Timestamps: 0:00 Introduction 4:43 Hadith compared to other sources of history 12:15 Transmission of hadith vs Transmission of the Qur'an 15:46 Difference between oral and written preservation 18:42 Discussion on skepticism and revisionism 35:42 Meta-historiography; traditionalist dismissal that skepticism is fringe and outdated 42:22 1) Prior probability of false ascription in religious-historical material 47:13 2) The earliest extant collections were recensions from the ninth century onwards 56:23 3) Hadith are full of contradictions 1:03:51 4) A large number of hadith suspiciously look exactly like later religious sectarian, political, tribal, familial, and other partisan, polemical and apologetic creations 1:08:45 5) Hadith talking about later terms, later institutions, later events, and later phenomena. 1:11:51 6) Putative supernatural explanations for texts have a vanishingly low prior probability of explaining the existence of these reports 1:27:48 7) Reports of mass fabrication 1:32:04 8) Isnads rose relatively late, and became widespread even later 1:44:33 9) Early usage of the word Sunnah was a generic notion of sunnah as good practice, which was not specifically Prophetical, and was independent of hadith 1:52:44 10) A rapid numerical growth in hadith can be observed 1:57:01 11) Absence of Hadith in early sources 1:59:49 12) Retrojection of hadith; ratio of cited hadith changes from mostly ascribed to followers then to companions then to the Prophet 2:09:02 13) Various peculiar correlations, descriptions, and content that don't make sense as a product of genuine historical transmission but make more sense as a product of later debates and later ascription preferences 2:17:45 14) Hadith contradicting earlier literary and archeological sources 2:21:08 15) Orality means less precision in transmission 2:31:17 16) Extreme variation, early rapid mutation and distortion across the hadith corpus 2:34:28 17) Artificial literary or narrative elements; Recurring topoi 2:37:53 18) Hadith exhibit telltale signs of storyteller construction 2:40:25 19) Exegetical reports about the context of the Quran are exegesis in disguise 2:45:32 20) Recurring disconnect between the Hadith and the Qur'an in terms of historical memory 2:50:30 21) There was no effective method for distinguishing between authentic and inauthentic hadith 2:58:03 Conclusion

For so many years, I’ve felt so disappointed and left uninspired by the vast majority of what we call Muslim scholars. I can’t count the number of jummah khutbahs I’ve left feeling disappointed in the imams. To put it bluntly, so many of our traditional scholars in the community come across to me as dogmatic, unconvincing, simplistic in their views, unable to think critically. They come across to me as uneducated, frankly. Coming across Javad’s talks has been so refreshing. I feel like my iman is strengthened. May Allah reward you, Dr. Hashmi.

Dr. Joshua really needs to get better internet connection. Otherwise a very refreshing view on Hadith criticism

First video I‘m watching, and I just want to say first of all thank you for the closed captions! I‘m hard of hearing so, these CCs are a blessing for me and helps me to fully understand these videos. And finally, keep up the good work, Dr. Hashimi!

Dr. Amir-Moezzi, inspired by Ibn Arabi, draws a distinction between Faith (Iman) that is essential and Doctrine (Aqeeda) that is incidental. Granted, the historical critical method can shake doctrines, but it cannot shake a believer's faith. (fulan ibn fulan)

This is wonderful. Thank you for this discussion. I absolutely enjoyed it and loved all of the points he made. I think its really important for us as muslims to not dismiss the historical secular criticisms and engage with it in a meaningful way. I also think that its a shame that the muslim community, even though they say we should use our reason, actually discourage it and insist on blind obediance and blind faith. If our religion or faith is really strong and true it should hold up to criticism and we shouldn't crumble to pieces when we hear things like this. My personal opinion is hadith is good to get an understanding of the life of the prophet as it was understood back then and maybe some historical context of the muslims of antiquity but I don't think people should be forced, shamed or coerced into practicing anything that is in hadith. You can still be a muslim if you don't want to follow hadith..and you are still muslim even if you do want to follow hadith and sunnah. It should all be personal choice and we should be accepting of each others differences.

