Jalal Abualrub's, The Prophet of Mercy,
vs.
Craig Winn's, The Prophet of Doom
Chapter Two Contents:
·
The Quran Does Not Have a Context?
Number of Fatalities in All of the Prophet's Battles Combined
·
The Jihad of the Prophet of Mercy Was Directed At Those Who Sought to Destroy Islam and Kill Muslims Jalal Abualrub's, The Prophet of Mercy,
vs.
Craig Winn's, The Prophet of Doom
Chapter Two The Quran Does Not Have a Context?
Craig Winn said, “Allah's Book, the Qur'an, lacks context and chronology… So for clarity and readability, I have trimmed their unruly word patterns and meaningless repetitions, being careful not to alter the meaning or message of any passage.”
This statement from Winn demonstrates how little he knows about the Quran and exposes his arrogance. The Quran is not a historical record. It does not contain a count of the number of Quraish sub-tribes and how many sheep, asses, camels and cattle they owned
[1]
. It is not a story book; it does not contain different genealogies for the same man who is supposed to be without a genealogy
[2]
; it is not a collection of fantastic dreams falsely portrayed as reality
[3]
; it is not a science book; it is not a medical or astronomical reference. The Quran is a book of religious guidance. What Winn sees –in his confused mind- as unruly patterns and meaningless repetitions all have unique purpose and meaning. Winn cannot even begin to understand what he is talking about as he cannot understand a sentence of the Arabic Quran. He cannot begin to understand the power of the Quran, its eloquent statements, the stories it narrates so as to draw specific lessons, its commandments, news of the Unseen and the deep emotions and elation it raises in the hearts of the believers when they listen to it. He cannot begin to contemplate the beauty of its formation, the magnificent sequence of its verses as they enlighten the believers about Allah, His Names and Attributes, His Infinite Power, His Actions, His Aid that He sent to Prophets Noah, Abraham, Lot
[4]
, Moses, Jacob, Job, Jesus and Muhammad, the creation, the trees, the fish in the sea, the wonders of the earth and the power of the nature that Allah created on earth. Winn thinks that because the translators of the meaning contained in the Quran repeat certain English words to explain various Quranic terms, that the original words in Arabic are the same. English is a rather limited language as compared to Arabic. Several ‘different' words in Arabic –which if placed in different sentences offer unique perspectives and implications- yet can only be translated into one or a very limited number of relevant English words. I am at loss for words for this extreme arrogance by a person who is truly ignorant in the Quran; the Quran that has always sparked the imagination and invoked the love, reverence and respect in the hearts of countless number of Muslims for more than 1438 lunar years. May Allah make you see the light one day, Winn, and indeed, you need a powerful light to be able to see.
The Quran Contains Many Topics
The Quran contains many topics foremost among them is its foundation: Monotheism and the belief in the One and Only Deity there is. The Quran teaches every aspect of the Islamic Faith, stories of previous Prophets and how they were treated by their respective nations, emphasizes the magnificence of the creation, repeats Allah's Warnings and Promises within various parts of it, vividly describes the Hereafter, Hell, Paradise and the Day of Resurrection, gives specific and general Commandments pertaining to various aspects of life and religion and establishes a code of good conduct and better behavior. Some long Surahs, such as Surat Yusuf (Chapter 12), which contains 111 Ayat (Quranic sentences) is almost entirely about the story of Prophet Yusuf (Joseph), peace be upon him, his father, Prophet Ya`qub (Jacob), peace upon him, and Yusuf's eleven brothers, may Allah grant them His Mercy. The last verse in this chapter reads like this, what transliterated means, {111. Indeed in their stories, there is a lesson for men of understanding. It (the Qur'ân) is not a forged statement but a confirmation of (Allâh's existing Books) which were before it [i.e. the original copies of the Taurât (Torah), the Injeel (Gospel) and other Scriptures of Allâh] and a detailed explanation of everything and a guide and a mercy for the people who believe}. If one takes out the oft-repeated reminder in this Surah about Tau`heed (Islamic Monotheism) and Allah's Warnings and Promises, then that would entirely spoil it. To Winn, the Quran is a set of meaningless repetitions but his Bible is not, even though it contains four Gospels narrating the same life-story of the same man? Yet, there are hundreds more different Gospels that the Christians have mysteriously cast away throughout their history that also narrate the same life-story of the same person. And there are horrific discrepancies and contradictions in these different Gospels to call for yet another revision. However, the Bible has been repeatedly revised, and changed, that a new revision would be useless. The best course of action for the Christians and Jews to take is to produce the original copies of the Torah and the Gospel, so that they can revise the copies they have based on the original, which will still be a human production, not divine. In, It is human, Yet Divine, Pg., 17, Dr. W Graham Scroggie of the Moody Bible Institute, Chicago, a prestigious Christian evangelical mission, says, “Yes, the Bible is human, although some out of zeal which is not according to knowledge, have denied this. Those books have passed through the minds of men, are written in the language of men, were penned by the hands of men and bear in their style the characteristics of men”; (http://www.themodernreligion.com/comparative/christ/christianity_scholars.htm). Yet, and even though Scroggie admits the Bible is human, he still calls it ‘divine'. There are numerous short Surahs in the Quran that discuss single topics. Many other Surahs contain multiple topics. The fundamental aspects of Islamic Monotheism are repeated throughout the Quran, because this is the purpose of the Quran and the core of its message. They are not meaningless repetitions or unruly, as Winn claims. The Quran itself is called, ‘Adh-Dhikr', meaning, ‘The Reminder', and the reminder is mentioned repeatedly. However, each repetition has a unique perspective and is expressed through a collection of unique sentences within various contexts. Each has its place in the Quran and each has a different impact on the heart of the faithful.
