International Symposium The spiritual heir of Islam III:

 

Historiography of early Islam today

– Source-criticism and reconstruction of the beginnings

 

 

5.-7. November 2009

Goethe-University Frankfurt am Main

 

Criticism of Shiite methods in the Prophetic tradition: History and Hadith

 

Ahmed Alkatib

 

Introduction

At the outset I would like to point out that the main doctrines of Islam, the Book and practical Sunna, are considered by all Muslims to be ‘Mutawater’ – that is, agreed upon without doubt. Consequently there are no fundamental disagreements among different Islamic sects regarding Islam’s pillars and branches, such as tawhid (monotheism), prophethood, the afterlife, prayer, fasting, hajj pilgrimage, zakat, or the values, ethics, laws and manners of Islam. The main disagreements between the different groups have occurred mainly in the constitutional and political field. Thus the differences between Shiites and Sunnis are not rooted in Islam itself but in political thought.

    The research subject in this seminar, the criticism of Shiite methods in hadith, will therefore not include references to the Holy Quran or to the Mutawater Sunna, especially the practical Sunna. Rather, it is concerned with the hadiths or narrations that the Twelver Imamist Shiites have attributed to the prophet Muhammad regarding the divine leadership of the Prophet's Family (the Husseini Alawi progeny). This includes hadiths on some of the reasons for Quranic revelation concerning the subject of divine leadership and the appointment of Imam Ali as successor to the prophet.  

    There are no major differences among Muslims concerning the Prophet's biography or the historic events that occurred after his death, such as Saqifa, the Apostasy wars, the Consultation and the great wars (the war of the Camel, Saffin, Nahrawan and Karbala wars). This largely explains the inattention given by Shiites to writing history and the Prophet's biography.

    The disagreement between Shiites and Sunnis in relation to the Prophet's biography revolves most significantly around the prophet’s attitude toward Imam Ali Ibn Abi Talib. That is, whether the prophet saw him as one of the ordinary Muslims, as one of his closest companions, or as a specific successor and supplement to the message, being appointed by Allah to rule after the Messenger and representing a kind of extension to prophethood as Shiites believe.

    Shiites take a particular view in interpreting some events which they report differently to Muslims in general. They tend to focus on marginal events that accompanied the greater events such as the supposed aggression against Imam Ali's house and the attempt to burn it, as well as the supposed crushing of Fatemah Alzahraa behind the door resulting in her having a miscarriage. Furthermore, they differ with regard to how they view the events that accompanied Abu Bakar's election as caliph.

    The Imamist Shiite hadiths focus mainly on the subject of leadership, the appointment of the Shiites’ succession of Imams from the Prophet's Husseini Alawi progeny, and the conflicts that marred each Imam’s appointment. Most importantly, the Shiite hadiths focus on the disappearance of the twelfth Imam, Muhammad Ibn Hassan Alaskary, in the middle of the third century A.H, which represents the cornerstone in the building of the Twelve Imamte theory. The Shiites have narrated tens, hundreds and even thousands of hadiths to confirm his secret birth, occultation, messianic ‘Mahdawiya’ mission, and the promise of his reappearance in the future.

    The Imamist Shiites therefore take a specific view regarding the Prophet's biography, Islamic history and especially the Prophet's Family history. In establishing their view on hadith, the Shiites have relied on narrating from the Messenger and from their twelve Imams. However, about ninety nine percent of Shiite hadiths are Imamate hadiths, while only about one percent are Prophetic hadiths. When criticising the Shiites method regarding hadith, the prophetic tradition and history, we aim to criticise the hadiths attributed to the Imams, which incorporate the Imami thought and the Shiite historical view.  

 

The principles of the Shiite Imami method in hadith

The Imami method in hadith emerged in the second century A.H, after the emergence of the theory of ‘divine leadership’ which claimed that ‘Imams’ had complete knowledge of the Quran, as well as the monopolistic ability of its interpretation.  The theory also claimed that the Imams had knowledge of the unseen, that the angels spoke to them, that they had authorisation from Allah in religious matters, that they were a source of legislation, and that their opinions and sayings were infallible. All this ultimately meant that people had to surrender to them without question.

