{[Qur’ānic] Interpretation [continued]}[9th April 1991]

[Redbook9:62][19910409:1553j]{[Qur’ānic] Interpretation [continued]}[9th April 1991]

.1553

[continued]

‘Form of Hadith and criteria of authentication. That Muhammad observed, “Seek knowledge, though it be in China” or “Beware of suspicion, for it is the falsest of falsehoods” reveals the matn or “the meat of the matter”. The formula introducing such a Hadith would speak in the first person: “It was related to me by A, on the authority of B, on the authority of C, on the authority of D, from E (here a companion of Muhammad) that the Prophet said....” This chain of names constituted the isnād on which the saying or event depended for its authenticity. The major emphasis in editing or arguing from tradition always fell on the isnād, rather than on a critical attitude to the matn itself. The question was not, “Is this the sort of thing Muhammad might credibly be imagined to have said or done” but “Is the report that he said or did it well supported in respect of witnesses and transmitters?” The first question would have introduced too great a danger of subjective judgement or independence of mind, though it may be suspected that issues were in fact often decided by such critical appraisal in the form of decisions ostensibly relating only to isnād. The second question certainly allowed a theoretically objective and reasonably precise pattern of criticism.’

*

* – ibid. [Encyclopaedia Britannica 22:] 11

[continued]

[PostedBlogger20052024]