Counter Argumentation against the Theory of Discrediting Hadith as Linguistic Evidence while Accepting the Authenticity of Anomalous Qiraʾat and Unknown Poetry (أوهام نظرية رفض الاحتجاج بالأحاديث النبوية الصحيحة بقبول القراءات الشاذة والشعر المجهول في الاحتجاج اللغوي)

Abstract

Linguistic argumentation is defined by Arab grammarians to mean a formulation of grammatical rules from primary sources using anomaly, consensus, measurement, an argumentation based on circumstances and other rules. The anomaly sources are considered the most authentic references which are the holy Quran, Hadith al-Nabawi and Arabic poetry. This research aims to highlight the different views of Arab grammarians in devising the grammatical rules of the hadith. The authenticity of the Quran is indisputable as its verses are reliable and consistent. However, is there a difference between reliable reading and anomalous reading? Why are grammatical rules which are derived from anomalous Qiraʾat accepted, while the linguistic argumentations resulting from Hadith al-Nabawi are refuted? Why it is accepted in unknown poetry? And why are the argumentation from Quran and Arab poetry not merited and taken as evidence in linguistic argumentation? These questions are answered thoroughly by presenting the evidences and arguments from scholars in the field. An analytical study is being used as an approach to discuss the topic.