    The Imamist Shiites did not accept prophetic hadiths from other narrators or the general public, and believed in contradicting the Muslim majority. Furthermore, they believed that Imam Jaafar Alsadik refused the method of giving opinion on laws based on own thinking, measurement or deliberation (Ijtihad), and have narrated him saying:

 

Those who measure seek knowledge by measurement, but this method diverts them from the truth. Allah's religion will not be obtained by measurement.[1]

 

Due to the controlled number of laws mentioned in the Quran and Sunna, Imamists sought to solve the problem of forming new legislation with the idea of continuous divine inspiration from the Imams of the Prophet's Family, who were believed to represent a continuous source of legislation beside the Quran and Sunna.[2]

1- Refusing hadiths transmitted by the public

While the Imamists accept the prophetic Sunna, they nonetheless doubt the hadiths received from the prophet through the public, and only accept the hadiths received by the Imams. The reason for this, according to the Imamists, is that the imams knew more than all the people about the correct prophetic hadiths which they inherited through their fathers from the Messenger, and thus differ from the prophetic hadiths transmitted by the public.[3] The Imamists have narrated about Alsadik that he said:

 

We have enough Knowledge and do not need any knowledge from the people, while the people need what we have. We have a book that has been dictated to and written by Imam Ali from the Messenger which contains every permitted and forbidden law.[4]

 

2 – Accepting hadiths from Imams without verification

As a result of the belief in the infallibility of the Imams, and because they are believed to have possession of the secret book, Imamists have accepted all hadiths that the Imams have attributed to the Messenger. These hadiths have been accepted without any need for verification, despite the fact that there was more than a hundred years difference between the Imams and the Messenger. [5]

    The theory of divine leadership therefore established a new source of hadith limited to the Imams of the Prophet's Family. The theory prohibited any discussion or questioning into the hadiths or authority of the “Imams”, as well as any inquiry regarding the attribution between the Imam and the Prophet. This is because the Shiites believed that the Imams were infallible and did not lie or forget.

    Some Imamists have alleged that Allah has authorised the Imams with the power of legislation, and they have claimed that the religion or legal judgments are not only what was narrated from the prophet or came in the Holy Quran but also included what the Imams have said.[6] This method subsequently allowed the Imamists to transfer many hadiths and fatwas about the Imams, thereby establishing a new form of jurisprudence.

    As a result of this new source of Imamate hadith, the Shiites have transferred distinct reports about the reasons for certain Quranic revelations, the Prophetic tradition, Islamic history and Imamate history.

    Alkulaini in Alkafi narrated an interpretation by Imam Muhammad Albaqir regarding the Quranic verse on the owners of kinship, which reads, ‘The Prophet is closer to the believers than their own selves, and his wives are (as) their mothers. And the owners of kinship are closer one to another in the ordinance of Allah than (other) believers’ (33:6). Albaqir interpreted that the word kinship in this verse meant the prophet’s progeny, and thus restricted leadership to them. He said:

 

It talks about authority. We have priority in leadership because we are closer to the Messenger in kinship than the believers, the migrants and supporters.[7]

 

Albaqir interpreted other verses in view of the Imamate, and narrated exclusive reports about the Messenger, saying:

 

Allah the Exalted, the Majestic, revealed the verse ‘This day I have perfected your religion for you and completed My favour unto you’ (5:3) on a Friday in Arafat, and the religion was completed by appointing Imam Ali Ibn Abi Taleb as Caliph. Then Allah revealed, ‘O Messenger! Make known that which has been revealed unto you from the Lord, for if you do it not, you will not have conveyed His message. Allah will protect you from mankind. Lo! Allah guides not the disbelieving people’ (5:67). Consequently, the Messenger took the hand of Imam Ali and said, ‘O assembly of Muslims! This is your leader (wali) after me; those who are here should inform those who are absent’. Thereafter, when the Messenger neared his death he said, ‘O Ali I want to entrust to you what Allah has entrusted to me of His knowledge, His knowledge of the unseen, His matters and religion’. Thus the Messenger did not include any one other than Ali’.[8]

 

The Shiites accepted without argument the opinions of Imam Albaqir on the restricting of leadership to the children of Lady Fatemah, and leaving out Ali’s other children. Thereafter, Albaqir restricted leadership in the Husseini line whilst leaving out the Hassani line. According to Albaqir the transfer of leadership among the sons of Hussein from one to another was based on narrations from Imam Ali, which were in turn received from the Messenger.[9] The Shiites did not demand from Albaqir any evidence to prove his claims as they believed him to be an infallible Imam appointed from Allah.

    The Shiite belief in Imam Albaqir’s infallibility was based merely on what he claimed, even though he should have brought proofs for his claims. Therefore, the Imamist Shiites accepted Albaqir's reports about himself, about leadership and about the Prophet, without asking him for any evidence to prove that he was infallible.

    The belief in Albaqir's divine leadership opened a window to those “Imams” who came after him, such as Alsadik, Alkazim, Alridha, Aljawad, Alhadi, Alaskari and ‘Almahdi’. The Shiites dealt with them with the same degree of obedience, and did not question them for evidence when they attributed reports to Allah and the Messenger.

    The theory of divine leadership had thus created a large gap among Muslims in the transmission of hadiths about the Messenger. This gap appears more noticeably when we view the Imams as ordinary narrators, and not as infallibles. We would demand from them, even if they were honest, to mention the ‘Sanad’, or the line of narrators mediating between them and the Prophet. We also must examine if these hadiths agree with the Quran, with logic, with knowledge and with other Mutawatir hadiths.

