Hadith Criticism between Traditionists and Jurisprudents

Mutaz al-Khatib compares and contrasts hadith criticism as practised by traditionists, specialists in hadith, and jurisprudents, specialists in inferring the law from revelation. Ninth-century hadith specialists proceeded by comparing isnāds, discarding uncorroborated reports. Contemporary jurisprudents proceeded differently, partly because their attention was focused on the matn rather than the isnād, partly because they often evidently began with a rule to be defended. Although all the Sunni schools of law respected hadith, jurisprudents of the Shāfiʿi and Ḥanbali schools tended to apply methods closest to the traditionists’, whereas jurisprudents of the Ḥanafi and Māliki schools were always more willing to test hadith by external criteria such as agreement with the Qur’ān and established practice.