Muslims accuse one another of slavishly imitating Christians. — Imitation of miracles of Christ; of sayings; of parables. — Ascetics and Monks. — Logia of Jesus.

WITHIN a few years of the prophet's death the Muslims were masters of Syria, Mesopotamia, Egypt, lands inhabited by nations which from a remote antiquity possessed traditions of civilization and culture. As we have seen, Islam at this time was undeveloped both as regards theory and practice, and we should a priori expect to see in the traditional literature some traces of that borrowing from Judaism and Christianity with which Muhammad in the pages of the Quran has long familiarized us. Nor is this expectation unrealized; for we find that many of the same speculations agitated the minds of Muhammadan theologians and thinkers before a rigid orthodoxy was enforced by the power of the sword as find expression in the writings of Christian theologians of that time.

The broad tolerance of the early Umayyads promoted the freest intercourse between their followers and the Christians of their capital. We find Akhtal, a Christian, the official court poet, and John of Damascus and his father high in the councils of the caliph. So genial were the relations between Muslims and Christians that we find the latter moving unhindered


with the cross openly displayed on their breasts within the mosques of their Muslim friends. In such an atmosphere of freedom and tolerance theological discussions must have abounded. To this unhindered intercourse of Muslim and Christian theologians is due the similarity between many of the dogmas of Islam and Christianity. This, of course, was not the only channel through which Christian thought percolated to the Islamic mind; but it was one of the earliest, and one which has left a permanent mark on the thought and literature of Islam.1

Down to the Abbasid times there was evidently opportunity for the exchange of ideas, as the Risala of Al Kindi, written in the reign of Al Ma'mun, proves. The hadith literature preserves a very large number of examples of this borrowing, ranging from the earliest and best-known doctrines of Islam, which were taken over from Jews and Christians, and are already incorporated in the Quran, to those sayings attributed to the prophet which betray a knowledge of Christian writings. Muslim theologians were not content to borrow the sayings of their predecessors in the counsels of God they borrowed also events from the life of Jesus, attributing them to their own prophet. Muhammad himself constantly insisted that he was not sent to work miracles. His miracle for all time was the

1 The great tolerance displayed towards Jews and Christians during the first centuries is well illustrated in the saying reported by Abu Huraira (Bukhari): The People of the Book used to read the Torah in Hebrew and expound it in Arabic to the people of Islam. The apostle of God said: 'Do not believe the people of the book and do not disbelieve them, but say, "We believe in God and what he has revealed to us."'


Quran. This is the opinion held by the authors of the oldest hadith: the chapter Fadailu-l-sayyidi-l-mursalin does not contain a single miracle of Muhammad's: on the contrary, there is the express statement of Abu Huraira that whereas the former prophets were given signs to induce the people to believe, Muhammad was given only the Quran, which nevertheless might secure him more followers than all that were before him. Naturally people who were familiar with many of the noblest writings of all time denied the claim of Muslims to possess a book of surpassing literary merit; and the polemical literature of the time abounds in taunts that Muhammad could not have been a prophet because, unlike the Messiah and the earlier prophets of Israel, he worked no miracles.

It is interesting to notice that apparently the only miracles said to have been performed by Muhammed and known to Al Kindi are: the wolf and ox that spoke; the tree that moved towards the prophet; the shoulder of goat's flesh, poisoned by Zainab bint Harith the Jewess, which called out that it was poisoned, and the miraculous production of water. Some, this writer says, the Ashabu-l-Akhbar reject altogether, while others are from reporters branded da'if1. Al Kindi's testimony to enlightened opinion on these miracles is worthy of note, because he wrote some years before Al Bukhari's collection was made, and he expressly refers (p. 60) to the traditions in terms which imply that they were not written.

Muhammadan apologists could not afford to allow their apostle to labour under the disadvantage appa-

1 He calls them Akhbarun baridatun wa-kharafatu 'ajdiz, 'witless fables and old wives' tales'.


rent when his everyday mundane life was compared with the mighty works of Christ, which seem to have been believed without question. And thus the curious and interesting fact is that the later picture of Muhammad approximates in tradition ever more closely to that of the Jesus of the gospels. No biographer, either ancient or modern, has succeeded in giving his readers an entirely satisfactory appreciation of the baffling personality of the great prophet of Arabia. His loyalty and treachery, abstinence and debauchery, wisdom and ignorance, mediocrity and inspiration, demand the pen of a Boswell.

