You always refer to a “close examination” of the narrative “ascribed to the Prophet (PBUH)” in light of Qur’an, logic and historical facts. I respect your opinion about the ways of examination fully except one thing. I don’t think we can understand everything “ascribed to the Prophet” with logic. There are many Ahadith narrated in Bukhari and Muslim that cannot be logically explained – for example about Dogs, pictures and many other which are referred time and again on this site by many people. You always put a “Question Mark” where you cannot explain the Ahadith. I just wanted to ask one thing; Is it necessary that we refute everything ascribed to the Prophet (PBUH) till the time we cannot find a logical or scientific explanation. Won’t this qualify you to fall in the category of “Munkirin-e-Hadith”? I do not mean to be rude to you because you are helping a lot in communicating and propagating the Islamic message. But I think the correct way to promote your definition of Sunnah (which is different than classical scholars) is not to refute or try to explain every Hadith with the help of Science and Logic. You should rather start a process for a modern and more authentic compilation of narratives which can surpass the other great works like Bukhari and Muslim. But I think simply changing the classical view of Sunnah would not help the cause you are trying to propagate. Am I right or wrong?
First of all, We would like to clarify that we do not seek to find a scientific explanation of every Hadith. In fact, we generally hold the opinion of those who do so, to be incorrect.
Secondly,Munkirin e Hadith(though we dont like such terms)are those people who do not even consider hadith as a source to derive any information about deen.
As far as we are concerned we do not accept ahadith carelessly as it may give incorrect information about Allah’s deen.We do hold that to be considered as accurately ascribed to the Prophet (pbuh), one of the acid-tests, which a narrative should be subjected to is that its content should not entail anything, which is contrary to the established and acknowledged scientific or established historical facts. Nevertheless, we are sure you appreciate that it is one thing to say that a narrative should not contain anything, which is contrary to established facts of science and history and quite another to seek a scientific explanation of every narrative, before accepting it.
However, you may still not agree with the application of the stated criterion in determining the accuracy of ascription of a given narrative to the Prophet (pbuh). Nevertheless, the significance of ascribing a saying or an action to the Prophet (pbuh), in our opinion, dearly demands extreme care and strict application of the criteria of acceptability of these narratives as being accurately ascribed to the Prophet (pbuh). It was precisely this pressing demand, which led to the development of the science of Hadith. It was exactly this requirement, which led such great names as Maalik ibn Anas, Bukhariy, Muslim etc. to prepare compilations, which according to their criteria were considered accurate.We do not see any reason why we should avoid applying the same criteria, wherever possible, in determining the accuracy of the ascription of a given narrative to the Prophet (pbuh).
In our opinion, Khatib Baghdadiy has very accurately summed up these criteria in the following statement:
ولا يقبل خبر الواحد في منافاة حكم العقل وحكم القرآن الثابت المحكم والسنة المعلومة والعمل الجاري مجرى السنة وكل دليل مقطوع به. (الكفاية في علم الرواية، ص 432)
No such narrative reported by a few people shall be accepted, which is against common sense, or against an established ruling of the Qur’an or against a known Sunnah of the Prophet or against any thing accepted and followed by the Muslims as the Sunnah, or against an obvious fact.
We hope this helps.