Western-inspired law codes" of colonialism and modernity. Like modernists, revivalists "vehemently rejected" taqlid and were not particularly interested in the classical schools of law (madhhab). But revivalists like Abul A'la Maududi and Mustafa al-Siba'i support for "the authority of Sunnah and the authenticity of Hadith in general" was "unwavering", as was their opposition to "Hadith denialism". At the same time they agreed that restoring relevant Sharia required "some reformulation" of the law, which would require a return to sources, which required agreement on how the sources were to be "interpreted and understand" and reassessment of hadith. This involved examining hadith content (matn) for its spirit and relevance "within the context of the Sharia as a whole" according to the method of scholars of Islamic law (fuqaha) and weeding out corrupted hadith inconsistent with "reason, with human nature, and with historical conditions". Shibli Nomani, Abul A'la Maududi, Rashid Rida, and Mohammed al-Ghazali being proponents of this effort. Alternatives to classical hadith based sunnah Although "most writers agree", including skeptics, that "sunnah and hadith must stand or fall together", some (Fazlur Rahman Malik, Javed Ahmad Ghamidi) have attempted to "establish a basis for sunnah independent of hadith", working around problem of hadith authenticity raised by modernist and Western critics, while reaching back to pre-al-Shafiʿi meaning of sunnah. "Living sunnah" In the 1960s, Fazlur Rahman Malik, an Islamic modernist and former head of Pakistan's Central Institute for Islamic Research, advanced another idea for how the (prophetic) sunnah—the normative example of Muhammad—should be understood: as "a general umbrella concept" but not one "filled with absolutely specific content", or that was static over the centuries. He argued that Muhammad had come as a "moral reformer" and not a "pan-legit", and that the specifics of the sunnah would be agreed upon community of his followers, evolving with changing times as a "living and on-going process". He accepted the criticism of Western and Muslim scholars that the content of many hadith and isnad (chain of transmitters) had been tampered with by Muslims trying to prove the Muhammad had made a specific statement—but this did not make them fraudulent or forgeries, because if "Hadith verbally speaking does not go back to the Prophet, its spirit certainly does". Instead these collections of ahadith of al-Bukhari and al-Muslim's were ijma (consensus or agreement of the Muslim scholars—which is another classical source of Islamic law). Doing so they follow the spirit