Reddit mentions of A Textbook of Hadith Studies: Authenticity, Compilation, Classification and Criticism of Hadith

I wouldn't normally recommend an advanced text to someone just thinking about Islam, but you attended seminary and I'm assuming not exactly a novice to the concepts and forms of textual criticism. You might appreciate some context to hadith studies generally to see that there is more basis to it than what it may initially seem like.

you might want to try this book. It's probably one of the best if not the best introduction to hadith sciences in English.

If you prefer learning directly from a person rather than pouring over what can be a dense and difficult text that gives you too much information, you could listen to these lectures. I don't think I've listened these, but the sheikh himself is very deservedly popular:

http://www.halaltube.com/usul-al-hadith

http://www.halaltube.com/sciences-of-hadith




>So, from what I have been reading, there are two categories of certainty for the validity of the hadith. The most certain are categorized as mutawaatir, and these are binding in terms of belief and obedience, right? This class of hadith is based on the number of witness in the chain of transmission that verify the saying or the event - and can also apply to the content of a hadith that may not have as reliable a chain of transmission. But there is also another component to this designation of validity, and that is that the Qur'an was compiled from the same sources as these hadith? So, the reasoning from scholars is that to deny these hadith is to deny portions of the Qur'an?


There are many more than two kinds of categories of certainty. Mutawatir doesn't actually refer to the degree of certainty, it applies to number of narrators that support each chain within a certain hadith, however, both a mutawatir and an ahad (only one narrator at one of the steps within the chain) hadith can be considered 'certain' in regards to their truth value as to whether the Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, actually made the statement. Mutawatir typically means that there are 4+ narrators at each step in the chain (scholars differ about the number), but you have to understand that if there is a reliable narrator at each step in the chain, then the hadith itself is still considered reliable.

When you say the Quran was compiled from the same sources, if you mean witnessed by people, then yes, the Quran was recorded according to how people heard the Prophet Muhammad, peace be upon him, recite the Quran. It didn't come down from the sky in book form, it was recited. Every verse of the Quran is considered mutawatir, meaning multiple people testified to each of the verses being considered Quran. There isn't really a "chain" though since it was compiled by people who all heard it directly from the Prophet himself.

>So, without these sources, would we have these verses in the Qur'an? Are there known manuscripts from about the same time or prior that contained these verses independent of these hadith? In other words, are these sources for the mutawaatir hadith the confirmed primary sources for those verses in the Qur'an?

again, by sources, in the Islamic tradition, the best source is the testimony of a truthful and reliable person with an unfailing memory. There were of course texts that had Quran and hadiths written on them, but they are not considered as reliable. Is the writing of a liar or a person prone to error better than the speech of a truthful person not known to err? The ancients Arabs preferred the latter. but to answer your question, the narrators of mutawatir hadith are not necessarily the people relied upon in compiling the Quran.

Knowledge is the cure to almost everything. What you're doing is excellent -- seeking out the knowledge. Muslims are encouraged to read hadith, to think critically about their religion rather than believe blindly, and above all--validate their personal understanding of the Quran + Hadith from more knowledgeable Muslims, as instructed from God in the Quran:

> فَاسْأَلُوا أَهْلَ الذِّكْرِ إِنْ كُنْتُمْ لا تَعْلَمُونَ

> ...then ask the people of remembrance if you do not know

---

> Has anyone read some of the Hadith from Bukhari Book of Jihad? What are your opinions of the Hadith in general?

Hadith are the premiere source for us getting to know our Prophet. Please note: Hadith =/= Quran. The Quran is the unaltered word of God. Hadith are Prophetic narrations / actions recorded by people. There are different grades of hadith -- even in Sahih Bukhari. Some hadith have been transmitted by many people each generation, making them very strong. Others have came through a single person per generation, etc. Muslim scholars have devised an entire science to study and authenticate hadith and anyone who does even mild research into that will understand why even non-Muslims find it difficult to attack the authenticity of hadith.

> I have read before on /r/islam that Hadiths are to be interpreted by Imam and/or scholars with greater understanding, but if that is the case, why are Hadith generally encouraged to be read by all Muslims?

How does one become a scholar if information is hidden and not made readily available? How would you be able to come across the hadith you mentioned? How does one ensure that information is reliably transmitted and not mutated if it's contained in the private collections of select individuals? How does one interpret commandments the Qur'an (like fast + pray) if they don't have access to hadith explaining how to fast and how to pray? There are many reasons why hadith should be made available to all, and these are just a few of them.

As a non-Muslim you are interested in learning more about Islam; makes sense, as Islam has been in the news for a while and some of the misinformation stated therein is alarming. So you've picked up some hadith books and are looking through them. This being the case, you've undoubtably came across tens, perhaps hundreds of hadith which detail how the Prophet prescribed excellence, even when battling an enemy--such as:

• Being exhorted by the Prophet to exhibit patience, even when fighting the enemy
  
• Following the example of the Prophet by invoke Allah to bestow guidance upon disbelievers, even though they are the enemy
  
• The Prophet instructing Muslims not to Wish for war; but to be steadfast with it when it is upon them
  
• Providing the prisoners of war with clothes (especially back at that time, when the companions of the Prophet including him himself, barely had clothes to wear or food to eat)
  
• Forbidding torture, particularly with fire
  
• Instruction not to abstain (as much as possible) from destroying enemy land / livestock when warring
  
• Encouragement to free the captives
  
  Having seen all of these, you occasionally come across which seems problematic to your morals, such as the one you quoted:
  
  > The Prophet (ﷺ) passed by me at a place called Al-Abwa or Waddan, and was asked whether it was permissible to attack the pagan warriors at night with the probability of exposing their women and children to danger. The Prophet (ﷺ) replied, "They (i.e. women and children) are from them (i.e. pagans)." I also heard the Prophet (ﷺ) saying, "The institution of Hima is invalid except for Allah and His Apostle."
  
