شبهات المستشرقين حول السنة النبوية القائلين بها، أدلتهم، تفنيدها. دراسة نقدية
Orientalist Doubts Concerning the Prophetic Sunnah: Their Advocates, Their Evidence, and Their Refutation — A Critical Study (Part Four)
Researcher: Sami Manshur Muhammad Saif
Translated by: Reza Ervani bin Asmanu
This paper, “Orientalist Doubts Concerning the Prophetic Sunnah: Their Advocates, Their Evidence, and Their Refutation — A Critical Study,” is included in the Science of Hadith Category
نعم إنهم أقوام لم يحابوا في حكمهم على الرجال أحدًا، لا آباء، ولا أبناء، ولا إخوة، ولا أصدقاء، إن ذلك لثمرة صدق ديانتهم، ولزومهم، وأمانتهم، وعنوان إجلال الحفاظ للسنة النبوية الشريفة، وأما عندهم أعلى من الآباء، والأجداد، والأولاد، والأحفاد، فكانوا مضرب المثل في الصدق والتقوى والأمانة.
Indeed, they were people who showed no favoritism whatsoever when judging narrators — not toward their fathers, their sons, their brothers, or their friends. This was the fruit of their sincerity in religion, their steadfastness, and their trustworthiness. It was also a sign of the immense reverence with which the hadith scholars regarded the noble Prophetic Sunnah. In their eyes, preserving the Sunnah took precedence even over fathers, grandfathers, children, and grandchildren. They therefore became exemplary models of truthfulness, piety, and integrity.
أمثلة على لزومهم في حكمهم على الرجال:
Examples of Their Consistency in Evaluating Hadith Narrators:
١. الجرحُ لآبائهم: الإمام علي بن المديني سئل عن أبيه فقال: “سلوا عنه غيري”، فأعادوا المسألة، فأطرق ثم رفع رأسه فقال: “هو الدين، إنه ضعيف”.
1. Criticizing their own fathers: Imam ‘Ali ibn al-Madini was once asked about his father. He replied, “Ask someone else about him.” When they repeated the question, he lowered his head, then raised it and said, “This is a matter of religion. He is weak.”
٢. الجرحُ لأبنائهم: الإمام أبو داود السجستاني “صاحب السنن” قال: “ابني عبد الله كذّاب”، ويوجه قول الذهبي في ولده أبي هريرة: “إنه حفظ القرآن، ثم تشاغل عنه حتى نسيه”.
2. Criticizing their own sons: Imam Abu Dawud as-Sijistani, the author of Sunan Abi Dawud, said: “My son ‘Abdullah is a liar.” The text also cites a statement attributed to adh-Dhahabi concerning the son of Abu Hurayrah: “He memorized the Qur’an, then became occupied with other matters until he forgot it.”
٣. الجرحُ لإخوانهم: زيد بن أبي أنيسة قال: “لا تأخذوا عن أخي يحيى المذكور بالكذب”.
3. Criticizing their own brothers: Zayd ibn Abi Unaysah said: “Do not take narrations from my brother Yahya, for he is known for lying.”
وبلغ من نزاهة أئمة الحديث أنهم كانوا لا يقبلون شفاعة إخوانهم للسّكوت عمن يرون جرحه، وكيف يرضَون تلك الوساطة وهم الذين طعنوا في آبائهم وأبنائهم وإخوانهم لما رأوا منهم ما يستوجب القدح.
The integrity of the imams of hadith reached such a level that they would not accept the intercession of their own brothers asking them to remain silent about someone whom they considered deserving of criticism. How could they accept such mediation when they themselves had criticized their fathers, sons, and brothers whenever they found grounds that required such criticism?
