AN ANALYTICAL STUDY OF THE POINTS OF CONVERGENCE AND DIVERGENCE IN THE PRINCIPLES OF HADITH BETWEEN MUHADDITHIN (HADITH SCHOLARS) AND FUQAHA (JURISTS)

Abstract

This critical research tells about what unites and what divides methodologies of Muhaddithun (Hadith scholars) and Fuqaha (Islamic jurists) in the science of Usul al-Hadith (Principles of Hadith). These two arts are critical fields of Islamic study Muhaddithun are experts in establishing the correctness of the Prophetic traditions, whereas Fuqaha use the correct traditions in the legal and social aspects. Their goals can be quite similar when maintaining and practicing the Sunnah, but a difference can be noted in their approach. Muhaddithun give much attention to riwayah (narration), and utilise strict standards in the study of the isnad (chain of transmission) and matn (text) of Hadith. The way they organize the narrations according to the levels of sahih, hasan, da, and mawd are dependent on either the integrity and memory of reporters, continuation of chain, or lack of imperfections. These standards were advanced by such great scholars as Imam Bukhari, Imam Muslim, and Imam Ibn Hajar and they have made great contributions to canonization of authentic Hadith. In contrast, Fuqaha are more contextual and intellectual (or, dirayah-based). Although they also take account of isnad, the primary issue of concern is the practical consequences of a Hadith. They tend to embrace other sources of Islamic law that include qiyas (analogy), istihsan (juridical preference) and maslaha (public interest). Imam Abu Hanifah and Imam al-Shafi, they stressed the spirit and intentions of Shari a in interpreting and implementing Hadith and sometimes even used a weaker one when it better fit into the jurisprudential principles. Signs of agreement also are pointed out, and these include agreeing on the authority (hujjiyyah) of Hadith, the preference of authentic reports and the need to use weak reports with care especially in legal judgments. But the difference is noticeable in the way they assess and the way they deal with the conflicting narrations and their tendencies to interpret. Finally, the study favors an intermediate approach that will balance the accuracy of the Muhaddithun and the wisdom of Fuqaha. Such a holistic system is highly essential in the contemporary scenario as new challenges require contextual ijtihad based on authenticity and purposes of Islamic texts. As the paper has implied, the approach that integrates textual analysis and the focus on the maqasid of application would make Islamic jurisprudence superior to the present-day pertinence and robustness of a system.

Keywords: Usul al-Hadith, Muhaddithun, Fuqaha, Dirayah and Riwayah, Jarh wa Ta‘dil, Maqasid al-Shari‘ah, Conflict of Hadith