And do not mix the truth with falsehood or conceal the truth while you know it. (Qur’an 2:42)
﷽
We have done a review of Dr. Jonathan Browns’ book here:
We mentioned in that review the following concerning Dr. Brown’s book:
The section “Western debates over historical reliability” is an absolutely essential read for those highly critical of Hadith literature.
Especially the section on ‘Western Evaluation‘.
Where he quotes from the works of Nabia Abbott, David Powers, Fred Donner, and Harold Motzki, all who do not dismiss Hadith literature outright.
These are the names of scholars that those people who reject the hadith in totality would prefer you do not know about.
In fact, one of the claims by people who reject the hadith in total is that that textual hadith came along some 250–300 years after the Blessed Messenger (saw).
Here is a German orientalist, Dr. Harald Motzki, who takes the followers of the ‘Qur’an only Religion‘ to task for this assertion.
The following entry is a must-read for anyone who holds the assertion of textual hadith coming some 250–300 years after the Blessed Messenger (saw).
The_Muannaf_of_Abd_al-Razzaq_al-anan
We have yet to see anyone from the ‘Qur’an Only’ movement interact with any of Dr. Motzki’s material in any meaningful way at all.
This is worth a read if we are looking at being fair and honest.
Again, we feel that the Prima-Qur’an approach, as embodied by the Ibadi school, is a middle ground between rejecting the traditions in their entirety, and accepting the traditions in their entirety.
“The Musannaf of Abd al-Razzaq al-San’ani as a Source of Authentic Ahadith of the First Century A.H.” – by Harald Motzki
May Allah Guide the Ummah.
May Allah Forgive the Ummah.
Prima Quran 
What methodology did Motski use to date musannaf? Looking through this article in scribd, I did not find any link to the results of radiocarbon analysis. Or do you simply propose to follow speculative conclusions of Motski built purely on the metaphysical bias whithout reffering to any empirical evidence?
Your sarcasm aside what is the process of radiocarbon analysis that you personally use?
Or am I to assume that you simply rely upon the findings of others?
Let’s say for example that Motzki put radiocarbon dating up as part of his claim what personal methods do you personally use to verify this?
Likewise what methods were employed by Joseph Schacht, or Herbert Berg?
Same question applies how would you personally verify the methodology?
Likewise do you find that a person’s worldview may colour their research?
I find it fascinating that Motzki who is not a Muslim came to very different conclusions than many of the Anti hadith crowd.
Certainly has to be unsettling for them.
I just read Joanathan Brown’s paper about how Hanbal would accept weak hadiths because he liked the vibe of them. Yet amidst this analysis is the potential to sift out hadiths that have more historical validity and then apply Quran-first analysis to accepting or rejecting them.
I have a lot of problems with the anti-iconism hadith but without taking it like, God would literally put in abyss everyone making images with AI and making Reddit avatars etc. – the wisdom of anti-iconism in the bigger picture of promoting Tawhid led me to accept additional constraints on visual art.