Customer Reviews (6) 
Summary of Goldziher's critique - free ebook?
This work is very old and I think this is available as a free ebook pdf, search online.
While others had expressed some doubt about the authenticity of hadiths before Goldziher, it was he who in the second volume of his Muhammedanische Studien first clearly articulated this scepticism. Familiarity with the vast number of hadiths in the canonical collections induced "sceptical caution rather than optimistic trust." Goldziher concluded that these hadiths could "not serve as a document for the history of the infancy of Islam, but [served] rather as a reflection of the tendencies which appeared in the community during the maturer stages of its development.
Goldziher's suspicions about the authenticity of hadiths sprang from several observations. The material found in later collections makes no references to earlier written collections and uses terms in the isnads which imply oral transmission, not written sources. Moreover, the ubiquitous contradictory traditions, the apparent proliferation of hadiths in later collections not attested to in earlier ones, and the fact that younger Companions of Muhammad seem to have known more about him (that is, they transmitted more hadiths) than the older Companions who presumably knew the Prophet for a greater length of time, suggested to Goldizher that large-scale fabrication of hadiths took place.
As a result, Goldziher provides a significantly different version of the origin and development of hadith literature. Goldziher has no trouble accepting that the Companions preserved the words and deeds of their prophet after his death, and that these might have been recorded in written form in sahifas. In this way he remains very close to the Muslim interpretation of the development of hadith literature. He not only presumes that the Companions tried to preserve the sayings and judgments of Muhammad, but also that some of them likely did so in written form (that is, in sahifas). And, when these Companions passed on what they had heard and recorded to the next generation of Muslims, the use of the isnad began."' But for Goldziher, the invention of and interpolation into hadiths also began very early, for both political and paraenetic reasons. And so mutually exclusive hadiths proliferated; "it is not surprising that, among the hotly debated controversial issues of Islam, whether political or doctrinal, there is not one in which the champions of the various view are unable to cite a number of traditions, all equipped with imposing isnarls ".
With the rise of the `Abbasids the situation changed significantly, according to Goldziher. `Abbasid rule was more theocratic than the more secular "Arab paganism" of the Umayyads.20 Consequently, the new dynasty encouraged the development of the shari'a and even employed court theologians to advise the caliphs, some of whom themselves studied and participated in theological debates. This attempt to give public life a more religious character also involved giving official recognition to the sunna. The rise of the sunna had begun during the Umayyad period in part in opposition to the perceived wickedness of the time, but its supporters remained relatively ineffective until the advent of the `Abbasid revolution. The report that the Umayyad caliph `Umar II commissioned the first collection of hadiths must be dismissed as untrustworthy because of the number of contradictions in the account and the absence of references to Abu Bakr ibn Hazm's work in later literature. For Goldziher, this claim is hagiographic, that is, "nothing but an expression of the good opinion that people had of the pious caliph and his love for the sunna."
Goldziher maintains that, while reliance on the sunna to regulate the empire was favoured, there was still in these early years of Islam insufficient material going back to Muhammad himself. Scholars sought to fill the gaps left by the Qur'an and the sunna with material from other sources. Some borrowed from Roman law. Others attempted to fill these lacunae with their own opinions (ra'y). This latter option came under a concerted attack by those who believed that all legal and ethical questions (not addressed by the Qur'an) must be referred back to the Prophet himself, that is, must be rooted in hadiths. These supporters of hadiths (ahl al-hadith) were extremely successful in establishing hadiths as a primary source of law and in discrediting ray. But in many ways it was a Pyrrhic victory. The various legal madhhabs were loath to sacrifice their doctrines arid so they found it more expedient to fabricate hadiths or adapt existing hadiths in their support. Even the advocates of ray were eventually persuaded or cajoled into accepting the authority of hadiths and so they too "found" hadiths which substantiated their doctrines that had hitherto been based upon the opinions of their schools' founders and teachers. The insistence of the advocates of hadiths that the only opinions of any value were those which could appeal to the authority of the Prophet resulted in the situation that "where no traditional matter was to he had, men speedily began to fabricate it. The greater the demand, the busier was invention with the manufacture of apocryphal traditions in support of their respective theses:"
Eventually, however there were reactions to this widespread fabrication of hadiths. Goldziher traces three such reactions to this. phenomenon. Ironically, fabricated hadiths began to circulate in which Mluhammad is made to condemn those who would fabricate hadiths about him. Others simply rejected the whole corpus of hadiths and referred only to the Qur'an. The third reaction was the one which arose among the traditionalists themselves and came eventually to dominate. They developed a means by which to evaluate the authenticity of any hadith. This method focussed not on the actual contents of the hadith (main) but on the transmitters of the main, that is, on the isnad. Goldziher seems to suggest that this critique was in nascent form already around 150 A.H. Even with this type of examination, forgeries continued to be made through the manipulation of the isnad in somewhat more subtle ways. According to Goldziher, hadiths, which originally had isnads ending with Companions or Successors, were often extended back to the Prophet.
