I recently recieved this comment from zeinabiyya-thank you zeinabiyya:):
Just thought I would point out that just because you studied something in university doesn't mean it's the only way of classifying ahadith, for instance. When we Shia debate with Sunnis we use Sunni ahadith to contest them, even if we don't admit to these ahadith ourselves, simply because our ahadith do not hold any weight in your eyes. It would be stupid to expect us all to view your ahadith, on the other hand, as the "right ones" simply because you think so yourself.
It seems you don't know much about the issue, however.
Anyway, the best of luck to you in your endeavor! It seems like it will be very interesting, as your blog is in general, and I'm curious to see how it will turn out.
Wa alaikom as salaam ramatullahi wa barakto Zeinabiyya. Thank you for the comment, as it poses a question, or marks an assumption I am sure is likely to come up.
On "I Love Hishma", in the past, not in all things, but in many, I have used Sunni Ahadith, whether or not I had personally researched their narrations or not. Only issues that seemed in doubt to me, did I take the personal trouble to study the Arabic in depth, or to research the time period of origin, and history of the chain of narration from all available sources. If anyone contests with me past writings, I am able to clarify.
In the following series, we intend to write about sects from ALL the points of veiw, using the evidences of those points of veiw. For example, I invited my shiite contributers to use their hadiths, as well the hadiths necessary for sunnis as proof, as well as Ibadhis to use their hadiths, and I am still looking for a Qu'ran only Muslima who wants to contribute, as far as any of these may be from what I personally follow. Same goes for Sunni hadith. When I write that section, it will often be using wholly the majority Sunni opinion.
But in my personal thoughts sections, seperate from the sects overveiw, in what to include, I am not using Sunni fiqh to study ahadith, or shiite, or Ibadhi. I am using only ACCEDEMIC. What you learn if you study history, any history. I will be using historical jurisprudence, not Islamic jurisprudence, in the manner of a science, so to be unbiased. It will be a more thorough agenda.
The reason before this was not done on matters I deemed myself sure one, was a. I did not have the time or resources to devote to such a study, and b. I went with what I believed to be the most correct opinion from the majority in things I was unsure of.
But as I always stated, it is the duty of the Muslim, to first, of course, consult those they trust with knowledge if there are things they are in doubt of, but beyond that, if they are able to, it is incombent upon them to seek out the sources of that knowledge, even to PROVE that source. To know it beyond any doubt. It is hard to do this in all things all the time, but when one is able to, they must.
So I will be using purely the Western science of History (which is not a perfect system in itself) to come to my final opinions, before mixing faith as well, in. The Sunni section will be sunni, the ibadhi, ibadhi, and shiite, shia, but to be honest, I do study all sources when I am able to. I only stay away from things I have doubt in if I do not have time or means to remedy that doubt.