Between Text and Context: Understanding Ḥadīth through Asbab al Wurud

Abstract

A comprehensive understanding of Ḥadīth, with their narrative background in Islamic tradition, would require the application of the principle of asbāb al-wurūd (discerning the specific circumstances for the reason or purpose of revealing Ḥadīth), an approach which gives detailed information about narrated Ḥadīth. Having such a comprehension about the essence of the message of Ḥadīth could enhance the understanding of Muslim audiences and followers. This situation will indirectly provide a stepping stone to comprehensive information to prevent misunderstanding the message of Islamic religion. Taking due cognizance of these circumstances could potentially result in preventing actions of religious radicalism, which might result from obtaining religious messages through a solely textual approach. In this situation, the sufficient application of asbāb al-wurūd plays a significant role in leading an order to achieve the contextual comprehension of the religious message of Ḥadīth. This paper aims to examine the significance of asbāb al-wurūd in understanding the contextual meaning of Ḥadīth beyond a textual basis. The findings reveal that the contextual elaboration of the message of Ḥadīth could be adapted in a proper way, in which its textual comprehension could be elaborated on clearly through detailing its asbāb al-wurūd, one method of which is to refer to Muslim scholars together with schools of thought in order to clearly attain the message of Islamic religion. Furthermore, this article attempts to address such a way of bringing about textual understanding to the context to assist in adapting the contextual significance of a clear and detailed comprehension of Ḥadīth. The significance of this study is to contribute to providing a detailed explanation on both text and context in seeking for clarity on the Ḥadīths’ information and message with a clear basis as a safeguard against extremist interpretations of Islam.

1. Introduction

In the last decade religious radicalism has emerged in various forms, such as war against the enemy in defense of the Islamic religion (Malik 2017). Rising religious radicalism in Muslim societies has presented some serious challenges for the understanding of Islam through a textual approach (Pektas 2021). A thorough critique of the fundamental ideas of the Islamic faith should be conducted in line with both the structures and principles of the Qurʾān and Sunnah vis à vis the underlying social and political systems in modern global societies. In the light of this discourse Islam is often misunderstood as providing a message fueling intolerance (Kloos and Berenschot 2016). Some individuals commit acts of terrorism often due to a lack of understanding about religious texts, namely the Qurʾān and Ḥadīth. Thus, the serious impact of the lack of contextual comprehension could be viewed as a source of radical movements claiming to defend Islam. An attempt to provide an appropriate response to such challenges should take into consideration the struggling against injustice and exploitation in Muslim societies. The need to gain a broad understanding of the religious texts of Islam should provide a pathway for discourse on religious beliefs, teaching, and traditions beyond the texts (Panjwani and Revell 2018). The message pathway of Islamic religion has to be concretely enlarged by addressing the current situation to respond amidst the contemporary trends and age.

In addition, there are urgent demands for obtaining an understanding of religious messages in a clear and concise way to promote comprehension of Ḥadīth in a contextual manner beyond textual meaning. In Islamic tradition, Ḥadīth refer to all manners attributed to the Prophet’s PBUH way of communication, deeds or actions, or tract approvals (Ali 2013). There are various ways of narrating Ḥadīth among the Prophet’s PBUH companions, which has often led to different ways of narration in subsequent generations. Consequently, a key requirement for the compilation of Ḥadīth is the relevance of the chain of narration from a particular source. It is important to obtain clear information about Ḥādīth with detailed explanations to keep away from the confusion that mainly prevails among the various narrations. In order to acquire a clear understanding, a general textual understanding of Ḥādīth is also required. The compilation of all relevant narrations related to a particular topic would enhance a clear understanding of Ḥadīth (Mufid et al. 2020). Such a compiled list of relevant narrations of Ḥadīth related to a particular theme would require sufficient scrutiny to provide a detailed explanation on certain specified circumstances (Abidin 2016). At this stage, scrutinizing other relevant narrations relating to Ḥadīth is an important aspect in attaining a clear understanding of their textual and contextual usage.

In addition, there are various strategic ways of gaining a good interpretation and understanding of the message of Ḥadīth, including deconstruction, which provides a pathway towards understanding the contextual detail (Abu-Alabbas 2017). From this perspective, interpreting the message from reading and understanding the textual message should go alongside addressing the cultural background involved within the narration process. This process refers to the particular Muslim school of thought involved in gaining the clear meaning from elaborated texts within different contexts (Adinugraha and Ulama’i 2020). The contextual approach of understanding the practices of Ḥadīth requires an application of the principle of asbāb al-wurūd, which gives detailed information about the narrated Ḥadīth. Asbāb al-wurūd generally provides the linkage with the inter-textual interaction amongst the various dominant narratives of Ḥadīth (Al-Munawwar et al. 2001). The emergence of this practical approach was a response to the emerging radical understanding of Islamic religion in which alternative ethical interpretations lead to an open and broad understanding of Ḥadīth.

Furthermore, having a detailed comprehension of the key points of Ḥadīth could facilitate broader understanding among Muslim audiences and followers as well as prevent the misunderstanding of the message of Islamic religion (Al-Munawwar et al. 2001). Similarly, such understanding will prevent religious radicalism, which resulted from obtaining the message of Islamic religion through a solely textual approach (Abdillah and Mampa 2019). In this situation, a sufficient application of asbāb al-wurūd would play a significant role in leading to contextual comprehension of the religious message of Ḥadīth. This paper aims to examine the importance of asbāb al-wurūd to facilitate understanding of Ḥadīth with their contextual meaning, beyond a textual basis. In this regard, adapting the contextual elaboration of the message of Ḥadīth provided from its textual comprehension should be elaborated on through detailing its asbāb al-wurūd. This process will further refer to Muslim scholars together with particular schools of thought in order to reach the Islamic message to be delivered into the Muslim community in particular and the context of society in general. The further elaboration comes to address the strategic approach in looking critically into the textual basis towards contextual engagement. The use of such an approach is considered to bridge the two to adapt within the contextual and textual comprehension of Ḥadīth. A key significance of this study is that it is expected to contribute to the development of an approach that would facilitate the provision of a detailed explanation of the text and context in deciphering the information and message of Ḥadīth.

2. Literature Review

2.1. About Religious Text of Ḥadīth

Linguistically, the word of Ḥadīth comes from the Arabic root which means to report a happening or to give the news. It indicates that Ḥadīth are meant as news brought by someone, which could also be a story about an action of the Prophet or his companion (witnessed by the Prophet Muhammad), an event, or something that the prophet participated in during his lifetime. Looking at its nature and origins, the term of Ḥadīth is comprehended as a tradition observed through record and narrative, where its essence is determined to take precedence and directive authority from the Prophet Muhammad PBUH (Andariati 2020). In terms of Islamic tradition, the link between content and constraint of Ḥadīth is implied in the structured root of the meaning and the underlying process of formulating the law and principles of Islam. In this regard, Ḥadīth refers to the record of the speech and practices of the Prophet Muhammad PBUH, and also as the basic source of legislation to guide the way of life of Muslims in their daily routines (Ash Shidiqqy 1997). It also serves as the second source of law, after the Qurʾān, for Muslims. In particular, Ḥadīth also provide various narratives of the biography of the Prophet Muhammad PBUH and his universal message (Darmalaksana 2018). As a vital element of Islamic history, the development of Ḥadīth has provided detailed information covering both the ethos and practices of Islam.

