KR

One subliminal reason why some are not pleased with normative hadith method as expressed by S. Hatim al-Awni is that he has reclaimed the hadith sciences from the subjectivity and relativism that seeped into it and firmly placed it under the rational disciplines.

The implication of that is, for scholars at least, taqlid in this subject - like what many can get away with in fiqh - matter becomes unsustainable. You cannot get out of narrating obvious fabrications and severely weak hadiths by simply relying on the (erroneous) verdict of a past scholar.

As a result, the response from those in that camp to S. Hatim - both person and works - can be encapsulated as follows:

- Some will become favourable, leading to a rift between them and their ex associates. Conveniently for the anti-S. Hatim camp, these new admirers of S. Hatim are labelled as Awnists. It is a low form of namecalling.

- Some will find anything to throw dirt on him and his admirers, in order to discredit the whole project with what is essentially is a series of ad hominems.

- Some will not be able to find it within themselves to praise him or at the very least acknowledge the error of their alternative methodology of hadith relatism, but will still secretly consult his works in order to a) either use information that they can later leverage against him (which they have failed to do thus far), or b) to boost their own credentials within the hadith relativist camp (which is essentially plagiarism).

There is a reason why his hadith works are instant classics. Had they been written even as late as 150 years ago, his books and ideas would have been already incorporated in most Islamic seminaries across the world.

www.tgoop.com/KnowledgeRevival/16006

3.2K viewsIsmail, May 17 at 14:26

One subliminal reason why some are not pleased with normative hadith method as expressed by S. Hatim al-Awni is that he has reclaimed the hadith sciences from the subjectivity and relativism that seeped into it and firmly placed it under the rational disciplines.

The implication of that is, for scholars at least, taqlid in this subject - like what many can get away with in fiqh - matter becomes unsustainable. You cannot get out of narrating obvious fabrications and severely weak hadiths by simply relying on the (erroneous) verdict of a past scholar.

As a result, the response from those in that camp to S. Hatim - both person and works - can be encapsulated as follows:

- Some will become favourable, leading to a rift between them and their ex associates. Conveniently for the anti-S. Hatim camp, these new admirers of S. Hatim are labelled as Awnists. It is a low form of namecalling.

- Some will find anything to throw dirt on him and his admirers, in order to discredit the whole project with what is essentially is a series of ad hominems.

- Some will not be able to find it within themselves to praise him or at the very least acknowledge the error of their alternative methodology of hadith relatism, but will still secretly consult his works in order to a) either use information that they can later leverage against him (which they have failed to do thus far), or b) to boost their own credentials within the hadith relativist camp (which is essentially plagiarism).

There is a reason why his hadith works are instant classics. Had they been written even as late as 150 years ago, his books and ideas would have been already incorporated in most Islamic seminaries across the world.

BY KR