Tons of knowledge sharing by both of you gents.. and very well articulated Dr. Little, thanks and best wishes

Hadith has created many Islamophobia and also led to high numbers of Ex Muslims. Anyone realise many her revert to Islam came to Islam after reading the Quran and not the Hadith. Salafis are stubborn and arrogant that because bukari or Muslim Hadith have be give authentic status, there can’t be any other new scholars after them refuting these Hadith.

Great interview. Josh's Australian internet letting him down though lol. Would like to see more on point 21, in particular why the main method of hadith criticism is unreliable with detailed examples, exploring exactly how inaccuracies are formed. I think that's the key point that a traditionalist would hold on to, hoping the next interview explores this.

Dr Hashmi, I appreciate your patience in hosting this lenghthy and important presentation when you were clearly feeling unwell.

Finally a Muslim serious enough to accept the reality of the historical perspective (and Id argue its academic not specifically western), but then to move on from it and discuss what can be salvaged from a religious and cultural perspective.

A fantastic BOMBSHELL of an interview! Fascinating and engrossing, excited for more!

Next time do 6 hours. Love the discussion. My sadness increases as every minute passes, because I'm getting closer to the end.

This was great to watch. Thank you for your work guys 😊

Wow, absolutely blown away by the quality of this discussion. Thank you so much for bringing *Joshua Little on. I only knew of him from the first video you did with him and I definitely want to look more into his work. This was a really great discussion. I think the most extreme opinion amongst Quran-Centric Muslims is that following hadith is a form of shirk. I'm Qur'an-Centric and don't consider it shirk, but believe hadith should be treated with a healthy bit *of skepticisim, especially where they appear to contradict the Qur'an and reason. The period in which they began being recorded widely in writing is shaky politically with a lot of mixed motivations and opportunity for corruption. I also don't generally trust the scholars responsible for collecting them based on some of the traditions they felt were reasonable or good to record in so-called "sahih collections". Ironically, though I generally disagree with Asharite "neo-traditionalism", John Brown (who I agree to be solid) has done some good research looking into how the classical scholars took hadith, and they often admit that even "sahih" hadith can mix up the *wording, which is significant. The more conservative scholars considered so few to be "mutawatr", and it seems even they who we expect would be the most biased, maintained at least some skepticism. Ayesha Y. Musa has a great book on the early debate amongst the "rationalists" and "traditionalists", though unfortunately we only have the "rationalist" arguments of al-Shafi'i's opponents whom he records. What's clear though, even in hadith reports themselves, is there was antagonism in the early Muslim community, and the debate isn't essentially "modern" as neo-traditionalist might portray it. All that being said, the only sahih hadith for me is the Qur'an. I also don't consider any other hadith necessary for dîn, though I understand why the community is attached to them. Personally, if I see something that appears to be clearly ethically or rationally objectionable, I don't even care how Bukhari graded it. So you can see why I would consider this talk so valuable. This will probably have a part 2...

Been waiting a long time for this... clicked instantly!

Welldone Reza, you acted really well as a host this time 🌟

7th video now watching of yours and it may help my book (notably Part 4, which is the biggest part of the book outside of Part 1) and it is AMAZING that I found you and Mufti Abu Layth all in the same week, and this was *ALL* because I was thinking of making a KZfaq video on Aisha’s age (which would be my first video since 2019 - the only year I made video in fact) before dropping my Arab / Israeli conflict history video that I am dropping on October 7th - and that possible video (‘Aishas age) would go against the grain of my normal videos on history and/or geopolitics (which is where I have received multiple degrees) and it might have hurt my small, but very loyal subs I garnered in less than a year - but I found abu layths 2 hour video while making my script for the ‘Aisha video and instead of making it, I just put his video on my X/Twitter page instead, because he tackled it perfectly and never realized that this particular topic of her age is already been thoroughly tackled by Muslims - but now when I get breaks from work/studies - I have been “binge” watching your and muft’s videos. Found only a few things I disagree on with both of you two this week so far, which is GOOD, as echo chambers are dangerous to the “truth” if you will (and dangerous to this din as well!!…via taqlid without the use of one’s own ‘aql - which Allah swt tells us to constantly use)

We need time stamps, I have not watch this yet but I know it will be a great historical discussion on the reliability of Hadith.