The most prejudiced among his followers or his enemies could hardly trace in the authentic record of Muhammad's life the lineaments of the Prince of Peace. Yet this is what a certain group of traditionists and theologians have constructed. Weary of hearing of the acts of love and mercy, of supernatural power and forgiveness of 'Isa b. Maryam, they have made a Muhammad after his likeness. Not content with the picture of a courteous, kindly, and able man, famed as the possessor of all human virtues, the idol of his race, if he was to compete with the Messiah they must represent him as a worker of miracles. There is an unmistakable reference to the slavish imitation of Christians in the plaint put into the prophet's mouth, 'Verily you would follow the paths (sunan) of those who were before you foot by foot and inch by inch so that if they went down a lizard's hole you would follow them!' 'Do you mean the Jews and Christians?' said they. 'And who else?' he answered.

The most obvious imitation of the New Testament miracles is that based on the 'feeding of the five


thousand.' (John ii. 1—11). A large number of variants are extant. The version cited below is perhaps the most interesting: Anas said: 'Abu Talha said to Umm Sulaim, "The voice of the apostle of God sounded to me weak: I know he is hungry. Have you anything to eat?" "Yes," said she, and bringing out some barley loaves she wrapped them in her veil. Then she put them in my hand, and wound the rest of the veil round my head, and sent me to the apostle of God. I brought them to him in the mosque where he was with the people. I saluted them, and the apostle of God said to me, "Did Abu Talha send you with food?" "Yes," said I. The apostle said to those who were with him, "Arise."' And he went off to Abu Talha's house, while I led the way and told Abu Talha, who cried, "O Umm Sulaim, the apostle of God has come with a company and we have nothing to give them to eat!" She answered: "God and his apostle know best!" So Aba Talha went forth to meet the apostle, and they came together. He said: "Produce what you have, Umm Sulaim," and she brought that bread, and the apostle ordered it to be broken, and Umm Sulaim squeezed a butter skin to season it. Then the apostle said grace. "Call ten men," said he; and they called them, and they ate and were well filled and went out. Then he said the same words again, and all the people ate and were well filled, and they were in number seventy or eighty men.1

Sometimes this miracle takes the form of miraculously supplying water in the desert for a large number of men; and the detail is added that water ran from the prophet's fingers in order to enable the people to

1 Mishkat, p. 529.


perform wudu. Most of these miracles will be found in the chapter Mu'jizat of the Mishkat.

Again, it is interesting to compare the acts of healing performed by the prophet with those recorded in the New Testament. Yazid b. Abu 'Ubaid says: 'I saw the mark of a wound on Salma's leg, and I said, "O Abu Muslim, what is this wound?" He answered, "It is a wound I received on the day of Khaibar, when it was said Salma is smitten to death. And I came to the prophet, who blew on the wound three times, and I have not felt it from that day to this. Cf. Mark vii. 33.

There is a close parallel to the man possessed with an unclean spirit in the story of the woman with the demoniac son (bihi jinnatun). The prophet takes hold of him by the nostril, crying, 'Come forth, for I am Muhammad the apostle of God.'1

The Companions of the prophet, like the apostles of the New Testament, enjoy some of the special privileges of their master: thus two of them were lighted on their homeward way at nightfall by a staff;2 another foretells his death; and Abu Bakr's food is miraculously increased.3 The very clothes of Muhammad and his shorn hair have virtue to heal the sick and to

1 Op. cit., p. 532. The story, fathered on Ibn 'Abbas, of the boy possessed by unclean spirits who vomited, at the apostle's touch, a thing like a black puppy, is reminiscent of the Syriac Acta Martyrum rather than the Gospels.

2 This recalls somewhat similar stories of the greater Rabbis. It is hardly possible, without a systematic investigation of the hadiih literature and the Talmud, to determine whether the borrowing has been from Judaism or Christianity. This is a subject to which I shall recur elsewhere.

3 Op. cit., pp. 536 f.


cure those under the power of the evil eye. Cf. Acts xix. 12.

