Thread by @MohammadBu93249

A Rational Critique Of The Secularist Way Of Verifying History (HCM) feel free if I have misrepresented anything to correct me

Reframing the Hadith of Ibn Sirin and the Historical-Critical Method (HCM)

Critics who follow the Historical-Critical Method (HCM) often cite the statement of Ibn Sirin — “They did not used to ask about the

isnad, but when the fitnah occurred, they said: Name to us your men…” — as evidence that the practice of verifying chains of transmission (isnad) began only after internal conflicts arose. They argue that this implies that earlier

generations transmitted hadith without rigorous scrutiny, and therefore those narrations are unreliable.

But this conclusion is based on a misinterpretation of the hadith and a flawed assumption.

First, I reject the broader HCM framework due to its many false premises and inconsistencies. But even within their own logic, their use of this narration is incorrect. Let’s examine this more closely.

---

1. A Truthful Generation Doesn’t Need Excessive Checking

If Allah created a righteous, God-fearing community — tightly connected, morally upright, and deeply concerned with the truth —

then it makes perfect sense that they would not feel the need to ask constantly for isnad verification in the earliest period. The absence of formal isnad scrutiny in the very beginning

doesn't mean a lack of concern for truth. Rather, it indicates a high level of mutual trust, based on the character and religiosity of the people involved.

The emergence of isnad verification after the Fitnah (civil strife) shows that the early Muslims were responsive to changes in the social climate. When they began to observe

fabricators and distorters of prophetic sayings — due to politics, sectarianism, or other motives — they introduced a more formal method to safeguard the authenticity of hadith. This was a protective response, not an

indication of earlier carelessness.

So rather than undermining hadith reliability, the hadith of Ibn Sirin actually implies that the earliest transmitters were so well known

for their integrity that extra layers of scrutiny were unnecessary until signs of falsehood emerged.

---

2. Inconsistency in How Motivations Are Evaluated

Islamic critics — and even some

internal skeptics — often show a strange selectivity in how they assess motivations behind narrations. They tend to highlight situations that could motivate lying, such as:

Political rivalry

Sectarian bias

Social pressure

However, they neglect or downplay the strong and constant motivations to tell the truth that also existed, especially in a deeply

religious community. These include:

Fear of Allah

Belief in accountability in the Hereafter

The Qur’anic command to be truthful

The grave sin associated with lying about the Prophet ﷺ (e.g., “Whoever lies about me

intentionally, let him prepare his seat in Hell”)

If critics argue that the presence of motives to lie invalidates reliability, then they must also acknowledge that motives to be truthful can

validate reliability. But if they insist that “people can still lie even when there are reasons to be honest,” then they must also admit that “people can still tell the truth even when there are reasons to lie.”

You cannot selectively apply this

logic in one direction only. Either you consistently consider both types of motivations, or you consistently set them aside and focus purely on other forms of evidence. But to only highlight the

potential for dishonesty while ignoring the powerful moral forces encouraging truthfulness is methodologically inconsistent and biased.

---

3. Conclusion: A Balanced Evaluation Is Required

In reality, early Muslims lived in an

environment where the cost of lying — spiritually and socially — was immense, while the incentive to tell the truth was both internal (fear of God, love of the Prophet ﷺ) and external (peer accountability, scholarly

reputation).

Therefore, a fair analysis of Islamic historical transmission must take into account both:

The rise of isnad verification as a deliberate defense against later corruption

The truth-centered ethos of the earlier generations, which made that formal process initially unnecessary

So rather than proving unreliability, the historical development of hadith verification demonstrates

maturity, self-awareness, and integrity within the Muslim scholarly tradition.

@chonkshonk1
Tell me what you think after reading everything

@chonkshonk1 We trust that the Qur’an is from Allah because it is something no created being can imitate and we only know of God being able to produce something like this. Its miraculous nature — in structure,

@chonkshonk1 message, foresight, wisdom, and literary form — awakens something innate in us. Just as we instinctively know that the external world is real and not an illusion even though one can reject

@chonkshonk1 and doubt this, we also know — through our fitrah (natural God-given disposition) — that the Qur’an can only be from Allah.