 

3 – Contradicting other Muslims

Based on the claim that the Imams have special authorisation in religious matters, some Imamists, or the extremists among them, adopted a new method of Contradiction with other Muslims (Sunnis). This method was based on Imam Alsadik’s narration:

 

If two different hadiths come to you, compare them with the Book of Allah. What agrees with the Book of Allah you take, and what disagrees with the Book of Allah you reject. If you do not find them in the Book of Allah, then compare them with the common (Sunni) hadiths. What agrees with these hadiths you reject, and what disagrees with these hadiths you accept.[10]

 

In another narration, he says ‘If two different hadiths come to you, you take the one that contradicts the common (Sunni) hadith’. [11]

    Some Imamists followed the Contradiction method without checking the narrators of hadith and examining their attribution objectively. That is, to see if the narrators were honest in order to accept their reports or dishonest in order to reject their reports. Furthermore, some Imamists followed the Contradiction method even regarding the hadiths narrated by the Shiites from the Imams themselves, regardless of their attribution. Alhassan Ibn Jaham said:

 

I said to the Righteous Servant (Imam Alkadhim), ‘Are we free to accept or refuse what comes from you or must we surrender to you?’ He said, ‘No. I swear by Allah, you must surrender to us’. I said, ‘Some hadiths are narrated from Abi Abdullah, while some contradict those from him. Which should we take?’ He said, ‘Take what contradicts the common (Sunni) hadiths, and keep away from what agrees with them’.    [12]

 

Sama’ah Ibn Mahran asked Abi Abdullah (Alsadik):

 

‘Two hadiths came to us. One orders us to do something, and the other forbids us from it’. Abi Abdullah said, ‘Do not take either of them until you meet an Imam then ask him’. I said, ‘We cannot wait’, and he said, ‘Take the one that disagrees with the common people. [13]

 

These reports have played a hugely negative role in distancing Imamate jurisprudence from the jurisprudence of Muslims in general.

 

4 – The Precaution or Tuqya method

Another important matter that played a huge role in the hadith of the Imamists and led to the discrepancy between Imamate jurisprudence and general Islamic jurisprudence was the method of Precaution or Tuqya. The Precaution method refers to the Shiite belief in the possibility of a jurisprudence that is contrary to Sharia – that is, to say or do something whilst secretly believing something else due to fear or precaution. Thus under pressure or fear the Imams can sometimes contradict themselves when giving a Fatwa. Abu Amr Alkinani narrated about Alsadik that he said:

 

‘O Abu Amr what do you think if I spoke to you of some hadith or gave you a fatwa, and then you came to me and asked me about it, and I answered you differently to what I said before. Which one would you take?’ I said, ‘The newer one, and I would leave the previous one’. He said, ‘You are right O Abu Amr, and Allah wants to be worshiped secretly. By Allah if you took the newer one, it would be better for me and you, and Allah the Exalted, the Majestic, wants Tuqya in His religion.[14] 

 

By this he means following a ruling that goes against Sharia or what was previously said – that is, following the new ruling given by Precaution or Tuqya. Abu Jaafar Alahwal narrated about Alsadik that he said:

 

The people should ask and learn, and know their Imam. And they should take what he says even if it was said in Tuqya.[15]

   

Zurara Ibn Aayoin narrated about Alsadik that he said:

 

If my sayings resemble those of the people it would be said in Tuqya, and if it does not resemble the sayings of the people then it would not have been said in Tuqya [I would be talking honestly].[16] 

 

Thus the Shiites permitted inaccurate or false fatwa through the method of Precaution. 

 

5 - The verbal transfer of hadith

The narration of hadiths among Shiites began verbally, and was thus more common than writing. The Imams did not usually write down their hadiths or distribute them in known books. It was thus expected that the process of verbal transmission of hadiths embodied distortion, forgery and lies. This distortion increased from one narrator to another, from one generation to another, and from one place to another. There are many texts about Jaafar Alsadik which convey his complaints that lying about him occurred.[17] This casts much doubt on the whole process of hadith transmission attributed to the imams.

 

6 - Book Finding

Occasionally, some Shiite scholars used to write down hadiths in books, and there were people who took these books and manipulated them by adding false hadiths containing exaggerations, profanities and blasphemy. Alsadik said:

 

Mughira Ibn Saaid and his friends intended to lie about my father (Albakir). They used to take the books of my father’s students and manipulate them by adding profanities and blasphemy and assigning these to my father. They then broadcasted these among the Shiites. Therefore, the exaggerations and distortions in my father books are what Mughira Ibn Saaid fabricated in these books.[18]

Therefore, the transmission of a hadith by referencing it or finding it in a book, and not hearing it directly from the source, is a very weak way of hadith transmission. It cannot be relied upon due to the possibility of forgery and manipulation by others.

