A.
Preface
The
question of the value of the hadith literature (sayings of the Prophet) as a
legitimate source is a broad one in which orientalists, not only those working
on hadiths, but also those in other areas, including Islamic law, Islamic
history and the Quran, are interested. For this reason, the discussion here
needs to be limited according to some parameters.
In
the West, hadith studies began to become an independent discipline rather than
being a part of studies on Islamic history or the life of the Prophet Muhammad
(pbuh) in 1890. In this era orientalist begun to ask about the authenticity, originality,
authorship, source, accurate and validity of hadith. There are some factors
that encouraged hadith as the field object of studies in the west :
1.
Their effort to worsening Islam is easier
through the Hadith research rather than Al-qur’an.
2.
There are the numbers of contradiction in the
corpus matters of hadith its self.[1]
Relating to the factors above, there are three
fields of hadith that being the focus object of hadith studies in the west: the
aspect of transmitter ( Isnad’ system), personality of Muhammad (pbuh), and the
method of hadith classification.
B.
Historical Development
The historical
development of hadith studies in the western scholarship can be devided into
four phases. Firstly, early western scepticism which is known later as
western revisionists. Secondly, reaction against scepticism. Thirdly,
an attempt to search a middle ground. Fourthly, Neo- scepticism.[2]
Goldziher and Schacht can be
included to the first phase because these two figures hasitates the authenticity of hadith. Goldziher
stated his scepticism to the authenticity of hadith after examining some materials of
hadiths in canonical collection, he likely tends to “sceptical caution rather
than optimistic trust”. Goldziher concluded that most of hadith is a result of
religious, historical, and social developments of Islam during the first two
centuries of Islam. Goldziher
(1850-1921) published the second volume of his famous book, Muhammedanische
Studien, in which he focuses on the hadiths. Therefore, any exploration of the
orientalist view of the authenticity and sources of hadith literature must
focus on the period that starts with Goldziher, although one also should pay
attention to earlier studies as well.[3]
Schacht’s scepticism to the auhenticity of hadith is more explicit than
Goldziher’s scepticism. Schacht stated, “We shall not meet any legal tradition
from the prophet which can be considered authentic”. According to Schacht, either classical
school of Islamic jurist or
experts of Hadith both were forged Hadith by ascribing these forged hadith to the older
authority, that is - to the Successors, and then to the Companions and in turn
to the Prophet Muhammad peace be up on him.
The second phase is reaction againts scepticism. Nabia Abbott, one of the
figures in this phase, have proven the mistake of Goldziher’s opinion.
According to Abbott, the collection of hadith was begun early in the
life time of Muhammad and continously to the canonical collections. Abbott also
said that the development of hadith in a great quantity in the second and the
third century after hijrah is not because of the fabrication of the contents of
hadith, but because of parallel and multiple growth of isnād. Azami then
adopted Abbott theories to defend traditions from Joseph Schacht’s criticism.
Azami stated in his works that there is no reason to reject isnād system
because it is a reliable system. About the writing down
of hadith, Azami stated his opinion that hadith was written down in the life time of Muhammad and continuoud until the
period of canonical collections. Azami also criticized the backward-projection
theory that, according to him, it is an invalid theory because it is not based
on historical facts. According to him, it is extremely difficult to imagine the
fabrication of traditions done by transmitters whose their houses are far away
each other.
The third phase is an attempt to search a middle ground. The figures of
this phase are Fazlur Rahman, G.H.A. Juynboll, Harald Motzki, and Yasin Dutton.
These figures, in one side, have objections to Goldziher’s and Schacht’s
scepticism and, in another side, they didn’t accept on the whole theories of
Abbott and Azami who believe the autenticity of hadith only based on ascription
such as in the isnād of hadith. Fazlur Rahman stands in somewhat unique
position among the students of hadith in the west. In one hand, he has accepted
Godziher scepticism, and in another hand, as a muslim, he hasitates to say that
prophetic hadith in the canonical collection are spurious. According to Rahman,
although verbally speaking, hadith does not go back to the prophet, but the
spirit of it is originated from him because hadith is a situational
interpretation and reformulation of prophetic spirit. While G.H.A. Juynboll is
influenced by Schacht’s works and then refines Schacht theories, especially
common link theory to trace the origin of hadith in early Islam. But he didn’t
agree with very sceptical opinion of Schacht on the autenticity of hadith. As a
whole, he is distrustful of the historical value of isnād of hadith, but
pushes the dating of hadith not earlier than the end of the first century,
which is earlier than Schacht’s dating of hadith.