Controversy with Christians on the rival merits of Jesus and Muhammad may fairly be regarded as the origin of the pretended miracles, flatly contradicting the plain statement of the great Arabian and those of many of his immediate followers that he was not sent with power to work miracles. Whether the object of the inventors was to elevate their prophet to a position equal to that held by Jesus in the estimation of His servants, or whether it was to furnish themselves and their pupils with a messenger of God who satisfied a natural craving of the human heart for a visible manifestation of divine power, it is not our purpose to determine. There are good reasons for believing the deliberate imitation was resorted to for the reasons already given and because the ashabu-l-hadith did not stop ascribing the works of Christ to their prophet. His words and those of his apostles are freely drawn on and put into the mouth of Muhammad.1

It is unnecessary to do more than set out some of the sayings of Jesus which have been attributed to Muhammad, and leave them to speak for themselves.

1. 'Abd Allah b. 'Umar. A man came to the prophet and said: 'O apostle of God, how often are we to forgive a servant?' He remained silent. Then

1 Muhammadan critics quite frankly draw a clear line between hadith of a legal and an edifying nature. They confess that where a pious motive underlies a tradition there is not the same necessity for scrutinizing the isnad. Thus Al Nawawi says of a hadith of this kind, 'it is weak, but one is delighted by it'; and Ahmad says that he deals gently with the genealogy of traditions concerning virtuous behaviour.


the man repeated the question three times, and finally he answered, 'Forgive him seventy times every day.' Cf. Matt. xviii. 21.

2. Nu'man b. Bashir. The apostle of God said: 'Believers in their mutual compassion, love, and kindness are like the body. When it aileth in a member it summons all the body to it in sleeplessness and fever (muttafag 'alaihi).' Another version from the same guarantor is: Believers are as one man. If a man's eye pains him his whole body suffers, and if his head pains him he suffers everywhere (Muslim). Cf. i Cor. xii. 13—26 and Eph. iv. 16.

3. Abu Musa. The relation of believer to believer is as a building. One part strengthens another. Then (by way of illustration) he interlaced his fingers. Cf. Eph. ii. 21.

4. Ibn Mas'ud. None, will enter hell who has in his heart faith of the weight of a grain of mustard seed; nor shall any one enter heaven who has in his heart pride of the weight of a grain of a mustard seed. Cf. Matt. Xvii. 20.

5. Anas: God does not deprive a believer of his reward in the world to come for a good deed, though he has been recompensed on earth; but an unbeliever is nourished in this world for the good deeds he has done for God, so that when he passes to the next world he has no good deed for which he can be rewarded. Cf. Matt. vi. 1—2.

6. Abu Huraira: There will go forth in the end of time men who will deceive the world in religion, they will appear to men clad in sheep skins for softness, their tongues will be sweeter than sugar, and their hearts are the hearts of wolves. God will say: 'Is it


with me ye are careless, or against me ye are bold? I swear by myself I will send against those men a punishment which will leave the wise man with understanding of the enigma.'

7. Abu Huraira: Blessed is he who hath seen me, and sevenfold blessed is he who hath not seen me and yet hath believed in me. Cf. John xx. 29.

Doubtless a search through the Six Books would reveal a large addition to the instances I have cited. To them may be added the examples quoted by Goldziher,1 which I have refrained from reproducing. The New Testament references are: Matt. v. 3; vii. 5 and 6, ix 2—7, x 16, xvi 24, and xxii 21.

The chapter on the Excellence of the Poor2 contains a selection of sayings which amply illustrate the extent to which the 'other-worldliness' of the New Testament influenced some of the thinkers of Islam. Riches are in themselves evil: they are the portion in this life of those who will perish in the next: the poor will enter paradise five hundred years before the rich: the world is a prison to the believer: all of which suggest an affinity in attitude and aspiration to the teaching of sections of the New Testament.

Of the parables of Jesus which have been transferred to Muhammad we may cite the following:

1. The Labourers in the Vineyard. Matt. xx. 1—16. Ibn 'Umar. Your age compared with the age of the peoples who were before you is as the time between afternoon prayer and sunset. You, the Jews, and the Christians, may be compared unto a man who employed labourers; saying; 'Who will work for me till noon for a qirat?' The Jews worked till noon for a qirat.

1 Op. cit., pp. 384 ff.

2 Mishkat, pp. 438 ff.


Then he said: 'Who will work for me from noon till afternoon prayer for a qirat?' The Christians did so. Then he said: 'Who will work for me from afternoon prayer to sunset for two qirat?' Ye are the latter. Have ye not a double reward? And the Jews and Christians were angry, and said: 'We have worked more and received less.' God said: 'Have I wronged you of your due?' They said, 'No.' He said: 'It is my grace. I give to whom I will.' (Bukhari's versions, see Ijara and Tauhid, differ considerably.)