    Alkulaini in his collection Alkafi, which is the most important hadith book for Shiites, did not report all hadiths directly from his Sheikhs, but relied on the four hundred origin books that he found. These were written by previous Shiites from all groups and trends, including the moderate, the exaggerating and the extremist.

    Although Alkulaini did not declare that he had adopted the method of ‘book finding’, he neglected to mention the transmission process from his Sheikhs. He did not say my sheikh told me so, or spoke to me so, or I heard him say thus, as other narrators have done. Rather, he only gave the names of the Sheikhs whom he quoted the hadiths from. Furthermore, he did not convey that these Sheikhs said some one told me so, or spoke to me thus, but was satisfied with what each Sheikh said about another. This method is much closer to the meaning of finding hadiths in books than reporting a chain of transmission directly by making clear exactly who heard what from whom.

 

7- The dilemma in cursing and praising Men 

Shiite scholars were unsuccessful in the ability to distinguish between honest and dishonest narrators, and often got lost in the tangle of contradictory hadiths received from the Imams which cursed some and praised others in contrary to reality (according to the method of Precaution). For example, the report that praises Mufadhal Ibn Omar, the leader of the exaggerating ‘Mufawwedhah’ group, or the report that wounds a moderate like Zurara Ibn Aayun.[19] Furthermore, Alkulaini narrated about Imam Alsadik that he cursed some of his virtuous friends in front of the people by ‘Tuqya’.[20]  

    The Precaution method allowed a man like Abu Alkhattab Mohamed Ibn Abi Zeinab Miqlas Alasadi Alkufi, who considered Imam Alsadik to be a divine prophet or God, to escape the Imam’s cursing. Abu Alkhattab did this by altering the meaning of the Imam’s speech and saying that the Imam meant someone else.[21]

    Shiite history informs us about the merging into of various misguided groups among the Shiites, so that it was difficult to discriminate between the guided and misguided during the lives of the Imams. This merging continued into the following generations, and negatively affected the transmission of hadiths from the Imams. Despite Alkulaini’s attempt to clarify the hadiths attributed to the Imams at the beginning of the fourth century A.H, there is doubt surrounding Alkulaini himself and the narrators who he praised and whose hadiths he accepted. This is because they were all considered extremists from the misguided groups whom the Imams cursed.

 

8 – Imitation in the ‘science of Men’

In the fourth and fifth centuries A.H Shiite scholars such as Alkashi, Alnajashi, Ibn Alghdaeri and Altousi, developed the ‘science of Men’, which seeks to distinguish and classify narrators according to strength of narration. They differentiated between the weak and strong narrations attributed to the Imams. However, even today there are still many disagreements in recognising the praised and discredited men as Shiites today continue to imitate the old generations in their views about the narrators, and have not carried out a process of independent criticism. Thus they remain in the same confusing tangle that existed centuries ago. 

    The criticism of men obviously did not touch upon the Imams themselves. None of the Shiites dared criticise the Imams or to distrust their ‘correct’ and ‘assured’ hadiths, or to inquire about their sources and their way of attributing to the Messenger. Furthermore, the scholars did not carry out a review of the hadiths attributed to Albaqir and Alsadik around the Imamate theory itself, and they did not criticise the hadiths that appeared in the fourth century A.H. about the doctrines of the twelve Imams. 

 

9 - The Akhbari  method

The Akhbari method emerged in the fourth century A.H, before being annulled by the fundamentalist Ijthadi method. Essentially, the Akhbari method puts hadith first. Akhbaris believed in any hadith about the Imams, even if this hadith went against the Quran, logic, science or the confirmed Sunna for fear of rejecting the Imams and diverging from their guidance. These Shiites believed hadiths to have domination over the Quran as they can interpret and explain the Quran.

 

10 – The Hashawi method

There are many hadith methods; some of which mention the Sanad or chain of narration and clarify if the narration is correct, while others only transmit the Sanad without commenting on the correctness of the hadith. Shiites have adopted a method that approves even weak narrations, and it has been claimed that weak hadiths strengthen other weak hadiths, while the ‘Mutawater’ hadiths do not need a strong Sanad. This method allowed much room for fabrication and forgery resulting in fictional stories, especially concerning the birth and presence of the twelfth Imam, Muhammad Ibn Alhasan Alaskary.

    The Twelver Shiites claim that the twelfth Imam was born secretly in the middle of the third century A.H, that he disappeared after the death of his father in 260 A.H, and that he is still alive today and will reappear in the future. However, Shiites do not have any valid historic confirmation or any solid reports about his birth. Nonetheless, they still believe in his birth, presence and continued life up to this day.