Does the Torah or the Gospel Mention the Creator and the Necessity to Serve Him Alone Only Once?
Does the Torah or the Gospel mention the Lord and the need to obey and worship Him only once? Does the Torah call to Monotheism and mentions Allah's Warnings and Promises only once? Do these books mention only one example of the earlier disbelieving nations and how they treated their Prophets? Was the current copy of the Torah meaningful when it mentioned in ‘detail' the number of the members of each Jewish tribe, men women and children, and the count of their animal possessions? Different verses and chapters of the Quran are recited aloud by Muslim congregations in every corner of the world three times a day every day of the year. The entire Quran is recited repeatedly throughout the year and especially during the lunar month of Ramadhan during optional Congregational Prayer held every night of the month. What Muslims recite is meant to be a reminder, not chronologically arranged story accounts, a record of genealogy, or a historical consensus of ancient tribes. Al-Bukhari, whom Winn admits arranged his collection of Hadeeth according to topics, as well as, many other Muslim Scholars who wrote similarly arranged books could have easily done a superior job rearranging the Quran chronologically than Craig Winn could ever have accomplished. This ‘Winn mission' was not contemplated even centuries after the Quran was recited and studied by billions of Muslims and countless Christians and Jews, some of whom spoke Arabic fluently and studied Islam for years consecutively, such as famous Western Orientalists of the last two centuries.
Continuing Scientific Criticism of Some of Winn's Claims
Winn said, “I have distilled the salient parts of the five earliest and most holy Islamic books into one: the Qur'an, and the inspired Sunnah collections of Ibn Is`haq's Sira, al-Tabari's History, and Bukhari's and Muslim's Hadith.” He also said, “…quoting vociferously from the Sunnah as recorded by Bukhari, Muslim, Ishaq, and Tabari—Islam's earliest and more trusted sources…These official works include: the Sira, Ta'rikh, Hadith, and Qur'an. Ishaq's Sira, or biography, called Sirat Rasul Allah, provides the lone account of Muhammad's life and the formation of Islam written within 200 years of the prophet's death…The Ta'rikh is the oldest, most trusted and comprehensive history of Islam's formation and Muhammad's example, called Sunnah. It was written by Tabari…It begins with Islamic creation and ends with the acts of Muhammad's companions. Tabari is a compilation of Hadith quotes and Qur'an passages…A Hadith is an oral report from Muhammad or his companions. Muslims believe that Hadith were inspired by Allah, making them scripture. The most revered Collection was compiled in a topical arrangement by Bukhari.”
Thus, Craig Winn took it upon himself to ‘distill' the salient (as in significant or important) parts of the so-called ‘five earliest and most holy Islamic books' into one. However, for Winn's conclusions to be used as evidence against Islam, and for his designating a part of Islam as being salient, it is fair to say that at least one Muslim Scholar should agree with him. Otherwise, Winn, who is not only a non-Muslim with deep animosity against Islam but also a non- scholar in Islam, would be determining for Muslims which books are most holy to them and which parts of these books are salient. Muslims do not take legislation or knowledge except from their own scholars and then only that which is supported by scientific evidence. Craig Winn does not speak Arabic, yet the vast majority of Islamic literature is written in classical Arabic. At best, Craig Winn might have read English transliterations –which he already claims are bad- of a few Islamic books devoid of any depth in research even if he wanted to, because he could not read or comprehend the texts in the original Arabic.