Harald Motzki used tradition-historical method to find a source of
authentic ahadith of the first century A.H. This method works by extracting
early sources from surviving compilations, not preserved as separated works and
focuses to the materials of certain transmitters rather than to the ahādith
collected on certain topics. Motzki focuses on the Muṣannaf of ‘Abd
al-Razzāq al-San’ānī (d.211 A.H). Matzki then an analyzes the stucture of
transmition from four dominant sources of ‘Abd al-Razzāq: Ma’mar b.Rasyīd, Ibn
Jurayj, al-Thawrī, and Ibn ‘Uyayna. The result is that four collections of the
text have special characteristics respectively. According to Motzki, special
characteristics of each structure indicates that it is impossible for a
fabricator to arrange materials in specific arrangement that make the text
coloured by very significant differencies. This proves that ‘Abd al-Razzaq
didn’t forge his ahādīth in the Muṣannaf. Yasin Dutton can
be included to the third phase because Yasin Dutton elaborates the concept of
Madinan ‘amal. Although the view of Yasin Dutton taken from Muwaṭṭa’
of Mālik is traditional one, it is different from classical theory of Syafi’i.
And although esensially, it is contradictory to the opinions of Western
revisionist, but it has similarities with them. This view is discovered by
Yasin Dutton after doing research of the Muwaṭṭa’ of Mālik. But
according to Dutton, his objective of study is not to prove the faulty of
Western revisionist theory and of the classical view of Syafi’i, but to
indicate that this view has a very strong sources. Yasin Dutton’s opinion gives
a perspective fundementally different on the history of Islamic law, considered
not preserved in the text, but in the Madinan tradition (‘amal).
The fourth phase is Neo-scepticism. Michael Cook and Norman Calder, two figures included to this
phase, are more sceptical than Goldziher and Schacht. As a whole, neither Cook
nor Calder deals with issues of the authenticity, chronology, provenance and
authorship of early hadith. If Cook is interested in early Islamic theology,
Calder is interested in Islamic jurisprudence. The similarity of the two
figures is that according to them, common link theory can not be used to trace
and to investigate the origin of hadith. Cook of the opinion that common link
phenomenon is a result of the process of the spread of isnād in a wide
scale. Common link phenomenon did not indicate that hadith is really originated
from a key figure or common transmitter. Calder also refuses validity of common
link method. For him, common link phenomenon is relating to the competition
between schoolls of Islamic law in Islamic society in the second half of the
third century A.H.
C.
The Different Between west and East in hadith
studies
Hadith studies in the
West differs fundamentally from
the hadith studies
elsewhere, such
as in the Middle
East and Indonesia.
While the Middle East and
Indonesia hadith
studies emphasize
on how to
do takhri-j
hadith to
determine its
authenticity, then the hadith
studies in
the West emphasizes
how do
dating (dating)
to assess
his historical traditions
and how
to reconstruct the
history of the events
that allegedly occurred
in the early days of
Islam. [4]
D. Some Orientalist in hadith Literature
Among the Orientalist
whose work, more
or less, concerned with the study of
hadith is Alois
Sprenger (1813-1893), Sir William Muir
(1819-1905), Ignaz Goldziher (1850-1921), David Samuel Margoliouth, P. Henri
Lammens (1862-1937), Snouck Hurgronje (1857-1936), Leone Caetani (1869-1926),
Josef Horovitz (1873-1931), Gregor Schoeler, Patrcia Crone, Alfred Guillaume
(1888- ), James Robson (1890- ), Joseph Schacht (1902-1969), G. Weil, R. P. A.
Dozy, Michael A. Cook, Norman Calder, David S. Powers, M. J. Kister, Daniel W.
Brown, L. T. Librande, Nabia Abbot, Rafael Talmon, Brannon Wheeler, Noel J.
Coulson Charles J. Adams, Herbert Berg, G. Lecomte, R. Sellheim, R. Marston
Speight, John Wansbrough, Burton, Hinds, Hawting, Uri Rubin, J. Fück, H. A. R.
Gibb, W. M. Watt, Nabia Abbot, G. H. A. Juynboll, dan Harald Motzki.[5]
Hadith
studies in the west are always growth through the days. Learn the history of a
particular methodology in hadith studies will
further enrich us,
which in
turn will be more likely
to reveal the historical life
of the Prophet. Nevertheless Orientalist
critique of the
methodology of hadith
studies, depend on the
majority of Islamic scholars
has settled down, it’s wait for the further response
from Muslim
scholars.
REFERENCES
1.
Kamaruddin Amin, Menguji
Kembali Keakuratan Metode Kritik Hadits (Jakarta: Penerbit Hikma, 2009)
2.
Badri Khaeruman. Otentitas Hadits: studi kritis
atas kajian hadits kontemporer. (Bandung: Rosdakarya, 2004)
[1]
. Amin, Kamarudin. Menguji Kembali Keakuratan Metode Kritik Hadits
(Jakarta: Penerbit Hikma, 2009), hal. 2.
[2]
. http://herusarjiyanta.blogspot.com/2012/07/perkembangan-historis-sebuah-hadis-di.html
taken on 5 april 2013 at 15.25 PM
[3]
. Khaeruman, Badri. Otentitas Hadits: studi kritis atas kajian hadits
kontemporer. (Bandung: Rosdakarya, 2004) h.248
[4]
. op. cit, kamaruddin amin. P 1
[5]
. http://febry23.blogspot.com/2011/12/Model-kajian-teks-teks-keislaman-studi-hadis-orientalis.html
taken on 5 april 2013 at 14.17 PM
Tidak ada komentar:
Posting Komentar