Thread by @DrJavadTHashmi

Instead of issuing a long, drawn-out response, I've decided to just engage @XGONDALX & you here. Your first point is one that you continually bring up, which is your claim that I am "inconsistent" in my methodology in regard to Ḥadīth. But, in reality... 1/

https://twitter.com/ApostateAladdin/status/1387126262829764610

It is you & @XGONDALX who are highly inconsistent & opportunistic in your methodology, including in this regard. Quite frankly, you will use any methodology or strategy, so long as it results in a negative image of Islam. This is apparent in your strategy to deal with... 2/

the Islamic sources. The great inconsistency of your work is that you insist on using modern secular scholarship when it comes to the recent findings on the Qur'an. These complicate traditional narratives, as you well know, & you (@XGONDALX) have made a whole series of videos 3/

taking some of these findings & trying to weaponize them (in a way that would, of course, be rejected by the same scholarship you rely on). Meanwhile, when it comes to Ḥadīth, suddenly it is declared that we cannot rely on the modern secular scholarship, which regards... 4/

the Ḥadīth to be a highly problematic source. It is generally regarded as a post-prophetic source, which can be used to figure out views of the early Muslims, often articulated for sectarian, political, legal, & dogmatic concerns. 5/

Yet, your own entire narrative is based on investing the Ḥadīth (& sīra) with as much authority & credibility as you can. So, on the one hand, we use the critical method in regard to the Qur'an, but then we use the most gullible method with the Ḥadīth & sīra. 6/

My own methodology, by contrast, is highly consistent. I rely on modern secular scholarship, which holds the Qur'an to be the earliest extant source & as going back, more or less, to the Prophet. I accept with this the nuances & complications, including the issue of variants. 7/

Similarly, I accept the modern secular view of the Ḥadīth & sīra, as expressed by most credible experts. This is a highly consistent approach, even if it differs from the traditional(ist) paradigm. Meanwhile, what you want to do is combine the critical method with... 8/

the traditional(ist) paradigm, even though you discount the methods & nuances of the traditionalist paradigm itself. So, for example, they themselves believe that hand amputation is rarely if ever enforced, due to mechanisms which they trace to the Prophet himself. 9/

This includes the idea of doubt: see Rabb, "Doubt in Islamic Law." Even if I disagree with this approach, it is important for you & I to acknowledge it. So, according to them, the punishment of amputation is only rarely enforced & is meant as a deterrent. 10/

They likewise point to the unjust modern criminal justice system, i.e. mass incarceration, which is not rosy even compared to the Islamic historical tradition. The point is: if you are going to insist upon the traditional view when it comes to Ḥadīth, then consistency means 11/

that you also take seriously the traditional view towards the law, including the idea of doubt, which is also back-projected to the Prophet & would mean that these judicial corporal punishments were rarely if ever enforced: see @JonathanACBrown: yaqeeninstitute.org/jonathan-brown… 12/

Next, your statement that "Islam DID allow capturing new slaves" is sophomoric & rejected from anyone who is an expert of religious studies. "Islam" is not a person. Yes, *Muslims* traditionally did have this understanding, but Islam as a metaphysical entity is another thing. 13/

As for your comment on crucifixion (Q 5:33), I have already addressed this elsewhere & have argued, along with Cherāgh ʿAlī, that this was a rhetorical statement meant indeed to instill fear in those who would engage in war & persecution of the believers... 14/

This was a rhetorical statement said at the height of battle, & saying "this is what you deserve," even though it became a dead letter when the Prophet was victorious & issued a general amnesty, according to the Qur'anic ideal. I have a whole lecture on this topic: 15/

Jihad, War & Peace in Islam, Part one:
Part two: 16/

This is not a haphazard view but based on a holistic & contextual reading of the Qur'an, & lines up in many ways with Prof. Juan Cole's (@jricole) "Muhammad: Prophet of Peace Amid the Clash of Empires":
amazon.com/Muhammad-Proph… 17/

To this, you will say that this differs from the traditional(ist) view, to which I say: yes, it does (as does your view of the Qur'an). But, even here, we would then need to do justice to the traditional(ist) paradigm, which you do not. You engage in a highly selective use... 18/

in order to push your hateful agenda. Be fair.
You are two intelligent young men & I ask you to live up to your own potential, which I see, but it would require you to be more nuanced & balanced in your approach. It's tougher work & might garner you fewer followers...19/

But, it will -- based on my experience of being a hatemonger once in life -- help you sleep better at night. Put into this world love & light, not hate & darkness. Peace. 20/