2. The Wedding Guests. Matt. xxii. 1—10. Jabir. Angels visited the prophet while he was asleep, and said to one another: 'There is a parable of this friend of yours, so propound a parable to him. But some said, 'He sleeps'; others, 'His eye sleeps but his heart is awake.' So they said: 'He is like unto a man who built a house and made therein a feast, and sent forth one to bid men come. And those who accepted the invitation of the summoner entered the house and ate of the feast, and those who refused neither entered nor ate.' They said: 'Explain it to him so that he may understand.' Some said, 'He sleeps'; others, 'His eye sleeps but his heart is awake.' So they explained: the house is paradise, the summoner Muhammad; for he who obeys Muhammad obeys God, and whosoever disobeys Muhammad disobeys God, Muhammad being the dividing difference (farq) between men' (Bukhari)

3. The Sower. Matt. xiii. 3—12. Abu Musa. 'The guidance and knowledge wherewith God has sent me is like unto abundant rain that falleth on earth, of which the good part receives the water and brings forth grass and herbage manifold. And part is high ground that retains the water wherewith God profits


men in that they drink, water their beasts, and sow their seed. And some of the rain falls on another part which is flat ground, neither retaining the water nor bringing forth grass. The two first are like unto a man who understands God's religion and the message God entrusted to me profits him, and he understands and teaches it. And the last is like unto the man who does not honour nor receive God's guidance with which I was sent.'

Many of the traditions quoted above found their way into the canonical collections through the same channel as the moral and didactic sayings current among the Arabs themselves, or among the Jews and other nations whose culture was so freely drawn on in the formative period of the history of Islam. These traditions circulated first as a hadith mauqufa1 (i. e. traceable only to a Companion or Follower). To gain a respectful hearing they required the stamp of the prophet himself. A missing name or two was all that was needed to make the chain complete, and this was supplied by the pious fraud who bore a special designation Raffa, because he made the hadith marfu'1 carried back to the prophet himself. Nothing could be further removed from the point of view of the ordinary Arab of the Jahiliyya or of Islam than asceticism, as the formidable array of hadith condemning it in all its forms clearly testify. Of these one example must suffice.

Anas: 'Three men came to the prophet's wives questioning them about his devotion ('ibada). When they were told they were for despising slightly his

1 See Glossary


devotion, saying, "Where do we come short of the prophet? And God has pardoned his sins past and future." One of them said: "As for me I will ever pray by night." The second said: "I will ever fast by day and not break by fast." The third: "I will turn aside from women and never marry." Then the prophet came to them, and said: "Are ye they who speak thus? Verily I am the most God-fearing and pious among you, yet I fast and break my fast. I pray and sleep; I marry women. And he who turns away from my sunna is none of mine."

A certain tendency to asceticism was always latent in Islam from the days when Muhammad first proclaimed the judgement of God one day to be pronounced against sinners, and the punishments of hell for those who lived without God in the world. Indeed reflections and meditations on the transitoriness of human life and a Day of Reckoning to come are not unknown in the poetry of the pre-Islamic period. But they are not of native origin: they are to be ascribed to the influence of Christian monks and communities, and also to Jewish monotheists scattered over Arabia.

The amazing successes of the Caliphs' armies, bringing in their train an influx of wealth which, even at the present day would be thought stupendous, did not but turn men's thoughts and ambitions towards worldly things. This tendency to covetousness and worldliness was a apparent to, and condemned by the prophet, 'You desire the passing wealth of this world,' he exclaims, 'but God desires the next world' (Sur. viii. 68) Ibn Sa'd furnishes us with details of the colossal fortunes bequeathed to their heirs by those reputed the holiest among the prophet's associates: thus Talha


b. 'Ubaid Allah is said to have died leaving a hundred leather sacks each containing three qinars of ingots.1 The early hadith are full of stories of the grinding poverty and want of the early Muhammadans. Talba's father relates that when he and his friends complained to the prophet of their hunger they each took a stone from their bellies, and the prophet took two from his.2 It is not surprising if a people which in a generation had passed from the extreme of indigence to the height of wealth and luxury should show active dislike of those who taught the vanity of riches. Yet even so among a minority the ideal of Weltverneinung lived on.

