A Critique of Traditional Approaches To Hadith

 A Critique of Traditional Approaches to Hadith

M. Bakri Musa

Adapted from Qur’an, Hadith, and Hikayat: Exercises in Critical Thinking (2021)

August 9, 2026

Prophet Muhammad (peace be upon him) was, as the Qur’an asserts (33:21), “…a beautiful example for those who hope for God and the Last Day.” Small wonder then that Muslims place such overwhelming and disproportionate emphasis on hadith. Hadith are the asayings attributed to Muhammad, s.a.w. The operative word there is “attributed.” That is often forgotten or glossed over.

The Prophet, s.a.w., as a human being who walked the earth, felt hunger, and weathered hardship, remains infinitely more relatable than the abstract majesty of the inanimate Qur’an or the transcendent, All-Powerful Allah. Admiration for the man—and with it, a deep curiosity about his life and sayings—is entirely natural and predictable.

However, there is a steep intellectual price for this obsession:  the dangerous temptation to idolize the messenger while blurring or outright ignoring his message.

The Theater of Authenticity

Consider the typical discourse on hadith today. The speaker begins in predictably scripted fashion, droning on about long, convoluted chains of narrators (isnad) to establish authenticity. This is followed by a dramatic recitation of the entire hadith in flawless Arabic, alongside a laundry list of medieval scholars who vouched for its chain. Never mind that the vast majority of his audience does not comprehend a single word of Arabic; the primary objective is to dazzle, not enlighten your listeners.

By the time this pedantic performance ends and the audience has finally drifted deep into slumber land, the speaker finally arrives at what should have been the core of his presentation:  the approximate translation and its practical application.

Except that in the mind of the speaker it is never merely an approximate translation—it is the definitive one, delivered with absolute, unquestioned certitude. “It means...” he bellows with undisguised arrogance, applying the same rigid dogmatism whether interpreting a hadith or a Qur’anic verse.

Form Over Substance in Mass Media

This performative ritual dominates public Islamic discourse in Malaysia. Take, for example, the popular weekly television program Wacana Al-Qur’an (Forum on the Qur’an). The first ten minutes are inevitably consumed by a tedious exchange of profuse Arabic salutations and elaborate, self-congratulatory introductions, as guests trade exaggerated expressions of mutual gratitude and admiration.

When the actual discussion finally starts, the ustadz recites the text and delivers his interpretation with unyielding authority. Bless the producers—the topics chosen are often deeply relevant: corruption, charity, civic responsibility, and education. Yet the ensuing commentary might as well be by aliens. There is virtually no attempt to connect classical texts to contemporary realities.

A recent episode on corruption offered a textbook demonstration of this disconnect. Panelists eagerly cited additional Qur’anic verses, recited lengthier hadiths, traced intricate narrator lineages, and quoted heavily from ancient luminaries. Yet not a single speaker dared to address the elephant in the room:

• Is accepting a free Hajj trip bankrolled by illicit funds haram?
• How do we confront the endemic corruption choking the nation, from the Prime Minister’s office right down to the local immigration counter?
• 
  

When the credits roll, precious little time remains for audience questions. On those rare occasions when a Q&A segment is permitted, the inquiries inevitably devolve into pedantic squabbles over the technical authenticity of a particular narration—as if an audience in the 21st century could definitively settle a transmission of over 1,400 years ago.

The Tyranny of the Ancients

Critical analysis is completely absent; finding points of direct relevance to modern governance and ethics is treated with suspicion. The entire enterprise rests on regurgitating historical opinions. The underlying premise is as cowardly as it is unexamined: Who are we mere present mortals to question those ancient luminaries? We are expected not to scrutinize established tradition, but to submit blindly to its dictates.

The thought that the dilemmas confronting the modern ummah are light-years removed from those faced by the Al-Kindis or Al-Ghazalis never enters the minds of these contemporary ulama. It is as if, despite all our advances in medical science and technology, we were to insist on diagnosing human illness using the ancient Greek theory of the four humors.

The Inevitable Rise of Modern Scholarship

Fortunately, the tide is turning. Modern critical-historical methods are being applied first to the study of the Qur’an, and now to Prophet Muhammad, s.a.w., as a historical figure and his hadith as historical documents.

Because these rigorous textual studies were initially pioneered by historians at elite Western universities, traditional Muslim scholars reflexively scoffed and dismissed them as another mere manifestation of Orientalist prejudice. Today however, that knee-jerk dismissal looks downright childish and insular. A growing cohort of Muslim scholars—many originally trained in traditional madrasahs before undergoing the rigors of Western academic scholarship—are bridging this gap.

Southeast Asian scholars are helping lead this intellectual movement. Thinkers like Ulil Abshar Abdalla (Harvard PhD) and Mu'nim Sirry (now at the University of Notre Dame) both bring unique authority to the table: deep roots in traditional presantren education coupled with advanced training at institutions like UCLA and the University of Chicago. Their work demonstrates that critical inquiry does not diminish faith; it rescues it from irrelevance.

Next in this series: A Different Approach to Understanding Hadith

The author’s forthcoming book, Exploring Imam Nawawi’s Forty Hadith: Through the Lens of Contemporary Knowledge, is expected early next year