or more of these writers (Buḵẖári and Muslim) may have vouchsafed'[1]
The study of the Traditions (ʿIlmuʾ-l-Ḥadíth) is an important part of the curriculum of Muslim Theological Schools. Traditions are of varying value. A Tradition of the highest class is called Ḥadíthuʾl-Mutawátir. In this case the isnád must be perfect, that is, the chain of narrators must be continuous, and each narrator must have been a man of unblemished conduct. These Traditions are few in number. Next to them come Traditions known as Ḥadíthuʾṣ-Ṣaḥíḥ or genuine Traditions. Those in the collections made by Bukhári and Muslím are generally placed in this class. Traditions known as Ḥadíthuʾl-Ḥasan, are accepted as good, though inferior to the other two classes. Weak Traditions, Ḥadíthuʾḍ-Ḍaʾíf, are those, amongst the narrators of which were men of doubtful reputation, or who committed the crime of introducing innovations (bidʿat) in belief or in worship. A Ḥadíthuʾl-Muʿallaq is a Tradition in which there is a break in the chain of narrators, that is, the isnád is not perfect. If the Tradition does not come from a Companion of the Prophet, but from a Tábiʾ, a man of the next generation, it is called a Mursal. In some cases there are other defects: these have to be taken note of by the Muslim student, but we may pass them by. A Tradition must not be contrary to a statement in the Qurʾán and it can be abrogated by a verse of the Qurʾán. The place of the Traditions in Islam theology and law is a very important one. They form the basis of the Sunna, 'To an orthodox Muslim, the Book and the Sunnai, God's word direct and God's word through the mind of the Prophet, recorded in the Traditions, are the foundation and sum of Islám.' The great collectors of the Traditions were ignorant of the sound canons of historical research: they lacked the spirit of the 'higher criticism': they paid little attention to internal evidence. The subject of a Tradition might be foolish, or improbable: that did not matter, if the isnád was sound. Like
- ↑ Muhammadan Jurisprudence, p. 31; see also Maulavi Cheragẖ ʿAlí, Critical Exposition of Jihád, pp. 65, 67, 73 and his Reforms Under Muslim Rule, p. 19; for Mírzá Ghulám Aḥmad's view see Walter, The Aḥmadiyya Movement, p. 39. Margliouth's The Early Development of Muḥammadanism, Chapter iii, is a valuable contribution to the subject.