In addition, Ḥadīth could also help to shape the behavior patterns of Muslims’ daily routines in the household within Islamic guidelines. In order for Ḥadīth to assume a central role in a Muslim’s life, the significant elements of Ḥadīth, both implicit and explicit meanings, need to be understood in recording the life of the Prophet Muhammad PBUH as a model for Muslims to emulate his life and practices (Alamsyah et al. 2020). Whilst it is important to take note of the concern that Ḥadīth are often disseminated and distributed in various contexts with a wide range of possible cultural confrontation, an assessment of the content of Ḥadīth reveals significant elements that would enhance the pathway of Muslim interaction within Muslim culture and tradition (Bin Salman 2017). The terms of distinguishing both content or matter and learning of the chain of narration are attached to the revelation process, which underlies the arrangement of Ḥadīth and their featured criteria to scrutinize their authentication. For instance, the narratives from one person to another with authority are indicated as the chain of narrators, called the isnād (Khon 2012). The extent of the narratives or events is dependent on their authenticity, where the main emphasis is placed on measuring their authenticity, i.e., the isnād, which refers to the qualities and integrity of the narrator. On the other hand, the content of Ḥadīth narrative is called matn, which refers to the key messaging in Ḥadīth.

Furthermore, an indicator with which to assess the authenticity of Ḥadīth is through one of the following questions: whether the Prophet PBUH said, practiced, or agreed with certain events, which could credibly be implied to have been said or done or not done by the Prophet PBUH (Motzki 2016). In particular, the report of the Prophet’s (PBUH) speech and practice was taken as supportive evidence by disseminators, narrators, or witnesses during his time as the key element defining the quality of Ḥadīth authenticity (Mustaqim 2008). The initial objective of inquiry into the religious text is to strike a balance between feedback and consequence about emerging dangers associated with an extremely subjective judgment or independence of the mind. While the attempts to surmise the real problem addressing such critical judgment relating to isnad are essential, the subsequent inquiry about assessing the theoretical objective pattern and precise criteria relative to the understanding of the message of Ḥadīth is also of paramount importance (Ilyas and Masudi 1996).

2.2. Classification of Ḥadīth

Ḥadīth played a significant role as one of the primary sources of legislation for Muslims’ conduct and practice. This is manifested in the biographical life of the Prophet PBUH, reflected in his activities and utterances, which are central to his life as the primary role model for Muslims who integrate such activities and utterances into their daily life (Khaeruman and Soetari 2004). The clarity of Ḥadīth is sometimes quite different between each of them. Whereas some might have detailed information, others require inference in more detail to reach a clearer understanding. As a result, the required explanation through bayān (a detailed inquiry process) should be made in a particular way to enable the subsequent phase of having further analysis through ta‘rīf (an advanced inquiry process) (Hasyim n.d.). The style of this approach requires the urgency of quoting Ḥadīth by adding commentary about each situational context. In this regard, the verification process of each Ḥadīth should take into consideration the kutub al-sittah (the six collected books of Ḥadīth). The kutub al-sittah refer to the popular main collections of Ḥadīth amongst Sunni Islam, identified as Ṣaḥīḥ al-Bukhari, Ṣaḥīḥ Muslim, Sunan as-Sughra, Sunan Abu Dawood, Jami al-Tirmidhi, and Sunan ibn Majah (Sumbulah 2010). These six books have reached a high-quality level of recognition in terms of their collection to have adhered to strict criteria of rigorous collection procedures. Thus, an attempt to determine the category of Ḥadīth quality in Islamic traditions would require looking into details about the classifications. Those of the most authentic quality are called ṣaḥīḥ, which are followed by the second most authentic, called ḥasan, and subsequently the lowest quality, with some questionable status of authenticity, called ḍaʿīf (As Salih 1997). In other words, there are two important factors to consider in determining the quality and authenticity of Ḥadīth, namely those consisting of both authentic status, indicated as ṣāliḥ, and lower quality of their authenticity, determined as saqīm (Al Thahhan 1979).

These classifications and subdivisions, based upon an assessment of the level of authenticity, depend on the quality of the classic compilers’ individual capacity and strenuous efforts expended during collection process (Begg 2012). Nevertheless, the difference is less noticeable if traditions (or Ḥadīth) are quoted not for legal definitions but purely for moral purposes. For instance, the tradition category of daʿīf (weak quality) is useful for advice or moral lessons, even though it might be excluded or ignored in a legal context (Davidson 2020). Such traditions also vary in strength according to whether one or more companions can be cited among the chain of narrators, or whether the isnād (the authority’s chain of narrators) has parallel narrators to corroborate its narratives. Moreover, whether the narrations have a linkage of message transmission to the Prophet Muhammad PBUH is referred to as muttaṣil (relationship to him as the originator of the narratives). The opposite of muttaṣil is called mawqūf (Al-’Aini n.d.). The arrangements of questions and answers with subtleties would become an integral part of the competency indicators for determining the quality of Ḥadīth. In terms of the authority and status about the canonical collections of Ḥadīth, submitting the criteria of creating the narratives to standardize the emergence of the zest for the tradition of Ḥadīth collection and authentication has facilitated the emergence of the science of Ḥadīth (Al Iraqi 2013). As a result, the field has been compacted into a stable amount of collections where there is not something new to be added credibly and from which waste is cleaned up by drawing upon the established criteria for the classical compilers. The traditions of Ḥadīth, with their variety, are then becoming a permanent and disciplined element in forming the structure of Islamic authority. Ḥadīth, known as the second source of Islamic law after the Qurʾān in guiding the life and practices of Muslims, provide a complementary source to the Qurʾān through the analogical approach (Andariati 2020). One of the methods is called qiyas (an analytic process addressing the comparative analysis of religious texts through a deductive analogy) (Hasan 1976). In particular, it is comprehended as making consideration or equating the law of a new thing that did not exist in the past with an existing thing because of the similarity of cause and benefit (Kasmo 2018). This approach has been used to resolve certain emerging issues in Islamic jurisprudence (Lucas 2006). Moreover, another approach is ijtihad, which refers to a process of serious effort in searching diligently by Islamic scholars (called mujtahid) (Kamali 1991) to publish laws that are practical in nature and which are not clear but exist in the Qurʾān or Ḥadīth, whether the ambiguity stems from a very general statement or from the reliability of the evidence used itself (Kamali 1996). This process is the same as that which goes through the consensus scenario, which is also considered as a source for further legislation, with supportive arguments from the Qurʾān and Ḥadīth as the key underlying principles (Al-Asqalani 1997).