Peace God bless you. Glad I found your channel. I already listened to the interview twice. Second time around I noticed that your notes missed item #12 01:59:53 Retrojecting or Raising of Hadith incase you wanted to add that for others

Finally a critical approach thank you

Extremely engaging and needed video!

Hadiths simply just do not make any sense.

Hey dr hasmi, although I may not agree with everything you say I will admit you are fairly well spoken and well articulated. Could you do a video on the controversial topic of the dhimmi and jizyah, many anti Islamic groups love to peddle this to show how Islam is an inherently super oppressive religion to those who don’t follow it.

What's Dr. Little's take on the Qur'an pre-Uthman?

Amazing interview! I learned a lot.

Hadith is collected and sorted into into various reliability categories. I don't think that there could be an issue with that process. The question which may be raised is if the prophet really said them. From person-to-person transmission errors, and the transmitters failing memories, to malicious transmitters, they may be compromised. That may be so, but still they could be significant if the transmitters are known to be non-malicious. So if they do not negate Quran, or each other, or the common sense, or contradicted by well known facts, their may be partially true. In those cases, one needs to take them into consideration. Aisha was 5 or 6 or 7 etc. for example, is one of those case where one should not rely on them. However, that her age may be wrong, does not mean that, the rest of the story is wrong.

For any muslims reading, in my opinion, we should let the Qur'an speak. I say this because if we apply or try to force the liberal agenda into it, in a way like the traditionalist wants to force their narrations, then we are like them. Many things in the Qur'an does NOT fit the liberal view, it's just the case, even taking into account the "ambiguous" or debatable terms. Therefore, you are free to reject, but if you believe this is the truth, then God knows better than us about morality. And our moral codes change and have changed before, so i say, let us take the Qur'an as our rock, not our desires, nor the desires of sectarians either... I recommend you the work of brother Sam Gerrans, i think he has some excellent points and his work is... work... a lot of work... You don't need to agree with everything, but he got a very good base and many notations explaining why he diverges at some points, both in historical narrative, cosmology and in other fields. Personally, i'm with him on the Petra thesis, i know many aren't, but i think expressions like the "mother of cities" and the fact that the people of the Prophet rejected the message is evidence that Masjid al Haram is now on ruins, and not the building people believe is "Masjid al Haram", so in this sense, altough i kinda hate the tag, we are revisionists. But on other issues, we are not, at all... The thing is again, to let the Qur'an speak, and do not push an agenda on it. Another is the modern cosmology, mostly based on the unseen (observations from dubious organizations private or statal, which use technology unavailable to independent actors due to its cost or vice versa) which seem to contradict the Qur'an and observations by independent researchers. This is extremely controversial, but i urge the people to take the stance which makes more sense given the evidence, not the one we have been raised in, or the one social pressure pushes us to, a believer does not fear the blame of a critic... always remember that. They will call us misguided, dumb, crazy, idiots, wrongdoers, kaafirun, this is a given if you are a true believer and speak up, prophets and messengers were called that as the Qur'an narrates to us, so don't fear standing for the truth, if you got evidence, based on what people would say to you, or you being discredited... The Garden is worth it, if you truly believe. This life is short. And full of pain, it isn't worth it being a sellout. Salamun alaikum

I have never seen such a great video about Islam! Although in many ways the video is “devastating”, it actually led me, on the contrary, to appreciate the Hadith more.

Any discussion with Dr Little in regards to Shia hadith?

Thank you for this video @The Impactful Scholar. Love your content. I wasted your time with a dumb comment last week which you were nice enough to respond to. so I thought I'd try to make up for it by liking all your videos and leaving this nice comment :D

In the future, it might be better latency if Dr. Little disabled his camera

May I ask: does any one know what the article by Marijn Van Putin (13:35) is that Dr Little referenced? -I'd love to read it myself.

