“Unwritten Documents” of the Prophet Muh.Ammad. an Isn¯Ad-Cum-Matn

religions

Article Untangling the “Unwritten Documents” of the Prophet Muh. ammad. An Isnad-cum-Matn¯ Analysis of Interwoven Traditions

Nicolet Boekhoff-van der Voort Religions 2021, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 16 of 33

Faculty of Philosophy, Theology and Religious Studies, Radboud University, 6525 XZ Nijmegen, The Netherlands; [email protected] present to carry out the Prophet’s command, yet he does not appear to give them time to Abstract: Since the earliest studies of Islam by non-Muslims were carriedcomply out, with variant his traditions(the women’s question immediately follows the Prophet’s request). ḥ ʿ (ah. ad¯ ¯ıth) have been regarded as a proof of forgery or editing withinMu theammad’sh. ad¯ıth material. reprimand Early would then have to be directed against Umar. However, it is studies have shown that variances are the result of different processes, somealso addressed intentionally to and other others people, which would only make sense if a discussion took place mistakenly; some caused by editing processes, while others throughamongst the process them. of transmission This shows that Hishām’s version is a secondary version. In Hishām’s across the first centuries of Islam. During the transmission process,version or the genesis a switch of ais tradition, made to a first-person perspective: ʿUmar, the alleged narrator of this accounts are constantly shaped and adjusted. The use of topoi formstradition, a part relates of this processthe event as from his point of view (f.e., “we were”, “between us”, “I said”). well as the inclusion of motifs in different accounts. The present articleIn contrast will explore with one the of versions these of Ibn ʿAbbās and Abū l-Zubayr, he is an active participant in the event. motifs, specifically, the instruction of the Prophet Muh. ammad, on his deathbed, to bring him writing materials so that he could prepare a document for his community. This motifThe appears noise or in adiscord number motif occurs in both Ibn ʿAbbās’ and Abū l-Zubayr’s versions, of accounts with different settings, characters and details on the naturebut of the documentʿUmar motif itself. only This in those of Hijazi origin, versions 4 and 6 of Ibn ʿAbbās and the version of Abū l-Zubayr. The Medinan origin of the two traditions of Hishām, who is from article examines whether there exists a direct relationship between the different accounts and, if so, what does this mean. Through this study, we will see that additionalMedina motifs himself have been and addedprovides a Medinan isnād, is consistent with the regional occurrence ʿ ʿ to this tradition during its transmission process and that some of theseof motifsthe Umar can be motif. attributed Is Hish to ām’s version derived from Ibn Abbās’ or Abū l-Zubayr’s? So Citation: Boekhoff-van der Voort, ʿ regionalisation or specific transmitters. far, Hishām’s version has more similarities to that of Ibn Abbās than that of Abu l-Zubayr, Nicolet. 2021. Untangling the such as that no location is mentioned, nor that Muḥammad is about to die, and the “Unwritten Documents” of the wording of the Prophet’s command. One part has not yet been discussed: the women Prophet Muh. ammad. An Keywords: Prophet Muh. ammad; Islam; s¯ıra; h. ad¯ıth transmission; history motif. Isnad-cum-Matn¯ Analysis of Interwoven Traditions. Religions 12: The women motif occurs in both of Hishām b. Saʿd’s traditions from ʿUmar and can 579. https://doi.org/10.3390/ therefore be traced back to him and dated to the second quarter or the middle of the rel12080579 1. Introduction second Islamic century, since Hishām died in 160/776–7. We have already encountered the (one) woman motif in two other versions: Ibn ʿAbbās versions 5 and 6. In two of the Contradictory stories or discrepancies within traditions sit at the heart of discussions Academic Editor: Terry Lovat three traditions of Ibn ʿAbbās version 5 of Layth b. Abī Sulaym, a woman rebukes the about the usefulness of the Islamic tradition (h. ad¯ıth pl. ah. ad¯ ¯ıth) material as a source of information on the early centuries of Islam. The discrepancies havepeople led scholarspresent for to developshouting instead of following the command of the Prophet. Although Received: 18 May 2021 the science of had¯ıth criticism and new methodologies and theorieswhat she to says study is thedifferenthad¯ıth from Hishām’s version, it conveys the same sentiment: a rebuke Accepted: 7 July 2021 . . material. This was especially important for those traditions in whichfor not a followingsunna (custom) the Prophet’s of command (“Woe unto you! [It is] the command of the Published: 27 July 2021 Messenger of God!” (wayḥakum ʿahd rasūl Allāh)). the Prophet Muh. ammad was described, because his behavior and sayings form instructive examples of the ideal Islamic way of life for Muslims. ContradictionsThe woman also appear motif in Layth’s traditions can be dated to the second quarter of the Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral biographical accounts of his life that deal with specific events. Onesecond of thoseIslamic events, century, about since Layth died in 138/755–6 or 143/760–1. In Ibn ʿAbbās version with regard to jurisdictional claims in 6, the woman is identified as Zaynab, one of the Prophet’s wives. Although her reprimand published maps and institutional affil- which a number of conflicting narratives exist, takes place towards the end of the Prophet’s follows a statement by ʿUmar, she addresses several people, revealing that part of the iations. life and is framed as his final illness. The narratives are centred around Muh. ammad’s commandstory to is bringmissing him from writing this tradition. The woman motif in this tradition is more difficult to materials in order to pen a document (kitab¯ ) for his community.date, The because wider details there is of only the one tradition of it. It is part of Ibn Saʿd’s work in which he tradition, such as who was present and other minor details, differ.collected Nevertheless, nine traditions the final about the unwritten document.75 Of these nine traditions, two result is the same: Muhammad foregoes his original instruction andcontain the documentthe woman remains motif, for which Ibn Saʿd both times lists his teacher al-Wāqidī as Copyright: © 2021 by the author. . unwritten. The setting and almost identical wording of the instructioninformant. indicate However, that of the these nine, Ibn Saʿd traces four traditions back to al-Wāqidī, two Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. narratives are derived from a common source. Although the exactof which nature do of thenot document contain the woman motif. It is therefore unlikely that Ibn Saʿd or al- This article is an open access article remains unknown, some narratives do allude to its content. Wāqidī included the woman motif in these two traditions. That would put the dating of distributed under the terms and ʿ ʿ conditions of the Creative Commons It is precisely this lack of clarity about the content that hasthe led women to heated motif Sunni-Sh in Ibn ¯ı ¯ı bbās version 6 with al-Wāqidī’s informant, Ibrāhīm b. Ismā īl, Attribution (CC BY) license (https:// contestations over the centuries. Examples of those discussionswho candied be in found165/781–2, within i.e., to the same period as Hishām’s. The woman motif (either one creativecommons.org/licenses/by/ the works of classical h. ad¯ıth scholars, such as Ibn Kath¯ır (d.or 774/1373) more women) and Ibn thusH. ajar seems to have been introduced into the story of the unwritten 1 2 4.0/). (852/1448). Even today, lively debates continue on the internet.documentThe discussions in the second focus on quarter of the second Islamic century. Unlike the ʿUmar motif, the woman motif is not restricted to any particular region (Layth and his informant Ṭāwūs are not from Medina, but from Kufa and Janad (Yemen), respectively), but occurs only in traditions that were not widespread, indicating that they were not widely accepted. Religions 2021, 12, 579. https://doi.org/10.3390/rel12080579 https://www.mdpi.com/journal/religions 2.4. Group 4: The ʿAlī b. Abī Ṭālib Narrative The traditions of the penultimate group are all traced back to Muḥammad’s nephew ʿAlī b. Abī Ṭālib (d. 40/661), the fourth caliph of the Muslim empire. The Islamic tradition material describes a strong bond between Muḥammad and his nephew ʿAlī that began before Muḥammad’s prophethood and continued until the latter’s death. ʿAlī was one of the first converts and married Fāṭima, the Prophet’s daughter. When Muḥammad died, ʿAlī led the preparation of his body for burial.76 Because of this, he did not take part in the discussions about succession of the Prophet. The debates on the day the Prophet died, and Religions 2021, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 16 of 33