In addition, the most authentic of the Ḥadīth collections, which are often referred to by Muslim scholars of traditionalist schools, is by al-Bukhārī (AH 194–256 (810–870 CE)). An important book authored by al-Bukhārī, called Al-Jāmiʿ al-ṣaḥīḥ (The authentic collection), provides a comprehensive collection with a unique arrangement as a great work with a profound dedication and historical import (Yücel 2016). His travelling process on a pilgrimage to Mecca, during which he gathered the unique traditions, inspired the great work on the biography and way of life of the Prophet Muhammad PBUH. This example has drawn upon his serious effort in collecting this unrivalled Ḥadīth collection. An anecdote likened him to be pestered by flies while asleep, with a huge impact to the extent that flies enabled him (al-Bukhārī) to be fanned by the Prophet’s PBUH face literally turned into a fan. In a critical exploration, these flies were representative of how the cloud of false tradition darkens the true image, and that the fan became a tireless savior. In view of this, the illustration about the truth of this narrative reflects the temperament and circumstance of al-Bukhārī’s vocation during his gathering of the Ḥadīth collection.

After having spent more than 16 years of editorial and oversight difficulties, the numerous filtering processes had resulted in 7397 Ḥadīth with full isnād. Prior to his scrutiny processes, al-Bukhārī had collected an overall number of more than 600,000 memorized Ḥadīth (Andariati 2020). Another Ḥadīth collection, which is comparable in stature, was the Ṣaḥīḥ of Muslim ibn al-Ḥajjāj (AH 202–261 (817–875 CE)). In this Ḥadīth collection ibn al-Ḥajjāj began to preface a substantive discussion about the Ḥadīths’ criteria of collection, where the contents were confirmed with a large basis of contemporaries underlying the arrangements which are common to two agreed-upon distinctive sources (muttafaq ‘alayh) (Al-Thahan 1985).

Furthermore, the four other classical collections of traditions had some commonality in that all began to be collected within the early third century AH or simultaneously interdependent in part (Hilali 2020). The first is Kitāb al-sunan (book of traditions) authored by Abū Dāʾūd al-Sijistānī (AH 202–275 (817–889 CE)). This book was produced containing 4800 Ḥadīth or traditions which principally contained materials relating to jurisprudence, and thus was called Sunan Abū Dāʾūd (Dawud 1994). The second is Abū ʿIsā Muḥammad al-Tirmidhī (died AH 279 (892 CE)), who made additional editing of the Jāmiʿ al-ṣaḥīḥ by giving some commentaries with featured analyses of the schools of thought and law (madhāhib); hence, this collection was called Sunan Tirmidhī (Tirmidhi 2007). The third collection is Abū ʿAbd al-Raḥmān al-Nasāʾī (AH 216–303 (830–915 CE)), who contributed to producing the Kitāb al-sunan, which provided a special commentary on the Islamic law and jurisprudence relating to ritual acts, called Sunan Nasāʾī (Melchert 2014). The fourth is Abū ʿAbd Allāh ibn Mājāh (AH 210–273 (824–886 CE)), who was a pupil of Abū Dāʾūd. He contributed by compiling another collection with the same title, while focusing on notes to complement the details reflected in a readier tolerance of traditions, called Sunan ibn Mājāh (Robson 1958). Additionally, there was another work authored by Abū Muḥammad al-Baghawī (died AH 516 (1122 CE)) called Maṣābīḥ al-Sunnah (The lamps of the sunnah) (Baghawī 1989). This book contains the commentaries on all these classical musannafāt (compilations) (Robson 1958).

2.3. Defining Asbāb al-Wurūd

Asbāb al-wurūd refers to discerning the specific circumstances for reason on the process of revealing Ḥadīth. This process refers to deciphering the background involved in the textual comprehension and contextual interpretation of the sayings and practices of the Prophet PBUH (Muin 2015). An explanation of asbāb al-wurūd could be viewed from the perspective of Imam al-Bulqini, who stated that it is the reason behind the revelation of Ḥadīth narrated by the Prophet PBUH through the form of speech (qawliyyah) (Bulqīnī 1999). Moreover, Imam Ibn Hamzah al-Husainy stated that the timing of the event of asbāb al-wurūd refers to the process of the situation and circumstance at the time of the Prophet PBUH (Ad Damsyiqi 2010). Imam al-Suyuthi gave a detailed explanation of asbāb al-wurūd as all matters including the event or question which occurred within the context of Ḥadīth as narrated by the Prophet PBUH (Ad Damsyiqi 2010). Furthermore, some Muslim contemporary scholars, such as Abu Syahbah, explains that asbāb al-wurūd is about the knowledge which discussed the reasons of the Ḥadīth narration, or in other words all matters that precipitated the Prophet PBUH narrating Ḥadīth, such as in response to a question or inquiry, telling a story, and/or occurrences (Abu Syahbah n.d.). According to Abu Laith, asbāb al-wurūd is about the extent to which Ḥadīth were narrated by the Prophet PBUH, who was essentially connected to its occurrence (Abul Lais 2011). Additionally, Sheikh Sayyid Abd al-Majid al-Ghauri gave further detail that asbāb al-wurūd refers to the reason behind the narration of Ḥadīth during the time of occurrence (Abul Lais 2011). In view of the common perspective of a large number of Muslim scholars about asbāb al-wurūd, it might be said that the focus of the discussion on asbāb al-wurūd of Ḥadīth bordered around questions, stories, narratives, events, or circumstances.

Linguistically, the word asbāb al-wurūd comes from the form of idāfah (a form of backup between one word and another, which is, between one noun and another noun). The further exploration is an arrangement of asbab as mudaf (front word) and al-wurud as mudaf ilaih (back word). In this view, asbāb al-wurūd is defined as everything that can connect or cause something to happen, or in a general sense mean everything that mediates for something that is expected to occur (Arifin 2011). Asbāb al-wurūd can simply be interpreted as anything that causes something to come into effect. Since this term is commonly used in the discourse of the science of Ḥadīth, asbāb al-wurūd is usually defined by the causation or relationship behind the emergence of Ḥadīth. Hence, the term asbāb al-wurūd is defined as something that becomes a method to determine the intent of Ḥadīth, which might be general in nature and thus require a specific meaning. Moreover, the potential of asbab al wurud aims to determine the presence or even the absence of cancellation (Ḥamzah 1982). Drawing on that perspective, it might be understood that the definition here refers to the functional meaning of asbāb al-wurūd, namely to determine the matter from the general to the specific meaning of Ḥadīth. Hence, this definition of asbāb al-wurūd refers to it as a science that explains the reasons why the Prophet PBUH made his statements at the particular times and contexts that he made them.