This is an excellent conversation on Hadith studies. Thanks Javad.

Rejecting made up man made hearsay scriptures is not an "extreme". It's what anybody who's not blind to the Quran does.

Dr. Hashmi, how long did it take you to write out subtitles for this lol? I can only imagine. It is very much appreciated :D

Look how this scholar talks about Quran at 14:30 no issues with its preservation absolutely wonderful

Assalamu Alaykum Dr. Javad. Thank you for the wonderful content. Did you ever make a follow up video that explains how to use hadith from a religious perspective? You mentioned that there will a video about it, at the beginning of this interview.

May God bless you brother for doing this despite not being a Quranist yourself. I am more than willing to interact with you on these ussues if you are intrested in a quranist perspective. Regarding the Inarah School I do not totally agree With your guest that the Inarah School has been discredited. More and more of Luxemburgs and Lullings materials are being used in Germany. Have you checked out Luxemburg’s videos on his youtube channel? The problem with the Inarah School is that they lack experts om the history of unitarian christianity and I have urged them to consult experts such as Dale Tuggy and Sam Tideman. Regarding alternatives to Hadith when it comes to context of the Quran. Have you read Sankt Ephraims book ”the Hymns of Faith”?

What makes hadith controversial is their method of authentication. Verse 24:12 requires any news, especially the indirect ones, be first verified and validated which needs to be carried out by means of the Comparison Test (Verses 2:26, 74:30). Otherwise, 4 direct and truthful witnesses are required (Verse 24:13). Verse 33:36 affirms verified and validated hadiths as stipulated are canonical and obligatory. This cannot be said to be true of those contained in the "six books of hadith".

a conspiracy theorist would suggest Islam was wipedout and replaced by a christianity-based model. And there is a direct one2one mapping between sunnism and the christian church: 1. Both have a priesthood system 2. Both have a church system 3. Both rely heavily on theological writers (the ahadith can be directly compared to "saintly" christian writings on various topics, particularly the nature of Jesus etc)

Dr. Joshua Little's microphone and internet connection were disturbing. It should be clear !

I’m Muslim but I was always skeptical about the Hadith. So many things in the Hadith are not mentioned in the Quran. Like for example the end of times. The Hadith mentions the coming of Dajjal and the anti-Christ (Mahdi) the Quran doesn’t state that.

Does anyone hold hadith to be above The Quran ? Is this not an unnecessary controversial start to a controversial topic ? Fortunately things improved from there, and I was relieved that it only took you 40 minutes to start point one ! Very interesting introduction to the subject from an orientalists perspective, and food for thought, which is what I came here for.

Great discussion. Are there some hadith which are more likely to be authentic? Or are they all equally unreliable? There are some beautiful hadith which, at the very least, seem to represent the Muslim ethos, even if they cannot be realistically traced back to the Prophet.

This video is a gold mine and gives me great confidence that the concept that Hadith could ever be used to explain Koran as laughable. This kind of scholarship is what I’ve been looking for, and I’ve finally found it thank the God of Truth. The criteria for evaluating Hadith that are postulated as a science do not actually measure the merit of the Matn, not in the slightest. Isnaad on a chain of Matn transmitters, ‘Ilm Ar-rijaal on the character of the transmitters, Dabt on the memory and written accuracy of the transmitters, Ghayr Ash-shaathth on Matn that must be taken for granted, since the first three criteria so far are essentially red herrings, and La ‘illah exemplifying a self-defeat of the prior criteria, stating that notwithstanding the aforementioned criteria hidden defects can still sneak past them. Sorry, but the science of authenticity is pure red herring rubbish. The best bet is for scholars to turn to the Quran, the true criterion, and evaluate Matn against it, since in the Quran, the prophet is ordered to judge by it, so whatever he was to have said or done should be corroborated by Quran; and if not, into the bin it goes.

Will there be a discussion on his findings regarding the Hadiths about the age of Aisha?