Do ‘Qur'an', ‘Tafsir', ‘Hadeeth', ‘Sunnah', ‘Tarikh', and, ‘Seerah', Sound the Same?
Definitions: Qur'an: The literal Word of Allah [5], and, “The Divinely Revealed Holy Book of Islam.
[6]
” Tafsir: Knowledge in the meaning contained in the Quran
[7]
Hadith: “A `Hadith reports the Prophet's actions and statements and his agreeing to some actions and statements.
[8]
”
[9]
Sunnah: “The Prophet's Tradition, which includes his statements, actions and agreeing to some statements and actions, is called, ‘Sunnah', which means, ‘path, way, methodology, method, tradition.
[10]
”
[11]
Tarikh: means, ‘History Collection', such as, Tarikh al-Umam wal-Muluk, or, Tarikh al-Islam, by at-Tabari Seerah: means, ‘Biography', such as, Seerat ar-Rasul, by Ibn Is`haq Isnad: A chain of narrators reporting Prophetic statements or actions Mursal: A Hadeeth reported through a broken chain of narration because it does not contain the name of the Prophet's companion
[12]
Craig Winn frequently claimed in his abusive emails to me that Muslims do not read their own scriptures. This is because Winn reads, and the evidence to his extensive readings on Islam is found here. For evidence supporting the claims he made against Islam in his doomed book, Winn relied on the Seerah of Ibn Is`haq and at-Tabari's Tarikh, calling them, ‘inspired Sunnah collections', and designating at-Tabari's Tarikh as a, ‘compilation of Hadith quotes and Qur'an passages.' [Winn says this even though at-Tabari already has a lengthy book on Tafsir that is entirely different in content and topics than his book on Tarikh, which is a book on history. At-Tabari must have been confused!] Further, Winn described the five books under discussion as being ‘official' and ‘the five earliest and most holy, most trusted Islamic books'.
Undisputed Facts Universally Accepted by Muslims
The Quran is Islam's holy book, as Allah stated in the Quran, what transliterated means, {And We (Allah) have sent down to you (O, Muhammad) the Book (this Qur'ân) in truth}; [5:48]. The Prophet's Sunnah is also a Divine Revelation inspired by Allah, but formed by the Prophet's own words, actions and practices, {Nor does he (Muhammad) speak of (his own) desire. It is only a Revelation revealed}; [53:3-4]. The two most authentic books after the Quran are the Hadeeth collections of al-Bukhari then Muslim
[13]
. They are called, “As-Sahihan”, meaning, “The Two Authentic Collections”. Al-Bukhari and Muslim gained this status among Hadeeth Collectors on account of their successful implementation of the tough conditions they set for any Hadeeth to be included in their books, not because they were the oldest, or the largest, or the “inspired” or the “official” collections. Then, there is no agreement among Muslim Scholars on which Sunnah books respectively come after these two books in authenticity. The mere suggestion by Winn that the Tarikh by Ibn Jarir at-Tabari and the Seerah by Ibn Is`haq qualify as being among the five earliest, most holy Islamic books is clear conjecture and demands proof, i.e. a list of Muslim Scholars who agreed with him.
