Musicman: Otentisitas riwayat-riwayat Tabari dan Ibnu Ishaq

by musicman Sat 06 Aug 2011, 3:18 pm

Siapakah Ibn Ishaq/Hisham?

Seringkali pengkritik Islam menggunakan sumber-sumber dari Tabari dan Ibnu Ishaq untuk menegaskan bahwa nabi Muhammad SAW adalah seorang maniak seks dan pembunuh berdarah dingin. Untuk itu dalam tulisan ini akan diberikan penjelasan sedikit bagaimana status dari riwayat-riwayat yang diambil dari Tabari/Ishaq.

As regards the Maghazi literature the famous book is the work of Muhammad Ibn Ishaq, who borrows freely from the Christians and the Israelites (Source: Maudu’at of Mulla ‘Ali Qari, Mujtaba’I Press, p.85, as cited by Allama Shibli Nu’Mani in Sirat Un Nabi, Vol. I, p.17)

Al Dhahabi also declares that
Muhammad ibn Ishaq reported facts borrowed from the Jews and the Christians, whom unfortunately, he considered as reliable. (Source: Sirat Un Nabi by Allama Shibli Nu’Mani rendered into English by M. Tayyib Bakhsh Budayuni, Vol. I p. 22, Kazi Publications Lahore)

Ibn Is`haq's Seerah as a Book of Hadeeth ?

‘Seerah', by definition, is a biography. Imam Ibn Is`haq, of the late second/early third generation of Islam, collected the Prophet's biography in a book popularly known as, Seerat Ibn Is`haq. In his Seerah, Ibn Is`haq narrated the Prophet's life-story starting from before his birth until after his death, peace be upon him. However, Ibn Is`haq's Seerah is not a collection of Hadith or Sunnah, but an autobiography
. Ibn Is`haq's Seerah contains historical accounts, poems, genealogies, irrelevant stories, narrations of battles, as well as, some Quranic Verses –and sometimes their explanation, many Hadeeth narrations and statements collected from the Prophet's companions. ‘Sunnah', exclusively pertains to the Prophet's statements, actions, practices and traditions, and in general terms, includes statements and actions from the Prophet's companions;
Sunnah reports rely entirely on established chains of narration (Isnad) reporting them. Ibn Is`haq, for instance, mentioned various poems popular since before the Prophet was born, and this by no means qualifies as Sunnah or Hadeeth. Sunnah collections do not emphasize the life-story of the Prophet before Islam except to a limited extent, as Imam Ibn Taimiyyah stated in his Fatawa. He also said (Fatawa: Vol. 13, Pg., 345), “Allah has provided evidence (i.e.,
Isnad) establishing the authenticity or lack thereof of the narrations that are necessary in matters of the religion. It is well known that most of what was reported in aspects of Tafsir (meaning contained in the Quran) is similar to narrations reporting Maghazi (or Seerah) and battles, promoting Imam Ahmad [Ibn Hanbal] to state that three matters (or topics) do not have Isnad: Tafsir, Mala`him , and Maghazi (or Seerah). This is because most of their narrations are of the Maraseel (pl. for Mursal) type, such as narrations reported by Urwah Ibn az-Zubair, ash-Sha`bi, az-Zuhri, Musa Ibn Uqbah and [Muhammad] Ibn Is`haq. Maraseel Hadeeths, wherein the chain of the narration is missing the name of the Prophet's companion, are weak (not authentic) narrations.

Adh-Dhahabi listed some of the major scholars of Islam who refuted Ibn Is`haq's reliability in Hadeeth narrations. Imam Malik, for instance, called Ibn Is`haq a liar and Yahya Ibn Sa`eed al-Ansari, as well as, al-A`mash refuted one of Ibn Is`haq's narrations by saying that he lied. As a general statement, Yahya Ibn Sa`eed graded Ibn Ishaq as being weak in Hadeeth narration. Imam Ahmad Ibn Hanbal discounted the reliability of Ibn Ishaq if he alone narrates a Hadeeth. Also, Imams Yahya Ibn Ma`een (in another narration from him), an-Nasaii and ad-Daraqutni stated that Ibn Ishaq was weak in Hadeeth. The great Imam of Sunnah, Imam A`hmad Ibn Hanbal, also added that Ibn Is`haq's narrations are not accepted if they are about the Sunan. Stating that even [in the rare occasions] where Ibn Is`haq clearly stated that he heard a Hadeeth from his teacher, he would often contradict other narrators. Therefore, and as Imam A`hmad stated, if Ibn Is`haq alone reports a Hadeeth, then that narration is not accepted. Adh-Dhahabi also stated that if a narration that Ibn Is`haq reports contradicts other [more established] narrators, then Ibn Is`haq's narration is rejected.