Religions 2021, 12, 579 for not following the Prophet’s command2 of 32 (“Woe unto you! [It is] the command of the Messenger of God!” (wayḥakum ʿahd rasūl Allāh)). The woman motif in Layth’s traditions can be dated to the second quarter of the second Islamic century, since Layth died in 138/755–6 or 143/760–1. In Ibn ʿAbbās version the purpose and content of the document, but6, often the woman also discuss is identified the variant as Zaynab, narratives one in of the Prophet’s wives. Although her reprimand which Muh. ammad’s request is embedded. Whilefollows the narratives a statement typically by ʿUmar, state the she purpose addresses several people, revealing that part of the of the document, which is to serve as guidancestory for Muis missingh. ammad’s from community, this tradition. its contentThe woman motif in this tradition is more difficult to remains unknown because the Prophet eventuallydate, refrains because from there writing is only it. Thisone tradition ambiguity of it. It is part of Ibn Saʿd’s work in which he allows for diverse interpretation of the document’scollected content nine and traditions import. Forabout example, the unwritten that document.75 Of these nine traditions, two it would be instructive with regards to the successioncontain the to woman the Prophet, motif, provide for which specific Ibn Saʿd both times lists his teacher al-Wāqidī as 3 guidelines for his fellowship, or serve as a testinformant. for his community. However, ofIbn these Kath nine,¯ır, therefore, Ibn Saʿd traces four traditions back to al-Wāqidī, two complains: of which do not contain the woman motif. It is therefore unlikely that Ibn Saʿd or al- “[t]his h. ad¯ıth has served to feed the imaginationsWāqidī ofincluded certain foolishthe woman persons, motif who in these two traditions. That would put the dating of advocate improper innovative practices. Thesethe women adherents motif of in the Ibnsh ¯ıʿa bbandās others,version 6 with al-Wāqidī’s informant, Ibrāhīm b. Ismāʿīl, all claimed that the Messenger of God4 wishedwho died to write in 165/781–2, in the document i.e., to the [ ...same] period as Hishām’s. The woman motif (either one what they purpose in their own statements.or more [ ... ]women) Whatever thus the seems Messenger to have of been introduced into the story of the unwritten God wished to write came previously indocument those ah. ad¯ in¯ıth thethat second lend themselves quarter of tothe second Islamic century. Unlike the ʿUmar motif, clear and unambiguous interpretation.”5 the woman motif is not restricted to any particular region (Layth and his informant Ṭāwūs are not from Medina, but from Kufa and Janad (Yemen), respectively), but occurs only in Ibn Kath¯ır here refers to the different interpretations, both by the ambiguity in this traditions that were not widespread, indicating that they were not widely accepted. tradition and its variant narratives. The present article will not go into the various discussions that were triggered by this 2.4. Group 4: The ʿAlī b. Abī Ṭālib Narrative ambiguity, but instead focus on the development of the narratives in the h. ad¯ıth material. The traditions of the penultimate group are all traced back to Muḥammad’s nephew The ah. ad¯ ¯ıth will be studied using the isnad-cum-matn¯ (ICM) analysis developed by Harald 6 ʿAlī b. Abī Ṭālib (d. 40/661), the fourth caliph of the Muslim empire. The Islamic tradition Motzki and Gregor Schoeler. This method is based on the fact that a h. ad¯ıth usually consists of a text (matn pl. mutun¯ ) and a chain of transmittersmaterial describes (isnad¯ pl. aas strongan¯ ¯ıd), whichbond between claim to Muḥammad and his nephew ʿAlī that began represent the transmission path between the firstbefore narrator Muḥammad’s of the story prophethood and the collection and continued until the latter’s death. ʿAlī was one of into which this tradition culminated. The numberthe of first people converts in a chain and variesmarried from Fāṭ sourceima, the to Prophet’s daughter. When Muḥammad died, ʿAlī led the preparation of his body for burial.76 Because of this, he did not take part in the Religions 2021, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW source and can range from four to five people3 of 33in the earliest collections of the third Islamic century to fourteen or more people in the laterdiscussions collections ofabout the eighthsuccession century. of the7 Prophet. The debates on the day the Prophet died, and Two problems are here highlighted within the Islamic tradition material: First, that the available collections date from a period that is at least two hundred years later than evolved and how, over time and across speciftheic time regions, they describe. other textual The questionmotifs have then been is whether the event described took place in the added and omitted, creating new narratives.way described or at all? The second problem is that the chain of transmitters represents a transmission process in which changes inherently take place. What we have at our disposal 2. Isnād-cum-matn Analysis Applied is the end result, being texts that the author of the collection claims to have received via Based on the asānīd, the traditions in whichthe persons the motif in appears the accompanying can be divided chains. in five The conflicting information in the narratives groups. The first group contains traditionson ascribed Muh. ammad’s to the famous unwritten Qur’ documentān scholar is indicativeand of the fact that the material has been Companion of the Prophet, ʿAbd Allāh ibn edited.ʿAbbās To(d. answer 67/686–7). the questionThe majority of who of the is responsible tra- for each part of the account, we need ditions (35) belong to this group. The secondto lookgroup beyond10 is ascribed the versions to the in Companion the collections. Jābir On the basis of these collections, we can only b. ʿAbd Allāh (d. 78/697) and contains sevenstudy traditio thens. conscious The third andgroup, unconscious consisting choicesof two collectors have made in the material they traditions, is traced back to the Companionpresent. and second An example caliph ʿ ofUma thisr typeb. al-Kha of analysisṭṭāb (d. is the discussion of Gurdofarid Miskinzoda. 23/644). The fourth group, with five traditions,She showsis ascribed that to the Mu narrativesḥammad’s were nephew linked and to the discussions about the succession of the son-in-law, ʿAlī b. Abī Ṭālib (d. 40/661), Prophet and the and last the grou statusp with of other the writings second largestwith guidelines for the community in addition to number of traditions (15)11 is traced backthe to QurʿĀ ʾ an,¯sha and (d. how 58/6 the78) position, said to of h theave collectors been developed.8 Muḥammad’s favourite wife and daughter of theThe first ICM caliph analysis Abū Bakr. is aimed All atof the alleged period before the h. ad¯ıth collections. It compares first transmit-ters of these traditions belongedtextual to the variations circle of Mu betweenḥammad’s traditions intima withtes and overlapping asan¯ ¯ıd, i.e., the traditions have a the sīra mate-rial describes their frequent interactionnumber ofwith people the Prophet. in common. If the asan¯ ¯ıd represent the actual transmission path of a The ICM analysis begins with a brief biographytradition, inof casethe in ofdividuals overlap, partto whom of the the text tra- should be the same. If there is textual overlap ditions are attributed per group. To obtainwithout an overview the chains, of which which people have ahave similar handed overlap, then one of the asan¯ ¯ıd is (partly) forged down the tradition according to the asānīd andor to erroneous. identify common9 However, transmitters if traditions per group, report the same topic, but do not overlap in the the asānīd have been drawn in a figure. Thechains earliest nor common are they comparabletransmitter, inthe terms so-called of word usage and structure of the text, then we common link, is by way of hypothesis assumedare dealing to be the with distributor two separate of the tradition tradition complexes, in i.e., two separate stories describing question. Subsequently, the mutūn of the traditionsthe same within event. Thea given following group ICM are first analysis com- of the