    This belief has been based upon ideological propositions, and the Shiites’ heavy reliance on fabricated hadiths that are closer to rumours and legends and which have no basis. The Twelver Shiites upheld these belief in order to rescue their political religious theory. They dug out a large number of older weak hadiths that spoke in an obscure and general way about an Imam Mahdi in general, who is said to appear at the end of time. They implemented these hadiths on the imaginary son of the eleventh Imam, Alaskari, and claimed that he was the Mahdi. With time these imaginary propositions became a part of the historic ‘proved’ and ‘established’ Shiite doctrine, which will no longer accept any argument or discussion.

    In studying the subject of Imam Mahdi, we can observe the Hashawi method, which in attempt to confirm the birth of Alaskari’s son accepts all hadiths without any discrimination at all.  An example includes Sheikh Lutf Allah Alsafi’s book The selected hadiths regarding the twelfth Imam.[22] He followed an extremist Hashawi method which was rejected even by the earlier Akhbaris, who at least made some attempt at hadith discrimination.

    Alsafi accepted narrations without any examination of the content or the chain of narrators, relying solely on the reports of the old Sheikhs, as well as hadiths found in the books of the old Sheikhs. He claimed the hadiths about Imam Mahdi to be Mutawater as all the people believe in him, and said he would not accept weak hadiths without examination, but if the hadith is Mutawater then it does not need to be examined. He also claimed that singularly the weak hadiths are weak, but altogether they become strong as weak hadiths strengthen other weak hadiths.[23]

    Alsafi’s claims might have been correct if the subject of Imam Mahdi’s birth was actually Mutawater, so that it would have been accepted by everyone regardless of their different religious affiliations in the same way that the existence of the Prophet Muhammad or Imam Ali or Alhassan Alaskari is agreed upon. However, a disputed, secret, unknown subject such as Imam Mahdi, who was denounced even by Imam Alaskari's family, and who has no trace in history, cannot be considered ‘Mutawater’. Consequently, it is not possible to overlook an examination into a ‘Mutawater’ hadith, as Alsafi claimed, when that hadith is not in fact Mutawater.

 

11 – Imaginary assumptions method

The strangest thing about the method of proving the existence of the Twelfth Imam is the attempt to prove his existence with ideology and not with the use of familiar historic evidence as might be used in proving the existence of any human being in history. The Twelver Shiites began following the ideological method after they fell into a theoretical crisis, which arose with the death of the eleventh Imam, Alhassan Alaskari, who died without leaving a known successor to lead the Shiites. In their view, the Imamate line should have continued vertically in Ali and Hussein’s progeny till Judgement day. When they did not find a single historic or legal piece of evidence to prove their claim, and in order to save their theory from collapse, they were forced into presuming the existence of a child born to Alhassan Alaskari.

    The Shiite theorist (Mutaklim) Abu Sahal Ismail Ibn Ali Alnoubkhti tried to prove the existence of the son of Alhassan Alaskari through ideology. In his book, The notification, written thirty years after the twelfth imams supposed disappearance, he says:

 

The Shiites came to know of the son of Alhassan’s existence by deliberation, as they came to know Allah, the prophet and religious affairs.[24]

 

Almufeed (338- 413A.H) maintained:

 

The ideological evidence required to prove the idea that we need an infallible Imam at all times is in itself enough evidence to prove the existence of Alhassan's son.

 

Almufeed also said, ‘This is a principle that will not need to be proven with narrations. It is an ideological issue’.[25]  In addition, Almurtadha Alam Alhuda (355-436 A.H) said:

 

The mind requires there to be an Imam at all times, and for that Imam to be infallible…if these two principles are accepted then it is necessary to say that there is a Twelfth Imam.[26]

 

Almurtadha denied the need to witness the Imam in order to believe in him, based on the possibility of recognising him through ideology.[27] Furthermore, Altousi (385-460 A.H) said:

 

Whoever accepts the ideological proofs will believe in the existence of the owner of time and his leadership, because we always need an infallible Imam.

 

Altousi divided the evidence on the birth of the owner of time (or Imam Mahdi) into two parts: ideological and traditional. He focused mainly on the importance of ideological proofs, even if there is no evidence of this Imam at all.[28]

 

Conclusion

Shiites have built their views of history, hadith, and the prophetic tradition on the Imamate theory, which maintains the belief in the infallibility of the twelve imams. Shiites have accepted the Imamate hadiths about the Prophet without a need for a chain of mediation between them and the Prophet. This is the biggest problem in the Shiite hadith method as it does not allow us to verify or to be certain of the trustfulness and accuracy of the hadiths transmitted.

    We discussed various methods such as the Tuqya or Precaution method which leaves us in confusion about the hadiths that actually came from the Imams, and makes it very difficult to distinguish between the honest and dishonest narrators. Furthermore, the imaginary assumptions method is most extraordinary, when we consider how it came to be widely accepted, and upon which the main cornerstone of the Twelver Imamist doctrine came to be built.  

