Summary
The Muwatta, also known as Muwatta Imam Malik of Imam Malik, is Islamic law literature written post-Quran in the 8th century. During this period, the Islamic teachings comprised the Quran recitation and tales that were believed to have occurred in the society, commonly referred to as hadith. Thus, the Muwatta was one of the hadith texts discussing Islamic laws, compiled by Imam Malik ibn Anas. This collection of literature has similar teachings and Islamic laws to those in the Quran; thus, this book has been used alongside the Quran for Islamic teachings. Although the teachings of the book have been centered on the fabrication of the Kitab al-Muwatta, Islamic scholars from the West have criticized Calder’s theory regarding the authorship of Kitāb al-Muwuṭṭa.
It is believed that the Muwatta, which is a collection of hadiths or narrations, was initiated by Abū Ja‘far al-Manṣūr, who was the second Caliph of the time. The Caliph requested Imam Malik in the early 148AH to compile the narrations, which were more than 100,000, but Malik was reluctant. However, the Caliph returned in the 163AH and insisted that the Imam consider compiling the narrations to help teach Islam (Yilmaz, 2018). The forceful approach was due to an increase in Islamic law differences, especially its application which prompted the Caliph to coax Imam Malik into compiling the narrations to help understand Islamic law alongside the Quran. For the book to remain systematic, Malik was asked to take the reign of the disciple Fiqh and compile the hadiths in Islamic prophetic teaching, reflecting his teachings from the past Islamic teachers.
After the compilation of these narrations, the Islamic heads, including then 2nd Caliph Abū Ja‘far al-Manṣūr, insisted that the Muwatta Imam Malik of Imam Malik could be the primary Islamic teaching books. Since Muwatta was meant to address the differences in Islamic teachings, especially the application of Islamic laws, it was to unite all the Muslims and their followers into subsequent single fiqh. The hadith is believed to have revolutionized Islamic teaching. The book is the primary reference to Islamic teaching alongside the Quran, and no man was to go contrary to it. This approach was successful because it unified the Islamic rulings realized by the Caliph, and the book was widely accepted because of its prophetic approach. Out of the 100,000 narrations presented before Imam Malik, only 1,900 narrations were included in the Muwatta Imam Malik of Imam Malik (Hallaq, 2008). Therefore, the laws were successful because of the many Islam regulations addressed in the text.
Assessment of the Muwatta Imam Malik of Imam Malik
Contrary to the Quran, which was written under Prophet Muhammad, the chief prophet in the Islamic region, the Muwatta was a combination of narration. Despite its popularity, the Muwatta was accepted by the Muslim leaders during that period but received backlash from modern analysts such as Norman Calder and the western evaluators. Thus, this Kitāb’s authenticity lies in one’s beliefs, knowledge, and ability to criticize. However, since Islamic literature adheres to the religion’s teachings, the book remained authentic and was accepted by the Islamic jurists.
According to the Islamic literature, the Muwatta required more than 40 years to compose because it considered earlier Islamic teachers, the Islamic prophecy, and Quran’s content to select its literature from the 100,000 narrations (Hallaq, 2008). This was to streamline the Islamic hadith teaching approach by narrowing down the literature; thus, the word Muwatta means to simplify. Since the aim was to abridge and unite the Islamic doctrine, the Muwatta remains authentic to the Muslims (Arifin, 2021). Additionally, early Muslim jurists like Imam Al ShafiI confirmed that the book was the only writing that was authentic after the Quran in the whole Islamic literature. Imam Al ShafiI was one of the renowned jurists in the Islamic doctrine who was famous for his strict understanding of Islamic teachings, especially its application as the law of the land.
The Muslims acknowledge the authenticity of the Muwatta, but some revolutionists like Michael Cook and Norman Calder renewed their doubts about the narrations. Modern philosophers will question how the narrations were developed and how they can be authenticated (Wakin, 2003). The Islamic hadith used in the composure of Muwatta was a collection of real-life experiences among the believers and their problems’ solutions. The greatest doubts arise on how one could believe the hadith, prove their authenticity, and how they came to reach them despite many events occurring at a similar time. They question the possibility of those developing the works to provide the literature that could support their teaching regardless of the truth or reality.
Norman Calder’s Theory Regarding the Authorship of Kitāb Al-Muwuṭṭa
The main backlash of the prophetic hadith theory in Islamic literature was its authenticity. Throughout its development till later centuries, most researchers and academic gurus questioned the validity of the narrations used in the development of Islamic hadith, such as the interpretation of the law. Michael Cook and Norman Calder are renowned authors who used comparative theories to prove that these narrations, especially ones from the early prophetic hadith formation, did not have a common origin (Masrur, 2017). They claim that the early hadith were not a result of common link theory but the action triggered by the spread of Isnād and its completion in the Islamic school of law, also known as madzāhib.