traditions of Muh. ammad’s unwritten pared with each other and then with the groupsdocument discussed will earlier. show to whom the earliest version of a narrative can be attributed and which parts that basic narrative consisted of. Furthermore, it will show how the narrative 2.1. Group 1: The Ibn Abbās Narrative evolved and how, over time and across specific regions, other textual motifs have been The first group of the traditions is tracedadded back and to omitted,ʿAbd All creatingāh b. ʿAbb newās. narratives.Ibn ʿAbbās was related to the Prophet through his father al-ʿAbbās, the brother of Muḥammad’s father ʿAbd Allāh, and his mother, who was the sister of the Prophet’s wife Maymūna.12 At the time when the story is set, the death of the Prophet, he was still young, between ten and fifteen years old.13 Ibn ʿAbbās is one of the most controversial Companions of Muḥammad within scholarly debates. In Muslim scholarship, he is revered as one of the greatest Qurʾān exegetes and his name appears in the asānīd of countless traditions on the Prophet Muḥammad.14 In non-Muslim scholarship, the authenticity of the ascription of the majority of these traditions is criticized. Herbert Berg and Claude Gilliot argue that Ibn ʿAbbās should be regarded as a symbolic figure to authenticate the information in the tradition.15 Figure 1 is a simplified representation of the chains showing only the earliest generations of transmitters.16 The common link according to Figure 1 would be Ibn ʿAbbās.17 In order to determine whether these traditions are indeed from Ibn ʿAbbās, the texts (mutūn) of the traditions will be compared. The textual analysis revealed six different versions of the tradition about the unwritten document, which correspond to the numbers indicated in Figure 1. Three of them go back to Saʿīd b. Jubayr (d. 94/714), a Kufan scholar of the Qurʾān, jurisprudence and Ḥadīth, who, according to Muslim biographies, was a student of Ibn ʿAbbās.Error! Reference source not found. Religions 2021, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 16 of 33

¯ 2.1. Group 1: 2.1.The Ibn Group Abb 1:ās The Narrative Ibn Abb as Narrative The first groupThe of first the grouptraditions of the is traditionstraced back is to traced ʿAbd back Allā toh b.Abd ʿAbb Allās.ah¯ Ibn b. ʿAbbas.ā¯s Ibn Abbas¯ was related towas the related Prophet to thethrough Prophet his through father al- hisʿAbb fatherās, al-theAbb brotheras,¯ the of brotherMuḥammad’s of Muh. ammad’sfa- father 12 ther ʿAbd AllAbdāh, and All hisah,¯ mother, and his mother,who was who the wassister the of sisterthe Prophet’s of the Prophet’s wife Maym wifeūna. Maym12 Atuna.¯ At the the time whentime the when story theis set, story the is death set, the of deaththe Prophet, of the Prophet, he was still he was young, still between young, between ten ten and 13 and fifteen yearsfifteen old years.13 old.Ibn ʿAbbIbnāsAbb is as¯one is oneof the of the most most controversial controversial Companions Companions of Muh. ammad Muḥammad withinwithin scholarly debates. In In Muslim Muslim scholarship, scholarship, hehe is revered is revered as one as one of the of the greatest greatest QurʾQurān exegetesan¯ exegetes and his and name his name appears appears in the in as theānīasd an¯of¯ıd countlessof countless traditions traditions on the on the Prophet 14 Prophet MuḥMuammad.h. ammad.14 In non-MuslimIn non-Muslim scholarship, scholarship, the the authenticity authenticity of of the the ascription ascription of of the majority the majority ofof thesethese traditionstraditions is criticized.criticized. Herbert Herbert Berg Berg and and Cla Claudeude Gilliot Gilliot argue argue that that Ibn Abbas¯ Ibn ʿAbbās shouldshould be be regarded regarded as as a asymbolic symbolic figure figure to to authenticate authenticate the the information information in in the the tradition.15 tradition.15 Figure1 is a simplified representation of the chains showing only the earliest genera- Figure 1tions is a simplified of transmitters. representation16 The common of the linkchains according showing to only Figure the1 earliestwould begener- Ibn Abbas.¯ 17 In ations of transmitters.order to determine16 The common whether link these according traditions to Figure are indeed 1 would from be IbnIbn ʿAbbAbbas,¯ās.17 the In texts (mutun¯ ) order to determineof the traditionswhether these will traditions be compared. are indeed The textual from analysisIbn ʿAbb revealedās, the texts six ( differentmutūn) versions of of the traditionsthe traditionwill be compared. about the The unwritten textual document, analysis revealed which correspond six different to versions the numbers of indicated the tradition inabout Figure the1 .unwritten Three of themdocument, go back which to Sa correspond¯ıd b. Jubayr to the (d. 94/714),numbers aindicated Kufan scholar of the in Figure 1. TQurhreean,¯ of jurisprudencethem go back andto SHa.ʿadīd ¯ıth,b. Jubayr who, according (d. 94/714), to a Muslim Kufan biographies,scholar of the was a student Qurʾān, jurisprudenceof Ibn Abb andas.¯ 18Ḥadīth, who, according to Muslim biographies, was a student of Ibn ʿAbbās.Error! Reference source not found. Religions 2021, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 16 of 33

motif. The women motif occurs in both of Hishām b. Saʿd’s traditions from ʿUmar and can therefore be traced back to him and dated to the second quarter or the middle of the second Islamic century, since Hishām died in 160/776–7. We have already encountered the (one) woman motif in two other versions: Ibn ʿAbbās versions 5 and 6. In two of the three traditions of Ibn ʿAbbās version 5 of Layth b. Abī Sulaym, a woman rebukes the people present for shouting instead of following the command of the Prophet. Although what she says is different from Hishām’s version, it conveys the same sentiment: a rebuke for not following the Prophet’s command (“Woe unto you! [It is] the command of the Messenger of God!” (wayḥakum ʿahd rasūl Allāh)). The woman motif in Layth’s traditions can be dated to the second quarter of the second Islamic century, since Layth died in 138/755–6 or 143/760–1. In Ibn ʿAbbās version 6, the woman is identified as Zaynab, one of the Prophet’s wives. Although her reprimand follows a statement by ʿUmar, she addresses several people, revealing that part of the story is missing from this tradition. The woman motif in this tradition is more difficult to date, because there is only one tradition of it. It is part of Ibn Saʿd’s work in which he 75 Religions 2021, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW collected nine traditions about the unwritten document. Of these3 ofnine 33 traditions, two contain the woman motif, for which Ibn Saʿd both times lists his teacher al-Wāqidī as informant. However, of these nine, Ibn Saʿd traces four traditions back to al-Wāqidī, two of which do not contain the woman motif. It is therefore unlikely that Ibn Saʿd or al- evolved and how, over time and across specific regions, other textual motifs have been Wāqidī included the woman motif in these two traditions. That would put the dating of added and omitted, creating new narratives. Figure 1. theThe womenisnad¯ bundle motif of thein Ibn Ibn ʿAbb bbāas¯s version traditions. 6 with al-Wāqidī’s informant, Ibrāhīm b. Ismāʿīl, Figure 1. The isnād bundle of the Ibn ʿAbbās traditions. who died in 165/781–2, i.e., to the same period as Hishām’s. The woman motif (either one 2. Isnād-cum-matn Analysis Applied 2.1.1. Ibn Abbas¯ or version more 1—Sufywomen)an¯ thus b. Uyayna seems to have been introduced into the story of the unwritten 2.1.1. IbnBased ʿAbb onā sthe version asānīd 1—Sufy, the traditionsān b. ʿUyayna in which the motif appears can be divided in five The Ibn Abbdocumentas¯ version in 1the of Sufysecondan¯ quarter b. Uyayna of the (d. second 198/814), Islamic the century. ﬁrst transmitter Unlike the ʿUmar motif, groups.The IbnThe ʿAbb firstā sgroup version contains 1 of Sufy tradān itionsb. ʿUyayna ascribed (d. 198/814),to the famous the first Qur’ transmitterān scholar com- and common to all asan¯the¯ıd womanin this subgroup, motif is not from restricted Sulaym toan¯ any b. particular Ab¯ı Muslim region (n.d.), (Layth appears and most his informant Ṭāwūs monCompa to allnion asā ofnī dthe in Prophet,this subgroup, ʿAbd All fromāh ibnSulaym ʿAbbāāns b.