أما عن موقف الصحابة والتابعين، فمن بعدهم من أئمة الإسلام من ملوكهم وأمرائهم، فالنماذج الدالّة على ذلك كثيرة، منها على سبيل المثال لا الحصر: موقف أبي سعيد الخدري من مروان والي المدينة، وموقف ابن عمر من الحجاج، وموقف الإمام الزهري من هشام بن عبد الملك الأموي، وغيرهم كثير.(1)
As for the attitude of the Companions, the Tabi’in, and the later imams of Islam toward kings and rulers, there are many examples demonstrating their integrity. Among them — by way of illustration rather than limitation — are the position of Abu Sa’id al-Khudri toward Marwan, the governor of Madinah; the position of Ibn ‘Umar toward al-Hajjaj; and the position of Imam az-Zuhri toward Hisham ibn ‘Abd al-Malik of the Umayyads, in addition to many other examples.1
الشبهة الثانية:
The Second Doubt:
زعمهم بأن السنة النبوية الشريفة لم تُدون إلا بعد قرن أو قرنين من وفاة الرسول ﷺ
They claim that the noble Prophetic Sunnah was not written down until one or two centuries after the death of the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
وهذه من الشبهات التي ادعاها بعض غلاة المستشرقين من قدم، وأقاموا بناءها على وهم أن الحديث مكث مائة سنة غير مكتوب، ثم بعد هذه المدة الطويلة قرر المحدثون جمع الحديث، والمقصد من وراء
This is one of the doubts advanced long ago by some of the more extreme Orientalists. They built their argument on the assumption that hadith remained unwritten for one hundred years, and that only after this lengthy period did the hadith scholars decide to collect it. The purpose behind this doubt is…
هذه الشبهة إضعاف الثقة باستظهار السنة وحفظها في الصدور سالمة دون تحريف، وقد رد عدد من المستشرقين هذه الشبهة منهم: “جولد زيهر” و”شبرنجر” و”دوزي”، فقد عقد “جولد زيهر” فصلاً خاصاً حول تدوين الحديث في كتابه “دراسات إسلامية”، وشكك في صحة وجود صحف كثيرة في عهد الرسول صلى الله عليه وسلم. ورأى شبرنجر في كتابه “الحديث عند العرب” أن الشروع في التدوين وقع في القرن الهجري الثاني، وأن السنة انتقلت بطريقة شفاهية فقط. أما “دوزي” فهو ينكر نسبة هذه “الركزة المجهولة” من الأحاديث إلى الرسول صلى الله عليه وسلم.
The aim of this doubt is to weaken confidence in the preservation of the Sunnah through memorization and its retention in the hearts of the early Muslims without distortion. Among the Orientalists associated with this claim are Goldziher, Sprenger, and Dozy. Goldziher devoted a special chapter to the recording of hadith in his book Muslim Studies, where he questioned the authenticity of reports concerning the existence of numerous written hadith sheets during the time of the Prophet ﷺ. Sprenger, in his work on hadith among the Arabs, held that systematic writing began only in the second Islamic century and that the Sunnah had previously been transmitted orally. Dozy, meanwhile, rejected the attribution of this body of hadith to the Messenger of Allah ﷺ and described it as an “anonymous foundation.”2
تفنيدها:
Refutation:
يُرَدُّ على هذه الشبهة جملة وتفصيلاً، أما من حيث الجملة فيرد عليها بما يلي:
This doubt can be answered both generally and in detail. As for the general response, it includes the following points:
١. عدم الحاجة لذكر رجال السند لتلقّيهم، عند كتابة المدونين.
1. The absence of the names of all transmitters in early written records does not mean that transmission did not exist, since much of the material had already been received directly through oral transmission before later compilation.
٢. أنه ليس في تأخر تدوين المحدثين إلا ما بعد تلك المدة المذكورة دليل على أن أولئك الأتباع لم يكتبوا عمن رووا عنه، من شيخ أو شيخ شيخ، والسند في ذلك الوقت لم يكن يروى سوى راوٍ واحد أو اثنين.
2. The fact that large-scale hadith compilation occurred at a later period does not prove that the earlier generations did not write down what they had received from their teachers or from the teachers of their teachers. At that time, chains of transmission were still very short, often involving only one or two transmitters.
٣. ثم الشروط التي اشترطت من جهة الضبط والراوي وأمانته واتصال السند كفيلة ببعث الثقة في النفس بأن هذا ثابت عن الرسول صلى الله عليه وسلم.
3. Furthermore, the conditions established by hadith scholars regarding precision, the reliability and integrity of the narrator, and continuity of the chain of transmission were sufficient, in the author’s argument, to inspire confidence that a report was authentically established from the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.3
To be continued in the next part, in sha Allah
Source: Alukah
Leave a Reply