In addition, it is apparent from the aforementioned definitions that asbāb al-wurūd refers to something that happened at the time the verse was being revealed or an action which occurred at the time Ḥadīth were narrated by the Prophet PBUH (As Suyuthi n.d.). A common thread that can be drawn from asbāb al-wurūd is the occurrence of events or stories at a particular time Ḥadīth were conveyed by the Prophet PBUH (Akasah 2018). Thus, it can serve as an analytical tool to determine whether Ḥadīth are general or specific. In the discourse of science of Ḥadīth, it should be pointed out that the science of asbāb al-wurūd played an important role in avoiding misunderstanding about the intent of Ḥadīth, which needs further analysis (Kamali 2005). The knowledge of asbāb al-wurūd is the knowledge that discusses the reasons that caused the Prophet PBUH to recite Ḥadīth. Hence, we can conclude that asbāb al-wurūd refers to the system of knowledge that talks about the reasons why Ḥadīth are uttered or revealed by the Prophet PBUH, whether they are in the form of questions, narrations, and also events or circumstances within which Ḥadīth were articulated.

Asbāb al-wurūd is one of the elements in the science of Ḥadīth, which contributed to a better understanding of Ḥadīth by reflecting on the situation or event at the time of the Prophet PBUH to enable lessons to be learnt or conclusions to be drawn (Helmy 2020). Asbāb al-wurūd as a means of understanding the context of Ḥadīth has various functions, including the following:

(a)

Determining the existence of Ḥadīth takhsis that are still general in nature;

(b)

Limiting the meaning of Ḥadīth that are still absolute in nature;

(c)

Making tafsil (giving detail) on Ḥadīth that are still general in nature;

(d)

Determining whether there are available or not naskh and mansukh in Ḥadīth;

(e)

Explaining the illat (reasons) for the establishment of a law;

(f)

Exploring the meaning of Ḥadīth which are still musykil (difficult to understand) (Marhumah 2018).

Asbāb al-wurūd is also considered a tool in determining the accuracy of the meaning of Ḥadīth. Therefore, the understanding of asbāb al-wurūd needs to consider several components relating to the background of Ḥadīth or how the Prophet PBUH responded to the situation, behaved, or what he recounted (Putri 2020). These components of asbāb al-wurūd can be mapped out as follows:

(a)

Al bu’du al mukhatibi (factors that arise from the person of the Prophet PBUH as a speaker);

(b)

Al bu’du al mukhatabi (factors related to the condition of the person being spoken to);

(c)

Al bu’du zamani (aspects related to time when the Prophet PBUH delivered his words);

(d)

Al bu’du al makani (the related aspect where the Prophet PBUH delivered Ḥadīth).

2.4. Between Textual and Contextual Comprehension of Ḥadīth

There are primarily two approaches towards understanding Ḥadīth, namely textual and contextual bases. The textual approach refers to the understanding and application of Ḥadīth when the clear meaning and related aspects are still in question (Musyafiq 2016). An example is linking the background of their occurrence and the need for understanding what is written in the text of the Ḥadīth in question. On the other hand, the contextual approach of understanding Ḥadīth carried out beyond the text of Ḥadīth, where there are instructions that require the Ḥadīth in question to be understood and applied not according to their explicit (textual) meaning but rather contextual understanding (Khan 2011). There are Ḥadīth that are sufficiently understood textually, so that contextual understanding is not required, while in certain other Ḥadīth contextual understanding is required. At other times both a textual and contextual meaning are required to promote broader understanding. Textual interpretation involves analysis using texts, both Qurʾān texts and other Ḥadīth texts to decipher the meaning and understanding of the various texts.

In addition, the model of this interpretation in the first instance is used to elaborate on the meaning contained in a word or a phase. At the second stage, it refers to reaching the conclusions in the clauses or sentences of Ḥadīth which form verses or sentences (Melchert 2020). In view of this, the main and complementary data are associated with a comparative method of finding out if there are similarities or differences between the concepts contained in each data, or by looking for a scientific relationship between the various data in question. From a historical point of view, the strategic approach of comprehending Ḥadīth resulted in the founding of traditional schools of thought with influential linguistics, namely the Kufa and Basrah schools (Melchert 1999). The Kufa School places more emphasis on the Arabic grammar, which has distinctive roots and characters. This school, grounded in classical Arabic tradition, addresses some difficult words and sentences in Ḥadīth to promote understanding of the Arabic language used to understand Ḥadīth (Versteegh 1993). Furthermore, the Basrah School emphasizes the universal use of logic as taught by Aristotle’s Greek philosophy, instead of an approach concerning classical Arabic grammar (Martin 1980). The argument for this school is that Ḥadīth as a source of Islamic teachings are intended for all human beings, and certainly have universal appeal and logic that transcend local boundaries and characters. Meanwhile, an understanding that seeks to uncover the secrets beyond the text sociologically, psychologically, historically, and in other aspects from existing branches of science is referred to as understanding with a contextual basis (Burris 2003). As an approach that relies on the use of textual analysis, the existence of science of linguistics together with uṣūl al-fiqh (the basic principles of Islamic jurisprudence) have become strategic tools for analysis. One such scholar, Imam Syafi’ī, is considered a meritorious precursor in formulating a methodology for understanding the arguments of syara (Islamic law) with a textual approach (El Chirri 2017). The textual approach can be divided into various phases, one of which is a linguistic approach that states that the meaning of a word is the main focus of study. The importance of the knowledge on the way to comprehend Ḥadīth as a part of Islamic sciences is noted in incorporating the Islam’s message clearly (Huda et al. 2016a).

The contextual understanding of Ḥadīth refers to a connection between the definition of the text and the extent of contextual analysis, which depends on or relates to the circumstances that formed the setting for an event, statement, or idea. Similarly, it also means depending on the preceding or following parts of a text to clarify meaning. There are many terms relating to the clarification of the contextual approach, such as ‘alaqah (relevance), qarinah (connection), and siyaq al-kalam (word context), all of which have helped shape-up each approach and meaning, respectively (El Chirri 2017). In the science of Ḥadīth, the contextual understanding has been recognized as one of the methods that promote comprehension of Ḥadīth (El Chirri 2017). The language approach has been used through the ages to propagate information and knowledge as, affirmed by Ibn Taimiyyah, the Qurʾān is in the Arabic language and the designation of the Prophet PBUH by Allah (SWT) to convey the message of the Qurʾān is also in the Arabic language (El Chirri 2017). Hence, there is no other way to preserve this religion and its knowledge except by using the Arabic language. Scrutinizing the content of the matan (main content) is also one of the methods of understanding Ḥadīth in a contextual way. The matan conveys the message, and therefore it is important to analyze the matan to verify whether Ḥadīth are authentic or fabricated (Al-Qardawi 1990). Another method that could be used is by collecting Ḥadīth together under the same concept or theme, but this method could only be implemented under the same category of Ḥadīth sahih (authentic).

