Muslim Apocrypha?

[Ahl al-Dhikr]

From what I have learned of Islam, and Muslim literary theory and jurisprudence, the structure (in terms of usul al-fiqh/din) is very similar to our own.

For example, given the primacy of revelation narrative, the Qur'an can be seen as corresponding to the Tora and the books of the prophets, as primary sources. Accordingly, the Sunna and the books of Writings ("kethuvim" or hagiographa) parallel each other in providing frameworks for interpreting the primary text, as both embody a sort of "national memory," certified narratives supplementing the prophetic text(s). Similarly, it seems to me that the Haditha are similar to the Midrashim (homiletical exegeses on the Book), in that they offer further interpretive material of varying degrees of authoritativeness.

Are there any apocryphal works among Muslims? By "apocryphal," I mean works contemporary with Muhammed (upon him is the Peace) that are not viewed as authoritative?

Thanks!:)

[islamirama]

Yes, it's true that Muslim's faith is more close to Jewish then christian.

If i got your question right then I don't think there are any apocryphal work among Muslims. There two main source of knowledge, Quran and Sunnah. Quran we know is authentic and unchanged since day one,and this even non-Muslim scholars can attest to.

As for the Ahadith, there is a whole science developed to it that has clearly classified all the adhadith into different categories. For example, there is sahih (sound, authentic), daef (weak) and fabricated lies. So anything that is not sahih, we disregard it due it's fabrication or weak narrations to confirm it. I guess you could say these non-sahih could be apocryphal works that are not views with any authoritativeness.

You can read more on science of hadith here:
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/

[Umar001]

Bismillah, Wa Salaatu Wa Salam Ala Rasulullah,

Peace be upon those who follow guidance.

I would like to just primarily say we should be careful, in my opinion, with using terms which have become common in one tradition and importing them into another.

In the context of the history of Christianity, or even maybe Judaism, one may do well to refer to apocryphal books. But I do not think one can have the same outlook within the context of Islamic history. The question strikes me as confusing, why, because there are no works whether contemporary, or preceding or sucseeding the Qur'an and authentic Sunnah which can be seen as sources of complete authority. Every individual after Muhammad will have his/her views/speech accepted and rejected.

As for the parralells you have drawn, I do not know how accurate they may be.

And Allah Almighty Creator of myself and All Creation Knows Best.

Regards,

Eesa

[Ahl al-Dhikr]

Yes, it's true that Muslim's faith is more close to Jewish then christian.
If i got your question right then I don't think there are any apocryphal work among Muslims. There two main source of knowledge, Quran and Sunnah. Quran we know is authentic and unchanged since day one,and this even non-Muslim scholars can attest to.
As for the Ahadith, there is a whole science developed to it that has clearly classified all the adhadith into different categories. For example, there is sahih (sound, authentic), daef (weak) and fabricated lies. So anything that is not sahih, we disregard it due it's fabrication or weak narrations to confirm it. I guess you could say these non-sahih could be apocryphal works that are not views with any authoritativeness.
You can read more on science of hadith here:
http://www.usc.edu/dept/MSA/fundamentals/hadithsunnah/

Thanks for the info and the link! I'm going to give it serious study, b"Y, over the next few days. I was really interested in usul al-fiqh and usul al-din when I first learned about them.

Were the non-sahih ahadith written or dictated by contemporaries of Muhammed?

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up

[Ahl al-Dhikr]

Bismillah, Wa Salaatu Wa Salam Ala Rasulullah,
Peace be upon those who follow guidance.
I would like to just primarily say we should be careful, in my opinion, with using terms which have become common in one tradition and importing them into another.
In the context of the history of Christianity, or even maybe Judaism, one may do well to refer to apocryphal books. But I do not think one can have the same outlook within the context of Islamic history. The question strikes me as confusing, why, because there are no works whether contemporary, or preceding or sucseeding the Qur'an and authentic Sunnah which can be seen as sources of complete authority. Every individual after Muhammad will have his/her views/speech accepted and rejected.
As for the parralells you have drawn, I do not know how accurate they may be.
And Allah Almighty Creator of myself and All Creation Knows Best.
Regards,
Eesa

I absolutely agree that should be careful not to confuse one cultural paradigm for that of another! :)

Please allow me to clarify my question: I was merely inquiring as to whether there were any non-Qur'anic or Sunnic narratives purported to be written by contemporaries of Muhammed (upon him is the Peace).

[Umar001]

Hi,

Hope you are well.

I absolutely agree that should be careful not to confuse one cultural paradigm for that of another! :)

Please allow me to clarify my question: I was merely inquiring as to whether there were any non-Qur'anic or Sunnic narratives purported to be written by contemporaries of Muhammed (upon him is the Peace).