(d. Ab 67/68ī Muslim6–7). The (n.d.), majority appears of the most tra- often in the Islamicare hnotad¯ıth fromcollections. Medina, but A reconstruction from Kufa and of Janad Sufy (Yemen),an’s¯ text19 respectively),based on the but occurs only in oftenditions in the (35) Islamic belong ḥ adto. ī ththis collections. group. The A reconstructionsecond group10 of is Sufy ascribedān’s text to the19 based Companion on the thir- Jābir thirteen20 traditionstraditions I found that is: were not widespread, indicating that they were not widely accepted. teenb. ʿ20Abd traditions Allāh (d. I found 78/697) is: and contains seven traditions. The third group, consisting of two 21 traditions,[…][ ... on] onisthe traced the authority2.4. authority Groupback ofto 4: of Ibn theThe Ibn ʿ CompanionʿAbbAlAbbī b.ās, as,¯Ab heīhe Ṭ said: āand said:lib Narrative21 second “Thursday,“Thursday, caliph what whatʿUma a raThursday!” b. Thursday!” al-Khaṭṭ āb (d. 23/644).(Then(Then The Ibn Ibn fourth ʿAbbAbbā as¯group,s wept wept sowith so hard hard five that that traditions, his his tears tears is wet wetascribed the the pebbles. pebbles. to Mu ḥSa Saammad’sʿīd¯ıd or or someone someone nephew and The traditions of the penultimate group22 are all traced back to Muḥammad’s nephew son-in-law,else asked ʿAlī Ibn b. AbAbbī as,Ṭ¯ ālib “What (d. 40/661), about Thursday?”) and the 22 last grouThep pain with of the the secondProphet largest else asked IbnʿAl ʿAbbī b. Abās, ī“What Ṭālib (d. about 40/661), Thursday?”) the fourth Thecaliph pain of theof the Muslim Prophet empire. be- The Islamic tradition 11 23 number of traditions (15) is traced back to ʿĀ iʾ tuns¯ha¯ı (d. 58/23678), said to have been camebecame severe, severe, materialso he so said, he describes said, “If you “If youbringa strong bring me bond(i meʾtūn (ībetween) [something]) [something] Muḥammad, then I, thenandwill writehis I will nephew ʿAlī that began Muḥwriteammad’s a document favourite for wife you and (lakum daughter), after whichof the first you caliph will never Abū go Bakr. astray.” All of People the alleged a document forbefore you (Mulakumḥammad’s), after which prophethood you will andnever continued go astray.” until People the latter’s began death. ʿAlī was one of first begantransmit- toters argue of these with eachtraditions other, belonged although to athe dispute circle of in Mu frontḥammad’s of a prophet intima istes and to argue withthe each first other, converts although and marrieda dispute F āinṭima, front the of Prophet’sa prophet daughter.is improper. When Muḥammad died, the simproper.īra mate-rial They describes said, “Whattheir frequent is the matter interaction with him?with the Is he Prophet. talking deliriously? They said, “WhatʿAlī led is the the matter preparation with him? of his Is body he talking for burial. deliriously?76 Because Ask of this,him hefor did not take part in the anAskThe explanation.” himICM for analysis an explanation.” (So begins they went with (So backa theybrief to wentbiography him, back repeating to of him, the those repeatingindividuals remarks those to to whom remarkshim,) 24the tra- 24 discussions about succession of the Prophet. The debates on the day the Prophet died, and ditionsandto him,) arethe attributedProphetand the replied, per Prophet group. “Leave replied, To me obtain “Leavealone! an The meoverview alone!state I Theofam which in state is better Ipeople am inthan ishave better that handed 25 downforthan thewhich thattradition foryou which are according calling you are tome.” the calling asHeān instructed me.”īd and He to instructedidentify (for them) common (for25 three them) transmitters things,three “Expel things, per group, the theas“Expelā npolytheistsīd have the polytheistsbeen from drawn the fromArabian in a the figure. Peninsula, Arabian The Peninsula,earliest give the common quantity give the transmitter, of quantity water sufficient of the water so-called commontosufﬁcient pass link, therewith tois passby way therewithfrom of onehypothesis from watering-place one assumed watering-place to to another be the to another distributorto the todelegations, the of delegations, the tradition as I in question.usedas I usedto Subsequently, do.” to do.”[Sulaym [Sulaym theān remarked],mutan¯ remarked],ūn of the “Either traditions “Either Saʿ Saīd within ¯ıdsaid said nothing a nothing given about group about the theare third thirdfirst com- paredoneone with intentionally, intentionally, each other or orand he he thensaid said itwi it and andth the I Ihave havegroups forgotten forgotten discussed it.” it.” earlier. IbnIbn ʿAbbAbbāas’¯s’ exclamation exclamation on on “Thursday”, “Thursday”, at at the the beginning beginning of of the the tradition, tradition, places places the the 2.1. Group 1: The Ibn Abbās Narrative subsequentsubsequent event event on on this day.day. MuMuh.ḥammadammad is is in in a a room room with with several several people. people. He He is very is very sick ʿ ʿ ʿ sickat the atThe timethe firsttime and groupand wants wants of to the prepare to tradit prepare aions document a isdocument traced to guideback to guide to the Abd people the All people (“forāh b. you”: (“forAbb you”:lakumās. Ibn ).lakum InAbb fact,).ā s ʿ Inhewas fact, appears related he appears to to be the so toProp sick be hetso that sickthrough people that thinkpeoplehis father he think is al- delirious. Abbhe isā s,delirious. the The brother debate The of thatdebate Mu arisesḥammad’s that after arises his fa- ʿ 12 afterrequestther his Abd request becomes Allāh, becomes tooand much his too mother, for much him who for and him was he asksandthe hesister everyone asks of everyone the to Prophet’s leave to without leave wife without havingMaym ūhaving writtenna. At writtenthethe document.time the when document. Atthe the story end,At is the itset, is end, saidthe itdeath that is said Muhammad of thethat Prophet, Muhammad commanded he wa commandeds still three young, things, three between only things, two ten 13 ʿ onlyofand which two fifteen of are which years mentioned. are old mentioned.. ThisIbn impliesAbb Thisās thatisimplies one he wantedofthat the he most wanted to record controversial to these record three these Companions commands three com- inof ḥ 26 mandstheMu document.ammad in the document. within scholarly26 debates. In Muslim scholarship, he is revered as one of the greatest Qurʾān exegetes and his name appears in the asānīd of countless traditions on the 14 2.1.2.2.1.2.Prophet Ibn Ibn ʿMuAbbAbbḥāammad.ass¯ Version Version In2—M 2—M non-Muslimāalik¯lik b. b. Mighwal Mighwal scholarship, the authenticity of the ascription of the majority of these traditions is criticized. Herbert Berg and Claude Gilliot argue that TheThe second second Ibn Ibn ʿAbbAbbāas¯s version version that that is is traced traced back back to to Sa Saʿīd¯ıd b. b. Jubayr, Jubayr, according according to to the the Ibn ʿAbbās should be regarded as a symbolic figure to authenticate the information in the asasāann¯ īd¯ıd, ,is is from from M Māalik¯lik b. b. Mighwal Mighwal (d. (d. 159/776) 159/776) via via ṬT.alalḥh.aa b. b. Mu Muṣs.arrifarrif (d. (d. 113/731), 113/731), both both of of tradition.15 Figure 1 is a simplified representation of the chains showing only the earliest generations of transmitters.16 The common link according to Figure 1 would be Ibn ʿAbbās.17 In order to determine whether these traditions are indeed from Ibn ʿAbbās, the texts (mutūn)

of the traditions will be compared. The textual analysis revealed six different versions of the tradition about the unwritten document, which correspond to the numbers indicated in Figure 1. Three of them go back to Saʿīd b. Jubayr (d. 94/714), a Kufan scholar of the Qurʾān, jurisprudence and Ḥadīth, who, according to Muslim biographies, was a student of Ibn ʿAbbās.Error! Reference source not found. Religions 2021, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 16 of 33

