We are studying about hadith sciences maybe we have some interesting on orientalist and we have do so critique hadith.
Ignaz goldziher is one of most prominent orientalist in Europe. He is one of figure that we will talk about. He is outsider of islam that has critical thought.
The orientalist travel trough countries sometimes for colonialism or study religion from another country. E.g snouck. Goldziher’s teacher armenius vambery relize the urge of traveling through Islamic countries to know their religions. The orientalist has bound friendship and they can share infos each other about the countries that they travel. Eg to indo to see maulid nabi.
The 1st orientalist conference held on 1883 in leiden. They share infos each other from their own religion background. As protestant they have to back to source. They have to read bible. They don’t need church etc.
Theis main critic of hadith is we cannot come with scientifically point of view that the hadith has been sent. So for us to know the criticism and read what their criticism is. And we can think about the answer. We can study kutubussittah, memorize riyadusshalihin or arbain Nawawi and also know ushulal hadith and that is the most important. But not only that.
So besides memorize hadith we have also understand what we memorize. Is it weak or strong. What does it mean for fiqh if it’s weak or it’s strong. And what does it mean if there are several narrations. How the way imam bukhari select hadith. If we don’t understand about this it will be hard to answer them and believe to our own religion.
How to againt orientalist;
- Know the history of them
- Knowing the answers that already given
- Know who are the orientalist.
- What are they criticize and what are the answers?
Compare with buku islam is not only for islam that the importance of critic of hadith not only by moslem
Gus Zia;
The term orientalist. He knows Joseph Schacht since long time ago.
In a book called ‘kritik hadis’ explained the critics of orientalist in transmission. The majority of hadith are fabricated and not originally from prophet. He give the thought that Islamic sharia doesn’t need hadith or sunnah. Just few amount of hadith that really come from prophet.
And here we know weather if hadith is fine, fair, or weak. And the transmission. It will be easy for scholars to attack back. E.g mm azamy, in his book, study in hadith literature. We can easily attack back if we know well about transmission and what hadith is.
Also we have to understand about what are their blame told about. E.g projecting back theory that hadith is fabricated by scholars of 3rd C hijria. To answer it we need to learn about the very important book, scholar Zakaria Auzon about jinaya of bukhari. He attacks mukharrij! That bukhari has interest to make some hadith. Inqoduddin from imam imam muhaddis. Bukhari not honest in his written. He also writes about syafii.
If we don’t have the strong basic of islam this book will mess our thought up.
Q n A
- What is the methodology of ignaz until he concludes that hadith is not original?
Academic tradition of western. Empirical thought and find the source. Critical thinking. So we have to know ushulal hadis to compare their thought
- What is the good that we ca learn from them? They have lot of books, explore many cultures and religions in details. The appetite of knowledge. They not discredit islam but for acknowledge about islam
- One of the criticism that attack islam the most, that has been replied and hasn’t
Drink Pee of camel. Why kafir cannot enter the masjidil haram dll (Still debated)
- How can we can stand on argument “asshohabah kulluhum udul”?
In political pov;
This is not what they are criticize. This is about quran. They don’t debate about transmission of quran. We need to discuss more
- How we generally answer the orientalist if they ask about islam
Hold tight the basic knowledge about islam. Basic of fiqh and other single of basic in our deen islam. s
- How to know the individual character of orientalist from islam body
- He is both believer and orientalist!
