Kritik Pandangan G.H.A. Juynboll terhadap Ilmu al-Jarh wa al-Ta’dil

Abstract

The orientalist assumed that the method of ahl h} adi> ts is only focused on the sanad analysis. Beyond that, they also give a critic of the sanad analysis methods and assume that is problematic. Among orientalists who discuss sanad is G.H.A. Juynboll. Besides, he agreed with his predecessors about the uncomprehensiveness method of ahl h} adi> ts, Juynboll also argued that the aforementioned sanad analysis method. According to him, the science of al-jarh{ wa al-ta'di> l -which is the most important aspect in sanad analysiswas deeply problematic, the reason can be traced from two sides; the first, the narrators (al-ra> wi) assessment standards are not objective. The fact is, more assessments are based on the opposite (regionalism); it's mean that in the early days of the hadith narration there were conflicts between one region to anothers, so that the narrators of the region refused to narrate from another regions. For example, the conflicts occurred between the narrators of Medina and Iraq or between Iraq and Syria. Secondly, a lot the terms have evolved over time, thus there occured various meanings among them. Therefore, through this article the writer will try to criticize this opinion and examine the level of Juynboll understanding to the methods of ahl h} adi> ts analysis, especially on the issue of al-jarh} wa al-ta'di> l. Afterward, seeing to what extent the actual accuracy of the criticism is given by orientalist (in this case Juynboll) to the method of ahl h} adi> ts.

Mutawattir dalam Gugatan Outsider ( Kajian Pemikiran Juynbool atas Hadis Man Kazzaba)

“…Jika para ulama mengkaji hadis untuk menentukan hukum serta memperkuat posisi hadis sebagai sumber ajaran Islam, pihak outsider lebih cenderung karena tujuan. Juynbool juga dikenal orientalis yang banyak membahas masalah sanad (Arif Chasanul Muna, 2016).…”