There are so many holes in science of hadith, how would one profiling the dead across generations accurately (al jarh wa ta'dil) even we couldn't and shouldn't be the judge of one's faith.I guess most of islamic scholar afraid to 'touch' bukhary because of the surrounding dogma around it made by some imam in the 5-6 centuries AH. It will be usefull to investigates, al firabri, there are also possibilities he redacted most of the content on bukhary. Salam

Great video, I have a question. Why is Dr Joshua wearing a desi wedding dress in the thumbnail ?

A question I have on hadith qudsi. These are hadith that God supposedly said so why do these not appear in the quran and ended up as hadith ?

Dr. Javad, what can we do about the audio, it's really annoying and affects viewer's/listeners comprehension, can the participants record the audio on their computers/zoom mics and sync with the video in the post, also these would make excellent Spotify podcasts for commuters like me who can complete a 3hrs session in a day. Thank you and an excellent discussion as always. Jazakallah chair and Ramadan Kareem!!

Salamou3alayk. At around 2:30:00 you're talking about works about the lack of reliability of oral transmission. Is it possible to have a few références about this subject? Barakallahou fik

2:18:50 Subtitle: "and [?] environment" should be "and polytheistic environment" 2:18:56 Subtitle: "the forthcoming researcher, for example, of Ahmad al-Jallad" should be "the forthcoming research of, for example, Ahmad al-Jallad"

But I don't understand from the hadith we know that Uthman was the one to compile the Qur'an, how can you say then uthmanic Quran

Hello I am French I do not speak English can I have a conclusion in a few lines please. Are hadiths reliable?

Dr Javad do you give me permission to use part of this clip in a possible upcoming video?

Ibn Hajar said that the tall buildings prophecy was already fulfilled close to the time of prophethood. Who are we now to claim that nobody was building relatively high buildings for 1400 years?

Your guest sounds a hell of a lot like the military KZfaqr Perun, it took me three hours to realise why he sounded so familiar

Thank you Dr Javad for doing this interview learned a lot .

Thank you both for an informative discussion. I always questioned some ahadith like the return of Jesus and the fight between the Muslims and the Jews in the last days. They sound fabricated and product of their time. It seems Isnad was given more importance than Matn which was a wrong approach.

GOD Bless you Doctors!

Why can sura 112 not be intended for different audiences at once (Muhsriks, Christians and Jews)? So that anyone with different background can appreciate the Qur'anic message?

Hello. I have to admit I'm a bit confused about Sura 112 being an example of a "quranic amnesia", or a "memory disconnect/discountinuity" between the Quran and the hadith. As Mr Little himself says, Sura 112 is a pretty obvious, clear reference to the Nicene Creed (even as a layman that's the first thing I think of when I read it)-so why would the hadith be completely silent about that connection _even if there was a memory discontinuity_ ? Even if no one actually "remembered" the original context, not one commenter could link the two together, for hundreds of years? All Islamic scholars and hadith interpreters were simply ignorant of the Nicene Creed? Or am I misunderstanding something?

Based on the isnad, shouldnt "sahih" have the strongest connection with reliable collaborators (basically making it the highest likelihood of being true)? In terms of content, does it contradict the Quran? If so, any specific cases? Also, between the consensus, what is the probability of hadith of being misclassified? Such as daif, which is another method considered sahih? Due to the generation gap, fabricated information can cause a missing link to be fulfilled, and they consider it to be "sahih". I thought the general consensus was that there were filtered out or addressed. If there are indeed cases like this, is it possible to give cases?