present to carry out the Prophet’s command, yet he does not appear to give them time to comply with his (the women’s question immediately follows the Prophet’s request). Muḥammad’s reprimand would then have to be directed against ʿUmar. However, it is also addressed to other people, which would only make sense if a discussion took place amongst them. This shows that Hishām’s version is a secondary version. In Hishām’s version a switch is made to a first-person perspective: ʿUmar, the alleged narrator of this tradition, relates the event from his point of view (f.e., “we were”, “between us”, “I said”). In contrast with the versions of Ibn ʿAbbās and Abū l-Zubayr, he is an active participant in the event. The noise or discord motif occurs in both Ibn ʿAbbās’ and Abū l-Zubayr’s versions, but the ʿUmar motif only in those of Hijazi origin, versions 4 and 6 of Ibn ʿAbbās and the version of Abū l-Zubayr. The Medinan origin of the two traditions of Hishām, who is from Medina himself and provides a Medinan isnād, is consistent with the regional occurrence of the ʿUmar motif. Is Hishām’s version derived from Ibn ʿAbbās’ or Abū l-Zubayr’s? So far, Hishām’s version has more similarities to that of Ibn ʿAbbās than that of Abu l-Zubayr, such as that no location is mentioned, nor that Muḥammad is about to die, and the wording of the Prophet’s command. One part has not yet been discussed: the women motif. The women motif occurs in both of Hishām b. Saʿd’s traditions from ʿUmar and can therefore be traced back to him and dated to the second quarter or the middle of the second Islamic century, since Hishām died in 160/776–7. We have already encountered the (one) woman motif in two other versions: Ibn ʿAbbās versions 5 and 6. In two of the three traditions of Ibn ʿAbbās version 5 of Layth b. Abī Sulaym, a woman rebukes the people present for shouting instead of following the command of the Prophet. Although what she says is different from Hishām’s version, it conveys the same sentiment: a rebuke for not following the Prophet’s command (“Woe unto you! [It is] the command of the Religions 2021, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 3 of 33 Messenger of God!” (wayḥakum ʿahd rasūl Allāh)). The woman motif in Layth’s traditions can be dated to the second quarter of the second Islamic century, since Layth died in 138/755–6 or 143/760–1. In Ibn ʿAbbās version 6, the woman is identified as Zaynab,evolved one of theand Prophet’s how, over wives. time Although and across her sp reprimandecific regions, other textual motifs have been follows a statement by ʿUmar, she aaddressesdded and severalomitted, people, creating revealing new narratives. that part of the story is missing from this tradition. The woman motif in this tradition is more difficult to date, because there is only one tradition2. Isn āofd-cum-matn it. It is part An ofalys Ibnis Sa Appliedʿd’s work in which he collected nine traditions about the unwrittenBased document.on the asān75ī dOf, the these traditions nine traditions, in which thetwo motif appears can be divided in five Religions 2021, 12, 579 5 of 32 contain the woman motif, for whichgroups. Ibn Sa Theʿd both first timesgroup lists contains his teacher traditions al-W ascribedāqidī as to the famous Qur’ān scholar and informant. However, of these nine, IbnCompa Saʿdnion traces of thefour Prophet, traditions ʿAbd back All toā hal-W ibnā ʿqidAbbī, ātwos (d. 67/686–7). The majority of the tra- of which do not contain the womanditions motif. (35) It isbelong therefore to this unlikely group. thatThe Ibnsecond Saʿ dgroup or al-10 is ascribed to the Companion Jābir Wāqidī included the womanwhom motif were inb. from ʿtheseAbd Kufa. Alltwoāh Thistraditions. (d. 78/697) version That and is shorter wouldcontains than put seven Sufythe datingtraditioan’s,¯ but ofns. similarly The third begins group, with consisting Ibn of two the women motif in Ibn ʿAbb bbāas’s¯ version exclamationtraditions, 6 with on aisl-W Thursday.tracedāqid īback’s informant, to the Companion Ibrāhīm b. andIsm āsecondʿīl, caliph ʿUmar b. al-Khaṭṭāb (d. who died in 165/781–2, i.e., to [the... same]23 on/644). theperiod authority The as fourth Hish ofā Ibnm’s.group,Abb The withas, ¯woman he five said motiftraditions,27: “Thursday, (either is oneascribed what a to Thursday!” Muḥammad’s Then nephew I and or more women) thus seems[ Sa ¯ıd to b. have Jubayr]son-in-law, been looked introduced ʿAl atī his b. Ab tearsintoī Ṭ runningtheālib story (d. down 40/661), of the his unwritten and cheeks the as last if they grou werep with a string the second of largest document in the second pearls.quarter He of said:numberthe second The of Messenger Islamic traditions century. of God(15)11 said: Unlike is traced “If youthe back ʿ bringUma tor me motif,ʿĀ ( iʾ tuns¯ h¯aı) a(d shoulder. 58/678) blade, said and to have been the woman motif is not restrictedan inkpot to (oranyMu aḥ particular tabletammad’s and regionfavourite an inkpot) (Layth wife28, and then and his Idaughter will informant write of for theṬā youw firstūs a caliph document, Abū afterBakr. which All of the alleged are not from Medina, butyou from will Kufa neverfirst and gotransmit- Janad astray.” (Yemen),ters They of thesesaid,respectively), “Thetraditions Messenger but belonged occurs of God onlyto the was in circle talking of Mu deliriously.”ḥammad’s29 intimates and traditions that were not widespread,The crythe indicati motif sīra mate- isng present thatrial they describes in both were Ibn theirnot Abbwidely frequentas¯ versions, accepted. interaction but has with been the formulated Prophet. differently. The comparisonThe ICM of analysis the tears begins with with pearls a canbrief only biography be found of the in versionindividuals 2 of Mto alik¯whom the tra- ʿ Ṭ 2.4. Group 4: The Alī b. Abb.ī Mighwalālib Narrativeditions from T .arealh. aattributed b. Mus.arrif. per Mugroup.h. ammad’s To obtain instruction an overview to bring of writingwhich people materials have handed The traditions of theand penultimate the reasondown group for the that aretradition areall traced the according same. back The to to Mu only theḥ asammad’s referenceānīd and nephew toto theidentify discussion common that transmitters then takes per group, ʿAlī b. Abī Ṭālib (d. 40/661),place the in fourth IbntheAbb caliph asāas¯nīd version of have the Muslimbeen 1 of Sulaymdrawn empire.an ¯in al-A aThe figure.h. Islamicwal isThe that tradition earliest they (several common persons) transmitter, say that the so-called material describes a strongMu bondh. ammad betweencommon was delirious.Mu link,ḥammad is by This wayand is hisof also hypothesis nephew the end ʿAl ofassumedī thethat story began to inbe this the seconddistributor Ibn ofAbb theas¯ tradition in before Muḥammad’s prophethoodversion; the andquestion. threefold continued Subsequently, command until the motif latter’s the ofmut versiondeath.ūn of ʿtheAl 1 isī traditionswas completely one of within missing. a given The commentgroup are first com- the first converts and marriedabout theFāṭima, deliriumpared the with Prophet’s is the each only other daughter. indication and then When that wi thisthMu the storyḥamma groups isd set died,discussed during the earlier. Prophet’s illness. ʿAlī led the preparation of his body for burial.76 Because of this, he did not take part in the discussions about succession2.1.3. of Ibn the AbbProphet.2.1. as¯Group Version The 1: Thedebates 3—Sulaym Ibn Abb on theāsan¯ Narrative day al-A themash Prophet died, and The third versionThe first of group Sa ¯ıd b.of Jubayr,the tradit accordingions is traced to the backasan¯ ¯toıd, ʿ comesAbd All fromāh b. the ʿAbb Kufanās. Ibn ʿAbbās scholar Sulaymwas relatedan¯ al-A tomash the Prop (d. 148/765)het through via his fellowfather al- townsmanʿAbbās, theAbd brother Allah¯ of b. MuAbdḥammad’s fa- Allah¯ [al-Raz¯ther¯ı] (n.d.).ʿAbd All Twoāh, slightly and his different mother, accounts who was have the sister been preservedof the Prophet’s by Ibn wife Sa d Maym and ūna.12 At 30 al-T. abaran¯ ¯ı.the Ibn time Sa d’swhen account the story is : is set, the death of the Prophet, he was still young, between ten [ ... ]a onnd the fifteen authority years of old Ibn.13Abb Ibnas,¯ ʿAbb he said:ās is The one Prophet of the becamemost controversial sick on Thurs- Companions of day, soMu he,ḥammad i.e., Ibn withinAbbas,¯ scholarly began to debates. cry and say,In Muslim “Thursday, scholarship, what a Thursday!”he is revered as one of the The paingreatest of the Qur Prophetʾān exegetes became and severe, his name so he appears said, “If in you the bringasānīd meof countless an inkpot traditions on the and aProphet piece of Mu paperḥammad.31, then14 IIn will non-Muslim write for youscholarship, a document the authenticity after which youof the ascription of will neverthe majority go astray.” of these He said: traditions Some ofis thosecriticized who. Herbert were with Berg him and said Cla thatude the Gilliot argue that ProphetIbn is ʿAbb certainlyās should talking be regarded deliriously. as a He symbolic said: It figure was said to authenticate to him (=Prophet), the information in the “Shalltradition. we not bring15 you what you asked for?” He replied, “Or after what?” He said: So heFigure did not 1 summonis a simplified it. representation of the chains showing only the earliest generations of transmitters.16 The common link according32 to Figure 1 would be Ibn ʿAbbās.17 In Al-T. abaran¯ ¯ı’s