3. Analysis and Discussion

3.1. Adapting Asbāb al-Wurūd for the Contextual Interpretation of Ḥadīth

The adaptation of asbāb al-wurūd could be done through incorporating some essentials of implementing the methodology of understanding Ḥadīth through comparatively reviewing other relevant Ḥadīth (Su’aidi 2017). The lafaẓ (wording) of a particular Ḥadīth that appears in a general form gives comprehensive meaning. However, when it is further examined and evaluated comparatively with other Ḥadīth expounding on the same topic, it is found that such general Ḥadīth carry a specific meaning and cannot be practiced in a general sense (Al-Subki 1991). Among examples that demonstrated this approach are the following Ḥadīth: the difference of how the Prophet PBUH gave advice corresponds to each individual condition, where many companions tried to look for his advice regarding habitual practices which lead to have a close feeling to God and paradise and also away from hell (Kasmani et al. 2019). From this view, it can be viewed that the form of the Prophet’s PBUH advice can be absolute or limited or sometimes both. For instance, he stated to worship Allah and do not associate Him with anything (Shirk), establish prayer, pay zakat, and maintain friendship. It clearly indicated that the Prophet’s PBUH advice in practice aims to acknowledge that I believe in Allah and then do for stability with an istiqamah (committed) (Muslim 2007). The essence of tradition of knowledge and wisdom in leading to enhance underlying Islam’s main point is significant to strengthen ethical consideration in the sustainable learning (Huda et al. 2017).

It is important to note that sometimes there are differences between the answers of the Prophet PBUH and fatwas by scholars in response to questions depending on various situations and contexts (Usman et al. 2016). The Prophet PBUH was once asked about what was the best practice in Islam, but the Prophet PBUH gave different answers to this question. For example, Abdullah bin Masud narrated that I asked the Prophet PBUH about what the most beloved of deeds to Allah is, then He answered the practice of filial piety to parents, that I asked again what the next is, and He responded Jihad (exerting one’s effort on the path of Allah (SWT)) (Al-Bukhari 1978). According to the Sahih al-Bukhari, there is a difference in the narrated Ḥadīth by Abu Musa, where he said that the companions asked: O Prophet PBUH who is the most Muslim is, then He answered that is, a person with whom other Muslims feel safe from his tongue and hands (Al-Asqalani 1997). Moreover, Abdullah bin Umar narrated that once the Prophet PBUH was asked again as to what is the best practice in Islam, then the Prophet PBUH responded that you give food, in charity, and give greetings, peace, to those you might know and those you might not know (Al-Bukhari 1978).

Nevertheless, the difference in terms of attitude and behavior corresponds to the situation of each person asking the Prophet PBUH. The way and manner in which the Prophet PBUH treated the Bedouin, the desert people, for instance, was not the same as the way he interacted with the non-Bedouin or companions he taught (Streusand 1997; Shehu 2017). It is the same issue with amnesty or forgiveness, which the Prophet PBUH gave to the Bedouin but not to his companions (Toure and Mamat 2018). The way and manner in which he persuaded the chiefs of the Quraish and women who had recently converted to Islam when Mecca came under the control of the Muslims was not the same as the way he dealt with the Ansar and emigrant women. The Prophet PBUH interacts according to the position and character of his friends during their socialization. The Prophet PBUH immediately covered his feet and straightened his clothes when Sayidina Uthman entered his house (Madelung 1997). The Prophet PBUH reacted differently when in the presence of Sayidina Abu Bakar and Sayidina Umarhe did not cover his feet or straightened his clothes (Birgivi et al. 2005). This was done to maintain the sensitivity of Sayidina Uthman, who was blushing. At that time Sayidina Uthman asked, am I not ashamed of a man whom even the Angels are ashamed of? (Al-Nawawi n.d.). Moreover, the Prophet PBUH once told the good news to Muadz bin Jabal that those who died firmly with their faith of monotheism (that is, the oneness of God) would enter heaven. Then, he forbade Muadh to tell other people about this because he was afraid they would act arbitrarily.

It must be pointed out that the Prophet PBUH responded according to a person’s ability and prevailing condition, and there difference between order and law about taklif (mandate). Hence, the Prophet PBUH giving taqlid (acceptance) to a person corresponds to the person’s situation and ability. An example of this is when the Prophet PBUH advised Abu Dzar not to be a leader because he felt his serious weakness; hence, there were both orders and prohibitions regarding ‘illah (reason) (Brown 2017). The Prophet’s PBUH delivery also considers the common good (public interest) or the cause of a thing. It is true that sometimes the way of his prohibition about something is due to ilham (God’s unseen inspiration for instruction) enabling him to go further in establishing rule on the matter or waiting for ilham come to him. An example is the ban on eating and storing sacrificial meat for more than three days at an early stage, which was then allowed, in which the first ban was made because of God’s help to the caravan that had arrived (Misbah 2020). Similarly, the ban on visiting graves in the early stages was also made because the community at that time practiced pagan worship. The companions also considered the contextual approach in the implementation of Ḥadīth of the Prophet PBUH.

3.2. Applying Asbāb al-Wurūd in Assisting the Contextual Comprehension of Ḥadīth

The application of asbāb al-wurūd in assisting the contextual comprehension of Ḥadīth could be illustrated by an example of the decision by Sayidina Umar bin al-Khattab to stop giving a share of property to new converts. Similarly, Sayidina Uthman had ordered that a lost camel be owned by his seeker but changed his decision when he was told that this was contrary to the order of the Prophet PBUH. Sayidina Uthman decided so because the situation of society in his time was very different from the time of the Prophet PBUH (Lucas 2004). As such, it is important to note that getting a clear picture about Ḥadīth is required to obtain further details to consider the contextual approach in order to enhance the understanding of the content of Ḥadīth. For example, Ibn al-Qayyim once narrated that his teacher, Ibn Taymiyah, had postponed efforts to prevent immorality for fear it would bring greater damage or hardship to the people (Qadhi 2010). This contextual approach is a science that has long been practiced by scholars through their writings over centuries. The emergence of different interpretations of Ḥadīth has been seen in works such as Ikhtilaf al-Ḥadīth (The differences of Ḥadīth) by Imam al-Shafi’e and Takwil Mukhtalif al Ḥadīth (An annotated translation on Ḥadīth) by Ibn Qutaybah, in which both scholars focused on the contextual approach (Mirza 2016). The debate among scholars was indicated through aspects of the science of asbāb al-wurūd and the science of nasikh wa al-mansukh, which are widely discussed in the books on Ḥadīth.

Looking at the real phenomena around Muslim societies, the application of asbāb al-wurūd of Ḥadīth requires context-based comprehension. There is a need to gather a contextual understanding of Ḥadīth through studying and observing similar sources, which would enhance the capacity of scholars analyzing the phenomena or occurrences in the narrated Ḥadīth (Naziyah 2017). Moreover, the coverage is laying in the way of having an observation process together with further study on the contextual basis. The contextual understanding can be referred to as an explanation of whether all matters concerning the Prophet PBUH, including his words, deeds, or rulings based on the situation and circumstances when Ḥadīth were originally narrated, should be the current understanding. The content of Ḥadīth should be made compatible with the development of knowledge in the modern age to respond to the contextual analysis of the contemporary era. The foundation of having a clear comprehension of Islam’s message played a significant role in bringing the Muslim community with critical response on certain issues (Huda and Sabani 2018).

