Ragheef, Ahmad Abd al-Rahman Hanzal Abu and Fahimi, Hamid Dr.Hamid Raza (2026) The Critical Methodology of Contemporary Hadith Scholars in Evaluative Preference (Tarjiḥ) Under Divergent Early Judgments: Sayyid Murtada al-Askari as an Applied Model. American Journal of Religious, Culture and Archeological Studies, 3 (8). ISSN 2997-948X

Text AJRCAS_The+Critical+Methodology.pdf Download (501kB)

Abstract

This study examines the critical method employed by contemporary hadith scholars when preferring among divergent judgments of early critics, taking Sayyid Murtada al-Askari as an applied model. The problem arises because narrator evaluations and critical judgments do not always form a single, uniform verdict. Different transmissions may attribute conflicting statements to the same critic; critics may disagree over a transmitter; or a judgment restricted to a particular teacher, region, period, or set of reports may later be generalized. Critics may also agree about a transmitter yet disagree about a specific report because of connection, interruption, elevation, suspension, name confusion, or textual composition. Contemporary preference therefore cannot be reduced to counting judgments or automatically choosing the harsher one. Using inductive, analytical, comparative, critical, and historical methods, the study classifies the causes of early disagreement and identifies shared criteria in Sunni and Imami scholarship: authenticating the attribution of a critical statement, defining its exact object, reconciling apparently conflicting judgments where possible, studying each critic’s terminology and relative strictness, preferring explained criticism or the judgment of the scholar most familiar with the transmitter’s reports, weighing report-specific evidence, and separating the status of a narrator from that of an individual transmission. These criteria are compared with al-Askari’s method in Abd Allah ibn Saba and Other Legends, One Hundred and Fifty Fabricated Companions, The Hadiths of the Mother of the Believers Aisha, and The Features of the Two Schools. The analysis shows that al-Askari expanded preference beyond formal narrator criticism to include source criticism, historical verification, and textual analysis. He reconstructs a report family, locates its earliest recoverable source, compares it with independent transmission lines, examines genealogy, geography, and chronology, traces semantic development, and considers tribal or political motives. Applied cases include Sayf ibn Umar’s reports, the Ibn Saba narrative, fabricated Companions, and variant reports concerning the number of Imams. The study also identifies limitations: some evaluative steps remain implicit, opposing evidence is not always exhausted, and criticism of a report cluster can occasionally become a broader generalization. A ten-stage model is therefore proposed, beginning with verifying critical statements and defining the disagreement, then moving through reconciliation, narrator and source analysis, report-family reconstruction, textual and historical testing, cumulative weighing, and a proportionate final judgment that states its degree of certainty.

Item Type:	Article
Uncontrolled Keywords:	Sayyid Murtada al-Askari, Hadith Criticism, Early Critics, Jarḥ wa-Taʿdīl, Critical Preference (Tarjiḥ), Textual Criticism, Historical Criticism, Contemporary Hadith Scholarship
Subjects:	H Social Sciences
Depositing User:	admin eprints
Date Deposited:	13 Sep 2026 10:01
Last Modified:	13 Sep 2026 10:01
URI:	http://eprints.umsida.ac.id/id/eprint/17070

Actions (login required)

View Item