Adh-Dhahabi listed some of the reasons why Ibn Is`haq was considered weak regarding Hadeeth narration, as follows.

A - Imam A`hmad Ibn Hanbal stated that Ibn Is`haq was a Mudallis , and in another occasion, he said that Ibn Ishaq's Tadlees (v. for Mudallis) was substantial. Imam A`hmad also said that Ibn Is`haq did not care from whom he collected Hadeeth.

]Mudallis = Ibn Is`haq often started his narrations by saying, “Those whom I trust narrated to me”, or “Some men from this city told me”, etc. He also would collect Hadeeths from unreliable narrators and hide the name of his teacher by saying, “So and So said”, meaning the teacher of his teacher, who may be trustworthy, so that the Hadeeth narration is not rejected if the name of his own teacher is specified.

B - Imam Ibn Numair said that Ibn Is`haq reported false Hadeeths from unknown narrators.

C - Adh-Dhahabi concluded by saying that among the worst errors made by Ibn Is`haq is that he used to record narrations he collected from anyone, and thus, did not have Wara` in this regard, may Allah forgive him.

How Ibn Is`haq's narration should be treated is summarized in this statement from Imam Ibn Numair, “If he narrates a Hadeeth from teachers he directly heard from and who are known to be truthful, then his Hadeeth is from the grade Hasan because he is truthful.” Yet, Imam A`hmad stated that if Ibn Is`haq is the only narrator of that Hadeeth, then his narration is discounted. And the key words to look for here, for Ibn Ishaq's narration not to be dismissed outright, are, “If Ibn Is`haq says, ‘So and so narrated to me', then he did hear that narration.' Otherwise, if he says, ‘So and so said', then the narration is rejected.'” Meaning, Ibn Is`haq would not lie; if he states that he heard the Hadeeth from his teacher, then his assertion is accepted.

Definition: A Hadeeth is a narration that starts with the collector of Hadeeth narrations, such as al-Bukhari or Muslim, wherein the collector names the teacher from whom he heard the Hadeeth, who also names his teacher, and so forth, until the chain reaches the Prophet's companion and then the Prophet, peace be upon him.

A Summary of How Muslim Scholars Treated Ibn Is`haq's Hadeeth Narration

For a Hadeeth reported by Ibn Is`haq to be accepted as a Hasan Hadeeth, which is the lesser grade of authentic Hadeeths, Ibn Is`haq must declare that he heard the narration directly from his teacher, provide a reliable chain of narrators throughout the chain of narration until it reaches the companion or the Prophet, and then his narration cannot contradict a narration reported by a more established narrator or group of narrators. Imam A`hmad added that Ibn Is`haq should not be the only narrator for a Hadeeth, otherwise, his narration is rejected.

Status of at-Tabari's Tarikh

Imam Muhammad Ibn Jarir at-Tabari (224-310/838-922) was a major scholar of Hadeeth, Tafsir (meaning contained in the Quran) and Islamic History, as Imam adh-Dhahabi stated. At-Tabari started his book on Tarikh with creation and ended it with historical accounts that occurred during his time. But at-Tabari was not the first to write a book on Islamic history, as Winn claimed. Al-Ya`qubi wrote a Tarikh before at-Tabari that also started with the story of creation.