The madzāhib was common in early Islamic society and thus was considered one of the early pieces of literature that could help Muslims live as per the Islamic teachings. Both Cook and Calder analyse the existing literature on Islamic theory and compare it to past events (Calder, 2020). Using that similar approach, they both ascertain that the entire Muwatta was not authentic, and there is no proof to confirm the trustiness of some of the narrations. Due to the lack of supporting evidence of the Muslim hadith, it can be concluded that they were fabricated to meet some people’s intentions or justify their actions. Thus, Kitab al-Muwatta’s authorship cannot be validated using the common link theory of Cook and Calder.
Calder argues that most early Islamic legal writings were organic texts indicating that they were fabricated. He proves his narrative by explaining that most of the writings were not actively considered until the person the narrative was based on died. This raises doubts because this narration cannot be established as the original transmitter is not alive to confirm the hadith. Calder emphasizes how al-Safii and Sulayman did not make a great contribution until after their deaths. As an approach to proving the authenticity of the hadith, scholars consider the tracing of the transmitter by assessing the similarities in the tales. However, when one’s hadith is reviewed after their death, it cannot be proved by the initial transmitter. Thus, the final narrator might have altered the meaning to their understanding or to suit their own narrative. Through the comparison of the hadith from the transmitters, Calder established the inconsistency in the literature.
Calder further argues that there were no authentic forms in which the hadith could be written to avoid the distortion of its messages. Due to the lack of books during the early period in the development of hadith, the information had to be passed orally with students compiling notes from their transmitters. Oral messages have a higher demerit as they can be distorted or fabricated to suit one’s intentions. Considering that there were several of such occurrences in the process, both intentional and unintentional, it is possible the hadith was altered, losing its viability.
Further, Calder forces questions that establish that there was no physical evidence of the books used in the development of the Katib al-Muwatta before the 4th century. The lack of evidence could serve as proof that the narrators might have gone through organic text fabrication, which undermines the authenticity of the literature. The editing of these narrations might have transpired over generation to generation losing its credibility. Additionally, the existing data contradicts the original final texts, proving the sources’ fabrication.
Generally, Calder challenges Islamic juristic books by arguing that they have undergone an editorial and redaction process, limiting their credibility. The editorial period makes them products of later periods since they were published much later after they were written. Candler explains that these texts originate from the era when their putative authors existed. Despite his stand against the Islamic hadith, his argument is valid as he asks questions that must be addressed by the Islamic historians and cannot be ignored. If considered by the Islamic legal experts, the new finding from Calder will lead to new major discoveries in the region; thus, Calder’s views should not be dismissed for his stand against Islam literature.
Western Evaluation of Norman Calder’s Theory
Due to the fabrication of the Sunni Islam hadith, the doubts in its authenticity have led researchers to scrutinize the resources to distinguish between the true attribution from the prophetic forgeries. More criticism arose when the scholars questioned the use of the Sunni Islam to spread the fabricated stories. This led to controversies in which even the Islamic scholar questioned the religious leaders’ approach to using hadiths that did not have sufficient evidence to support their authenticity. Despite these doctrines teaching the Islamic laws and being accepted by most experts in the Islamic school of law where Sunni Islam was dominant, some scholars remained doubtful about them.
Although there were data and accounts given by Calder, there has not been any established evidence supporting his thesis. Hallaq challenges Calder’s findings stating that most evidence has been proved by scholars that question his findings or directly contradict his conclusions. Hallaq first counters Calder’s explanations that the Kitab al-Muwatta was written in the early century and was not Malik’s own words (Hallaq, 2022). However, Calder places the Muwatta in the correct period, 30 years after the Mudawwana of the Maliken Suhnan was written. This gives the ground for its development, and the original texts are traced to Imam Malik.
Further, it is established that Calder uses a single text to substantiate his conclusion. However, a single text cannot be sufficient to support a strong argument against most Islamic teachings. Additionally, the criteria considered by Calder to criticize the Muwatta appears shallow as it does not implement all the facts stated in the Muwatta and the chronological flow of events depicted by the Mudawwana. Proceeding with the critique, Hallaq points out how Calder downplays most of the important points of the Muwatta. Calder first explains and admits that the Muwatta is a product of the Mudawwana but states that it comprises less sophisticated facts than those in the Mudawwana (Hallaq, 2008). Next, Calder moderates his claim that the Mudawwana is the foundation of the Muwatta, claiming that the literature is unorderly to a great degree.
