Interview with Prof. Nadirsyah Hosen: Not All Hadiths Can Be Directly Applied

 

Interview with Prof. Nadirsyah Hosen: Not All Hadiths Can Be Directly Applied

Hadith is a complete picture of the life of the Prophet narrated by the Companions and those who followed him. The picture of life contains some cultural and religious content. Therefore, hadith needs to be understood contextually, especially those related to locality, culture, politics, and others.

Textual understanding of hadith that does not contain religious content in turn makes Islam unproductive and accommodating to social change. Even this kind of hadith is often twisted and politicized by some groups to promote their movement and ideology.

Along with the spread of Islamization movements that tend to be radical, perhaps more to Arabization, textual interpretations often also lead to the politicization of Hadith, in which they often heresy local traditions that exist in society. However, in our current era, the textualist movement is increasingly unstoppable, because such understandings are often seen as viral on social media. Its very fast spread is able to move the masses in a short time.

Indeed, the reality is that there are a lot of Hadith that the general public tends to understand textually. Recently, symptoms of textual understanding have also started to appear among the younger generation of Islam in Indonesia. Hadith quotes that are virally spread on social media such as Instagram are mostly published with only text without explanation, and these are mostly quoted by young people who now seem to be trending quoting Hadith.

How exactly do we deal with the phenomenon of Muslims using Hadith textually? How to deal with communities that often politicize Hadith or other religious texts? The following is the conversation of Prof. Dr Nadirsyah Hosen, senior lecturer in Islamic Law at Monash University, Australia, (Read his columns on islami.co here-ed) with Yogi Febriandi while visiting Melbourne at a conference organized by the University of Melbourne entitled CILIS “Conference of Indonesian Law, Islam and Society” on (15/11).

What is your response to the phenomenon of the growing politicization of Hadith by several Islamic movements in Indonesia?

I think it's quite worrying what is currently happening in the country. The general public knows that the only arguments are the Qur'an and Hadith. It's as if there's no further argument. If you have quoted a verse from the Qur'an and then a Hadith, it is considered that the problem has been solved.

While the fiqh scholars do not say so. Not all authentic Hadith can be directly applied. Who knows the Hadith has already been mansukh (the law does not apply), for example. Meanwhile, to know Nasikh and Mansukh , there must be knowledge. But for ordinary people, the origin of the Hadith is valid. Simple.

Well, this kind of debate does not reach the general public. So as long as there is a verse and there is a Hadith, then it is immediately accepted raw by the general public. Indeed, this is a very effective way for groups of movements that politicize Hadith or movements that want to return to the Qur'an and Hadith to be more accepted by the community. Why? That's because it's not complicated .

I think this is quite worrying, because it makes people less intelligent. But if we have explained at length, then we are asked which Hadith is it? valid or not? even though they also don't understand what the criteria for authenticity are, what tsiqah , what narrators are, what fair criteria are, they don't get there. This is our problem.

Currently, the symptoms of strengthening textual understanding among young people are widely spread on social media. How do you feel about this viral movement on social media?

Now is the era where learning can be instant through Google, Instagram and so on. While Hadith is a text, while the context is like what to learn asbabul wurud (historical context of Hadith), look at the syarah. While they just said, "Oh, this Hadith is sahih bukhari, it means there is no problem."

Regarding further explanations related to the hadith, they seemed not to want to know how Ibn Hajar in Fathul Bari explained, Imam Nawawi in Sahih Muslim explained, they did not get that far. This has to be fought and we have to painstakingly explain.

So if they preach through social media like that, I hope that the kiai and students will also take the trouble to explain on social media, on Facebook, Instagram, Twitter, to explain that. We also need to follow the current trend of media to explain, of course in language that is easy to understand and not complicated .

Now, I think it's also good if my friends at the el-Bukhari Institute provide training on how to explain Hadith on social media in simple language or if it's currently a trend to make 30-second videos on Instagram and they can go viral everywhere. I don't think it's easy for someone who has a lot of knowledge to explain everything in just 30 seconds. This is because a lot of people want to explain, but it must be 30 seconds. Meanwhile, people who are textual have not much knowledge, so they can explain in 30 seconds. This is what must be practiced among us.

If friends like el-Bukhari don't go there and only study in closed spaces such as recitation rooms, lectures, bahsul masail and don't go to social media, we will lose to the previous movement.

Just look at youtube, for example, there are so many salafi clerics' lectures, wherever they lecture there is a team that follows and is always ready to record, as soon as the lecture is finished, it is immediately uploaded and the followers immediately share it everywhere. So we also have to be organized. It's a shame that the scholars among us have mastered and qualified their knowledge, but this kind of technical matter is less of a concern.

Currently, there are clerics who are new to Islam, so the traditions they use tend to corner other groups and the hadiths are a little problematic. What do you think is the solution?

I thought it was a phenomenon that happened but now what is the solution? We can't stop people from speaking. Because there is no certification for lectures. Actually what is the so-called ustad? As long as you wear a turban, let alone quote verses and Hadith, our society calls it a cleric. If that's the standard, now so many artists suddenly become ustad and ustazah.

What's the solution? Like I said, go with the flow. There must be open-minded clerics who can explain in an uncomplicated manner , in light and easy language. If we don't fill the place, then they will get the place. Moreover, they are attractive in appearance and not rustic , and they also have a network.

I also had time to ask why the media prefers such clerics. The response is that if they want to follow the appearance on television, their appearance must be polished so that they are eye catcher or pleasing to the eye. While among us, it may be too Sufi, so it is difficult to polish it.

Second, the ustad among us likes to explain things at length, such as the letter ba in the bismillah sentence, the explanation can be very long, even though people don't need it. Meanwhile, for us, we can explore the differences from various kinds of pleasant interpretations. But it turns out that for the lower class it is not, confused, bored, complicated. Well the stronghold over there can explain well. That's what we lack.

So it is not enough and should not stop just to the point of not liking their existence. But we also have to think, for example, if we can't perform, how can we approach and fill in their knowledge so that they will be more careful when speaking. For example, how to approach the artists who suddenly became clerics by holding Hadith training and explaining how complex the problem is.

The phenomenon of instant understanding of religion is also very common. Does this indicate a kind of social faith movement from the community or a kind of movement of frustration with religious knowledge which is considered too difficult for metropolitan communities to reach in the midst of their busy lives?

So the science of religion understood by modern society is a practical religion. Why have a long debate like I said earlier, this interpretation says that. the interpretation says so. They just want to know where the practice is, what application? Finally, only the skin understands religion like that.

So, yes, we have to practice how we deliver the lecture with depth of material but also in a relaxed language. Because relaxed dialogue is acceptable. Indeed, not everyone can finally maintain the depth of the material but also polish it with relaxed language. Just practice on social media on status on Facebook or other social media. Some of the topics on my facebook, for example, are quite heavy because I have to unpack several books, but apparently they can understand it, seen from their responses in my comment column.

It turns out that from what I experienced, they really missed an explanation like that, not just the skin. A lot actually. It's just that these traditional clerics are difficult for us to polish. I really enjoy explaining about Arabic grammar for a long time, then its contents. Like that, how does the general public know? Yes, maybe we don't have to go