However, and just like many other Muslim historians, Ibn Jarir relied heavily on Ibn Is`haq's Seerah while reporting the Prophet's biography. This is why a good segment of at-Tabari's Tarikh is almost identical to Ibn Is`haq's Seerah; at-Tabari often quotes Ibn Is`haq even if to contradict him. The Tarikh by at-Tabari is by no means a Hadeeth or Tafsir collection. It is far larger than Ibn Is`haq's Seerah, because it narrates the stories of Creation, earlier Prophets and nations, pre-Islamic history, the history of the Islamic era, until his time, and includes biographies of countless number of people. It also includes Quranic Verses and Prophetic Hadeeths relevant to the topics contained in the book. It is a book on Tarikh, not on Tafsir or Hadeeth. At-Tabari compiled another book on Tafsir, popularly known as, Tafsir at-Tabari, dedicated to explaining the meaning contained in the Quran. At-Tabari's Tafsir is one of the major books of Tafsir. Yet, it also contains many false Hadeeths and unreliable narrations that he collected from various resources. At-Tabari was a scholar, but neither he nor his book are divine. In Islam, the only resources that are free from errors are the Quran and the authentic Sunnah as reported through reliable, established chains of narration.

To summarize, at-Tabari's book on history suffers from similar defects as Ibn Is`haq's Seerah. This is because when reporting history, Muslim scholars did not set a condition to only include authentic narrations reporting various incidents or statements. Thus, Seerah and Tarikh books are collections of stories that their authors collected from various sources, using authentic chains of narration, weak chains of narrations and even no chains of narration. Enjoying a book of stories about earlier nations and historical accounts is one thing. Using these stories as a source for Islamic legislation is an entirely different matter.

If Hadeeth Established Through Weak Isnad (Chain of Narration) is Rejected in Islam, Then What About Stories that Have No Isnad?

In the introduction to his collection of authentic Hadeeths, Imam Muslim restated, and agreed with, the established methodology that scholars of Hadeeth use pertaining to rejecting weak and unsubstantiated Hadeeths and only accepting authentic, well known Hadeeths reported by reliable, trustworthy and truthful narrators. Imam Ibn Taimiyyah concurred, by saying (Fatawa 1:250), It is not allowed to rely on weak Hadeeths, i.e. that are neither Sahih nor Hasan in grade, in matters pertaining to Sharee`ah. ‘Sharee`ah', pertains to aspects of Sunnah and Islamic Law, which Imam A`hmad stated should not be taken from Ibn Is`haq, a known
Mudallis.

Undisputed Facts Universally Accepted by Muslims

The Quran is Islam's holy book, as Allah stated in the Quran, what transliterated means, {And We (Allah) have sent down to you (O, Muhammad) the Book (this Qur'ân) in truth}; [5:48].

The Prophet's Sunnah is also a Divine Revelation inspired by Allah, but formed by the Prophet's own words, actions and practices, {Nor does he (Muhammad) speak of (his own) desire. It is only a Revelation revealed}; [53:3-4].

The two most authentic books after the Quran are the Hadeeth Collections of al-Bukhari then Muslim. They are called “As-Sahihan” , meaning, “The Two Authentic Collections”. Al-Bukhari and Muslim gained this status among Hadeeth collectors on account of their successful implementation of the tough conditions they set for any Hadeeth to be included in their Books, not because they were the oldest, or the largest, or the ‘inspired’ or the ‘official’ collections.
As we said before the Hadeeth of Ibn Ishaq and Tabari are mostly based on weak (not authentic) narrations.

At-Tabari was a scholar, but neither he nor his book are divine. In Islam, the only resources that are free from errors are the Quran and the authentic Sunnah as reported through reliable, established chains of narration.

Edisi Bahasa Indonesia/Melayu

SEPINTAS LALU TENTANG IBNU ISHAQ : PEROSAK SEJARAH AWAL ISLAM

Namanya Muhamad bin Ishaq . Hidup sezaman dengan Imam Malik dan pernah berjumpa dengan Anas bin Malik dan Said ibnu Musayyab. Beliau tidak rasminya diangkat sebagai 'bapa sirah' dan cerita-cerita sirah yang bersumber dari beliau banyak bertebaran dalam kitab-kitab sirah kemudiannya . Malah dalam sukatan pelajaran Universiti Al-Azhar terdapat cerita-cerita yang bersumber dari beliau.