 

 

 

International Symposium The spiritual heir of Islam III:

 

Historiography of early Islam today

– Source-criticism and reconstruction of the beginnings

 

 

 

5.-7. November 2009

Goethe-University Frankfurt am Main

 

Campus Westend

Grüneburgplatz 1

60629 Frankfurt am Main

 

 

05. November 2009, Thursday

Room: Casino 1801

 

18:00 – 22:00      Opening

                               

18:00     Welcome

Ömer Özsoy, director of the Institution for Studies of the Culture and Religion of Islam

Matthias Lutz-Bachmann, vice-president of the Goethe-University

Rudolf Kriszeleit, permanent secretary for justice and integration

Greeting in the name of federal minister of the interior

 

18:45     Greeting for the foundation of the Institution for Studies of the Culture and Religion of Islam

Ali Bardakoğlu, president of the Turkish Religious Institute Diyanet

                Considerations on the development of Islamic theology in the German university system

 

19:05     Musical

 

19:30     Opening speech

                Angelika Neuwirth, Berlin

An “European” reading of the Quran – thoughts about the late antique horizon of the Quran

 

20:00     Greeting reception

 

 

06. November 2009, Friday

Room: HZ 6

 

09:00 – 12:30      1. Session (German)

Biography of the Prophet and beginnings of Islam

Presentation: Stefan Wild, Bonn

Observer: Ayşe Başol-Gürdal, Frankfurt

 

09:00     Raif Georges Khoury, Heidelberg

Critical remarks to the actual situation of the researches and sources about the biography of Muhammad

09:30     Commentary: Daniel Birnstiel, Cambridge

09:40     Discussion

 

10:00     Tilman Nagel, Göttingen

Who was Mohammad? The meaning of the “minor” details

10:30     Commentary: Gregor Schoeler, Basel

10:40     Discussion

 

11:00     Break

 

11:30     Marco Schöller, Munster

Value of sources of the Prophet-biography and other kind of literatures

12:00     Commentary: Michael Marx, Berlin

12:10     Discussion

 

12:30     Possibility for the Friday-prayer or a guided tour in the “Palmengarten”

13:30     Lunch

 

15:00 – 17:00      2. Session (English and Turkish)

The evidences of tradition as historical source

Presentation: Josef van Ess, Tubingen

Observer: Serdar Güneş, Frankfurt

 

15:00     Mehmet Akif Koç, Ankara

The value of the isnād system from the point of exegetical reports

15:30     Commentary: Stefan Leder, Halle/Beirut

15:40     Discussion

 

16:00     Bünyamin Erul, Ankara

The value of the sources of the Sīra-traditions in point of view of criterions of the Islamic Hadith Criticism

16:30     Commentary: Ali Dere, Ankara

16:40     Discussion

 

17:00     Break

 

17:30 – 19:30      3. Session (English)

Classical Hadith Methodology and contemporary History and Hadith Criticism

Presentation: Miklos Muranyi, Bonn

Observer: Mark Khalil Bodenstein, Nurnberg

 

17:30     Mehmet Hayri Kırbaşoğlu, Ankara

The classical Hadith Methodology: a critical approach

18:00     Commentary: Ismail Bardhi, Skopje

18:10     Discussion

 

18:30     Ahmad Al-Katib, London

Criticism of Shiite methods in the Prophetic tradition: History and Hadith

19:00     Commentary: Rainer Brunner, Freiburg

19:10     Discussion

 

19:30     Dinner

 

 

07. November 2009, Saturday

Room: HZ 1, HZ 6, HZ 14, HZ 15

 

09:00 – 10:30      Forum series

                               

Forum 1: Hadith and the Prophet in lessons

Chairman and observator: Zekirija Sejdini, Wien

Room: HZ 1

 

Ednan Aslan, Wien

Hadith-Didactics: A vital relation to the Sunna of the Prophet

Yaşar Sarıkaya, Paderborn

Hadith as a source of the Islamic religious instruction and the exemplary position of the Prophet

               

Forum 2: Muhammad-receptions in Christian Theologies

Chairman and observator: Hansjörg Schmid, Stuttgart

Room: HZ 14

 

Anja Middelbeck-Varwick, Berlin

Muhammad, the Prophet after Jesus. Catholic-theological assessments of the results of the 2. Vatican

Wolfram Reiss, Wien

Muhammad, a prophet? Rapprochements of byzantine positions

 

Forum 3: Muslim historiography as a hermeneutical problem

Chairman and observator: Bekim Agai, Halle

Room: HZ 15

 

Sabine Damir-Geilsdorf, Marburg

Early Islam, a projection place? Contemporary bricolages in online-fatwas and reform debates

Nicolai Sinai, Berlin

The Tunisian historian Hishām ǦaÝī (born 1935) and his work "The historicity of Muhammad’s proclamation” – a contemporary approach to the early Islam

 

Forum 4: Images of women in the early Islamic tradition

Chairman and observator: Ertuğrul Şahin, Frankfurt

Room: HZ 6

 