There was always a strife between those who fought for the gain of this world and those who strove 'ala-l-akhira. Abu Sa'id Al Khudri is the mouthpiece of those who took the middle view that wealth in itself is harmless if it does not lead to avarice and extravagant display.2 This was the view of the ordinary Muslim, who stood midway between the Ascetic and the Plutocrat.

Probably the reason why asceticism provoked so much opposition and gave rise to so many hadith in its condemnation was that, like the doctrine of man's free will was recognized that its immediate origin was Christian. Many of the hadith directed against asceticism, like 'There is no monasticism in Islam —

1 Eine schwere Ladung für das Paradies! Goldziher, Vorlesungen, p. 141.

2 There are frequent references in hadith to the custom of tying stones on the belly to still the craving for food, and to enable men to walk upright. Mishkat, p. 440. Hunger was the driving force behind the Arab migration. See Caetani, Annals, ii, passim.

3 Mishkat, p. 431.


the monasticism (rahbaniyya) of my community is the Jihad', bear the obvious stamp of anti-Christian polemic.1 The Christian monks had long been settled in Arabia. Muhammad in the Quran (9. 113 and 66. 5) speaks of them not unfavourably. And when the conquest and occupation of Syria, Egypt, and Mesopotamia brought Muhammadans into daily intercourse with monks and nuns, those to whom a life of prayer and meditation and poverty appealed were not slow to copy closely the practices of their Christian neighbours. These early Sufis drew from the New Testament the parables and sayings of Jesus which seemed to sanction and commend the ascetic life; and very early in their history a work full of thinly-disguised extracts from the Christians' bible was circulated. Margoliouth writes of Abu 'Abd Allah al Harith b. Asad al Muhasibi (d. 243 A.H.):

'It is to be noticed that these sermons show evident traces of the use of the Gospel, as indeed the work on the "Observation of God's Claims" commences with a repetition of the Parable of the Sower without distinct mention of its source. The Keuprulu treatise, which is against hypocrisy, might be said to be an expansion of the doctrines of the Sermon on the Mount: and to the phraseology of the Gospels there seem to be some clear allusions: these may be due to infiltration or to actual study of the Gospels on the author's part.'2

An extremely interesting collection of Logia et

1 In the early part of the third century it appears that the Muslim ascetic was not easily distinguished from the Christian; and, indeed, they had much in common.' — Margoliouth, Early Development, p. 141.

2 Transactions of the Third International Congress for the History of Religions, i, p. 292, Oxford, 1908.


Agrapha attributed to Christ by Muhammadan writers was made by Professor Asin,1 who explains their origin thus:

'Slowly and by degrees monasticism, an institution execrated by Muhammad,2 was evolved in the succeeding centuries, and was developed to such a point that it lacked none of the essentials of Christian monasticism. . . . Now from what seed could this mystical tree of monastic perfection grow in the arid soil of Muhammadanism? No other source can be imagined than Christian monasticism, which was well known to the Muslims, and not unknown to the pre-Islamic Arabs. . . . Therefore it is not to be wondered at if, after the Christian institution of monasticism began to put forth roots among the Muslims, the example of Christian monks was imitated by the Muslims themselves, and they at once endeavoured as far as possible to destroy the anti-monastic lineaments, so to speak, of Muhammad, both by forging traditions in which the words and deeds of Jesus are attributed to Muhammad, and by publishing the precepts and precedents, authentic or apocryphal, of Jesus, so that His authority might lend strength to their ascetic innovations.... Without

1 Logia et Agrapha Domini Jesu apud Moslemicos scriptores, asceticos praesertim, usitala . . . Michael Asin et Palacios (Patrologia Orienlalis, Tome ,xiii, Fasc. 3, Paris (n. d.), p. 338).

2 It may be doubted whether this statement is altogether justifiable. 'Know ye that this world's life is only sport and pastime and show and a cause of vainglory among you' (Sur. 57, 19), would suggest the advisability of withdrawing from the affairs of this world. Ver. 27, 'We put into the hearts of those who followed him (Jesus) kindness and compassion: but as to the monastic life (rahbaniyya) they invented it themselves' (ci. Rodwell, 9. 3 i), is hardly an execration. But possibly Dr. Asin is referring to some of the hadith quoted above.


doubt the Logia ascribed to Jesus by Muslim writers are connected with a settled (certa) Christian tradition among the Oriental churches, orthodox or heterodox, before the seventh century A.D. Now I do not say that this tradition is entirely free from error: indeed it has been corrupted by their traditionists; yet not intentionally, but rather from the accidents inseparable from all oral tradition. The simple choice of words, the ingenuous character of the narrative, full as it is of anachronisms, both as to time and place, point to the vehicle of transmission being not written but oral tradition handed on in the first place by the common people before it was recorded by theologians.'

