robert spencer-did muhammad exist__ an inquiry into islams obscure origins-intercollegiate studies institute (2012) (1)

illegitimate hadiths were condemned by strong words uttered by the Prophet.” 50 Muhammad was
accordingly made to acknowledge: “After my departure, the number of sayings ascribed to me will
increase in the same way as sayings have been ascribed to previous prophets.” 51 In another hadith he
prophesies, “In the later days of my community, there will be people who will hand you communications
which neither you nor your forefathers have ever heard. Beware of them.” And even more strongly: “At
the end of time there will be forgers, liars who will bring you hadiths which neither you nor your
forefathers have heard. Beware of them so that they may not lead you astray and into temptation.” 52
But how was a pious Muslim to know the true hadiths from the false? A hadith cites Muhammad
proposing a solution: “What therefore is told you as a saying of mine you will have to compare with the
Book of God (the Qur'an), and what is in accordance with it is by men, whether I have in fact said it
myself or not.” 53 Ibn Abbas adds another criterion, community acceptance: “If you hear from me a
communication in the name of the Prophet and you find that it does not agree with the Book of God or is
not liked by the people, know that I have reported a lie about the Prophet.” 54
Note that in these hadiths, neither Muhammad nor Ibn Abbas is made to say that Muslims should make a
careful effort to winnow out the Islamic prophet's authentic sayings from those that are inauthentic. Rather,
they are simply to measure his purported sayings against the Qur'an, and follow those that aren't
contradicted by the Muslim holy book. To this day, one of the criteria by which Muslims evaluate hadiths
is by how well they accord with the Qur'an. Those that contradict the words of Allah are rejected. That is
a reasonable criterion, but it doesn't get us any closer to what Muhammad actually said and did.
Nonetheless, Bukhari and the other hadith collectors made a valiant attempt. They claimed to be able to
distinguish genuine material about Muhammad from forged hadiths largely by examining the chain of
transmitters (isnad), the list of those who had passed on the story from the time of Muhammad to the
present. Islamic scholars grade individual traditions according to their chains of transmitters, as “sound,”
“good,” “weak,” “forged,” and so on.
A hadith is considered sound if its chain of transmitters includes reliable people and goes back to a
recognized authority. A typical strong chain is recorded by the Shiite scholar Sheikh al-Mufid (Ibn
Muallim, 948–1022) as going all the way back to Ali himself. Al-Mufid said: “Abul Hasan Ali b.
Muhammad b. Khalid al-Maythami reported to me from Abu Bakr Muhammad b. al-Husain b. al-
Mustanir, who reported from al-Husain b. Muhammad b. al-Husain b. Masab, who reported from Abbad
b. Yaqoob, who reported from Abu Abdil Rahman al-Masoodi, from Katheer al-Nawa, from Abu Maryam
al-Khawlani, from Malik b. Dhamrah, that Amir ul-Mu'mineen [leader of the believers] Ali b. Abi Talib
(A.S.) said…” 55
If the chain of transmission includes unreliable people or a broken link, Muslim scholars consider the
authenticity of the hadith doubtful. Ibn Maja notes that one hadith is considered weak “because of Khalid
b. Ubaid,” one of its transmitters. He quotes Bukhari saying of Khalid: “His hadith is debatable” and
points out that two other Islamic authorities, Ibn Hibban and Hakim, “have stated that he narrates maudu
(spurious) ahadith (traditions) on Anas's authority.” 56
The apparent reliability of the isnad chain was what determined authenticity. It didn't matter if a hadith