"They took their rabbis and their monks to be their lords besides Allah..." [Qur'an 9:31]
Many scholars mention how this is about taking rulings from them that opposed what Allah revealed. Attached are screens taken from the abridged translation of tafsir Ibn Kathir
The famous Rabbi, Abba ben Joseph bar Ḥama, quoted in the Talmud as "Rava", is cited as saying that the words of the "sages" (ie, the authoritative rabbis) are more important than the revelation (Torah)!
Note in the previous tweet, the top part of the screenshot also mentions the sages brought completely new mitzvot as well (ie laws, commands, prohibitions, etc)
The below text from another part of the Talmud also claims "a Sage is greater than a prophet"
In Christianity, there are various practices that are against the bible, but deemed permitted, sometimes due to an infallible (ecumenical) council of bishops. Catholics openly defend prostrating to images (eg of Mary), despite the bible prohibiting it
Even if we conceded that the prohibition is not for creating literally any image, it is clear that bowing down to images that have been installed in house of worship (eg a statue/icon of Mary) is a violation. But because of the 7th ecumenical council, many Christians allow it
One can bring forth numerous other examples, but this suffices. Indeed these folk distort words from their proper places
@JudaismUnveiled perhaps you'd have an interest in this thread
• • •
Missing some Tweet in this thread? You can try to
force a refresh
Was dmed this morning that after months, Little has responded to the points in this thread with an article: islamicorigins.com/revisiting-the…
His article is long, for brevity I will respond to only some of the points x.com/KerrDepression…
The new approach (as expected) is that Yahya ibn Abi Kathir is the initial origin/common source of this material. Little also says that he is probably a genuine CL and that his hadith did include the Isfahan detail.
Now is Yahya's hadith (preserved by Ahmad, Ibn Abi Shayba, Ibn Hibban, and other later sources) about the Isawiyya? No. The hadith is not a one line report. As Little notes it mentions various things aside from the Jews from Isfahan.
A thread on the hadith critics and consistency in their methodology
A charge I have seen levied against hadith scholarship, especially by orientalists, is that the evaluations and conclusions of muhaddithin are often contradictory and at odds with each other. This suggests that their method is imprecise, inconsistent, or arbitrary
In this thread I will be touching on:
* Scott Lucas's work on narrator evaluation of early critics
* An attempted response to his thesis by I-Wen Su
* Potential problems with this metric
* A different metric to look at
I was asked to address an article which argues that Imam al-Awza'i was a forger of prophetic hadith.
So here is a thread.
In short, the above cited hadith regarding the jews of Isfahan and al-dajjal is said to be a forgery by Imam al-Awza'i, who is the common link the isnads for the hadith converge on.
It is argued the hadith was a response to a group that emerged in Isfahan, the Isawiyyah.
It is claimed the earliest datable version of this material is with al-Awza'i, I will show that this is not the case in this thread.
Additionally the claim that the Isawiyya had a presence in his region is also questionable.
After heavy hikes, Kayseri dhimmis jizya was 220 akçe. At the time 1 akçe was 0.25g silver, so 55g/yr
Don't have wages for Kayseri, but wages for UNSKILLED labourer in Istanbul were 3.3g/day. So ~17 days pay
In other times & areas it was FAR lower, eg 30akçe
Sources in replies
The value of 220 was in 1624 after many hikes. As mentioned in the same paper, in 1583 the jizya in Karaman province was 30 akçe for the poor and up to 90 for the rich. Far less.
Source for the jizya values is this paper by Ronald C. Jennings:
https://t.co/fnt8eCO5DIjstor.org/stable/3632199
The historicity of the seerah and hadith literature; the case of Suraqah bin Malik (ra).
The hijra of the Prophet (ﷺ) from Mecca to Medina with his companion Abu Bakr (ra) is well known. An incident that occurred on this journey involved a man named Suraqah bin Malik (ra). He would become muslim, but was not one at the time of this incident.
After The Prophet (ﷺ) had left Mecca, the pagans had promised a hefty reward to anyone who could capture him and many went out in pursuit. Suraqah bin Malik (ra) was one of them. He had managed to catch up to the Prophet (ﷺ) and Abu Bakr (ra), but could not proceed.