Narratives of what? If you mean to ask were there any people, at the same time as Muhammad, sal Allahu alayhi wa salam, who claimed to have revelation then yes there were.

[Ahl al-Dhikr]

Hi,
Hope you are well.
Narratives of what? If you mean to ask were there any people, at the same time as Muhammad, sal Allahu alayhi wa salam, who claimed to have revelation then yes there were.

Thanks! I am doing well, thank God.

I was speaking in general terms, not really knowing (to any great extent) the corpus of Muslim religious literature; the narratives about which I was asking could be about Muhammed (upon him is the Peace), or about his society, or even about the history of the tribes on the Peninsula! :)

Are these individuals who claimed to have revelation considered to be false prophets, or simply non-authoritative?

:w:

[Umar001]

Thanks! I am doing well, thank God.

Good to hear that.

I was speaking in general terms, not really knowing (to any great extent) the corpus of Muslim religious literature; the narratives about which I was asking could be about Muhammed (upon him is the Peace), or about his society, or even about the history of the tribes on the Peninsula! :)

Are these individuals who claimed to have revelation considered to be false prophets, or simply non-authoritative?

:w:

I think we are going to need a clarification of the word authoritattive, what do you mean by it in this context? There are for example works which a stunt may need to master, they are 'standard'/'authoritative', but they are not authoritative in the sense that they are the same as Qur'an and Sunnah i.e. revelation.

I do not know about the narratives.

As for anyone who claimed to have revelation like Muhammad had revelation from MUhammad's time onwards is taken as a liar.

Wa Salatu Wa Salam Ala Muhammad.

Regards
Eesa

[Grace Seeker]

If I may change the question slightly:

Are there writings that are read by Muslims today and accepted among the corpus of Islamic literature that were written by contemporaries of Muhammad, that are not also already included in the reporting of Hadith?

[Ahl al-Dhikr]

I think we are going to need a clarification of the word authoritattive, what do you mean by it in this context? There are for example works which a stunt may need to master, they are 'standard'/'authoritative', but they are not authoritative in the sense that they are the same as Qur'an and Sunnah i.e. revelation.

I'm not entirely sure what I mean, in this context! :)

Authoritativeness, in the sense of Jewish religious literature, stems from the fact that the Tanakh - Tora, the books of the prophets, and the books of Writings (kethuvim) - was compiled by our national representative body (the Great Congress / Kenesseth ha-Gedhola), formally published and promulgated among our people, and officially "closed" by the same body (at a later point in history). If something is written in the Tanakh, it is "authoritative" - it is meant to be interpreted, but it is not open for dispute. In contrast to this we have books (like the books of Maccabees and Ecclesiasticus) that were not officially included in the Tanakh and were not formally promulgated among our people; these books are not considered "authoritative" - they are open to dispute (like any written opinion) and are not meant to be interpreted.

How were the Sunna compiled and published, at first? Was it a process similar to that described above?

Also - what are examples of those works which someone must master, but aren't considered on the same level as the Qur'an or the Sunna?

And I didn't know that the Sunna are considered to be revealed texts, in the same sense as the Qur'an! :) Can you elaborate more on this? It's very interesting!

:w:

[Umar001]

I'm not entirely sure what I mean, in this context! :)

Authoritativeness, in the sense of Jewish religious literature, stems from the fact that the Tanakh - Tora, the books of the prophets, and the books of Writings (kethuvim) - was compiled by our national representative body (the Great Congress / Kenesseth ha-Gedhola), formally published and promulgated among our people, and officially "closed" by the same body (at a later point in history). If something is written in the Tanakh, it is "authoritative" - it is meant to be interpreted, but it is not open for dispute. In contrast to this we have books (like the books of Maccabees and Ecclesiasticus) that were not officially included in the Tanakh and were not formally promulgated among our people; these books are not considered "authoritative" - they are open to dispute (like any written opinion) and are not meant to be interpreted.

I think this is the difference in historical background that caused the confusion. In Islam the Qur'an is revelation and there was revelation to the Prophet too, sala Allahu alayhi wa salam. It was not a body of people later in time, but rather the Prophet himself which made it clear. Maybe that is why I was confused by your request.

How were the Sunna compiled and published, at first? Was it a process similar to that described above?

I don't think it was the same, the Sunnah is the way of the Prophet, so this was there from the starrt and was then passed down to later generation like the Qur'an was passed down.

Also - what are examples of those works which someone must master, but aren't considered on the same level as the Qur'an or the Sunna?

There are no works which a student must master. Because there are no authoritative works, so the works (i.e. the books) may differ in different areas, depending on what the scholars there studied. But generally now days you have works which students are encouraged to study in different fields, like for example, some are encouraged to master first short conise works and then move on to bigger ones, for example, Usool ath thalaatha or/and Qawaaid Al Arbaa by Ibn Abdul Wahhab, or Aqeedah Wasitiyyah later on, and then move on to bigger and more specific works.