This statement contradicts his early explanation that the Muwatta was not valid because the Kitab was not chronologically correct. Based on these facts alone, the Muwatta is credible despite the change of events and inconsistency in the chronological flow of events. Considering that the book was meant to teach the law, it is therefore unjustifiable for Calder to use the flow of events and trace them to a common origin to dismiss the Muwatta. The latter has been used for decades and accepted by Muslims, thus requiring more substantial evidence for such dismissal.
Calder explains that the Mudawwana was a highly articulated document with enough supporting information, unlike the Muwatta, which was shortened. He explains then that he is concerned not with scale of the writing but with its experience with redaction, which reduced the originality of the document. Thus, due to reduced materials, he assumes that this literary work took a shorter time to accumulate than the Mudawwana. In Calder’s opinion, it led to a harried affair of the final canonical reduction. However, Hallaq opposes the claims about the reduction process applied for both the Mudawwana and Muwatta. Throughout his explanation, Calder does not give evidence confirming that the Mudawwana went through a different reduction process than the one used in the writing of the Muwatta (Hallaq, 1999). Thus, Calder’s argument is based solely on the fact of the reduction of the content of the Muwatta and not the skills applied in the process.
Calder’s literature further receives criticism from Motzki, who explains that the absence of the hadith in Mudawwana does not mean that the text was not told or written by the prophet himself. Motzki explains that since the Muwatta and the Mudawwana are similar books, he believes that whatever was omitted in the Muwatta should be explained by the Mudawwana (Motzki, 1998). The hadith on dogs supports his claims, as it is mentioned in the Muwatta but spiritually presented in the Mudawwana; thus, the two books should be considered complementary, not separate. Motzki insists that the differences raised by Calder about Muwatta are due to the comparison of the structure and content. Motzki’s theory varies from Calder’s by explaining that the biggest difference is that the compilations of the work were not meant to serve the same purpose (Topgül, 2019). To him, Muwatta was meant to address legal issues in Islamic society, while the Mudawwana was meant to add information on Malik ibn Anas and his followers. Supporting his evidence, Malik was instructed to consider the legal hadith that was meant to unify the differences in the legal verdicts delivered by Islamic jurists.
Hadith Fabrication
However, in the process of reviewing, western Islamic scholars have all agreed on the differences between the Mudawwana and Muwatta. These differences show that the Muwatta, which Sunhi Islam widely accepts, is considered to comprise fabricated stories. This is because some of the evidence from the transmitter show variability, with some of the materials missing. Thus, the Muwatta cannot be justified in Islamic laws because of the lack of authenticity. Additionally, the need to debate on a clear goal with evidence showing that there is fabrication or errors between the transmitters should directly disqualify this literary work.
Despite the Kitab Hadith’s fabrication claims, the alteration can be considered an intentional or unintentional attribution to the false hadith. Regardless of the state, its result is the same; hence, the scholars were correct in dismissing the Muwatta (Brown, 2009; Brown, 2011). Intentional fabrications were made by people who had different purposes and were motivated to lie throughout the narration. Some like Zindiqs who could not fight Islam directly, changed the narrative to favor their opinions. Others altered the truth with good intentions, such as Abu Isma, who fabricated the narrations to bring back the Quran followers. He admitted it and stated he was seeking rewards in the next kingdom, thus fabricating the narratives to suit his wishes despite having a positive aim. The leader had no honest intentions with the existing narratives, thus he decided to create the foundation that could support his twisted ways in the society of the Muslims. Others used to lie publicly to please the rulers; however, there are only a few examples of this fabrication recorded by scholars.
Unintentional fabricators include those who might have received the hadith and transmitted it after transforming it for novelty and learning purposes. This kind of fabrication could be constructive such as in the case of the Muwatta (Mustafa, 2021). Despite the caliph and Imam having positive intentions of transforming the Islamic judicial system, they changed some of the narrations by making them understandable and acceptable to society, especially the Islamic school of law. Additionally, others altered the hadiths unintentionally, such as those who made mistakes like the isnad that only ended with the companion or successors. This is due to the fact that every isnad should have transmitters to the prophet. Finally, third parties were not exact in their teaching or learning and hence did not study the hadith rightfully before transmitting it.