And even though Muslim traditionalists developed elaborate means to scrutinize the mass of traditions that were then extant in the Muslim lands, they were "able to exclude only part of the most obvious falsifications from the hadith material."
Thoughts on Islamic Theology
This book is a classic and it really provides a 'westerner' a good concise way to look at a culture very different from what is comfortable.
The Gold Standard for Islamic Studies
Having just read the Qur'an, I wanted to learn more about Islam.A study of available literature on the subject revealed that modern writing falls into three basic categories: 1. anti-Islamic polemic; 2. pro-Islamic apologetic; 3. "Impartial" studies overly concerned about political correctness and hyper-careful not to touch off the "Danish cartoonist effect."
What to do?Find something written before all the modern craziness began.Goldziher, a Jew writing at the turn of the 20th Century, prepared this book as a series of lectures to be given on an American tour that never came to fruition.He displays an encyclopedic knowledge of the history of Islamic thought, and presents that knowledge in a sympathetic, even-handed way.He is unstinting in his praise for those things he finds praiseworthy and unflinching in his criticism of those things he finds blameworthy.And there is plenty of both.
As a student of the history of Christianity, I could not help but be struck by the many theological parallels between various schools of Islamic thought and various schools of Christian theology.Goldziher elucidates the influence of Roman Law, Neoplatonism, Zoroastrianism, Buddhism, and Hinduism upon the formation and growth of Islamic theology.He discusses the differences among Shi'ite, Sunni, and Sufi, and writes on other splinter sects, some of which have died out and some of which still exist.
Of particular interest was Goldziher's treatment of Hadith, and how the Islamic world views the words of the Prophet and his Companions.At its best, there is much to admire about Islam, but there are disturbing currents of thought: the two most dangerous being intolerance and belligerence.At several times in history certain portions of Islamic culture eschewed both to the betterment of contemporary culture.Of course, there are undercurrents of intolerance and belligerence in the Dar al Harb also.
Goldziher opined that the less attractive aspects of Islam were due less to Islam itself than to the culture in which it grew.[Page 16].Although he did not use the following datum as an example of his point, I think it supports it.Goldziher writes that the earliest Moslems were friendly with their Christian neighbors, and it was only later that they became increasingly hostile to Christianity.It seems that their immediate Christian neighbors were Arab Christians who were considered heretics by the Byzantine Church.In the spirit of brotherly love the Byzantine Christians hated the Arab Christians and vice versa.As Arab Christianity was assimilated into Islam, hatred for Byzantine Christianity (and by extension Christianity in general) was assimilated into Islam also. [Page 33, footnote 3].It seems the irony of this was lost on Goldziher, else he would not have buried the datum in a footnote.
Islamic Theology
By Ignaz Goldziher; translated by Andras and Ruth Hamori; edited by Bernard Lewis.From the back cover: "Ignaz Goldziher (1850-1921), a Hungarian scholar, was recognized as one of the outstanding European Islamicists of his time.Presented here for the first time in a scholarly and accurate English translation are six lectures he originally had planned to deliver in America in 1906.Though the lectures were never given, they were published in the original German in 1910 and were translated into many European languages.Since then, this classic work has served as an essential guide for serious students and scholars of Islam.""Based almost entirely on primary sources, the lectures are devoted to the following aspects of Muslim religion and culture: Mohammed and Qur'an; the holy law of Islam; the principles of Muslim theology; asceticism and Sufism; Islamic sects; and developments in modern times.""...Bernard Lewis is Cleveland E. Dodge Professor of Near Eastern Studies, and Andras Hamori is Associate Professor of Near Eastern Studies, both at Princeton University.Ruth Hamori holds a master's degree in Near Eastern Studies from Harvard University."
classic work of scholarship
Even though his scholarship is over one hundred years old, Goldziher's scholarship still remains relevant and in use.A parallel could be drawn between the continued importance of Albert Schweitzer's work on NT studies and the continued legacy of Goldziher.This edition of the work is nicely translated and well edited and belongs in the library of anyone interested in Islamic Studies.Along with Muslim Studies, this work remains as an historical monument marking the beginning of modern historical skepticism and critical scholarship towards the Muslim jurisprudential literature.
... Read more |