tradition is a shortened version of this: order to determine whether these traditions are indeed from Ibn ʿAbbās, the texts (mutūn) [ ... ]of on the the tra authorityditions will of Ibnbe compared.Abbas,¯ may The God textual be pleased analysis with revealed them: six When different versions of it wasthe Thursday, tradition what about a the Thursday! unwritten Then document, he cried which and said:correspond The Messenger to the numbers indicated of Godin said,Figur “Ife 1 you. Thr bringee of t mehem (i gtoun¯ b¯ıa)c ak pieceto Saʿ ofīd paperb. Jubayr and (d. an 94/714), inkpot, a then Kufan I scholar of the will writeQurʾ forān, youjurisprudence a document and after Ḥa whichdīth, who, you according will never to go Muslim astray.” biographies, They said, was a student “The Messengerof Ibn ʿAbb ofās. GodError! Reference is talking source deliriously.”not found. Then they said nothing and he (=Prophet) said nothing. They said, “Shall we not bring [it] to you later?” He replied, “After what?” Although both traditions share similarities with the ﬁrst two discussed Ibn Abbas¯ versions, both attributed to Sa ¯ıd b. Jubayr, they are distinct from one another. The two traditions contain the same deviant motifs, which is why they are considered one version.33 Like Ibn Abbas¯ versions 1 and 2, version 3 begins with the exclamation motif and the cry motif. However, no description is given of the crying and this version is clear about the writing material, a piece of paper and an inkpot. Again, Muh. ammad is thought to be delirious. The question they then ask the Prophet and his answer are unique to version 3, although they seem to be a vague echo of version 1. As in version 2, the threefold command is missing. The unique motifs of each version can be provisionally attributed to the partial common links from Figure1, Sufy an¯ b. Uyayna for Ibn Abbas¯ version 1, Malik¯ b. Mighwal for version 2, and Sulayman¯ al-A mash for version 3. The motifs the three Ibn Abbas¯ versions have in common can be tentatively attributed to the ﬁrst transmitter common to these versions, Sa ¯ıd b. Jubayr (d. 95/714): 1. The exclamation of Ibn Abbas¯ “Thursday, what a Thursday!”; Religions 2021, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 16 of 33

present to carry out the Prophet’s command, yet he does not appear to give them time to comply with his (the women’s question immediately follows the Prophet’s request). Muḥammad’s reprimand would then have to be directed against ʿUmar. However, it is also addressed to other people, which would only make sense if a discussion took place amongst them. This shows that Hishām’s version is a secondary version. In Hishām’s version a switch is made to a first-person perspective: ʿUmar, the alleged narrator of this tradition, relates the event from his point of view (f.e., “we were”, “between us”, “I said”). In contrast with the versions of Ibn ʿAbbās and Abū l-Zubayr, he is an active participant in the event. The noise or discord motif occurs in both Ibn ʿAbbās’ and Abū l-Zubayr’s versions, but the ʿUmar motif only in those of Hijazi origin, versions 4 and 6 of Ibn ʿAbbās and the version of Abū l-Zubayr. The Medinan origin of the two traditions of Hishām, who is from Medina himself and provides a Medinan isnād, is consistent with the regional occurrence of the ʿUmar motif. Is Hishām’s version derived from Ibn ʿAbbās’ or Abū l-Zubayr’s? So far, Hishām’s version has more similarities to that of Ibn ʿAbbās than that of Abu l-Zubayr, such as that no location is mentioned, nor that Muḥammad is about to die, and the wording of the Prophet’s command. One part has not yet been discussed: the women motif. The women motif occurs in both of Hishām b. Saʿd’s traditions from ʿUmar and can therefore be traced back to him and dated to the second quarter or the middle of the second Islamic century, since Hishām died in 160/776–7. We have already encountered the (one) woman motif in two other versions: Ibn ʿAbbās versions 5 and 6. In two of the three traditions of Ibn ʿAbbās version 5 of Layth b. Abī Sulaym, a woman rebukes the people present for shouting instead of following the command of the Prophet. Although what she says is different from Hishām’s version, it conveys the same sentiment: a rebuke for not following the Prophet’s command (“Woe unto you! [It is] the command of the Messenger of God!” (wayḥakum ʿahd rasūl Allāh)). The woman motif in Layth’s traditions can be dated to the second quarter of the second Islamic century, since Layth died in 138/755–6 or 143/760–1. In Ibn ʿAbbās version 6, the woman is identified as Zaynab, one of the Prophet’s wives. Although her reprimand follows a statement by ʿUmar, she addresses several people, revealing that part of the story is missing from this tradition. The woman motif in this tradition is more difficult to Religions 2021, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 3 of 33 date, because there is only one tradition of it. It is part of Ibn Saʿd’s work in which he collected nine traditions about the unwritten document.75 Of these nine traditions, two contain the woman motif, for which Ibn Saʿd both times lists his teacher al-Wāqidī as Religions 2021, 12, 579 6 of 32 evolved and how, overinformant. time an However,d across spof eciftheseic regions,nine, Ibn other Saʿd textualtraces four motifs traditions have been back to al-Wāqidī, two added and omitted,of creating which newdo not narratives. contain the woman motif. It is therefore unlikely that Ibn Saʿd or al- Wāqidī included the woman motif in these two traditions. That would put the dating of 2. Isnād-cum-matn theAn2. alys womenTheis Applied cryingmotif in of Ibn Ibn ʿAbb bbāass¯ version (even if 6 the with three al-W versionsāqidī’s differinformant, in the Ibr details);āhīm b. Ismāʿīl, Based on the aswhoān3.īd ,died theMu traditionsinh. ammad’s 165/781–2, in instruction which i.e., to thethe for motifsame writing appearsperiod materials as can Hish be (evenā dividedm’s. thoughThe in woman five the three motif versions (either differone groups. The first groupor more containsin women) the materials trad thusitions listed);seems ascribed to have to the been famous introduced Qur’ān intoscholar the andstory of the unwritten Companion of the Prophet,document4. The ʿAbd in reason the All secondā forh ibn his ʿquarter instruction:Abbās (d. of 67/68the to writesecond6–7). aThe documentIslamic majority century. for of them the Unlike tra- after whichthe ʿUma theyr motif, will not ditions (35) belong theto this woman grougo astray. motifp. The is second not restricted group10 to is any ascribed particular to the region Companion (Layth and Jābir his informant Ṭāwūs b. ʿAbd Allāh (d. 78/697)are5. not and Peoplefrom contains Medina, who seven wonder but traditio from if Muh Kufans.. ammad The and third Janad is delirious.group, (Yemen), consisting respectively), of two but occurs only in traditions, is tracedtraditions back toOnly the thatIbn Companion wereAbb notas¯ versionwidespread, and second 1 explicitly indicati caliph states ngʿUma that thatr theyb. Mual-Kha wereh. ammadṭṭ notāb widely(d. is seriously accepted. ill, as well 23/644). The fourth group,as one with tradition five traditions, of version is 3, ascribed while version to Mu 2ḥa andmmad’s the other nephew tradition and from version 3 state son-in-law, ʿAlī b. 2.4. Abthis īGroup Ṭ implicitlyālib 4: (d. The 40/661), throughʿAlī b. Ab and theī Ṭā questionlib the Narrative last of grou whether p with he the is delirious. second largest The use of a plural form in number of traditionsthe (15)The conjugation11 traditions is traced of of back the the verb topenultimate ʿĀ (“ iʾ tuns¯ha¯ı”) (groupd indicates. 58 /are678 thatall), straceda severalid to back h peopleav eto bMueen areḥ ammad’s present during nephew this Muḥammad’s favouriteʿAlevent.