Author Topic: Authors of the Hadith  (Read 4481 times)

Peter

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • Posts: 8702
  • the sword of the Spirit, which is the Word of God
    • View Profile
    • False Prophet Muhammad
Authors of the Hadith
« on: November 07, 2011, 04:59:11 AM »
Muslim Eastern History teacher on the historicity of Mecca and authors of the hadith.
http://www.brotherpete.com/index.php?topic=2859.0

ibn Ishak - "Muḥammad ibn Isḥaq ibn Yasār ibn Khiyār (according to some sources, ibn Khabbār, or Kūmān, or Kūtān,[3] Arabic: محمد بن إسحاق بن يسار بن خيار‎, or simply ibn Isḥaq ابن إسحاق, meaning "the son of Isaac") (died 767, or 761[4])"
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ibn_Ishaq

Muwatta Imam Malik - The Muwaṭṭaʾ (Arabic: الموطأ‎) is the first written collection of hadith comprising the subjects of Muslim law, compiled and edited by the Imam, Malik ibn Anas.
Mālik ibn Anas ibn Malik ibn 'Āmr al-Asbahi (Arabic مالك بن أنس) (c. 711 – 795) (93 AH – 179 AH ) is known as "Imam Malik," the "Sheikh of Islam", the "Proof of the Community," and "Imam of the Abode of Emigration."
"Malik's best-known work, Al-Muwatta was the first legal work to incorporate and join hadith and fiqh together."
"The Muslim Jurist, Muhammad ibn Idris ash-Shafi`i famously said, "There is not on the face of the earth a book – after the Book of Allah – which is more authentic than the book of Malik."[5]"
"It is reported that Imam Malik selected only about 1% of authentic Ahadith for inclusion into the Muwatta, from the corpus of 100,000 narrations available to him. Thus, the book has been compiled with great diligence and meticulousness. [3]"

Does that really indicate "meticulousness" or something more akin to the monumental task of one man, picking and choosing his way through a toxic landfill, in search of pearls? ".....gee, I like this one, euuu I don't like those, ah I like this one.....". Not unlike when the Quran was collected up and all of the less preferred copies burned, on two separate occasions. How could Malik know what was true or false, a hundred years after Muhammad lived? How could he resist picking the things he liked, and discarding the things he didn't like, like Hisham who admitted: "I have omitted things which are disgraceful to discuss". As with all things Islamic "Over one thousand disciples of the Imām have transmitted this work from him. This has resulted in differences in the text in various instances. There are thirty known versions of the work of which the most famous is the one transmitted by Yahyā b. Yahyā Laythī Andalusī."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muwatta_Imam_Malik#Description

Ibn Hisham - Abu Muhammad 'Abd al-Malik bin Hisham (Arabic: أبو محمد عبدالمالك بن هشام‎), or Ibn Hisham (died 833)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Ibn_Hisham

Ishak's writings didn't survive, but they were supposedly "preserved" by Hisham with the caveat: Ishaq: 691 "I am omitting things which Ishaq recorded in this book. I have omitted things which are disgraceful to discuss and matters which would distress certain people."

al Bukhari - Muhammad Ibn Ismail Ibn Ibrahim Ibn al-Mughirah Ibn Bardizbah al-Bukhari (Persian/Arabic: محمد بن اسماعيل بن ابراهيم بن مغيره بن بردزبه بخاری), popularly known as Bukhari or Imam Bukhari, (196-256AH / 810-870AD)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhammad_al-Bukhari

Sahih Muslim - Abul Husayn Muslim ibn al-Hajjaj ibn Muslim ibn Warat al-Qushayri al-Nisaburi (Arabic: أبو الحسين مسلم بن الحجاج القشيري النيسابوري‎; Persian: مسلم نیشابوری; lived c. 206–261 AH/c.821-875 CE) was the author of the second authentic sahih collection of hadith in Sunni Islam, Sahih Muslim.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muslim_ibn_al-Hajjaj

Could the reason the prior two "collections" are rated at the top of the heap be credited to a couple hundred years of editing and embellishing? Are we to believe that Hadith would become more accurate the further away from the lifetime of Muhammad they were penned?