Ibn Is`haq's Seerah as a Book of Hadeeth
‘Seerah', by definition, is a biography. Imam Ibn Is`haq, of the late second/early third generation of Islam, collected the Prophet's biography in a book popularly known as, Seerat Ibn Is`haq. In his Seerah, Ibn Is`haq narrated the Prophet's life-story starting from before his birth until after his death, peace be upon him. However, Ibn Is`haq's Seerah is not a collection of Hadith or Sunnah, but an autobiography. Ibn Is`haq's Seerah contains historical accounts, poems, genealogies, irrelevant stories, narrations of battles, as well as, some Quranic Verses –and sometimes their explanation, many Hadeeth narrations and statements collected from the Prophet's companions. ‘Sunnah', exclusively pertains to the Prophet's statements, actions, practices and traditions, and in general terms, includes statements and actions from the Prophet's companions; Sunnah reports rely entirely on established chains of narration (Isnad) reporting them. Ibn Is`haq, for instance, mentioned various poems popular since before the Prophet was born, and this by no means qualifies as Sunnah or Hadeeth. Sunnah collections do not emphasize the life-story of the Prophet before Islam except to a limited extent, as Imam Ibn Taimiyyah stated in his Fatawa. He also said (Fatawa: Vol. 13, Pg., 345), “Allah has provided evidence (i.e., Isnad) establishing the authenticity or lack thereof of the narrations that are necessary in matters of the religion. It is well known that most of what was reported in aspects of Tafsir (meaning contained in the Quran) is similar to narrations reporting Maghazi (or Seerah) and battles, promoting Imam Ahmad [Ibn Hanbal] to state that three matters (or topics) do not have Isnad: Tafsir, Mala`him
[14]
, and Maghazi (or Seerah). This is because most of their narrations are of the Maraseel (pl. for Mursal) type, such as narrations reported by Urwah Ibn az-Zubair, ash-Sha`bi, az-Zuhri, Musa Ibn Uqbah and [Muhammad] Ibn Is`haq.” Maraseel Hadeeths, wherein the chain of the narration is missing the name of the Prophet's companion
[15]
, are weak (not authentic) narrations
[16]
. Further, the claim that Ibn Is`haq's Seerah (or, Maghazi), at-Tabari's History and the books of Hadith by al-Bukhari and Muslim are, along with the Quran, the five earliest and most holy of Islamic books, is plainly false. In, Holy Wars…Crusades…Jihad
[17]
, the following is stated under the chapter, ‘Books of Hadeeth': “There are many books that contain collections of Prophetic statements. They include -descending in status, prestige and authenticity
[18]
-: Sahih al-Bukhari
[19]
, Sahih Muslim
[20]
, Sunan Abu Dawood
[21]
, Sunan at-Tirmidhi
[22]
, Sunan an-Nasaii
[23]
, Sunan Ibn Majah
[24]
, Muwatta Malik
[25]
, Musnad Ahmad
[26]
, and so forth.”
However, these are by no means the earliest Sunnah collections.
In, Holy Wars…Crusades…Jihad, Pg., 27-8, is the following: “Collecting `Hadiths started during the lifetime of the Prophet, peace be upon him. Some of his companions, like the family of `Hazm, Abdullah Ibn `Amr Ibn al-`Aas, to name a few, recorded the Prophet's statements, with his permission. Many more companions memorized and reached an excellent standard in memorizing `Hadith verbatim…The Arabs were largely an unlettered nation that depended on memory to preserve its traditions, history and poems, in order to transfer them from one generation to the next…A large number of companions excelled in memorizing `Hadith, such as Abu Hurairah, `Aishah (the Prophet's wife), Jabir Ibn Abdullah, Abdullah Ibn `Umar, Abdullah Ibn `Amr, Abdullah Ibn Abbas, Abdullah Ibn az-Zubair, among many others. Even when literacy became widespread in the Muslim World, scholars of early and successive Muslim generations relied on memory to preserve `Hadith narrations, as well as, compiling `Hadith on a massive professional scale.” Also, there is this segment in, Holy Wars…Crusades…Jihad, Pg., 29-30,: “There were many other Collectors of `Hadith who came before and after the mentioned scholars, such as Abu Zur`ah `Ubaidillah ar-Razi (200-264 AH/815-877 CE), Abu `Hatim Muhammad Ibn Idris ar-Razi (195-277/810-890) and his son Abdul-Ra`hman Ibn Abi `Hatim (240-327/854-938), Muhammad Ibn Nasr al-Marwazi (202-294/817-906), Ayyub as-Sikhtiyani (68-131/687-748), Abdullah Ibn al-Mubarak (118-181/736-797), Muhammad Ibn al-`Hasan ash-Shaibani (131-189/748-804), Abu Dawood at-Tayalisi (124-204/741-819), Abdul Razzaq Ibn Hammam (126-211/743-826), Muhammad Ibn Sa`d (168-230/784-844), Abu `Hatim Ibn `Hibban (270-354/883-965), at-Tabarani (260-360/873-970), to name a few.”