ī b.wife Ab The īand Ṭā presencelib daughter (d. 40/661), of of several the the first fourth people caliph caliph and Ab the ūof Bakr. motifthe Muslim All of Muof thehempire.. ammad’s alleged The illness Islamic can tradition therefore first transmit-ters ofmaterial thesealso betraditions describes attributed belonged a to strong Sa ¯ıd to b.bond the Jubayr. circlebetween of Mu Muḥḥammad’sammad andintima histes nephew and ʿAlī that began the sīra mate-rial describesbefore Mu theirḥammad’s frequent prophethoodinteraction with and the continued Prophet. until the latter’s death. ʿAlī was one of The ICM analysisthe2.1.4. beginsfirstIbn converts withAbb aas¯ andbrief Version married biography 4—Ibn Fā ṭofima, Shih the ab¯the in al-Zuhrdividuals Prophet’s¯ı to daughter. whom the When tra- Muḥammad died, ditions are attributedʿAl perī led Ibngroup. the Abbpreparation Toas¯ obtain version of an his number overview body for 4, accordingofburial. which76 Because people to the ofhaveas an¯this,¯ıd handed, he does did not not cometake part from in Sathe¯ıd down the tradition accordingdiscussionsb. Jubayr to about the but as from āsuccessionnīd and the famousto identifyof the MedinanProphet. common Theh. ad transmitters ¯ıthdebatesscholar on per andthe group,day jurist the Ibn Prophet Shihab ¯died, al-Zuhr and ¯ı the asānīd have been (d.drawn 124/742) in a figure. via Ubayd The earliest Allah¯ b. commonAbd All transmitter,ah¯ b. Utba (d.the appr. so-called 102/720), who also lived common link, is by wayin Medina. of hypothesis The vast assumed majority to of be this the group distributor of traditions of the comestradition from in the Yemenite scholar question. Subsequently,Abd the al-Razz mutūnaq¯ of b. the Hamm traditionsam¯ al- Swithin. an an¯ ¯ ıa (d. given 211/826) group (see are Appendix first com-B). His nine traditions pared with each otherare and very then similar, with the making groups it possiblediscussed to earlier. make a reconstruction of Abd al-Razzaq’s¯ text:34 Abd al-Razzaq—Ma¯ mar on the authority of al-Zuhr¯ı on the authority of Ubayd 2.1. Group 1: The Ibn AbbAllāah¯s Narrative b. Abd All ah¯ (b. Utba) on the authority of Ibn Abbas,¯ he said: When the Messenger The first group ofof the God tradit reachedions theis traced point back of death, to ʿAbd during Allā whichh b. ʿAbb thereās. wereIbn ʿAbb menās [present]in the house, was related to the Propamonghet through whom washis fatherUmar al- b.ʿ al-KhaAbbās,t. t.theab,¯ brother the Prophet of Mu said,ḥammad’s “Now then! fa- I shall write for you ther ʿAbd Allāh, and ahis document mother, who after was which the yousister will of the not Prophet’s (never)35 wifego astray.” MaymūUmarna.12 At said, “The Messenger the time when the storyof Godis set, became the death overpowered of the Prophet, by the he pain was andstill youyoung, have between the Qur tenan.¯ The book of God and fifteen years oldis.13 enough Ibn ʿAbb forā us.”s is Theone peopleof the inmost the housecontroversial disputed Companions and quarrelled. of Some of them said, Muḥammad within scholarly“Make them debates. let him In (/theMuslim Messenger scholarship, of God) he is36 reveredwrite a documentas one of the for you after which you greatest Qurʾān exegeteswill and not gohis astray.” name appears Some of in them the as saidānīd what of countlessUmar said. traditions When on the the nonsense (/noise)37 and Prophet Muḥammad.the14 In disagreement non-Muslim intensified scholarship, in frontthe authenticity of the Messenger of the ofascription God, the of Messenger of God said, the majority of these“Go traditions away.” is criticized. Herbert Berg and Claude Gilliot argue that Ibn ʿAbbās should be regardedUbayd as a All symbolicah¯ (/ Abd figure Allah)¯ to38 authenticatesaid: Ibn Abb theas¯ information used to say, in “The the most terrible disaster tradition.15 is that their disagreement and their noise came between the Prophet and him writing Figure 1 is a simplifiedthat document.” representation of the chains showing only the earliest generations of transmitters.16 TheIn common addition link to accordingAbd al-Razz to Figureaq’s¯ version 1 would from be Ibn Ma ʿAbbmar,ās. there17 In is a second Ma mar order to determine whetherversion these from traditions his fellow are townsman indeed from Hish am¯Ibn b.ʿAbb Yusuf¯ ās, the (d. 197/813).texts (mut39ūnThe) biggest differences of the traditions will befrom compared.Abd al-Razz The textualaq’s¯ text analysis are al-nab revealed¯ı (the Prophet) six different instead versions of ras ul¯of Allah¯ (the Messenger the tradition about theof unwritten God), the document, omission ofwhich the prepositioncorrespond ghalabahuto the numbers al-waj indicated(the pain overpowered him) in Figure 1. Three of insteadthem go of bghalabaack to Salayhiaʿīd b. al-waj Jubayrand (d. the94/714), Prophet a Kufan saying scholar “Go away of the from me” (qum¯ u¯ ann¯ı) Qurʾān, jurisprudenceinstead and Ḥa ofdī “Goth, who, away” according (qum¯ u¯). to In Muslim addition, biographies, there are three was traditionsa student from Yunus¯ b. Yaz¯ıd of Ibn ʿAbbās.Error! Referencefrom source al-Zuhr not found.¯ı, which are very similar to Abd al-Razzaq’s¯ text, but, like Hisham’s¯ version, nevertheless contain unique formulations40, making it possible to ascribe Ibn Abbas¯ version 4 to al-Zuhr¯ı and to date it to the first quarter of the second Islamic century. In version 4 of al-Zuhr¯ı, the beginning with Ibn Abbas’¯ tear motif and Thursday’s exclamation is missing, but a similar emotional statement returns at the end, in which Ibn Abbas¯ speaks of a disaster. Like the first three versions, the event takes place during Muh. ammad’s disease. Although the Prophet expresses the same desire to write a document for his community, there is no mention of writing materials. For the first time, one of the people present is mentioned by name, Umar, the second caliph of the Islamic empire and the one who was involved in appointing Abu¯ Bakr as the first caliph after the death of the Prophet.41 He is the one who makes the call not to obey the Prophet’s wish. His argument is that no second document is needed besides the Qur an.¯ 42 The discussion in Ibn Abbas¯ version 4 is more drawn out by mentioning Umar’s counter argument. Ibn Religions 2021, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 16 of 33

FigureFigure 2.2. The isnisnad¯ād bundle ofof thethe IbnIbn ʿAbbAbbas-traditions¯ās-traditions fromfrom Layth.Layth.

43 VersionVersion T1T1 IbnIbn HḤ. anbal:anbal:43 WhenWhen thethe MessengerMessenger of GodGod reachedreached thethe pointpoint ofof death,death, hehe said,said, “If“If youyou bringbring meme aa shouldershoulder blade,blade, thenthen II willwill writewrite forfor youyou onon itit aa documentdocument [so[so that]that] twotwo menmen fromfrom amongamong youyou dodo not not disagree disagree after after me.” me.” He He said: said: The The people people (qawm (qawm) began) began to shout. to shout. The womanThe woman said, “Woesaid, “Woe unto you! unto [It you! is] the[It is] command the command of the Messengerof the Messenger of God!” of God!” (wayh. akum (wayḥahdakum ras ʿul¯ahd All rasah¯ ū).l 44 AllāhVersion). T2 al-T. abaran¯ ¯ı: TheVersion Messenger T2 al-Ṭabar of Godānī:44 called for a shoulder blade. He said, “If you bring me a shoulder blade, then I will write for you a document [so that] after me you never disagree.” There was a stir (lagha.t) among the people who were with him. A woman among those in

Religions 2021, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 16 of 33

present to carry out the Prophet’s command, yet he does not appear to give them time to comply with his (the women’s question immediately follows the Prophet’s request). Muḥammad’s reprimand would then have to be directed against ʿUmar. However, it is also addressed to other people, which would only make sense if a discussion took place amongst them. This shows that Hishām’s version is a secondary version. In Hishām’s version a switch is made to a first-person perspective: ʿUmar, the alleged narrator of this tradition, relates the event from his point of view (f.e., “we were”, “between us”, “I said”). In contrast with the versions of Ibn ʿAbbās and Abū l-Zubayr, he is an active participant in the event. The noise or discord motif occurs in both Ibn ʿAbbās’ and Abū l-Zubayr’s versions, but the ʿUmar motif only in those of Hijazi origin, versions 4 and 6 of Ibn ʿAbbās and the version of Abū l-Zubayr. The Medinan origin of the two traditions of Hishām, who is from Medina himself and provides a Medinan isnād, is consistent with the regional occurrence of the ʿUmar motif. Is Hishām’s version derived from Ibn ʿAbbās’ or Abū l-Zubayr’s? So far, Hishām’s version has more similarities to that of Ibn ʿAbbās than that of Abu l-Zubayr, such as that no location is mentioned, nor that Muḥammad is about to die, and the wording of the Prophet’s command. One part has not yet been discussed: the women motif. The women motif occurs in both of Hishām b. Saʿd’s traditions from ʿUmar and can therefore be traced back to him and dated to the second quarter or the middle of the second Islamic century, since Hishām died in 160/776–7. We have already encountered the (one) woman motif in two other versions: Ibn ʿAbbās versions 5 and 6. In two of