al-Radd ala Mazaim al-Mustashriqin Gold Tashir wa Yusuf Shakht wa man Ayyadahuma min al-Mustaghribin
- Author died
- -
- Editions
- King Fahd Complex for the Printing of the Holy Quran in Medina
al-Radd ala Mazaim al-Mustashriqin Gold Tashir wa Yusuf Shakht wa man Ayyadahuma min al-Mustaghribin (Refutation of the Claims of Orientalists Ignaz Goldziher and Joseph Schacht and Their Westernized Supporters) is a contemporary research study by Abd Allah al-Khatib examining and refuting Western orientalist critiques of the Prophetic Sunna and Hadith transmission .
Scope and Purpose
The treatise addresses the critical theories advanced against Hadith literature by Western orientalists, focusing primarily on Ignaz Goldziher and Joseph Schacht, as well as modern Muslim writers influenced by their approaches . The author sets out to demonstrate that classical Muslim Hadith evaluation operated on rigorous, integrated principles that examined both the chain of transmission (isnad) and the text (matn), contrary to orientalist claims that traditional criticism was purely formal or limited to isnad inspection .
Structure and Content
Traditional Methodology of Hadith Authentication
The first section outlines the classical framework of Hadith scholarship, detailing the division between ilm al-hadith riwayatan (the reporting of prophetic traditions) and ilm al-hadith dirayatan (Hadith nomenclature and methodology) . The text highlights the central role of isnad verification developed by early scholars—such as Muhammad ibn Sirin, Sufyan al-Thawri, and Abd Allah ibn al-Mubarak—following early political fitnahs to prevent fabrications .
To refute the assertion that early Muslim scholars neglected text criticism (naqd al-matn), the author cites classical genres such as mukhtalif al-hadith (reconciliation of seemingly contradictory reports), including works by al-Shafi'i (Ikhtilaf al-Hadith), Ibn Qutaybah (Ta'wil Mukhtalif al-Hadith), and al-Tahawi (Mushkil al-Athar) . He also draws on the rebuttals formulated by modern Hadith scholars, such as Nur al-Din 'Itr, Hammam Sa'id, Muhammad 'Ajjaj al-Khatib, and Muhammad Muhammad Abu Shahbah .
Refutation of Goldziher and General Orientalist Claims
The work addresses several core propositions propagated by Goldziher and subsequent scholars:
- Textual Skepticism and Supernatural Narratives: Orientalist claims that Hadith texts predicting future conquests, theological sects, or reporting miracles must be retroactive fabrications because Western rationalist premises reject physical miracles and prophetic foresight .
- Probity of the Companions: Claims attacking the integrity (adalah) of prominent companions, including Alfred Guillaume’s allegations against Abu Hurayrah . The author cites consensus on the integrity of the Companions, early narrations by Anas ibn Malik, and statements by Abu Zur'ah al-Razi regarding attempts to discredit the transmitters of religious texts .
- Allegations Regarding Ibn Shihab al-Zuhri: Goldziher's claim that Ibn Shihab al-Zuhri forged the Hadith regarding travelling only to three mosques (la tushaddu al-rihal) on behalf of the Umayyad Caliph Abd al-Malik ibn Marwan . The author refutes this by noting that Goldziher relied uncritically on al-Ya'qubi, that the tradition has 56 distinct transmission lines (including 15 independent of al-Zuhri), and that al-Zuhri narrated it from his teacher Sa'id ibn al-Musayyib, who was notably oppositional to Umayyad authorities .
- Fabrication Controls: The assertion that transmitters could fabricate isnads at will without detection, countered by detailing the discipline of rijal criticism, the rigorous screening for inverted chains (al-hadith al-maqlub), and quoting al-Khatib al-Baghdadi on invalidating untrustworthy narrators .
Refutation of Joseph Schacht's Isnad Theory
The third major section evaluates Joseph Schacht’s theses presented in The Origins of Muhammadan Jurisprudence (1950) . Schacht contended that legal traditions originally reflected the local customary practice (sunna) of early legal schools and were later systematically back-projected to Successors, Companions, and ultimately the Prophet ﷺ through fictitious chains, claiming the isnad was the most arbitrary part of a tradition .
The author reviews Western assessments of Schacht—noting praise and adoption from W. Montgomery Watt, H. A. R. Gibb, John Burton, and Norman Calder, alongside partial critiques from N. J. Coulson, S. Vesey-Fitzgerald, and Abd al-Qadir Sharif .
Drawing extensively on the critical rejoinders of Muhammad Mustafa al-A'zami, the study refutes Schacht’s methodology on several grounds :
- Misuse of Jurisprudential Texts: Schacht derived general conclusions about the history of Hadith from legal treatises (such as Malik ibn Anas's al-Muwatta', Muhammad ibn al-Hasan al-Shaybani's al-Muwatta', and al-Shafi'i's Kitab al-Umm) rather than primary Hadith compendia, overlooking that jurists routinely cited broken chains (marasil) for brief legal argumentation without intending full isnad documentation .
- Generalization from Atypical Errors: Schacht built universal rules upon isolated transmission errors that classical Hadith scholars had already recognized and documented (such as discussions by al-Zurqani regarding transmission errors in Malik’s report on wiping over leather socks, or narratives concerning eating spiny-tailed lizard) .
Conclusion and Recommendations
The work concludes that Schacht's and Goldziher's sweeping dismissals of Hadith authenticity rest on flawed generalizations and methodological oversights . The author emphasizes that the classical apparatus of Hadith criticism provides a reliable basis for trusting authentic narrations, and calls for specialized academic conferences to continuously critique orientalist arguments targeting the Sunna and the Prophet's biography .
Answer updated