Except for the Quran, Winn Erroneously Designated a Blend of Books of Seerah, History and Sunnah as Being the Earliest Sunnah Books
By referring to history, we find that these are the years of birth of the four scholars Craig Winn mentioned: Muhammad Ibn Is`haq (89-150 AH/707-767 CE), Muhammad Ibn Isma'eel al-Bukhari (194-256/809-869), Muslim Ibn al-Hajjaj al-Qushairi (204-261/819-874) and Muhammad Ibn Jarir at-Tabari (224-310/838-922). How can these four scholars qualify to write the earliest Sunnah books, when two of the books under discussion, Ibn Is`haq's and at-Tabari's, were written on Seerah (autobiography) and Tarikh (history), respectively, while numerous scholars collected books of Hadeeth before al-Bukhari and Muslim? Three of the Four major Imams of Islamic Jurisprudence, Malik Ibn Anas (93-179/711-795), Muhammad Ibn Idris ash-Shafi`i (150-204/767-819) and A`hmad Ibn Hanbal (164-241/780-855) are not only the authors of well-known Hadeeth and Sunnah collections, but they all preceded al-Bukhari, Muslim and at-Tabari. Malik, who wrote the, Muwatta, was the teacher of ash-Shafi`i; ahs-Shafi`i, who wrote several major books on Islamic Jurisprudence, such as, al-Umm, was the teacher of A`hmad Ibn Hanbal; A`hmad Ibn Hanbal collected the, Musnad, one of the major encyclopedias of the Sunnah, and was the teacher of al-Bukhari and Muslim. Further, several Muslim Imams wrote books on Maghazi (or, Siyar [the Prophet's Seerah or life-story]) before Ibn Is`haq and at-Tabari. They include Abdullah Ibn Abi Bakr Ibn `Hazm (65-135/684-752), the teacher of Ibn Is`haq who collected a book on Maghazi before Ibn Is`haq
[27]
. Malik Ibn Anas, a contemporary of Abdullah Ibn Abi Bakr Ibn `Hazm and also of Ibn Is`haq, as well as, [Muhammad] Ibn Sa`d stated that Ibn Abi Bakr was a truthful teacher who narrated a number of Hadeeths. The scholars who collected Maghazi also include Imam Musa Ibn Uqbah (died 141/758), the first to collect a book on Maghazi, according to Imam adh-Dhahabi in, Siyaru A`lami an-Nubalaa. When Imam Malik Ibn Anas was asked about which book of Maghazi should be studied, he recommended Musa Ibn Uqbah's. Malik said on another occasion, “Musa Ibn Uqbah did not collect numerous narrations as others did.” Imam adh-Dhahabi commented, “Malik meant Ibn Is`haq by these words. There is no doubt that Ibn Is`haq wrote a lengthy book and mentioned numerous genealogies, which should have been summarized, and collected many unnecessary poems, which should have been omitted, as well as, collecting unreliable narrations. In addition, Ibn Is`haq failed to collect many authentic narrations he did not hear of. Therefore, his book needs to be edited and corrected in addition to adding the narrations he failed to include.” Adh-Dhahabi added that al-Bukhari and Muslim collected the narrations of Musa Ibn Uqbah in the core of their Hadeeth collections. In comparison, and as adh-Dhahabi stated, al-Bukhari only mentioned Ibn Is`haq's narrations as a way of supporting other narrations (and without Sanad, i.e., in the form of Ta`liqat); Muslim mentioned Ibn Is`haq's narrations coupled with other narrators narrating the same reports. Musa Ibn Uqbah died in the Hijri year of one hundred and forty-one (758 CE), nine years before Ibn Is`haq died. May Allah honor both of them.
The Status of Muhammad Ibn Is`haq in Islam
In his scholarly encyclopedia on biographies of notable Muslims entitled, Siyaru A`lami an-Nubalaa, Imam Shams ad-Din adh-Dhahabi (673-748 AH/1274-1347 CE), a major scholar of Hadeeth and Islamic History, stated the following facts about Muhammad Ibn Is`haq, author of, as-Seerah an-Nabawiyyah.