Al-Bu’d al-Zamani as a criteria facilitates understanding about the situation during the life and times of the Prophet PBUH for 23 years. Another approach to promoting comprehension is through Al-bu’d al-makani, which examines the circumstance of situating the atmosphere of the Arabian Peninsula including weather, ’uruf (custom), culture or tradition, and also behavioral practices during the Prophet’s PBUH period (Junaidi et al. 2017). The mutual link between al-bu’d al-zamani and al-bu’d al-makani is in promoting understanding of the contextual approach of Ḥadīth by considering time and place factors, respectively. The contextual approach enabled Muslim societies to have a clear understanding about Ḥadīth (Ramle and Mohamad 2020). The contextual approach for clear comprehension could be adopted in elaborating hidden messages from a variety of Muslim scholars, who facilitated the understanding of details of Ḥadīth. While Ḥadīth associated with al-thawabit (constant) do not vary in their implementation until the day of kiamah (resurrection), even with the change of time and place they could still not be understood contextually (Saloot et al. 2016). As such, part of this attempt could be arranged to achieve a clear comprehension of Ḥadīth with contextual meaning. As a result, the detailed information achieved through this approach would lead to strengthen Islam’s point on the divine commitment, so that it will bring the Muslim’s mind and practice with more experiences (Huda et al. 2019).

3.3. Enhancing an Asbāb-al-Wurūd-Based Clear Interpretation of Ḥadīth for Guarding against Extremist Interpretations of Islam

In order to maintain the accuracy of the message of Islam’s religious texts, mainly Ḥadīth, from extremist interpretations, it is a must to have a clear interpretation. Achieving a clear interpretation of Ḥadīth requires an asbāb-al-wurūd-based comprehension to be expanded, starting by looking into Ḥadīth themselves. This is followed by recognizing their status either as an accepted or rejected category, which becomes the most important step. The process of scrutinizing the status of Ḥadīth must be performed in advance before analyzing their meaning, laws embodied in them, and their applicability (Terem 2020). Following the acceptability of Ḥadīth, the next step is for scholars to attempt the clarification of meaning and understanding. In view of this, scholars would engage in the arrangement of Ḥadīth known as Mustalah al-Ḥadīth (the rules and terminology of the science of Ḥadīth). This builds upon a major goal of the science of Ḥadīth, which aims to preserve the Prophet’s PBUH Ḥadīth from mixing the authentic and fabricated Ḥadīth (Al-Munawi 1988a). This goal is highly important as it contains several advantages, such as preserving religion from corruption and the potential to mislead by preventing people from narrating false Ḥadīth, thereby facing the threat of entering hell due to a lie against the Prophet PBUH (Al-Munawi 1988b). An example of this consequence in a Ḥadīth is: “whoever narrates from me a Ḥadīth seen to contain a lie, then he is included into among the liars” as narrated by Muslim (Muslim 2007), and in another saying of Ḥadīth: “whoever lies against me, then do prepare to take his seat in the hell” as narrated by al-Bukhari (Al-Bukhari 1978).

In addition to enhancing the clear interpretation of Ḥadīth, the requirement of expanding the foundation through bringing the science of Mustalah al-Ḥadīth should be considered in particular. It is to ensure that all Ḥadīth narrations, with their authenticity, would play a major role in cleansing the minds of the community from elements of superstitions (Tahhan 1984). This is facilitated by those who are well-versed in the field of Ḥadīth and filters the status of the authenticity of Ḥadīth. An example of a Ḥadīth about jihad as narrated by Muslim was evaluated and categorized as an authentic Ḥadīth:

I heard the Prophet pbuh (Peace be upon him: pbuh) said: “person who stands guard at the border for the whole day and night are better than fasting and praying at night for a month. If he dies, then does flow (the reward of) the deed that he always practices, he is bestowed with bounties and protected from torment (punishment) of grave and its trials

(Muslim 2007).

The Ḥadīth narrations are often linked to the same topic or theme, with the objective of elaborating on the contents and meaning of the Qurʾān. Thus, attempts to achieve an accurate and comprehensive understanding of certain topics would require scrutinizing collected meanings of summaries of the topics or themes of Ḥadīth (Najeeb 2014). Sometimes certain subjects are mentioned generally in a Ḥadīth, but then are elaborated on in another Ḥadīth. The comprehension from this category of Ḥadīth is considered as mutlaq (without condition, binding on others) on a subject, but is mentioned with muqayyad (an element of binding and relating it to other Ḥadīth) (Kamali 1991).

In line with continuing a clear interpretation, the connection of meaning of Ḥadīth contained in the same topic requires more elaboration through the gathering and analyzing of their common basis with the aim of preventing misunderstanding or unclear information (Saad et al. 2010). It is important to take note that the significance of strategizing the asbab al wurud here refers to clearly narrated information gathered from a particular Ḥadīth. The main emphasis here is facilitating clear understanding of Ḥadīth with a general discourse, which requires further elaboration (Balgamwalla 2003). Hence, if scholars want to revise an issue they would gather all proofs related to it from the Qurʾān and Ḥadīth, and they would clarify and improve the relationship between different proofs. Many scholars of Ḥadīth produced their works relating to similar topics gathered in a chapter (of Ḥadīth) based on this method. For example, this method was clearly implemented by Imam Muslim in his Sahih, where he gathered narrations of a topic differing in text and path within the same chapter. Imam Muslim in his Sahih narrated a number of 112 Ḥadīth gathered in Kitab al-Jihad and divided them into 29 chapters related to the theme of jihad, for instance (Muslim 2007).

Corresponding to the attempts to gain a clear comprehension, an example about the application of the above method is the Ḥadīth regarding isbal, which refers to lowering the end of clothes exceeding the ankle (Muslim 2007). The Prophet PBUH, in a Ḥadīth narrated from Abu Hurairah, stated that there are three groups of people who are not invited to speak by Allah on the day of judgment, i.e., not gazed (not fix eyes on) and not purified, and for them painful torments. The Prophet PBUH uttered these words three times (Muslim 2007). Then, Abu Dzar said, they are damned and losers. Who are them, O Rasulullah? He said they are those who do isbal, mentioning gifts, and who find sales in trade by false swearing. In view of this, the person who does isbal (musbil) is a person who lowers his clothes or pants below the ankles (Muslim 2007). There are several other narrations that mention the act of lowering clothes, but in those narrations it is associated with arrogance and boasting. Another example is the Ḥadīth narrated by Ibn Umar, that the Prophet PBUH said Allah will not gaze onto a person who drags his clothes in arrogance. From this point of view, the arrangement of having a good look through physical cleanliness might possibly indicate the inner pathway. Having clear interpretation would lead to enhance clear comprehension of Islam’s main point (Syarkun and Huda 2020). The orderly organization of the outer side comes to enhance the surroundings with more conduciveness, and this refers also to cleanness, which has not only an outside but also an inside basis. This is to ensure the clear interpretation could be made in referring to the contextual comprehension.