Abu Dawood - Abu Dawood Sulayman ibn Ash`ath Azdi Sijistani (Persian/Arabic: ابو داود سليمان بن اشعث السجستاني), commonly known as Abu Dawud, was a noted Persian collector of prophetic hadith
He was born in Sistan, in east of Iran, (then Persia) and died in 889 in Basra.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Abu_Dawood

al Tabari - Abu Ja'far Muhammad ibn Jarir al-Tabari (Persian: محمد بن جریر طبری; Muḥammad b.Ǧarīr aṭ-Ṭabarī, Arabic: أبو جعفر محمد بن جرير بن يزيد الطبري‎; Abū Ǧaʿfar Muḥammad b.Ǧarīr b.Yazīd aṭ-Ṭabarī) (838–923)
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muhammad_ibn_Jarir_al-Tabari

more to be added as needed

Consider the monumental task those on this page had before them. To repeat the words they heard through the grapevine, that were originated by men a century or two before them, who attempted to create thousands of years of pre-6th century Mecca-centered Islamic historical fiction - from thin air - without reference to any actual historical, archaeological or geographical record dated prior to the 6th century AD. What a task!
Mecca's actual history BEGAN to be recorded around the time of Muhammad's birthday in 570 AD.

To our Muslim friends, please ask yourself, how would these folks know what went on so many thousands of years before them? Doing research in the Quraish pagan's "Library of Mecca"?

1John 5:10 He that believeth on the Son of God hath the witness in himself: he that believeth not God hath made him a liar; because he believeth not the record that God gave of his Son.

THOSE WHO REWROTE HISTORY FOR MUSLIMS
http://brotherpete.com/index.php?topic=1177.0

Muslim Eastern History teacher on the historicity and authors of the hadith.
http://www.brotherpete.com/index.php?topic=2859.0

Peter

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • Posts: 8702
  • the sword of the Spirit, which is the Word of God
    • View Profile
    • False Prophet Muhammad
Re: Authors of the Hadith
« Reply #1 on: November 10, 2011, 05:08:29 AM »
"It is reported that Imam Malik selected only about 1% of authentic Ahadith for inclusion into the Muwatta, from the corpus of 100,000 narrations available to him. Thus, the book has been compiled with great diligence and meticulousness. [3]"

Does that really indicate "meticulousness" or something more akin to the monumental task of one man picking and choosing his way through a landfill in search of pearls? How did he know what was true or false? How could he resist picking the things he liked, and discarding the things he didn't like, like Hisham who admitted: "I have omitted things which are disgraceful to discuss" As with all things Islamic "Over one thousand disciples of the Imām have transmitted this work from him. This has resulted in differences in the text in various instances. There are thirty known versions of the work of which the most famous is the one transmitted by Yahyā b. Yahyā Laythī Andalusī."
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muwatta_Imam_Malik#Description

Did the Quran fare much better?

"After the famous battle of Aqraba in 632 AD, during the Caliphate
of Abu Bakr, many Muslims who knew the Koran by heart were killed.
As a result, Umar B. Al-Khattab advised Abu Bakr of the need to compile
the Koran into a standardized text. Abu Bakr ordered the compilation to
be made by Zaid Ibn Thabit from inscriptions on palm leaves, stones and
from the remaining reciters.

When the compilation was done, it was kept by Abu Bakr until his
death. His successor, Umar, then took custody of it. Afterward, it came
into the possession of Hafsa, one of Muhammad's widows (a daughter of
Umar).1 The companions of the prophet also did their own compilations
and produced other manuscripts for use in various provinces. There were
four rival provinces, each using a different text of the Koran.2

During the reign of Khalif Uthman (the third Khalifah),  reports
reached him that in various parts of Syria, Armenia and Iraq, Muslims
were reciting the Koran differently from the way it was being recited by
Arabian Muslims. Uthman immediately sent for the manuscript in Hafsa's
possession and ordered Zaid Ibn Thabit and three others, Abdullah Ibn
Zubair, Said Ibn Al-As and Abdullah Al-Rahman Ibn Harith B. Hisham to
make copies of the text and make corrections where necessary. When
these were completed, we  read that Uthman took violent action
regarding other existing Koranic manuscripts:
______________________________

