Muhammad
Reply #37 - June 30, 2014, 06:16 PM
Yep, what is interesting about Brown's article is that he makes no secret of the fact that (1) Muslims knew hadith were fabricated all the time, which is why they had to come up with the isnad system to try to impose some sense of order; and (2) compilations of hadith and their authenticity were analyzed and canonized INCREDIBLY late in Muslim history. Quote from that article by Brown:
"Five of the six books of the famous Sunni ‘Six Book’ canon – all of them except Ibn Mâjah’s Sunan - rose to prominence during the fourth/tenth and fifth/eleventh centuries in the Islamicate heartlands of the Nile/Oxus region."
In other words, one must distinguish the process of compilation from the process of canonization. Sunni compilations of hadith, as we know them, were written down incredibly long after Mohammed's death. But their canonization -- deciding which compilations were acceptable -- took centuries further, during which some were accepted and others rejected.
Another point, it is absolutely mind-boggling how many alleged "transmitters" were used by these guys in their isnads. We have *thousands* of alleged transmitters. It is interesting that some have argued this in favor of authenticity -- after all, how could thousands of people all be made up? -- whereas I would say the opposite, clearly it shows that people were just making up names at a frenetic pace, often making up obscure isnad links so that nobody could gainsay them. In an environment where none of this was written down in any authoritative form, there were essentially no constraints at all.