3.4. Contributing an Asbāb-al-Wurūd-Based Clear Comprehension of Ḥadīth for Bridging Moderate Muslims

The appropriate enhancement of asbāb al-wurūd towards expanding the clear comprehension of narrated Ḥadīth has to be well-arranged to obtain the contextually understood meaning of Ḥadīth in a broad sense. This refers to giving a critical insight into bridging moderate Muslim personalities through having both a clear interpretation and clear comprehension (Akmaliah 2020; Ni’am 2015). The strategic arrangement comes to take a main point of the message in bringing the classification of al-mutaghayyirat (possibility of being able to change) (Shah 2011). The extent of an emergency or exception could be implied in, for instance, the Prophet PBUH giving relief to ‘Abd al-Rahman bin ‘Auf and Zubayr bin al-‘Awwam in letting them wear silk on their bodies due to their suffering from disease (Al-Bukhari 1978). Moreover, issues about technicality and cultural identity might require an adaptation of the understanding of Ḥadīth to be contextualized within contemporary situations; for example, paying charity through an online platform as fulfilling the rationale behind it (Suliaman and Yaakob 2019). This points out the transformation since the period of the Prophet PBUH and his companions, Tabiin (the successors of the second Muslim generation). The sufficient details about maslahah (public interest) become key in making decisions that require facilitating contextual comprehension. For example, the Prophet PBUH gave half of the land for Khaybar (one place in Medina, Saudi Arabia) to the Muslim army who conquered it, but Umar (RA) thought there was no need to give such land to the Muslim army (Helmy 2007). In this regard, the differences of ‘uruf (custom) and tradition might also necessitate certain decisions corresponding to the circumstances.

In addition, asbāb al-wurūd contributes towards contextualizing the message of Ḥadīth, which transmit principles, regulations, and related circumstances (Ali 2016). In this point of view, the contextual approach constantly refers to the period of the Prophet PBUH and his companions by considering the socio-cultural conditions and situation involved during the narration of Ḥadīth (Fadli 2014). An example is the case of aqiqah (slaughter of animal), which was narrated through various sanad (the list of authorities for the transmission of Ḥadīth). The details of such a tradition had existed in Arabian society prior to the advent of Islam, but became part of Muslim practices under the Prophet PBUH (Musyafiq 2016). This tradition exists to date and is practiced by most Muslims in various parts of the world (Ahmad 2016). Whether the practice is rigidly understood that the birth of every baby would require what type and number of animals to be slaughtered as aqiqah (e.g., two for a male baby and one for a female baby) needs further clarification through the use of asbāb al-wurūd. It is important to have a clear picture of the socio-cultural background of each narrative of Ḥadīth apart from the written text.

In line with contributing to the application of the principle of asbāb al-wurūd in bridging moderate Muslims, one example of Ḥadīth narrated from Amr ibn Syuaib could be understood that the Prophet PBUH was asked about the question of aqiqah, and his response was to encourage it (Abu Dawud 1994). Nevertheless, it seems to give a different view when considering the text of the narrated Ḥadīth by Aishah without examining the background situation or reason that necessitated the order to perform aqiqah (Ibn Majah n.d.). Similarly, aqiqah, as narrated in Ḥadīth by Ibn Abbas from two different sanad, brings out different versions about the number of animals for slaughter for al-Hassan and al-Hussain (grandchildren of the Prophet PBUH). The narration by Ayub, from Ikrimah and from Ibn Abbas, stated that aqiqah was made by the slaughter of one animal (Abu Dawud 1994), while the similar narration from Qatadah, Ikrimah, and Ibn Abbas stated that aqiqah could be made by slaughtering two animals (An Nasai n.d.). It is important to note that the early period of Arabian society prior to the advent of Islam emphasized male hegemony. It is within the social construct that favored male dominance. The reason why men have two goats and women have one goat is because it is equated with diyat (fine), where the diyat of women is half that of men as the purpose of aqiqah is to redeem the souls (Anṣārī 2012).

In terms of the above example, textually obtaining the theological legitimacy of Ḥadīth from the Prophet PBUH, both the number and type of animals to be slaughtered for aqiqah is probably not a matter that needed to be conceived rigidly. For instance, if having the female birth with an advantage of property, slaughtering aqiqah could be made with two or more animals. Moreover, if having male birth with a lack of economic conditions, which is not possible to implement aqiqah, it is allowed to make aqiqah with one goat. According to Ibn Abbas, aqiqah can be made through the slaughtering of chicken, since the main purpose of aqiqah is to shed blood as a sacrifice (Al Bajuri 1997). It indicated that the important points and spirit which are emphasized in the Ḥadīth is a moral dimension and an expression of gratitude for the safety of the baby bestowed by Allah. The most important thing is that conducting aqiqah is a recommended act for those who can afford it, for the purpose of worship and almsgiving. The significance of thinking paradigm through this approach is taken into consideration to underlie moral comprehension and practice (Salleh et al. 2020).

With this regard, the contextual-based analysis of each message has to be done alongside constant looking into socio-cultural circumstances. Moreover, the clear comprehension from the analytical interpretation from the Muslim school of thought has to be widely and constantly perceived into the natural environment surroundings. In this point of view, attempts to comprehend Ḥadīth are required to refer to the Muslim school of thought in bridging the moderation about the clear meaning apart from extremist comprehensions (Alamsyah et al. 2020). Through expanding the role of asbāb-al-wurūd-based clear comprehensions of Ḥadīth, the necessary act to deal with their main message should be considered in enabling Muslims to have a clear understanding. From this view, it can lead to bring Muslim comprehension about an issue within an appropriate manner as arranged in religious principle (Kubro and Ali 2021). It can be conceived that bringing Muslims clear comprehension would lead to enhancing the bridging of moderate Muslims. It is important to look into details about the instruction within the religious principles to arrange into certain occasions and circumstances, such as in the context of Muslim style of learning requirements (Huda et al. 2016b). The encouragement process of applying the different ways to respond, for instance, is supposedly giving a proportional value towards such diverse responses, as this is an initial phase to transmit the teaching principles (Jamal et al. 2018). In this view, the strategic effort to bring a constant aspect of the main message of the religious message in terms of giving particular attention to individual differences should consequently adapt the differences covering individual, environmental, and societal bases. As such, the continued process of expanding the process of knowledge acquisition (Noh and Huda 2020) should bring along with continuing the practical understanding of Islam’s message into the society (Masroom et al. 2020).

