watch dogs for his cultivated land. With all the mistakes that Abū Hurairah may have made in reporting so many ḥadīth, no critic has ever yet questioned his integrity; in fact, critics are unanimous in maintaining that no Companion of the Holy Prophet ever told a lie. Thus, Ibn Ḥajar says: “The Ahl Sunnah are unanimous that all (the Companions) are truthful (‘adūl).”42
Further, the same European writer asserts that independent thinkers in the second and third century not only questioned the authority of Ḥadīth altogether but derided the very system: “There was still a large circle outside the orthodox thinkers who rejected the whole system of ḥadīth. They were not concerned to adopt those which happened to fit in with the views and doctrines of the doctors, or even with those which might fairly be held to support their own view of life. So far from being impressed by the earnestness of the traditionists who scrupulously examined the isnād, or by the halo of sanctity which had gathered round the early guarantors of traditions, the independent thinkers of the second and third centuries openly mocked and derided the system as a whole and the persons and matters named therein.”43
And, as evidence in support of these sweeping statements, he adds: “Some of the most flagrant examples of these lampoons will be found in the Book of Songs, where indecent stories are cast into the form in which Tradition was customarily handed down to posterity.”44
Thus the “independent thinkers” who rejected the system of Ḥadīth and “openly mocked and derided the system as a whole” are only the lampooners mentioned in the concluding portion of the paragraph. The Aghānī,45 the Book of Songs, which is referred to as if it were a collection of lampoons directed against Ḥadīth, is an important collection of ballads by the famous Arabian historian, Abū al-Faraj ‘Alī ibn Ḥusain, commonly known as Isfahānī (born in 284 A.H.). One is at a loss to understand why the learned Western author should look upon it as an attempt to mock and deride the system of Ḥadīth. There may be some indecent stories connected with these songs, but the presence of such stories does not alter the essential character of the work which is in the nature of an historical collection.46 Neither in the book itself nor in any earlier writing is there a word to show
42 Is. I. Pg. 6. The word ‘adāla, as used regarding transmitters of reports, means that there has been no intentional deviation from the truth, and this is not due merely to the respect in which the Companions are held, for the critics of the transmitters of Ḥadīth never spared any one simply because he held a place of honour in their hearts.
43 Tr. Is., p. 80.
44 Ibid.
45 The Encyclopaedia of Islam speaks of the Aghānī, in the following words: “His chief work, which alone has been preserved, is the great Kitāb al-Aghānī; in this work he collected the songs which were popular in his time, adding the accounts of their authors and their origin which appeared of interest to him … With every song there is indicated, besides the text, the air according to the musical terminology … to these are added very detailed accounts concerning the poet, often also concerning composers and singers of both sexes. In spite of its unsystematic order this book is our most important authority not only for literary history till into the third century of the Hidjra but also for the history of civilization” (Art. Abu’l Faradj).
46 There are indecent stories in some of the books of the Bible, but still the Bible does not cease to have a sacred character.