Allah Himself points to how people may try to explain away miracles

@chonkshonk1 even if they saw them with their own eyes:

> “And even if We opened for them a gate to the heaven and they ascended through it, they would still say, ‘Our eyes have been

@chonkshonk1 dazzled! No, we must have been bewitched.’”
[Qur’an 15:14–15]

This shows us that doubt can go to absurd extremes — doubting even clear reality. But Islam teaches that

@chonkshonk1 such doubt is unnatural. We do not need to prove the external world in an undoubtable way before trusting it. We do not need to prove others have minds in an undoubtable way before

@chonkshonk1 interacting with them. These are natural beliefs — built into us. So why deny the most natural of beliefs: that God exists, and that only He is able to reveal something like the Qur’an?

@chonkshonk1 If you reject God’s authorship of the Qur’an because doubt is “possible,” then to be logically consistent despite the naturality that only God is capable of producing it , you must also doubt the external world and the minds

@chonkshonk1 of other humans, for it the mind can imagine the external world to be an illusion and that other minds do not exist rather only robots in human flesh do devoid of a mind but perfectly imiating human behaviour like ChatGPT

@chonkshonk1 Therefore, once we accept the Qur’an is from Allah — as we naturally should — we must also accept all that it says. That includes what it says about the Companions of the Prophet ﷺ. Allah praises them, is pleased with

@chonkshonk1 them, and describes their sincerity, truthfulness, and strength of character. He chose them to carry this religion, witness His Messenger, and preserve the Qur’an.

So we trust their reliability — not

@chonkshonk1 blindly, but because Allah Himself endorsed them. This also explains why those who came after them, and studied under them, carried that torch of sincerity and

@chonkshonk1 motivation. Allah did not abandon His religion after the Prophet ﷺ — He used the Sahabah to preserve it, as He promised:

> “Indeed, We have sent down the Qur’an, and indeed, We will be its Guardian.”
[Qur’an 15:9]

@chonkshonk1 Allah says about them (and also know the relevance and significance of what Allah demands of them for it shows not just what they were capable of but of what a large group of them were willing to do which again proves their reliability and by extention whomsoever they taught)

@chonkshonk1 1. Surah At-Tawbah (9:100)

> "And the first forerunners [in the faith] among the Muhajireen and the Ansar and those who followed them with good conduct – Allah is pleased with them and they are pleased with Him..."
[At-Tawbah 9:100]

@chonkshonk1 2. Surah Al-Fath (48:29)

> "Muhammad is the Messenger of Allah; and those with him are forceful against the disbelievers, merciful among themselves..."
[Al-Fath 48:29]

@chonkshonk1 3. Surah Al-Fath (48:18)

> "Certainly was Allah pleased with the believers when they pledged allegiance to you, [O Muhammad], under the tree..."
[Al-Fath 48:18]

@chonkshonk1 4. Surah Al-Hashr (59:8–9)

> "For the poor emigrants who were expelled from their homes and their properties, seeking bounty from Allah and [His] approval... And [also for] those

@chonkshonk1 who were settled in the Home [i.e., Madinah] and [adopted] the faith before them..."
[Al-Hashr 59:8–9]

@chonkshonk1 5. Surah Al-Hujurat (49:7)

> "...But Allah has endeared to you the faith and has made it pleasing in your hearts and has made hateful to you disbelief, defiance,

@chonkshonk1 and disobedience. Those are the [rightly] guided."
[Al-Hujurat 49:7]
(According to many Mufassirun, this verse refers to the companions.)

@chonkshonk1 6. Surah Al-Imran (3:172)

> "Those [believers] who responded to Allah and the Messenger after injury had struck them..."

@chonkshonk1 [Al-Imran 3:172]
(Refers to the Sahabah after the Battle of Uhud.)

@chonkshonk1 7. Surah Al-Ahzab (33:23)

> "Among the believers are men true to what they promised Allah..."
[Al-Ahzab 33:23]

@chonkshonk1 8. Surah An-Nur (24:36–37)

> "[Such niches are] in houses [i.e., mosques] which Allah has ordered to be raised... [By] men whom neither commerce nor sale distracts from the remembrance of Allah..."
[An-Nur 24:36–37]
(Many scholars hold this as a reference to the companions.)

@chonkshonk1 @unrollhelper