Farhad Ghoddousi, Research Associate, Brain Research and Imaging Neurosciences Research Division, Wayne State University School of Medicine, USA
Abstract
Among the Shiʿi ḥadith corpora there is a unique and relatively long report in the form of a colloquy or admonition of God to Jesus. The most complete version of this report is survived in al-Kafi, the most important Shi’i Hadith collection of the 4th century, beginning with the title: “Hadith ʿIsa b. Maryam, fi ma waʿaz Allah bihi ʿIsa” (That With Which God Has Instructed or Counseled Jesus) with several chains of narrators in which Ali ibn Asbat (8th cent.) is the common link. He was a well-known and trusted Hadith narrator coming from a Christian background with a keen interest in Imami Shi’i reports about Jesus.
Previously, Mahmoud Ayoub identified this long text, consisting of nearly 80 subparts some of which could be traced in the Gospels, as a single Hadith Qudsi (Divine Utterance), attributed to Jesus as a whole with a single isnad, adding that “throughout this colloquy, God is the speaker, and Jesus asks one brief question towards the end.” However, a thorough examination of this report shows that it is composited out of pre-existing shorter components. Thanks to a few of these smaller parts which have been narrated independently, we were able to shed light upon the process of the compilation and production of this long report: ʿAli b. Asbat had a collection of several independent short sayings attributed to Jesus through different chains of narrators. At some later stage, another compiler combined all of these smaller narrations into a unified longer version. As a part of this process, the sayings of Jesus were changed to Divine utterances to Jesus, adding an introduction and possibly absorbing some other wisdom sayings attributed to Jesus while keeping the chain of narration through ʿAli b. Asbat.
This study, by focusing on the history of composition of this unique and one of the earliest collection of sayings of Jesus in Islam, also sheds some light on the more general question of the transmission and integration of biblically related material in Shiʿi and Islamic hadith collections.
Thank you for this interesting and well-researched paper. I have a question about the conclusion and the way you bring Merlin Schwartz' s review into conversation with Khalidi. I do not necessarily read Khalidi's use of the term "fabrication" (p.45) in the same way that Schwartz interprets it. I think that it is possible that Schwartz brings too much of his own history of religions background into Khalidi's use of the term. Khalidi does not use the term unadvisedly but seeks to present evidence for his usage (pp.44-45). Schwartz proposes the use of "transformation" or "adaptation" instead. He claims that the diverse images of Jesus are "products of faith" (p.692). Can you suggest more clearly how you might use Schwartz's suggestions as a corrective to Khalidi?
A very interesting study, Farhad. Thank you.
What I'd really like to know is why so few Muslim writers seem to have any direct interaction with the canonical gospels. I can think of many possibilities. But could you find out what your authors/transmitters might have thought of the idea that they should read/listen to/ find out about the canonical gospels?
Thank you for this very interesting study. It would be interesting to hear more next week on whether Shi'i adoptions of elements of Jesus' teaching reflect specific Shi'i concerns. I can see this in what you mention about interest in e.g. spiritual succession. I wonder also about the role of Jesus in Shi'i thought today, given this early interest which you record.
Thank you, Farhad, for an engaging article. I am particularly interested in your reflection on page 7 that Shi'ite collectors of hadith tended to view Jesus through the lens of walaya, which can either be translated as "loyalty to" or as "friendship with" God. (You specifically mention the awliya', translating it as friends.) In my understanding, walaya as loyalty takes pre-eminence in Shi'ite thought, in the form of loyalty to the imams (see Maria Dakake for more on this). In any case, I wonder if you might be able to do more with this in your analysis of al-Kafi's collection of Gospel parallels. For example, consider #27 (O Jesus! How long must I wait and hope for good from people while they are heedless and reluctant to return? The words which emitted from their mouths do not correspond to what is in their hearts, they subject themselves to my loathing, while seeking the love of the believers by [feigning] drawing near to Me), as compared with Matthew 15:8 (These people honor me with their lips, but their hearts are far from me). Does the Shi'ite elevation of walaya impact one's reading of the Gospel verse? In other words, is our reading of Matthew 15:8 transformed at all when we think about Jesus through the lens of walaya?
This is interesting in many respects. You finish by saying this approach needs to begin with the Arabic--and I agree. This study uses English. This complicates the methodology for establishing 'parallels'--something I cannot quite discern in this paper. How can one decide what is a parallel? And, following on from Ida, above, what is of most interest for me is, if these do draw from the Christian Gospels, what is being done with the Christian source?