Hidayet Şefkatli-Tuksal, Ankara

The image of woman in the Hadith material: a critical contemplation

Doris Decker, Frankfurt

Female reflexion and emancipation – conceptions of women-images in early Islam until the 9th century

 

10:30     Break

 

11:00 – 13:45      Conclusion

Presentation: Abdullah Takım, Frankfurt

Room: HZ 6         

 

11:00     Ending speech (Turkish)

Mehmed Said Hatiboğlu, Ankara

The origin of the Hadith-critical thought in early Islam exemplary on the Prophet’s wife  ÝĀÞiša

11:30     Discussion

 

12:00     Observatory reports

12:45     Discussion

 

13:30     Final commentary

Abdullah Takım, Frankfurt

 

13:45     Goodbye

 

 

 

 

 



[1] Çáßáíäí¡ ÇáßÇÝí¡ ßÊÇÈ ÇáÚÞá¡ ßÊÇÈ ÝÖá ÇáÚáã¡ ÈÇÈ ÇáÈÏÚ æÇáÑÃí æÇáãÞÇÆíÓ¡ Í ÑÞã 7

[2] Imamists believe that Jaafar Alsadik claimed to have special exclusive knowledge from Allah, and mention that once he asked Abu Hanifa, ‘Are you the scholar of Iraq?’ He answered, ‘Yes’, and Alsadik asked ‘With what do you give them a fatwa?’ Abu Hanifa said, ‘By the Book of Allah and his prophet’s Sunna.’ Alsadik then asked, ‘O Abu Hanifa do you recognise Allah’s book very well? The abrogating and abrogated?’, and Abu Hanifa said ‘Yes’. Alsadik said, ‘O Abu Hanifa! You have claimed a knowledge. Allah did not give that knowledge except to the people of the book to whom it was revealed and especially to a special group from our prophet Muhammad’s progeny, and  Allah did not leave you a single letter from his book’. 

   ÇáßÇÔÇäí¡ ÇáæÇÝí ¡ Í ÑÞã [ 33177 ]27 

[3] - Alkashi narrated from Salem Bin Abi Hafsa  that he saw Abi Abdullah (Alsadik) and he told him, ‘We complain to Allah of a man [meaning Imam Albaqir] who when he talks to us, says ‘The Messenger said…’ [Without any mediation]. Alsadik began to say, ‘Allah said…’ Al Kashi, Al Hassan Bin Saleh Bin Hay's biography. 

[4] ÇáßÇÔÇäí¡ÇáæÇÝí¡ [ 33362 ] 29

[5] ÇáßÇÔÇäí¡ ÇáæÇÝí¡ [ 33363 ] 30

[6] The Imamists attribute to Imam Alsadik that he said, ‘What Allah authorised for his Messenger, he has authorised for us’, and that he said, ‘Allah did not authorise for anybody except for the Messenger and the Imams. Allah said, ‘We have sent down to thee the Book in truth, that thou might judge between men, as guided by Allah’, and so the authorisation runs in ‘the guardians’ peace be upon them’.

[7] - Çáßáíäí¡ ÇáßÇÝí¡ ßÊÇÈ ÇáÍÌÉ¡ ÈÇÈ ãÇ äÕ Çááå æÑÓæáå Úáì ÇáÃÆãÉ æÇÍÏÇ ÈÚÏ æÇÍÏ¡ Í ÑÞã 2  

[8]  - Çáßáíäí¡ ÇáßÇÝí¡ ßÊÇÈ ÇáÍÌÉ¡ ÈÇÈ ãÇ äÕ Çááå æÑÓæáå Úáì ÇáÃÆãÉ æÇÍÏÇ ÈÚÏ æÇÍÏ¡ Í ÑÞã 6  

[9]  - Çáßáíäí¡ ÇáßÇÝí¡ ßÊÇÈ ÇáÍÌÉ¡ ÈÇÈ ãÇ äÕ Çááå æÑÓæáå Úáì ÇáÃÆãÉ æÇÍÏÇ ÈÚÏ æÇÍÏ¡ Í ÑÞã 6  æ ÈÇÈ ÇáÅÔÇÑÉ æÇáäÕ Úáì ÇáÍÓä Èä Úáí¡ Í ÑÞã 1 æ 5 æ ÈÇÈ ÇáÅÔÇÑÉ æÇáäÕ Úáì ÇáÍÓíä Èä Úáí¡ Í ÑÞã 2

[10]  - ÇáßÇÔÇäí¡ÇáæÇÝí¡ [ 33362 ] 29

[11]  - ÇáßÇÔÇäí¡ ÇáæÇÝí¡ [ 33363 ] 30

[12]  - ÇáßÇÔÇäí¡  ÇáæÇÝí¡ [ 33364 ] 31

[13] -  Alkashani, Al Wafi [ 33375 ] 42.