And I didn't know that the Sunna are considered to be revealed texts, in the same sense as the Qur'an! :) Can you elaborate more on this? It's very interesting!

:w:

I don't know how much you'd like me to elaborate. But to put it simply, the Qur'an was revealed, and the Prophet had various Jobs, one of which was to explain the Qur'an, but the explanation came from Almighty God to the Prophet. So examples, Qur'an states estalish prayer, the Prophet shows how to establish prayer, the Qur'an states cut the hand of the thief the prophet shows how to execute that command, or he may explain by mouth and not actions, the Qur'an says that everyone will pass over hell, the Prophet explained the scene on the day of Judgement and the bridge extended over hell that man will have to pass over.


And Allah truly Knows Best.

[doorster]

Apocrypha are texts of uncertain authenticity:

Shaikh Muhammad Nasiruddin al Albaani (rahimullah) discovered thousands of Ahdees to be of uncertain authenticity (some outright fabrications too)

our Apocrypha are za'eef ahdees


Peace!

P.S. The only forum I know that could provide you with unadulterated information is at http://forums.almaghrib.org/index.php? but it may be difficult if not impossible to join it without enrolling in some course

http://forums.almaghrib.org/register.php?

[Ahl al-Dhikr]

I think this is the difference in historical background that caused the confusion. In Islam the Qur'an is revelation and there was revelation to the Prophet too, sala Allahu alayhi wa salam. It was not a body of people later in time, but rather the Prophet himself which made it clear. Maybe that is why I was confused by your request.
I don't think it was the same, the Sunnah is the way of the Prophet, so this was there from the starrt and was then passed down to later generation like the Qur'an was passed down.
There are no works which a student must master. Because there are no authoritative works, so the works (i.e. the books) may differ in different areas, depending on what the scholars there studied. But generally now days you have works which students are encouraged to study in different fields, like for example, some are encouraged to master first short conise works and then move on to bigger ones, for example, Usool ath thalaatha or/and Qawaaid Al Arbaa by Ibn Abdul Wahhab, or Aqeedah Wasitiyyah later on, and then move on to bigger and more specific works.
I don't know how much you'd like me to elaborate. But to put it simply, the Qur'an was revealed, and the Prophet had various Jobs, one of which was to explain the Qur'an, but the explanation came from Almighty God to the Prophet. So examples, Qur'an states estalish prayer, the Prophet shows how to establish prayer, the Qur'an states cut the hand of the thief the prophet shows how to execute that command, or he may explain by mouth and not actions, the Qur'an says that everyone will pass over hell, the Prophet explained the scene on the day of Judgement and the bridge extended over hell that man will have to pass over.
And Allah truly Knows Best.

Thank you for clearing that up!

Is it noted about Muhammad (upon him is the Peace), in particular, that he excelled in explaining the revelations and instructions of the Qur'an? We tend to have a similar perception of Moshe (Moses), whom we accord the title of "teacher" (in the sense of "explainer") and "lawgiver."

Also, can you tell me a bit more about those works that you specified? Are they books of law, or of history, or of philosophy, etc?

:w:

[Ahl al-Dhikr]

Apocrypha are texts of uncertain authenticity:
Shaikh Muhammad Nasiruddin al Albaani ( rahimullah) discovered thousands of Ahdees to be of uncertain authenticity (some outright fabrications too)
our Apocrypha are za'eef ahdees
Peace!
P.S. The only forum I know that could provide you with unadulterated information is at http://forums.almaghrib.org/index.php? but it may be difficult if not impossible to join it without enrolling in some course
http://forums.almaghrib.org/register.php?

Thanks! I'll check it out. :) Do you think they'll let me join?

Is this the shaikh to whom you are referring? He seems like quite the scholar! He reminds me of Joseph Qafeh and Saul Lieberman.

:w:

[islamirama]

Thanks! I'll check it out. :) Do you think they'll let me join?

Is this the shaikh to whom you are referring? He seems like quite the scholar! He reminds me of Joseph Qafeh and Saul Lieberman.

:w:

you can join it. I've joined some time ago but have not been there since.

[Grace Seeker]

If I may change the question slightly:

Are there writings that are read by Muslims today and accepted among the corpus of Islamic literature that were written by contemporaries of Muhammad, that are not also already included in the reporting of Hadith?

Just quoting myself in case someone new might be reading this thread and care to respond.

[Imam]

Are there writings that are read by Muslims today and accepted among the corpus of Islamic literature that were written by contemporaries of Muhammad, that are not also already included in the reporting of Hadith?.

No, there Aren't