The examples given below quoted from more than a hundred collected by Asin, are all taken from Al Ghazali's great work the Ihyau 'Ulumi-l-Din. Ghazali lived in the eleventh and twelfth centuries, though the traditions, for the most part, are demonstrably centuries older.

1. Jesus said, 'Do not hang pearls on the necks of swine. Verily wisdom is better than pearls, and he who despises it is worse than swine.' Cf. Matt vii. 6. Al Ghazali, Ih. I. 43. 4.

2. It is related that God revealed to Jesus: 'If you worship me with the worship of the dwellers in heaven and earth and have not love in God1 and hatred in God, that will not profit thee aught.' Ih. II. 110. 15. The same in a somewhat different form is ascribed in 110. 6 to 'Abd Allah b. Umar. 'By God, though I fast all day without sustenance and rise spending the night in prayer and spend my wealth purse by purse

1 For the Christian genesis of the expression fi-llah and billah in tradition, see MS, ii, p. 392.


in the way of God, and when I die there is no love in my heart towards the people who obey God, nor hatred to those who disobey Him that will not profit me aught.' Cf. I Cor. xiii. 1-3.

3. It is related that the devil appeared to 'Isa b. Maryam, and said: 'Say, "There is no God but the God." He replied, 'The saying is true, but I will not say it with your voice because it has ambiguity beneath the good.' A cryptic synopsis of Matt. iv. 3-10: Ih. III. 23. 19.

4. Jesus said: 'Blessed is he who leaves present desire for a promise not present which he does not see.' Ih. III. 48. 8: cf. John xii. 25.

5. The Messiah passed by a company of Jews, who cursed Him, but He blessed them. It was said to Him: They speak Thee evil and Thou speakest them well!' He answered: 'Every one spends of that which he hath.' lit. III. 123. 19: cf. Matt. xii. 34, 35 and Luke vi. 8 and 45.

6. It was said to Jesus: Teach us one precept ('ilm) for keeping which God will love us.' He answered: 'Hate the world and God will love you.' Ih. III. 141. 10: cf. John xii. 25; xv 18, 19. Practically the same hadith is put in the mouth of the prophet by Tirmidhi and Ibn Maja on the authority of Sahal b. Sa'd. It reads thus: A man came and said: 'O Apostle of God, teach me a work the which if I accomplish God and mankind will love me.' He replied: 'Renounce the world and God will love you. Renounce what mankind possess and mankind will love you.'1

1 Since I wrote this paragraph, I see that Goldziher (Vorlesungen, p. 188) quotes this hadith as one of the 'Forty Traditions' of Nawawi. Apparently he is incorrect in saying 'Der Spruch findet sich nicht in


7. Jesus said: 'The world is a bridge. The world is a bridge. Therefore cross it; do not dwell on it.' Ih. III. 149. II.1

8. 'When death was mentioned in the presence of Jesus his skin used to distil blood.' Ih. IV. 325. 12. This remarkable tradition is evidently based on the agony in the garden described in Luke xxii. 44.

9. 'It is related that when Jesus the Son of Mary was born the devils came to Satan and said: "Today the idols are overthrown and their heads broken." He said: "A new thing has happened. Keep in your places." So he flew unto the ends of the earth and found nothing. Then he found that Jesus had been born, and lo angels were encompassing him. And he returned unto the devils and said: "Verily a prophet was born yesterday. Never has a woman conceived or brought forth but I was present with her, except this. Therefore the idols despair of being worshipped after tonight. Nevertheless tempt the sons of men (to act) with haste and levity." III. 26. 4. This is in keeping with the canonical tradition recorded by Bukhari that the only child untouched at birth by Satan was Jesus.

den strengeren Sammlungen und blosz aus dem Traditionswerk des Ibn Madscha nachgewiesen', if the compiler of the Mishkat is to be believed. The latter writes, 'rawahu Al Tirmidhi wabnu Maja'.

1 'This appears to me to be an agraphum,' Asin. The words occur in an inscription on the great gateway of the mosque of Fathipur-Sikri erected by Akbar in 1601.

The Traditions of Islam [Table of Contents]
Answering Islam Home Page