In terms of bringing about both compatibility and suitability, mainly about the technical arrangements amidst the different backgrounds among Muslims, the basic principles of bridging a safeguard against extremist interpretations of Islam have to fulfill the main point of religious principles as the central foundation. The interpretation of certainly basic terms, together with deliberately used topics in Islam, would lead to enhance the circumstances of moderate Islam (Kamali 2015). This would be an important element in transmitting the logic of moral values arranged within the regulations, as this is a central characteristic of Islamic faith (Huda and Kartanegara 2015). As such, the very beginning of Islam’s principles as a reference to underlie Muslims’ daily lives should come up with a comprehension level in leading to a justly balanced way of life (Manshur and Husni 2020). As a result, this situation would give insight into preventing extremist interpretations of Islam in order to respond and experience within a moderate basis. In this point of view, transmitting in a moderate basis of understanding Islam has to do with making a balance in all aspects of life, including social interaction amidst diverse backgrounds to live in harmony (Huda et al. 2020). The consequence is that bringing the identity into the religion’s indicator might have a strategic style to apply for the individual capacity (Maseleno et al. 2021). In particular, the moderate-based comprehension here comes from the contextual interpretation about the religious message, first referring to the Muslim school of thought reflected in Muslims’ daily lives. The elements of moderate Muslims come from a balanced comprehension from Muslim schools of thought and contemporary linked circumstances in technical arrangement. The contextual comprehension is thus central to bring into the condition on Islam’s way of life in giving a direction pathway (Hasbi et al. 2021). It is important to have a sufficient comprehension about the religious message of the Qurʾān and Ḥadīth, whilst bringing a contextual-approach-based analytical process.

3.5. Reflections, Limitations, and Further Directions

This study focused on critical examination of texts and contexts of Ḥadīth for the purpose of acquiring a clear understanding of their key messages, as this is to bridge the guarding from extremist interpretations of Islam. Both a clear interpretation and clear comprehension are required while reflecting on the contextual basis of the message. Such a detailed point of the commitment to deal with the circumstance might give the positive feedback in order to be a good Muslim individual (Artha et al. 2021). It is necessary to strategically analyze Ḥadīth from textual and contextual perspectives. In the Islamic tradition, there was a strong need to develop the science of Ḥadīth and their analysis as a way of communicating the life and times of the Prophet PBUH to succeeding generations of Muslims. The enlightening process of Ḥadīth, with a variety of rich backgrounds, often articulated different situations of Ḥadīth’s narration, broadly comprehended through the relevant compilation process through various sources (Ramle et al. 2021). Whilst it is important to gather detailed messages about Ḥādīth through the consolidation of asbāb al-wurūd, it is necessary to keep away from the confusion that might result by disregarding the rigorous process of the use of asbāb al-wurūd. The required practice of achieving a clear comprehension should come up when contextualizing Ḥādīth to address their backgrounds from socio-culture perspectives. The necessity to compile all narrations relevant and related to a particular topic could contribute towards broader understanding of Ḥadīth (El Fadl 1997).

Asbāb al-wurūd provided an essential medium for transmitting Ḥadīth from the Prophet PBUH, which took into consideration the historical context of the emergence of Ḥadīth as well as cultural, casuistic, and even temporal factors (Martin 1982). It is also important to note that the analogical approach could also be applied in obtaining the clear meaning from the general text. It must also be pointed out that the role of asbāb al-wurūd might perhaps lead to some challenges, such as rigid, literal, and scriptural interpretations, as well as sometimes being even less accommodating to intergenerational transformation over time. At the theoretical level, the discussion of the importance of the conversation might include dialectics about the authority of the text, the context, and the authority of the author, among others (Noor 2018). It is especially in relation to the background of its presence where the distinction could be implied with addressing the with regard to, whether it is for one of the for instance. As such, becoming closely related to the imperative value of each Ḥadīth as a source of Islamic law, the function or context of the message or information need to recognize the profile and background of Ḥadīth.

Similarly, among the varied approaches of the interpretation of asbāb al-wurūd aimed at achieving a clear message of Ḥadīth is through a deconstruction, providing a certain meaning to acquire a clear understanding within the contextual details (van Doorn-Harder 2012). The method of the interpretation process about the message could be done through reading and understanding the textual basis (Kayadibi 2017). As a result, the required information to address the social and cultural background involved in the narration process is analyzed by various Muslim schools of thought to obtain the lucid meaning of the relevant text while addressing the context as well (Nasr 2020). The contextual analysis aims to facilitate the comprehension of Ḥadīth, giving detailed information about the narrated Ḥadīth as well as linking inter-textual analysis from a wide range of dominant narratives of Ḥadīth. Moreover, this method applies the practical approach that helps to address the misunderstanding and even extreme or radical understanding of the religious message thereby providing an alternative Islamic ethos and ethical discoveries in understanding of the message of Ḥadīth.

Since the current study is limited to the role of asbāb al-wurūd in promoting the comprehension of the messages of Ḥadīth, further studies need to be done, mainly in examining the circumstance and background of the narration of Ḥadīth in facilitating a broader understanding of the details. The socio-historical perspective, contextual elaboration, and details of the message of Ḥadīth, as well as the textual and contextual analysis of each narrated Ḥadīth, clearly address not only the appropriateness of the message of Ḥadīth but also the flexibility element, which accommodates a variety of situations. The significance of the future direction of research would result in contributing discussions on asbāb al-wurūd. Thus, the indirect feedback is that it could bring Muslim audiences and followers together in order to have a clear, broad understanding, and thus prevent misunderstanding of the message of Islamic religion.

4. Conclusions

In summing up, it is required to apply the principle of asbāb al-wurūd (discerning and specifying the circumstances of the revelation of Ḥadīth) in order to attain a high level of comprehension of the message of Ḥadīth with their narrative background in Islamic tradition. This method could give detailed information about narrated Ḥadīth as well as bring Muslim audiences and followers into a clear, broad understanding of the work of scholars of the science of Ḥadīth. This situation will indirectly lead to a stepping stone towards a more comprehensive methodology to prevent misunderstanding of the message of Islamic religion. Thus, attempts to achieve an accurate and comprehensive understanding of certain topics would require scrutinizing collected meanings and summaries of the topics or themes of Ḥadīth.

Moreover, it should be kept in mind that these circumstances would preventive actions of religious radicalism, which result from obtaining the message of Islamic religion through a solely textual approach. In light of what has been mentioned previously, the sufficient application of asbāb al-wurūd played a significant role in leading an order to achieve the contextual comprehension of Ḥadīth’s religious message. This analysis also takes into consideration the socio-economic and cultural backgrounds that explain both the textual and contextual factors that facilitate a broader understanding of the issues involved. This paper examined the importance of asbāb al-wurūd in assisting in the understanding of Ḥadīth with a contextual meaning beyond a textual basis. In this regard, adapting the contextual elaboration of Ḥadīth’s message is supplied in a proper way, in which its textual base of comprehension should be elaborated clearly through the detailing of its asbāb al-wurūd, one of which is to refer to Muslim scholars together with schools of thought to attain the message of Islamic religion. Furthermore, this article addressed the gap in the science of Ḥadīth by bridging between text and context. The contextual moves beyond emphasizing the significance of a clear and detailed comprehension of Ḥadīth; the significance of this study is expected to contribute to giving a detailed explanation between text and context, and seek for Ḥadīth’s information and message with a clear basis.