Search

This study sheds a light on one of the common issues between hadith (narration) and jurisprudence (fiqh) sciences, which is the method used by scholars to prevent the conflict between the textual evidence (religious texts). The books of jurisprudence principles (Usul al-fiqh) and narration principles (Usul al-hadith) mention the existence of two approaches of scholars regarding this issue: Muhaddith's (narrator's) and majority of principalist's (Usuli's) approach and Hanafi's approach, and both can be traced back to their origins in the school of people of Ra'y (school of opinionists) and the school of people of hadith (school of narrationists). This paper assumes that the common method known to be used by Hanafis to resolve the conflict between texts by Naskh (Abrogation), Tarjih (Preponderance) and then Jam' (Combining) is not the correct method expressed by the scholars of this school or the school of Ahl Alra'y (opinionists) since it is a dubious order controversing the principles of that school and the texts of the school founders. It also assumes that the correct order cannot be known without studying their school's origins and order of evidence. Al-'Awnī addressed this issue as well, and he claimed that the Hanafis' approach is consistent with the approach of Muhaddithin (narrationists) upon discrepancies where they do the opposite by starting with Jam' (Combining), then Tarjih (Preponderance) if they could not resolve it, and finally Naskh (Abrogation) comes if any of the previous two approaches could not resolve these discrepancies. This study aims to critically analyse the study paper of al-'Awnī' and explain (the agreements and the disagreements between the two studies), before presenting a method that fits the statements of the Hanafī scholars in resolving the discrepancies between texts. The study agrees with what al-'Awnī' has stated aboutthe delaying the Naskh (Abrogation), but it disagrees with its statement that the Tarjih (Preponderance) succeed the Jam' (Combining) by Hanafis. Therefore, the proposed order is Tarjih (Preponderance), Jam' (Combining), and then Naskh (Abrogation), and this study explains the appropriate evidence to support this claim. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper deals collect the research dedicated for the study of Hadith in the “Journal of Studies” (Sharia and law Sciences) published in the University of Jordan starting from issue (1) and up to issue(42) the current issue, followed by a study of the researchers’ trends in these papers, classifying them by: 1. Time period; considering the difference between papers and the change in writing style starting with the earliest issue until the current one 2. Subject matter; considering to what extent the papers have covered the subject matter 3. Researchers; and to what extent they were involved in the subject matter they discussed. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This scientific research deals with Imām Abū Hanīfah al-Nu‘mān not in his field, which he excelled in, but in another field that he is accused of, which is the hadīth of the Prophet. Many concerned the study of many aspects of the jurisprudence of Imām Abū Hanīfa, but it is unfair in the comprehensiveness of his studies in the side is a source of any fundamental jurisprudent is the Hadīth side. This paper shows the compatibility of the methodology of Imām Abū Hanīfa with the legal origins of this great religion. The researcher has proved through the deeds and sayings positions of him and the great critics of the great rapprochement or the full commitment of Abū Hanīfa with the Hadīth Scholars, either in carrying the modern novel or in its performance. And highlighted the character of Abū Hanīfa scientific perform which exceed thejurisprudence limits in the Hadīth area, and this is impossible for many of those who criticized Abū Hanīfa without a deep vision and scientific exploration of his curriculum and vision. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

This paper could be considered a template or an example of how to deal with some of the critiqued hadīths in al-Sahīhayn (Muslim and Bukhārī). It also exemplifies a scientific method in studying these hadīths with an objectivity that avoids the bias of both sanctification and desecration. It also serves as an example of how to answer those who -in these times where Sahīh-dispute has taken a loud and very unscientific path - try to attack the principles and pillars of this religion. The researcher has chosen a hadīth that has been often criticized and even mocked. Sometimes on the hands of the biased who hold ill intentions close to heart, and other times by those who simply lack enough knowledge and expertise. The teacher refutes the arguments that both parties have come to provide and gives an evidenced approach to the study in order to get to the result that confusing the sound Hadiths with the unfit ones has often been die to failing to observe the methodology of the writers of the al- Sahīhayn. And from God I seek guidance and precision. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]