1 See Mishkatul Massabih, ch. 3
 2  In Kufa, the manuscript of Abdullah ibn Masud was in use. That of Ubyy Ibn
Ka'b was in the possession of the Syrians. The one edited by Migdad Ibn Amr was
in circulation in the province of Hims. While that of Abu Musa al-Ash'ari was in use
in Basra, Iraq.
____________________________________

 Islam Reviewed    21

"Uthman sent to every Muslim province one copy of what they
had copied and ordered that all the other koranic materials,
whether written in fragmentary manuscripts, whole copies, to
be burnt." (Sahih al-Bukhari Vol. 6 Page 479).

To  eliminate  variant  readings  and  contradictions,  all  other manuscripts were indeed burned, but the Uthmanic edition itself was not perfect and met with a similar fate. When Marwan was governor of Medina, he ordered Hafsa's manuscript to be destroyed. The only reasonable conclusion one can have is that during Uthman's time, some of the contradictions in Hafsa's text were so glaring that a total destruction of it was called for rather than a revision. From then until now, conflicting passages and historical inaccuracies exist within the  Koranic texts."
http://www.beholdthebeast.com/textual_history_of_the_koran.htm
___________________________

Compare all in the above two posts to Hebrew scribal methodology:

"To suggest there was tampering to the Old Testament documents prior to 300 B.C. shows a misunderstanding of Israelite scribal methodology and of their reverence for the Scriptures. First of all, biblical scrolls were written on the inside only to prevent any smudging or smearing that might lead to a misreading of the text. When being copied -- besides many parallel readings -- the copy was compared with the original in every way humanly possible.

The words in each column were counted and then the letters. The first, last, and middle letter and word in each column had to be identical to the original. If the number of words or the number of letters of the copy differed from the original, the copy was destroyed. Then they counted the words and letters in the whole document. They divided the document into quarters and into eighths. The first, last and middle letter in each section had to be the same. The number of words and the number of letters in each section had to be the same.  The middle word and the middle letter in each section had to be the same, and they had to be the same for the whole document. If not, the copy was destroyed. Not corrected, but destroyed!"
http://www.beholdthebeast.com/bible_manuscript_errors_.htm
______________________

Earliest Quran washed and written over:



http://brotherpete.com/index.php?topic=2576.0

PeteWaldo

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • Posts: 3849
    • View Profile
    • False Prophet Muhammad
Re: Authors of the Hadith
« Reply #2 on: December 04, 2013, 09:37:15 AM »
Even though this Eastern history teacher puts Mecca founding in the 4th century AD, he remains a Muslim! Go figure.

http://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20091231160732AAlTMZx

Best Answer - Chosen by Asker
I am Muslim and teach Eastern History.
While Mohammad, the Kaaba and the Islamic religion seems to be very well documented in religious sources, I regret to say that there are few authentic Historical sources of Mohammad and Mecca. Of course, New Age Historians have come up with theories including a story of communication between the Pope and Mohammad but these theories are unfounded.

The earliest and most famous biography of Mohammed is, "Sirat Rasul Allah" (The Life of the Prophet of God) of Ibn Ishaq. The dates given for Mohammed's life are 570-632 AD. Ibn Ishaq was born about 717 and died in 767. He thus wrote his biography well over 100 years after Mohammed lived, precluding his gaining any information from eyewitnesses to the Sira, as they would have all died themselves in the intervening years.
However, no copies exist of Ibn Ishaq's work. We know of it only through quotations of it in the History of al-Tabari, who lived over 200 years after Ibn Ishaq (al-Tabari died in 992). Thus, the earliest biography of Mohammed of which copies still exist was written some 350 years after he lived.
It is curious, therefore, that there seems to have been so little serious scholarly research of the historical evidence for how Islam came to be. Yet what seems to be isn't so. A number of professional academic historians, both Western and Moslem, have produced a large body of research on the origins of Islam. For reasons best known to the pundits and reviewers who should be aware of it, this research remains publicly unknown.