Salah seorang anak muridnya Ibnu Hisham telah mengutip secara bebas ( ataupun dengan tapisan yang ringan) cerita-cerita dari Ibnu Ishaq dan memuatkannya di dalam kitabnya yang termasyhur Sirah Ibnu Hisham, sebuah kitab rujukan sirah yang utama masakini.

Ibnu Ishaq ialah seorang penganut Syiah . Anutannya telah mempengaruhi cara beliau berfikir dan telah banyak diabadikan di dalam kitab-kitab yang beliau nukilkan atau dalam siri pengajiannya.

Banyak cerita-cerita ganjil berkenaan kehidupan dan suasana awal Islam yang bersumber hanya dari beliau seorang. Cerita-cerita ini banyak untuk menyokong fahaman syiahnya iaitu samada mengangkat Saidina Ali ra atau keluarganya, mengurangkan sumbangan atau memburuk-burukkan sahabat yang lain terutama Saidina Muawiyah serta sahabat-sahabat utama seperti Abu Bakar , Umar ra.

Banyak lagi kisah aneh yang dikeluarkan oleh beliau seorang. Maka tidak menghairankan bila ulamak besar mengatakan :

''..salah seorang dajjal " , " Kami telah menghalau Ibnu Ishaq keluar dari Madinah" - Imam Malik
"Dia meriwayatkan hadith-hadith karut dari orang-orang majhul ( orang yang tidak diketahui latarbelakangnya) " - Ali Ibnu Al-Madini
" Muhammad bin Ishaq adalah di antara perawi-perawi yang tidak menepati syarat-syarat hadith sahih" - Imam Nawawi
"Aku bersaksi bahawa Muhammad bin Ishaq adalah pendusta besar " - Yahya bin Said al-Qatthan

Mereka yang men'ta'dil' kannya bersikap demikian kerana tidak mengetahui dengan jelas kedudukan sebenar beliau samada kerana tidak hidup sezaman dengannya atau tidak dapat mengesan sifat sebenar disebabkan oleh sikap "Taqiyah" yang diamalkan sesuai dengan kehendak ajaran Syiah yang dianutinya.

Pesan Musicman:Hati2 kaum Muslimin... :study:

copas dr saudara saya....muslim nice

by kermit katak lucu Sat 06 Aug 2011, 4:31 pm

kalo anda tak percaya pada sejarawan2 muslim paling awal,anda mau percaya sama siapa lagi. muhamad husein haekal?????? apa badut semacam haekal bisa lebih dipercaya??????

by sun-moon Sat 06 Aug 2011, 7:32 pm

kermit katak lucu wrote:kalo anda tak percaya pada sejarawan2 muslim paling awal,anda mau percaya sama siapa lagi. muhamad husein haekal?????? apa badut semacam haekal bisa lebih dipercaya??????

@bung kermit, maksud bang musicman itu bukan tidak percaya pada sejarawan2 muslim paling awal, tetapi pada salah satu atau beberapa dari sejarawan2 itu, mengingat 'keautentikannya' dan/atau kebenarannya diragukan....

by ndink Sat 06 Aug 2011, 10:30 pm

kermit katak lucu wrote:kalo anda tak percaya pada sejarawan2 muslim paling awal,anda mau percaya sama siapa lagi. muhamad husein haekal?????? apa badut semacam haekal bisa lebih dipercaya??????

Muslim tau mana yang benar2 sejarawan dan mana yang politikus,...
dari pada kodok ? mana sejarah yang membuat 4 injil,.. masing2 injil siapa yang ngarang....
lukas ? karangan siapa....
markus ? karangan siapa....
matius ? karangan siapa...
johanes ? karangan siapa ....

katanya kitab suci kok dikarang orang, yang lebih gila lagi pengarangnya gak ketahuan siapa ?,... pengikut palulus !!, sadarlah,... paulus itu sudah membelokan ajaran yesus,...
paulus itu bukan nabi,..yang nabi itu yesus,,,