I am a Muslim but always held the hadiths as suspect and impossible to verify or to deny. My inclination is they cannot be disproved but they cannot be proved also. So when people quote the famous or infamous hadith of Ayshiah. I tend to use the above lines, but of course when people are bringing it up they do not care what i say. I have few lines of thought, say the hadith is true, the society around had no problems with the marriage or consummation. The enemies of Muhammad did not use it against him nor did the other nations esp. the Christians it was nearly 1,000 years later it became an issue. Also there is the memory factor, if one studies history esp. family history people tend to forget as they grow older, that's in a society with written records with literacy universal. We only need to go back 200 years when mass education was not the norm, people did not know their true age, it was all guess work, and the further we go back it is harder to pinpoint. Age or the obsession with it, is a modern phenomena, people had more issues to worry about, war, diseases, food and work etc. Going on about one's age in a time of want is seen as wasted energy to me. So if the hadith is correct and Ayshiah did relay it is extremely possible she was wrong, people do it all the time. I often forget one of my son's birthday dates and have to constantly ask, so it seems likely she did get it wrong. Equally its possible that the hadith was invented to put a Marian spin on Ayshiah to make her the Islamic virgin. The fact the hadith is not mentioned in the earlier works speaks volumes, and points us to the direction that it was not said. Also the location of where the hadith was related is all very important giving it a sectarian spin. Futherthemore the hadiths are related not directly by Ayshiah but by other people in the chain . i.e Bob said it to John, he said it to Dave and then he said it to Simon - meanwhile a 100 years has passed. I am being sarcastic here but my point is why only to a few narrators and not to wider circle of people, it seem like a family status thing going here. The Ayshiah age hadith is very singular in it its expressed age and narration history, both are very problematic and interesting at the same time. So with regards to the hadiths they are unreliable, they are full of contradictions but they cannot be ignored entirely. As the implausibility of a girl at 9 going through puberty, this is medically not impossible. My own cousin went through her puberty at 9/10 years old and when we saw her she looked 14. So yes it can happen in our own society imagine what it was like in a society that has a short life span. Also of course there are other hadiths that suggest Ayshiah was much older but like I have said they are like clouds in the sky, pick one and you can run with it and get nothing. The only way is to analysis the text and other hadiths and official records of the time to see what was going on. Its not impossible but its extremely difficult to do. Islamophobes use the hadith all the time to say Muhammad was a pedeo but if he was why did he wait till she was officially a woman in his own society? Of course their answer is she was 9 and not a woman. That is presentism and a distortion of history, using the present society's values and imposing them on a historical period is plain wrong but they do not care. As one islamaphobe said about Ayesha's age "I only need one hadith". That is the core of the hate that some have for Muslims and Islam and its extremely dangerous. These people are distorting history to use it for political ends and it can end up getting people hurt or killed.

Wish there were time stamps for the reasons. Anyway. Small gripe.

First and foremost, rest & get well soon

1:10:01 Scholars of history cannot include a-priori pre-suppositions, such as Mohammad was a prophet therefore he could prophesize, into their scholarly analysis. Such assumptions belong to the domain of theological discourse. If historians could do that, then they would need to explain ghosts, spirits, djinns, talking animals, whispering trees, demigods, resurrected messiahs, Ahura Mazda, Brahman, Yahweh, Allah, and the list goes on. These pre-suppostions are supernatural and it is therefore not possible to objectively distinguish between the mutually exclusive views about them held by different religious groups. Jonathan Brown is a Muslim theologian, therefore the a-priori supernatural pre-supposition of Mohammad being a prophet does not pose a problem for him.

Muslims need to throw away any Hadith contradict the Quran, you can't give more respect to Albukhary and hadith narrators and push the Quran under the bus.

In regards to hadith criticism, there are a couple of issues which would be interesting to discuss with Joshua Little. First of all, the hadith is deeply influenced by Jewish traditions of the "Israʼiliyyat" which is why dietary restrictions and circumcision encompass part of both canons. To what extent are these traditions sourced to Judaism instead of the Quran? I think that is a very interesting question to explore. Moreover, you could look at the issue of prayer. While the Quran mandates prayer, it doesn't outline any particular method for prayer and presumes its audience is already familiar with praying. Unfortunately, if you look to the hadith to form a prayer method, that is just as inconclusive so how do we even know how to pray? I think most of it is coming from "ijma" or consensus but it would be interesting to explore the relationship between hadith and prayer. Lastly, I think the controversy around the word "ummi" in reference to Muhammad is also worth exploring. While traditionally this gets interpreted as "illiterate" or "unlettered", this could also be interpreted as "gentile". We can't say for sure that Muhammad was illiterate, the literary evidence is more than a little inconclusive and the topic is totally worth exploring further. Either way, these are all topics which I'm deeply fascinated with and I'd like to hear him talk about it, he has an interesting perspective.