  Is the Prophet instructing his companions to kill women + children here?
  
  

1. The companions asked the Prophet if it was permissible to attack the disbelieving warriors while they were sleeping / at night. This here should be enough to expose their intent -- that it was only to go after their warriors.
   
   
2. The fact that the companions are asking permission about this means that they must have had some other instructions which caused them to waver. It's not like they're asking permission to kill the women+children, but the companions were so afraid of causing any harm to them that they considered it questionable to even attack the fortified enemy due to the very risk of even exposing women and children.
   
   
3. The hadith you had mentioned -- if you just flip to the very next page, the very next hadith in Bukhari's kitab al-jihaad, what does it say? "During some of the Ghazawat of the Prophet (ﷺ) a woman was found killed. Allah's Messenger (ﷺ) disapproved the killing of women and children. Aha - this must have been what the companions had in their minds, which caused them to not even want to attack the enemy at night.
   
   
4. I am assuming you live in a western country. At least in America, women, children and other combatants are killed all the time in their wars. What is your position on this? For example research by the Bureau of Investigative Journalism finds that fewer than 4% of the people killed by US Drones have been identified by available records as members of al Qaeda (though a higher number, less than 50% though, have been identified as militants). I do NOT condone this, but I ask because it would be hypocritical for someone (for example) living in America who supports drone strikes to have an issue with collateral damage. Just to be clear, A) I'm not saying the Prophet SAW condone collateral damage and B) I'm not saying YOU condone drone strikes. I'm just bringing awareness to a point.
   
   If we were to go through not just Bukhari, but all of the various hadith collections and tried to find every instance which even remotely seemed like the Prophet saw was suggesting it's okay to slaughter women + children or other non-combatants, vs the times where it is explicitly states that doing so it not part the Sunnah, you'll get over a crazy ration, something like over 99%. As someone who has gone through some of Bukhari, I am sure you've noticed this as well. So when you see something that looks a bit off, you have to hit it with context. Learn about what specifically was happening in a scenario and with that information, you'll see that the morals of the Prophet are unchanging.
   
   > Chapter 44, 1264: Narrated by Aisha: Once the Jews came...
   
   I can tell you about my day - I woke up, went to work, watched some tv and went to bed. Or I can tell you about my day: My alarm went off at the crack of dawn. I jolted out of bed, crept down the stairs. Used my favorite cinnamon toothpaste, gave the cat her treats. Started my Tesla, got in the carpool lane cause they allow electric cars---
   
   In hadith, you can find multiple narrations of the same incident, depending on how much detail the narrator was giving the person being narrated to. Let's look at a dif narration of said incident:
   
   > Aisha said, "The Jews came to the Prophet and said to him, "As-Samu 'Alaika (Death be upon you)." He replied, 'The same on you.' " Aisha said to them, "Death be upon you, and may Allah curse you and shower His wrath upon you!" Allah's Messenger I said, "Be gentle and calm, O Aisha! Be gentle and beware of being harsh and of saying evil things." She said, "Didn't you hear what they said?" He said, "Didn't you hear what I replied? have returned their statement to them, and my invocation against them will be accepted but theirs against me will not be accepted."
   
   Let's dissect this together.
   
   

• This is the Prophet, who is the head of state in Madinah. Think President Obama. Like the President, he has some decenters in his ranks who think lowly of him. Now you tell me, what would happen if some Obama hater walks up to him and says to Obamas face "Die son!"? I think we both know the answer. Chances are, the person would face an ambiguous amount of time rotting in Guantanamo. Here, the Prophet, who was loved by his companions even more than anyone in the US loves Obama, was told to die by some haters and how did he handle the situation? With the highest moral character any human can be upon. We get pissed off with such simple things such as when someone cuts us off on the freeway, or when we pay for 12 donuts and find only 11. Here, someone is doing much worse than that, wishing death upon him, and his only response to them is, "eh, you too".
  
  
• The Prophet's wife was with him when this occurred. If you're a man, you know how difficult it is to back down when someone picks a fight with you in front of your lady. And If you're a lady in mad love with your guy, you know how difficult it is to see people mistreat your man--especially when you know he deserves better. Here, some Jews entered upon the Prophet in his own house (again, imagine some Obama haters entering his private quarters--yeah right, it'll never happen), and they said whatever they said. A'isha lost it at that point and she said what she said. How did the Prophet SAW rebuke her? He didn't! He didn't even rebuke her but instead advised her with that which is best: "Be gentle and calm, O `Aisha! Be gentle and beware of being harsh and of saying evil things." You tell me, which normal guy in that situation would instruct his closest companion to behave that way right in the heat of that sort of situation?
  
  Given the above two pieces of information, I really do not see how anyone can find the above narration problematic(?). If anything I think it's extremely cute to see the love Aisha had for her husband, and I think it's an amazing example of the high moral character of the Prophet saw.
  
  If I've said anything wrong here it is from me, and if I spoke the truth, then it is from what God has inspired me with.