1 – He was born in the year 89 AH (707 CE) and met Anas Ibn Malik, the Prophet's companion, and az-Zuhri, a major scholar among the second generation of Islam. 2 – Adh-Dhahabi then mentioned these major Hadeeth scholars who stated that Ibn Is`haq was reliable in Hadeeth narrations, grading his narrations as Hasan
[28]
: Yahya Ibn Ma`een and A`hmad Ibn Hanbal
[29]
. Abu Zur`ah stated that Ibn Is`haq was Saduq (truthful), `Ali Ibn Abdullah said that Ibn Is`haq's narrations are accepted; Ibn `Adi said that Ibn Is`haq is acceptable; and Ibn Idris said that Ibn Is`haq was a Thiqah (reliable, or trustworthy). Also, Imam Abu Zur`ah stated that a group of scholars learned knowledge with Ibn Is`haq, such as Sufyan, Shu`bah, Ibn Uyainah, Ibn al-Mubarak, and so forth. Az-Zuhri, Asim Ibn Umar Ibn Qatadah and adh-Dhahabi also praised Ibn Is`haq's knowledge in the Maghazi (narration of battles). 3 – Adh-Dhahabi also listed some of the major scholars of Islam who refuted Ibn Is`haq's reliability in Hadeeth narrations. Imam Malik, for instance, called Ibn Is`haq a liar and Yahya Ibn Sa`eed al-Ansari, as well as, al-A`mash refuted one of Ibn Is`haq's narrations by saying that he lied. As a general statement, Yahya Ibn Sa`eed graded Ibn Ishaq as being weak in Hadeeth narration. Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal discounted the reliability of Ibn Ishaq if he alone narrates a Hadeeth. Also, Imams Yahya Ibn Ma`een (in another narration from him), an-Nasaii and ad-Daraqutni stated that Ibn Ishaq was weak in Hadeeth. The great Imam of Sunnah, Imam A`hmad Ibn Hanbal, also added that Ibn Is`haq's narrations are not accepted if they are about the Sunan (Pl. for Sunnah; [yet, Craig Ibn Winn claims that Ibn Is`haq's Seerah is a Sunnah book!]), stating that even [in the rare occasions] where Ibn Is`haq clearly stated that he heard a Hadeeth from his teacher, he would often contradict other narrators. Therefore, and as Imam A`hmad stated, if Ibn Is`haq alone reports a Hadeeth, then that narration is not accepted. Adh-Dhahabi also stated that if a narration that Ibn Is`haq reports contradicts other [more established] narrators, then Ibn Is`haq's narration is rejected. 4 – Adh-Dhahabi listed some of the reasons why Ibn Is`haq was considered weak regarding Hadeeth narration, as follows. A – Imam A`hmad Ibn Hanbal stated that Ibn Is`haq was a Mudallis
[30]
, and in another occasion, he said that Ibn Ishaq's Tadlees (v. for Mudallis) was substantial. Imam A`hmad also said that Ibn Is`haq did not care from whom he collected Hadeeth. B – Imam Ibn Numair said that Ibn Is`haq reported false Hadeeths from unknown narrators. C – Adh-Dhahabi concluded by saying that among the worst errors made by Ibn Is`haq is that he used to record narrations he collected from anyone, and thus, did not have Wara`
[31]
in this regard, may Allah forgive him. 5 – How Ibn Is`haq's narration should be treated is summarized in this statement from Imam Ibn Numair, “If he narrates a Hadeeth from teachers he directly heard from and who are known to be truthful, then his Hadeeth is from the grade Hasan because he is truthful.” Yet, Imam A`hmad stated that if Ibn Is`haq is the only narrator of that Hadeeth, then his narration is discounted. And the key words to look for here, for Ibn Ishaq's narration not to be dismissed outright, are, “If Ibn Is`haq says, ‘So and so narrated to me', then he did hear that narration.' Otherwise, if he says, ‘So and so said', then the narration is rejected.'” Meaning, Ibn Is`haq would not lie; if he states that he heard the Hadeeth from his teacher, then his assertion is accepted.
Definition: A Hadeeth is a narration that starts with the collector of Hadeeth narrations, such as al-Bukhari or Muslim, wherein the collector names the teacher from whom he heard the Hadeeth, who also names his teacher, and so forth, until the chain reaches the Prophet's companion and then the Prophet, peace be upon him.
A Summary of How Muslim Scholars Treated Ibn Is`haq's Hadeeth Narration
For a Hadeeth reported by Ibn Is`haq to be accepted as a Hasan Hadeeth, which is the lesser grade of authentic Hadeeths, Ibn Is`haq must declare that he heard the narration directly from his teacher, provide a reliable chain of narrators throughout the chain of narration until it reaches the companion or the Prophet, and then his narration cannot contradict a narration reported by a more established narrator or group of narrators. Imam A`hmad added that Ibn Is`haq should not be the only narrator for a Hadeeth, otherwise, his narration is rejected. It is now clear that Craig Winn involved himself in a type of knowledge that is far more complicated for his limited intellect, and meager knowledge in Islam, to comprehend.