Mecca is another problem; authentic, non Islamic Historians cannot find the City of Mecca before 400 AD and many experts seem to think it was not anywhere near the Arabian trade route.
The famous greek geographer Ptolemy mentioned Macoraba as a city in the Arabian interior. Some people wanted to assume that Macoraba was actually Mecca. Macoraba had appeared recently, with respect to Ptolemy’s time. This assumption would result in the conclusion that Mecca was built around the middle of the 2nd century A.D. However, even if this were true, it wouldn’t support the claim that Mecca was an old city existing from the time of Abraham.
Upon further study of the facts concerning Macoraba, we can conclude with certainty that Macoraba can’t be Mecca, and we can refute the idea that Mecca was built in the 2nd century A.D. All the facts point to the historical argument that Mecca was constructed in the 4th century A.D. Since Macoraba is not pronounced similar to Mecca, the scholar Crone suggested that the location of Maqarib, near Yathrib, was actually Macoraba. Maqarib is mentioned by Yaqut al-Hamawi, an Arab geographer who lived from 1179 to1229 A.D., in his geographical dictionary Mujam al-Buldan.[lx][60] This location is more acceptable than Mecca for the modern-day location of Macoraba, because Maqarib is closer in pronunciation to Macoraba than Mecca. Another reason is that Maqarib, though it does not exactly fit the documented location of Macoraba, is closer to the location, according to the latitude and longitude of Ptolemy, than Mecca is to the documented location of Macoraba.

So what can I say?
As a Muslim, I believe in the spiritual revelations of Islam but as a History teacher, unless more authentic Historical proof is found, I will keep religious History and authentic History separate.
It should be noted that the same can be said about both Christianity and Judaism; the authentic Historical sources are also shady. In fact there are more authentic Historical mention of Jesus than the more recent Great Prophet Mohammad himself.
However, History is an ongoing science and experts are always at work trying to dig up the truth.

Sorry if I offend fellow Muslims who think differently.

Edit....
Jim L, While diodorus siculus mentioned a shrine in Arabia, no one knows the location; he never called it Mecca. Remember there were many shrines all over Arabia and each had a black stone and gods.
However that's a good discussion; please feel free to Email me.

ExMilitary

  • ecclesia
  • Sr. Member
  • Posts: 335
  • In the last days perilous times shall come
    • View Profile
Re: Authors of the Hadith
« Reply #3 on: December 04, 2013, 11:52:44 AM »
A number of professional academic historians, both Western and Moslem, have produced a large body of research on the origins of Islam. For reasons best known to the pundits and reviewers who should be aware of it, this research remains publicly unknown.

Fear of murder for telling the truth that the evidence opposes Islam, maybe?

Quote
As a Muslim, I believe in the spiritual revelations of Islam but as a History teacher, unless more authentic Historical proof is found, I will keep religious History and authentic History separate.

Time and again, archaeology continues to show that the Bible is an authentic history.  The same can not be said for the Q'uran.  With regard to history, time and again, archaeology continues to come up empty on the claims of the Q'uran about Mecca.  This insenses Muslims so much, that they'd rather destroy archaeological evidence than to know the truth.

Quote
It should be noted that the same can be said about both Christianity and Judaism; the authentic Historical sources are also shady.

Shady, indeed.  You can not find any archaeological evidence for Christianity and Judaism... well except for here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, here, and here.

And here, here, here, here, here, here, here... well, you get the point... there just isn't any evidence available.

Quote
In fact there are more authentic Historical mention of Jesus than the more recent Great Prophet Mohammad himself.

Because, as history shows, Mohammad was neither great nor a prophet.

Quote
However, History is an ongoing science and experts are always at work trying to dig up the truth.

Again, Islam continually tries to hide[/quote] the truth of history.