Great talk. Slightly unfortunate Javed rushed through some of the good parts. I think he wasn't feeling that great. For example, there were no examples given of "extreme variation"

Edited: Kindly fix the internet on Joshua Little's side, it is difficult to understand him.

Excellent program

It would be good to have a representative Maybe Dr Brown or yourself speak about the traditional methods reply to each 21 points.

If they do not contradict the minhaj(Islam Iman and Ihsan) of the Salaf. Then disregard them

Assalamu aleykum. This is a deep topic with a lot of details, so the internet connection should be fixed beforehand, thanks.

How would we judge the Muwatta of Malik along these lines?

I'm good at places accents but this guy is spinning me out. It's like a complete Aussie/American/English hybrid?! Where is he from?

Superb. Thank you

THE HORSE HAS LEFT THE BARN! 🎉

it's like a pure water with drops of black ink, give it more time and the whole color will change without mixing it. give it more time and the image will change. this is just sad.

Does refer to the sahih hadith or is it specfic to the weak hadith?

I have to admit I’m not wild about the interview technique/ production though - but rambling, not helped by the lag.

He doesn't set a baseline for what a reliable historical source is, doesn't make any comparisons between chains of hadith, doesn't give any examples. He just makes claims about things without substantiating anything. He doesnt break down any hadith and he continuously conflates things like the organisations of hadiths into collections with the recording and existence of those hadith. Compilation at x time, doesn't mean those hadiths didnt exist prior.

If Hadith came from original sources, you'd see more of them from Abu Bakerؓ and Khadijaؓ, the two individuals closed to the Prophetؐ who spent most time with the him.

I’d be interested in the authenticity of the Hadith in regards to the early manuscript in the 6th century, why are there no direct correlations until the 8-9th century and does it take account of the different Qurans with dialectical variances before the Uthman burnt them?

Bruh this was long jargon heavy and I’m not even talking about Arabic terms lol didn’t get much out of this. Not presented well

Does Dr. Little have any books on the topic?

It would be great if he would let the dr. Speak. It could be confusing to some when he has to stop in the middle of his presentation, chase a few rabbits and the back to what he was saying. Especially if his audience is as slow as it seems like he thinks some of them are js

Dr Joshua, has essentially approached this subject with a heavy dose of skepticism, mistrust, the premise that most Muslims including pious ones were fabricators even when the issue is non political?! The final statement summed up his whole academic Skepticism approach the methodology is literally throwing out the baby with bath water. Many of these 21 points were just mute points… there were few specifically cited examples that could be commented on for their own merit and relevance. Dr Jawad this was a heavily one sided over embellished presentation and it needs tempering with an opposing and nuanced traditionalist response 🙏🏻

Loved dr Joshua’s study. I follow quran only

00:01 - I am not proceeding from the premise that miracles are impossible, in historical research 00:02 - David Hume's no-miracles argument P.S. I'm not a Muslim.

Pls do something about your connection. Otherwise, excellent research. Thank you.

Would you take historical-critical methodology to form your beliefs about Qur'an as well or your scepticism is only limited to the Hadiths that don't sit right with you?

Dr. Little, if the lack of inscriptional evidence for paganism's prevalence in Mecca is used to challenge the validity of hadith, what is your take on the fact that the Quran mentions pagan gods?

This is very interesting. I am wondering why don’t your all so called researchers and scholars just reach out to the office or imam of the time or “Ali” of the time, to verify the key accounts? Or your research suggests he is NOT the true, divinely appointed (after physically appointed by the Prophet) leader for the humanity in our times?

Bro let the man know his internet sucks

Where are the Islamist!??

I feel offended that pious honest people lie all the time...

The "in-between" position: if a certain hadith makes Mohammed look bad, then it's probably false. If it makes him look good, then it's probably true