Imam Muhammad Ibn Jarir at-Tabari (224-310/838-922) was a major scholar of Hadeeth, Tafsir (meaning contained in the Quran) and Islamic History, as Imam adh-Dhahabi stated
[32]
. At-Tabari started his book on Tarikh with creation and ended it with historical accounts that occurred during his time. But at-Tabari was not the first to write a book on Islamic history, as Winn claimed. Al-Ya`qubi wrote a Tarikh before at-Tabari that also started with the story of creation. However, and just like many other Muslim historians, Ibn Jarir relied heavily on Ibn Is`haq's Seerah while reporting the Prophet's biography. This is why a good segment of at-Tabari's Tarikh is almost identical to Ibn Is`haq's Seerah; at-Tabari often quotes Ibn Is`haq even if to contradict him. The Tarikh by at-Tabari is by no means a Hadeeth or Tafsir collection. It is far larger than Ibn Is`haq's Seerah, because it narrates the stories of Creation, earlier Prophets and nations, pre-Islamic history, the history of the Islamic era, until his time, and includes biographies of countless number of people. It also includes Quranic Verses and Prophetic Hadeeths relevant to the topics contained in the book. It is a book on Tarikh, not on Tafsir or Hadeeth. At-Tabari compiled another book on Tafsir, popularly known as, Tafsir at-Tabari, dedicated to explaining the meaning contained in the Quran. At-Tabari's Tafsir is one of the major books of Tafsir. Yet, it also contains many false Hadeeths and unreliable narrations that he collected from various resources. At-Tabari was a scholar, but neither he nor his book are divine. In Islam, the only resources that are free from errors are the Quran and the authentic Sunnah as reported through reliable, established chains of narration. To summarize, at-Tabari's book on history suffers from similar defects as Ibn Is`haq's Seerah. This is because when reporting history, Muslim scholars did not set a condition to only include authentic narrations reporting various incidents or statements. Thus, Seerah and Tarikh books are collections of stories that their authors collected from various sources, using authentic chains of narration, weak chains of narrations and even no chains of narration. Enjoying a book of stories about earlier nations and historical accounts is one thing. Using these stories as a source for Islamic legislation is an entirely different matter.
If Hadeeth Established Through Weak Isnad (Chain of Narration) is Rejected in Islam, Then What About Stories that Have No Isnad?
Winn agrees with Muslims that the collection of Hadeeth by Imam Muslim is among the most respected books in Islam. In the introduction to his collection of authentic Hadeeths, Imam Muslim restated, and agreed with, the established methodology that scholars of Hadeeth use pertaining to rejecting weak and unsubstantiated Hadeeths and only accepting authentic, well known Hadeeths reported by reliable, trustworthy and truthful narrators. Imam Ibn Taimiyyah concurred, by saying (Fatawa 1:250), “It is not allowed to rely on weak Hadeeths, i.e. that are neither Sahih nor Hasan in grade, in matters pertaining to Sharee`ah.” ‘Sharee`ah', pertains to aspects of Sunnah and Islamic Law, which Imam A`hmad stated should not be taken from Ibn Is`haq, a known Mudallis.
Why Did Ibn Is`haq and At-Tabari Collect Weak and Fabricated Reports in Their Seerah and Tarikh, Respectively
Imam Ibn Taimiyyah said (Fatawa 1:250), “Some scholars of Hadeeth collected in their books all the narrations they could find regarding a certain topic. Their aim was to publicize all what was narrated pertaining to certain topics, not that every narration they collected is actually reliable [even to them]. This is especially the case since one of them would grade a certain Hadeeth [that they collected in their books] as Gharib (weak), Munkar (Rejected) or Dah`eef (weak; not recognized). Sometimes they failed to do even that
[33]
.”
What Does ‘Inspire' Mean in Islamic Terminology?
