http://quranists.proboards.com/thread/44/proof-saheeh-hadeeth-conjecture#ixzz49EpleNJP

With that said, NO hadeeth should have extra-quranic religious authority. Mutawaatir hadeeth MUST apparently coincide with the mutawaatir Qur'an. And NO Ahaad hadeeth or practice (saheeh or otherwise) should be declared obligatory upon any Muslim because of the possiblity that it could be false. The gravity of making such claims of certainty and obligation when it comes to even saheeh hadeeth and mash-hood pratices is the follow mutawaatir hadeeth:

“Whoever tells a lie against me deliberately, let him take his place in Hell.”

Narrated by al-Bukhaari, 107; Muslim, 3; Abu Dawood, 3651; al-Tirmidhi, 2661; Ibn Maajah, 30, 37; and Ahmad, 2/159.

This hadeeth was narrated by more than seventy-two Sahaabah, and was narrated from them by a huge number of narrators whom it is impossible to list.

6:112 affirms this. The Quran also speaks about false testimony and adhering to conjecture in our religion.

We CANNOT obligate any non-mutawaatir hadeeth upon ANY Muslim because if we do so, it is possible that we are obligating people to follow falsehood and not true. And we are obligating them to follow doubt and conjecture and not certainty and knowledge.

With that said let's continue to talk about whether these non-mutawaatir hadeeth really represent the prophet Muhammad (saas) and his true companions? Let's talk about the books and sayings attributed to scholars that were passed down in an non-mutawaatir fashion and whether we should really be claiming that these scholar said these things.

Ahaad hadeeth can ONLY be optional and should only be accepted when they enhance and improve our adherence to the Quran, plain and simple. And even when accepted by some, they CANNOT be made obligatory upon any Muslims as has been happening in the Muslims world for a millenia.

Peace,

I have yet to see tawaatur being proven in these methods. Imam Malik saw that the people of Medina did certain things in their majority, but it seems that he did not get further than mash-hoor in what he put forward. If you read about him you will learn about MANY scholars in Medina during his time who held many different opinions.

I have also seen a lot of inconsistency in what is considered tawaatur. Sometimes Ahaad hadeeth that can be attributed to a number of sahaabah is considered mutawaatir, even if there are common narrators in the chains that coincide or could have colluded. These hadeeth are often not really mutawaatir. The concept of mutawaatir is flawless and the hadeeth that all scholars agree upon as being mutawaatir are only a handful. Much of what is mash-hoor or seemingly widespread is wrongly called mutawaatir. Some may assume that because all Muslims or schools of thought agree upon something that that thing is mutawaatir. That is mistaken. The thing is mash-hoor but not mutawaatir. Mutawaatir has to be clearly demonstrated and that is where the scholars lack. I have not seen them clearly demonstrated tawaatur, but rather settling for mash-hoor or other "acceptable" aahaad hadeeth that conform what seem to be preconceptions or alread established practices or beliefs.

In a way you have highlighted the problem...too many methodologies, and too may concepts of what is obligatory and what is not based on hadeeth. Much is said about these scholars but none of their methodologies are made fully clear. Ijmaa' is not mutawaatir, and neither is mash-hoor. When that is taken into consideration it seems that much of the consistency of the methodologies fade away. 

To clarify I agree with the majority orthodox, shia and ibadhi opinon that Ahaad hadeeth can be true. Howevever, I disagree that they are obligatory upon the Muslim IN ANY FASHION, because it is almost unanimously recognized that these hadeeth can be false and that they are conjectural and only convey doubt.