Ali Ibn Asbat asks Alredha, ‘There is a matter the ruling about which I must know, and there is no one from the Shiites in the place I am in to advise me. What should I do?’ Alredah replied, ‘Go to the scholar of the Government and ask him about your matter. If he gives you a fatwa, do against what he says because the truth is in disagreeing with him’. Alredha also says, ‘If two contradictory hadiths come to you from us, look to what disagrees with the public (sunnah) and take that, and look to what agrees with their hadith and reject that.’

Al Wafi [ 33356 ] Úä Úíæä ÃÎÈÇÑ ÇáÑÖÇ   1 : 275 | the fulfilling 10, [ 33367 ]

[14] - Çáßáíäí¡ ÇáßÇÝí¡ ßÊÇÈ ÇáÅíãÇä æÇáßÝÑ¡ ÈÇÈ ÇáÊÞíÉ¡ Í ÑÞã 7

[15]  - ÇáæÇÝí¡ [ 33346 ] Úä  ÇáßÇÝí 1 : 31 | 4

[16]  - ÇáæÇÝí¡ [ 33379 ] 46 

Abu Baseer said, ‘I asked Abu Abdullah about something. He answered me, and I said, ‘I asked your father about that, and his answer was different’. He said, ‘My father’s friends asked him and he informed them of the right answer. Then you came to me while you were hesitant and uncertain and so I gave you a different fatwa by Tuqya’.

Çáßáíäí¡ ÇáßÇÝí¡ Í ÑÞã 5122 -3

[17] - Alsadik said, ‘People lie about me much. We, the Prophet's Family are honest, but there are many liars that lie about us, and deface our truthfulness with their lying. And some people lie until the devil requires their lies’.  

 -  Çáßáíäí¡ ÇáßÇÝí¡ ßÊÇÈ ÇáÑæÖÉ¡ Í ÑÞã 362 æ Í ÑÞã 293 æ ßÊÇÈ ÇáÅíãÇä æÇáßÝÑ¡ ÈÇÈ ÇáÊÞíÉ¡ Í ÑÞã 10 æ ÇáßÔí. ÊÑÌãÉ  Èä ÃÈí ÒíäÈ ÇáÃÓÏí¡ Í ÑÞã5 æ9 æ 11 æ 18   

[18] - Asad Heidar,  Imam Alsadik and the four schools of law, the second volume, p. is 381 - 383

 

[19] - Alkashi in Zurara Ibn Aayun's biography reported that Imam Alsadik told his son Abdullah, ‘Pass Salams to your father and say to him, ‘I criticise you in order to defend you because the enemies harm and kill those who I praise, and they love those who I criticise, and praise all who I mar. Therefore, I criticize you because you are known to lean towards us. In the Quran it says, ‘As for the ship, it belonged to poor people working on the sea, and I wished to mar it, for there was a king behind them who was taking every ship by force’ (18:79).’’  Al Kashi, Zurara Bin Aayun's biography.

[20]  - Çáßáíäí¡ ÇáßÇÝí¡ ßÊÇÈ ÇáÑæÖÉ¡ ÑÓÇáÉ ÇáÅãÇã ÇáÕÇÏÞ¡ ÍÏíË ÑÞã 1

[21] -  Abu Alkhattab said, ‘By cursing us in public,  the Imam really intends to praise us’, and he also referred to the following verse of the Quran, ‘As for the ship, it belonged to poor people working on the sea, and I wished to mar it, for there was a king behind them who was taking every ship by force’.

 ÇáÃÔÚÑí ÇáÞãí¡ ÓÚÏ Èä ÚÈÏ Çááå¡ ÇáãÞÇáÇÊ æÇáÝÑÞ¡ Õ 55   

 

[22]   - ãäÊÎÈ ÇáÃËÑ Ýí ÇáäÕ Úáì ÇáÇãÇã ÇáËÇäí ÚÔÑ

[23]  -   ÇáÕÇÝí¡  ãäÊÎÈ ÇáÃËÑ¡ Õ 2 

[24]  - ÇáÕÏæÞ¡ ÅßãÇá ÇáÏíä¡ Õ 92  

[25]  - ÇáãÝíÏ¡ ÇáÅÑÔÇÏ¡ Õ 347

[26]  - ÇáãÑÊÖì¡ ÑÓÇáÉ Ýí ÇáÛíÈÉ¡ Õ 2 - 3

[27]  - ÇáãÑÊÖì¡ ÇáÔÇÝí¡ Ì 1¡ Õ 79 

[28]  - ÇáØæÓí¡ ÊáÎíÕ ÇáÔÇÝí¡  Õ 211 æ ãÓÇÆá ßáÇãíÉ / ÇáãÓÇÆá ÇáÚÔÑ¡ Õ 99  æ ÇáÛíÈÉ¡ Õ  3 æ 4 æ 15 æ  138