To detect the fabrications, scholars considered various factors: firstly, a narration was rejected if it contained an exaggerated statement that the prophet could not have said. Secondly, if the experiments refuted it, it was not accepted for use. Thirdly, if it contained a strange kind of attribution that contradicted some of the Quran teachings, it was also rejected. Fourthly, other narrations could disagree with a well-known hadith, proving their fabrication. Lastly, besides those general criteria used to detect fabrication, the whole isnad system was considered to investigate the transmission process and detect illegality or inconsistency of the narration.
An example of the fabrication is evident in the western scholar critique of the Calder literature. However, Brown confirms that not all Islamic system aspects are derived from the Quran; thus, some had to be derived from the hadith (Brown, 2022). Since some of the narrations were fabricated, several of the Islamic laws and teachings were not supported by the Quran. Even in the 19th century, the fabrication was proven when hadith from Sahih al-Bukhari conflicted with the experimented and proven astronomic knowledge. Using the criteria formulated by the scholars to test fabrication, the results of the conducted experiments thus disqualify the narrations.
Responses
Scholars like Joseph Schacht have researched the oldest books of the Maliki school to unveil the controversy facing the publishing and establishment of the Kitab Hadith. Schacht explains that most hadith were created in the years after the 100 AH, stating that early Islamic teaching was directly linked to the prophet Mohammad. Other writings were always traced to the closest jurist or the Sahabah, a companion of Chief Prophet Muhammad (Brown, 2008). However, they fail to confirm a direct connection to the prophet himself. To further prove that the traditions did not exist, the fact that they were not used primarily in legal argument discussions was emphasized. This could have significantly discredited their application in real life or questioned their credibility.
The whole discussion on the authorship of Kitāb al-Muwuṭṭa confirms that the hadiths were passed from one generation to the other. Thus, there is a possibility of the fabrication, which disqualifies its authenticity. The changing of information from one generation to another may shift the value of information. There is a higher likelihood of information getting a lower credible assessment as opposed to when it is maintained. Therefore, the authorship of Kitāb al-Muwuṭṭa has impacted the changes that have happened in the coming generations.
Reference List
Arifin, T. (2021) ‘Gender equity in Hadith literature: an analysis of the contemporary hadith curriculum of Madrasah Aliyah in Indonesia’, Journal of Hadith Studies.
Brown, J. (2008) ‘How we know early Hadīth critics did matn criticism and why it’s so hard to find’, Islamic Law and Society, 15(2), pp. 143–184.
Brown, J. (2009) ‘Did the Prophet say it or not? The literal, historical, and effective truth of Ḥadīths in early Sunnism’, Journal of the American Oriental Society, 192(2), pp. 259–285.
Brown, J. (2011)’ Even if it’s not true it’s true: using unreliable Hadīths in Sunni Islam’, Islamic Law and Society, 18(1), pp. 1–52.
Brown, J. (2020) ‘Mālik, the Muwaṭṭa’, and Sunni identity’,Dr. Jonathan Brown. Web.
Calder, R. (2020) ‘Halalization: religious product certification in secular markets’, Sociological Theory, 38(4), pp. 334–361.
Hallaq, W.B. (1999) ‘The authenticity of prophetic hadith: a pseudo-problem, Studia Islamica, (89), p. 75.
Hallaq, W.B. (2008) ‘The origins and evolution of Islamic law: a response by Wael B. Hallaq’, Journal of Islamic Studies, 19(3), pp. 456–466.
Hallaq, W. (2021) On dating Malik’s Muwatta.HeinOnline. Web.
Masrur, A. (2017) ‘Neo-skepticism Michael Cook Dan Norman Calder Terhadap Hadis Nabi Muhammad’, Journal Theologia, 28(1), pp. 1–28.
Motzki, H. (1998) ‘The prophet and the cat: on dating Malik’s Muwatta’ and legal traditions’, Jerusalem Studies in Arabic and Islam, 22, pp. 18–83.
Mustafa, S. (2021) Fabrication of hadith: causes and means of elimination.Mehbooba UK. Web.
Topgül, M.E. (2019) ‘Harald Motzki. Reconstruction of a source of Ibn Ishaq’s life of the Prophet and early Qur’an exegesis: a study of early Ibn ‘Abbas traditions’, Divan: Disiplinlerarası Çalışmalar Dergisi.
Wakin, J. (2003) Remembering Joseph Schacht: (1902-1969), Cambridge, MA, US: Islamic Legal Studies Program.
Yilmaz, R.K. (2018) ‘An example of the way how an idea is criticized within the Orientalist paradigm: the criticisms regarding Norman Calder’s dating of Muwatta’, The Journal of Theological Academia.