Another aspect of the unique ‘Winn paragraph' under discussion is his calling the list of books he chose, ‘official', and his using of the word, ‘inspired' while describing Ibn Is`haq's Maghazi. By using the word, ‘inspired', Winn seeks to elevate Ibn Is`haq's Seerah to a divine status similar to that given to the ‘inspired' books popularly claimed to have been written by John, Luke, Mark and Matthew
[34]
. Winn is the only ‘scholar on Islam' who claimed this status for Ibn Is`haq or for any other Muslim author or Islamic book. It is obvious why he did this: he wants to dwell on any and every story Ibn Is`haq collected in his book as proof establishing his claims against Islam; this is a pre-emptive offensive against those who may dispute some of Ibn Is`haq's accounts. Since Winn decided that Ibn Is`haq's Seerah is inspired, then we will use Ibn Is`haq's Seerah to refute Winn's claims. But first… Allah said in the Quran, what translated means, {Nor does he speak of (his own) desire. It is only a Revelation revealed}; [53:3-4]. ‘He', referred to in this Quranic Ayah (Sentence) is Muhammad, son of, Abdullah, peace be upon him, Islam's Prophet, not Muhammad, son of Is`haq, author of the Seerah, may Allah grant him His Mercy. And in Islam, all types of revelation from heaven to earth ceased upon the death of Prophet Muhammad, who stated that there will be no Prophet after him; [al-Bukhari and Muslim reported this Hadeeth from Abu Hurairah, the Prophet's companion]. It is a fundamental aspect of the Islamic Creed that only the Prophets are immune from committing error in aspects of the religion and that they alone receive divine revelation or inspiration. Imam Ibn Taimiyyah said (Fatawa 35:121), “Except for the Prophets, everyone will have some of what they say either accepted or rejected. It is not required to obey anyone who is not a Prophet or a Messenger in everything they say, nor is it required from creation to imitate him or believe in all what he commands or all the news that he conveys…Allah Ta`ala (the Exalted) said, {O, you who believe! Obey Allâh and obey the Messenger, and those of you (Muslims) who are in authority. (And) if you differ in anything amongst yourselves, refer it to Allâh and to His Messenger, if you believe in Allâh and in the Last Day}; [4:59].” Thus, the Book of Allah and the authentic Sunnah of His Messenger are the supreme authority in Islam and everyone and everything else is subservient to them. There are no exceptions. We do not have ‘inspired' Muslim writers in Islam, not even al-Bukhari, whose collection of Prophetic Statements (Hadeeth) is second in authenticity only to the Quran. Allah gave success to al-Bukhari to accomplish this admirable fete, but his book is not ‘inspired' in the Christian sense of the word; it is his personal effort and he was not immune from error. The great Imam of Sunnah, Imam Ibn Taimiyyah (Fatawa 18:17) said that among the authentic Hadeeths that the community of Hadeeth scholars agreed upon accepting and approving are the majority of the Hadeeths collected by Bukhari and Muslim. He also stated that several scholars disputed some Hadeeths in Bukhari. He also stated that Bukhari had more knowledge in Hadeeth than Muslim and that Muslim collected some Hadeeths that other scholars rightfully considered weak. Yet, the overwhelming majority of the Hadeeth collections of Bukhari and Muslim are not only well-established, but are also representative of a good part of the Prophetic Sunnah. They do not contain all of the authentic Hadeeths, but what they contain is substantially accurate. Therefore, if Winn and his likes still wish to attack Islam, we, Muslims, direct them to reading al-Bukhari and Muslim. Then, they had better bring serious claims backed by scientific evidence and void of foul words of abuse, so as to support their claims and earn respect for their work. I look forward for serious challenge that requires hard work on my part to refute it. Winn's book is no such challenge: he does not have a clue as to which Islamic narration is just a story, and which narration establishes Islamic Legislation. Craig Winn is the only ‘scholar' who called Ibn Is`haq's Seerah ‘inspired'. Frequently, Imams of history and Sunnah contradicted Ibn Is`haq's Seerah and Hadeeth narrations, including Ibn Hisham, who edited Ibn Is`haq's Seerah, and Ibn Qayyim al-Jauziyyah who contradicted Ibn Is`haq in various parts of, Zad-ul Ma`ad, reminding his readers of the controversy between Muslim Scholars regarding Ibn Is`haq's reliability. For instance, Ibn Hisham said, “I will abandon some of what Ibn Is`haq collected in his book which does not involve the Messenger of Allah, peace be upon him, nor was it revealed in the Quran…and also omit some poems that Ibn Is`haq collected and which none among those who have knowledge in poems recognize [as genuine], as well as, some outrageous reports that are not worthy of mentioning.” Winn may elect to clarify his usage of the word, ‘inspired', by saying that Ibn Is`haq's Seerah was unprecedented. Yet, we refuted this claim earlier in this research.
This is a segment taken from, Holy Wars…Crusades…Jihad, Pg., 26-7, on the topic of Isnad, “Unlike followers of any other major religion, Muslims have a complete and accurate record of the biography, actions and statements of their Prophet, peace be upo |