Brethren of Purity@brethrenfpurity
Aug 1, 2025
5 tweets
Addition of al-Zuhrī in the Chain:
In the critical historical studies of Ḥadīth, it is well-known that al-Zuhrī added additional links to his chains which are not corroborated through any co-transmission. In the traditional study, some of al-Zuhrī's texts are rejected...
because of his additions. The noteworthy point is that while his textual additions often face scrutiny, his additions in the chains, which are far more significant, do not. Görke and Schoeler have already noted that this is a pattern in al-Zuhrī's transmission.
While a detailed list can be accessed in their work, a simple example here can help.
When al-Zuhrī cites the Warqah tradition from ʿUrwah, he gives the chain:
ʿUrwah — ʿĀʾishah — (Narrative about Khadījah and the Prophet)
When nearly the same (and likely older) textual block is cited from Hishām b. ʿUrwah, ʿUrwah's own son, it does not contain the same chain. The chain cited by Hishām is:
ʿUrwa — (Narrative about Khadījah and the Prophet)
This chain is clearly missing a link.
When al-Zuhrī's textual additions are not ignored, why is it the case that his serious additions in the chains are ignored? It is clear that al-Zuhrī took broken and disconnected chains and filled them in based on his prior knowledge and general information.
Brethren of Purity
@brethrenfpurity
Spreading rational philosophical Islam
- Philosophy | Islam | Mysticism | Anti-Neo-Athari
YouTube: https://t.co/JbQvdkmPd8
Missing some tweets in this thread? Or failed to load images or videos? You can try to .