Quote
While diodorus siculus mentioned a shrine in Arabia, no one knows the location; he never called it Mecca. Remember there were many shrines all over Arabia and each had a black stone and gods.

PeteWaldo

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • Posts: 3849
    • View Profile
    • False Prophet Muhammad
Re: Authors of the Hadith
« Reply #4 on: February 25, 2015, 07:23:04 AM »
https://answers.yahoo.com/question/index?qid=20090914151322AAr0khp

Q:  "When were the first Hadiths recorded?"

A:  "You will hear MANY stories about this !!!!!!

1)- The pro-Hadith guys will say that they were recorded during the life of prophet Mohammad.
2)- The anti-Hadith will tell you that the prophet himself forbid the recording of his sayings.

------
But let us look at what is AVAILABLE in hard copy:

- To date the OLDEST Hadith document found, is that of "Hamam ibn-e-Manmba". And as per a careful estimate it is dated to around 58 Hijri i.e. 48 years AFTER the death of prophet Mohammad.

Hammam ibn-e-Manmba was the student of Abu-Huraira. All the Hadith he wrote were from Abu-Huraira. (A very controversial person by the way).

This document contains "ONLY" 138 Hadith. And mind it, it is written 48 years AFTER the death of prophet. Just how reliable can it be, is anyones guess. Can you recall what were the causes and events of the Vietnam war ??? Or say the Beirut war ??? Or say what your grandfather did or say, about 20 years ago ??

(Pete note: We can only wonder how embarrassing it must be, since I can't find those 138 Hadith online. If you do please post it here.)
------

The next compilation that is ONLY reported but is NOT existent anymore is of the time of King Umer bin Abdul Aziz. This is around 100 hijri. It is said that many people used to confuse him in the matters of state and decisions through their narrations stating that it is from Prophet. So eventually he ordered a learned person in his court to gather all that the people narrate in the name of prophet and make it a compilation so that there are no further additions and surprises.

The compilation was prepared, but it does not exist anymore. Its existence is mentioned in ONLY some documents and references.

It is also said that this compilation contained around 500 hadiths.

---
The next compilation came in around 150 Hijri (140 years after the death of prophet). This is of Imam Malik (Muwatta). It is said that the initial compilation of Muwatta contained 10,000 hadiths. Which he himself slashed to about 700. In any case, these days one can have various versions of it that range from 300 to 700 hadiths.

The next came from Hanbal (Musnad Hanbal). It contains 40,000 hadiths.

Then came some unkown types as well i.e. Mushkat.

Then came Bukhari's compilation in around +220 Hijri. Followed by Muslim, and the 4 others i.e. Tirmizi, Nisai, Abu-Dawood and Ibn-e-Maja.

Bukhari writes in his introduction that he travelled to far flung places to collect Hadith. He received verbally from people in Iraq, something like 660,000 Hadiths over a period of 16 years. Out of these 660,000 after investigations and as per his own criterias, he chose to include 7,256 Hadiths in his compilation.

It is also interesting to note that there are various versions of Bukhari. The shortest contains 7,256 and the longest contains 9048 hadiths. Bukhari was not final until about 200 years after the death of Bukhari.

It is also interesting to note that his own student "Muslim" disagreed with Bukhari and rejected his Hadiths. In return Bukhari rejected the Hadiths of Muslim."

PeteWaldo

  • Administrator
  • Hero Member
  • Posts: 3849
    • View Profile
    • False Prophet Muhammad
Re: Authors of the Hadith
« Reply #5 on: February 25, 2015, 07:35:52 AM »
http://www.islamicmanuscripts.info/E-publications/witkam_oldest_dated/index.html

"The oldest known dated Arabic manuscript on paper (dated Dhu al-Qa`da 252 (866 AD).

This is MS Leiden Or. 298. Arabic, paper, 241 ff., upright script (with application of ihmal), dated Dhu al-Qa`da 252 (f. 241b; 866 AD), and thereby probably the oldest dated Arabic manuscript on paper, bound in a full-leather standard Library binding."

Apparently the oldest known Arabic script of any kind.