3 Bukankah Ia ini tukang kayu, anak Maria, saudara Yakobus, Yoses, Yudas dan Simon?
Dan bukankah saudara-saudara-Nya yang perempuan ada bersama kita?" Lalu mereka
kecewa dan menolak Dia.
4 Maka Yesus berkata kepada mereka: "Seorang nabi dihormati di mana-mana kecuali di
tempat asalnya sendiri, di antara kaum keluarganya dan di rumahnya."
markus 6: 3:4

by musicman Sun 07 Aug 2011, 4:09 am

kermit katak lucu wrote:kalo anda tak percaya pada sejarawan2 muslim paling awal,anda mau percaya sama siapa lagi. muhamad husein haekal?????? apa badut semacam haekal bisa lebih dipercaya??????

kenapa tolak ukur anda Sejarahwan awal pasti benar? :04:
sudah jelas diatas...seperti apa Ibnu Ishaq...
sanggahan dengan data2 valid...akan lbh memiliki acuan yg jelas...drpd anda memberi sanggahan asal kayak gt mit..

kl tolak ukuranya "kebenaran"adalah awal..
sekalian saja Ikuti dan taati kelakuan abu lahab yg hidup semasa Nabi Muhammad.. :D

by kermit katak lucu Sun 07 Aug 2011, 5:33 am

musicman wrote:
kermit katak lucu wrote:kalo anda tak percaya pada sejarawan2 muslim paling awal,anda mau percaya sama siapa lagi. muhamad husein haekal?????? apa badut semacam haekal bisa lebih dipercaya??????
kenapa tolak ukur anda Sejarahwan awal pasti benar? :04:
sudah jelas diatas...seperti apa Ibnu Ishaq...
sanggahan dengan data2 valid...akan lbh memiliki acuan yg jelas...drpd anda memberi sanggahan asal kayak gt mit..

kl tolak ukuranya "kebenaran"adalah awal..
sekalian saja Ikuti dan taati kelakuan abu lahab yg hidup semasa Nabi Muhammad.. :D

abu lahab bukan sejarawan.

sejarawan paling awal adalah yang oaling dekat masa hidupnya dengan kelahiran islam.

jadi sejarawan islam mana yang anda percaya?????

by musicman Sun 07 Aug 2011, 9:38 am

kermit katak lucu wrote:
musicman wrote:
kermit katak lucu wrote:kalo anda tak percaya pada sejarawan2 muslim paling awal,anda mau percaya sama siapa lagi. muhamad husein haekal?????? apa badut semacam haekal bisa lebih dipercaya??????
kenapa tolak ukur anda Sejarahwan awal pasti benar? :04:
sudah jelas diatas...seperti apa Ibnu Ishaq...
sanggahan dengan data2 valid...akan lbh memiliki acuan yg jelas...drpd anda memberi sanggahan asal kayak gt mit..

kl tolak ukuranya "kebenaran"adalah awal..
sekalian saja Ikuti dan taati kelakuan abu lahab yg hidup semasa Nabi Muhammad.. :D

abu lahab bukan sejarawan.

sejarawan paling awal adalah yang oaling dekat masa hidupnya dengan kelahiran islam.

jadi sejarawan islam mana yang anda percaya?????

saya memang tidak sebut abu lahab sebagai sejarahwan...
saya membicarakan dalam konteks prilaku...

yg saya percaya?
sejarahwan yg memiliki intregitas teruji dalam dunia Islam..

sepertinya anda merasa risih dengan fakta ibnu Ishaq diatas mit?

Laughing

by Sponsored content

Subscribe to MURTADIN_KAFIRUN

Musicman: Otentisitas riwayat-riwayat Tabari dan Ibnu Ishaq

Musicman: Otentisitas riwayat-riwayat Tabari dan Ibnu Ishaq

Re: Musicman: Otentisitas riwayat-riwayat Tabari dan Ibnu Ishaq

Re: Musicman: Otentisitas riwayat-riwayat Tabari dan Ibnu Ishaq

Re: Musicman: Otentisitas riwayat-riwayat Tabari dan Ibnu Ishaq

Re: Musicman: Otentisitas riwayat-riwayat Tabari dan Ibnu Ishaq

Re: Musicman: Otentisitas riwayat-riwayat Tabari dan Ibnu Ishaq

Re: Musicman: Otentisitas riwayat-riwayat Tabari dan Ibnu Ishaq

Re: Musicman: Otentisitas riwayat-riwayat Tabari dan Ibnu Ishaq