the three traditions of Ibn ʿAbbās version 5 of Layth b. Abī Sulaym, a woman rebukes the people present for shouting instead of following the command of the Prophet. Although what she says is different from Hishām’s version, it conveys the same sentiment: a rebuke for not following the Prophet’s command (“Woe unto you! [It is] the command of the Messenger of God!” (wayḥakum ʿahd rasūl Allāh)). The woman motif in Layth’s traditions can be dated to the second quarter of the Religions 2021, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 3 of 33 second Islamic century, since Layth died in 138/755–6 or 143/760–1. In Ibn ʿAbbās version 6, the woman is identified as Zaynab, one of the Prophet’s wives. Although her reprimand follows a statement by ʿUmar, she addresses several people, revealing that part of the evolved and how, over time and across specific regions, other textual storymotifs is have missing been from this tradition. The woman motif in this tradition is more difficult to added and omitted, creating new narratives. date, because there is only one tradition of it. It is part of Ibn Saʿd’s work in which he collected nine traditions about the unwritten document.75 Of these nine traditions, two Religions 2021, 12, 579 8 of 32 2. Isnād-cum-matn Analysis Applied contain the woman motif, for which Ibn Saʿd both times lists his teacher al-Wāqidī as Based on the asānīd, the traditions in which the motif appears can beinformant. divided inHowever, five of these nine, Ibn Saʿd traces four traditions back to al-Wāqidī, two groups. The first group contains traditions ascribed to the famous Qur’of āwhichn scholar do notand contain the woman motif. It is therefore unlikely that Ibn Saʿd or al- Companion of the Prophet, ʿAbd Allāh ibn ʿattendanceAbbās (d. 67/68 said,6–7). “Woe The to majority you!Wāqid [Itī is] ofincluded thethe commandtra- the woman of the motif Messenger in these of two God!” traditions. One of theThat would put the dating of ditions (35) belong to this group. The secondpeople group said,10 is ascribed “Be quiet! to Youthe the haveCompanion women no knowledge!” motif Jābir in Ibn (la¯ ʿaql bbā lakis version). The Prophet 6 with said,al-Wā “Youqidī’s have informant, Ibrāhīm b. Ismāʿīl, b. ʿAbd Allāh (d. 78/697) and contains seven traditiono understanding!”ns. The third (group,antumwho consisting la¯ ah. diedlam¯ lakum in of 165/781–2, two).” i.e., to the same period as Hishām’s. The woman motif (either one 45 traditions, is traced back to the Companion and Versionsecond T3caliph al-T. abarʿUmaan¯ r¯ı: orb. moreal-Kha women)ṭṭāb (d. thus seems to have been introduced into the story of the unwritten 23/644). The fourth group, with five traditions, is Theascribed Messenger to Mu ofḥammad’s Goddocument said, nephew “If you in theand bring second me a quarter shoulder of blade the second and an Islamic inkpot, century. then I Unlike the ʿUmar motif, son-in-law, ʿAlī b. Abī Ṭālib (d. 40/661), andwill write the last for you grou ap document with thethe on woman second which motif largest two men is not will restricted not disagree.” to any particular He said: They region delayed (Layth and his informant Ṭāwūs number of traditions (15)11 is traced back ( tofa-abt ʿĀ. iʾ u¯s)h thea ( shoulderd. 58/678 blade), sareaid and notto thefromhav inkpote Medina,been and but God from took Kufa him (andfa-qabad Janad. ahu (Yemen), Allah¯ ). respectively), but occurs only in Muḥammad’s favourite wife and daughter of theAlthough first caliph the Ab threeū Bakr. traditionstraditions All of the differ that alleged were from not each widespread, other, they indicati still haveng that a few they charac- were not widely accepted. first transmit-ters of these traditions belongedteristics to the incircle common, of Muḥ whichammad’s makes intima themtes and classiﬁable under the same version. All three the sīra mate-rial describes their frequent interactionmention with a shoulder the Prophet. blade as2.4. writing Group material, 4: The ʿAl whichī b. Ab isī uniqueṬālib Narrative for this Ibn Abbas¯ version 5. The ICM analysis begins with a brief biographyFurthermore, of the unlike individuals the Ibn toAbb whomTheas¯ versionstraditions the tra- 1–4, of the the penultimate purpose of the group document are all istraced to avoid back to Muḥammad’s nephew ditions are attributed per group. To obtain disagreementan overview of between which people twoʿAl men.ī haveb. Ab Since īhanded Ṭā thislib (d. is mentioned40/661), the in fourth twotraditions caliph of the (T1 Muslim and T3), empire. I The Islamic tradition down the tradition according to the asānīd andalso to identify consider common this a peculiarity transmittersmaterial of theper describes Ibngroup,Abb asa¯ strong version bond from between Layth. The Mu sameḥammad applies and to his nephew ʿAlī that began the asānīd have been drawn in a figure. Thethe earliest noise orcommon shouting transmitter, after thebefore request the Mu so-calledḥ ofammad’s the Prophet prophethood and the correction and continued of those until present the latter’s by death. ʿAlī was one of common link, is by way of hypothesis assumedthe (unknown) to be the distributor woman (both ofthe the presentfirst tradition converts in T1 in and and T2). married Two traditionsFāṭima, the (T1 Prophet’s and T3) daughter. indicate When Muḥammad died, 46 question. Subsequently, the mutūn of the traditionsthat this within event tooka given place group justʿAl ī are beforeled firstthe thepreparation com- death of of the his Prophet. body for burial.Of the76other Because elements of this, he did not take part in the pared with each other and then with the groupsin the discussed text that earlier. only appear discussions in one tradition, about succession it is not clear of the whether Prophet. they The come debates from on the the day the Prophet died, and transmitters above Layth in Figure2 or if they come from variations in the transmission 2.1. Group 1: The Ibn Abbās Narrative by Layth. Only the textual elements appearing in two or all three of the traditions can be The first group of the traditions is tracedattributed back to ʿ toAbd the All commonāh b. ʿAbb linkā ofs. thisIbn ʿ group,Abbās Layth b. Ab¯ı Sulayman.¯ was related to the Prophet through his father al-ʿAbbās, the brother of Muḥammad’s fa- 2.1.6. Ibn Abbas¯ Version 6—Ibn Sa d ther ʿAbd Allāh, and his mother, who was the sister of the Prophet’s wife Maymūna.12 At the time when the story is set, the death of the Prophet,The last he Ibn wasAbb stillas¯ young, version between can be ten found in one tradition in Ibn Sa d’s al-T. abaqat¯ and fifteen years old.13 Ibn ʿAbbās is one al-Kubrof thea ¯ mostwith thecontroversial Medinan isn Companionsad¯ Muh. ammad of b. Umar [al-Waqid¯ ¯ı] (d. 207/823) -> Ibrah¯ ¯ım Muḥammad within scholarly debates. In Muslimb. Ism scholarship,a¯ ¯ıl b. Ab¯ı H .heab is¯ıba revered (d. 165/781–2) as one of ->the D awud¯ b. al-H. us.ayn [al-Qurash¯ı al-Umaw¯ı] greatest Qurʾān exegetes and his name appears(d. in 135/752–3) the asānīd of -> countlessIkrima [al-Qurash traditions ¯ıon al-H theashim¯ ¯ı], a mawla¯ of Ibn Abbas¯ who died in 47 Prophet Muḥammad.14 In non-Muslim scholarship,105/723–4 the -> authenticity Ibn Abbas¯ of (d. the 67/686–7). ascriptionThe of text of the traditions is: the majority of these traditions is criticized. Herbert[ ... Berg] on theand authority Claude Gilliot of Ibn Abbargueas,¯ that that the Prophet said during his illness what Ibn ʿAbbās should be regarded as a symbolic figurehe to died authenticate of, “If you the bring information me an inkpot in the and a piece of paper, then I will write for tradition.15 you a document after which you will never go astray.” Umar said, “Who belongs Figure 1 is a simplified representation of the tocha so-and-soins showing and only so-and-so the earliest of the citiesgener- of the Byzantines? The Messenger of God ations of transmitters.16 The common link accordingis notto Figure dead until1 would we be conquer Ibn ʿAbb themās.17 and In if he dies, we will wait for him as the order to determine whether these traditions are indeedBanu¯ from Isra¯ ¯ılIbn waited ʿAbbā fors, the Moses!” texts ( Zaynab,mutūn) the wife of the Prophet, said, “Do you of the traditions will be compared. The textual analysis[people] revealed not listen six todifferent the Prophet versions charging of you?” They shouted (lagha.tu¯) and so the tradition about the unwritten document, whichhe correspond [the Prophet] to said:the numbers “Get out!”. indicated When they left, the Prophet was taken on the in Figure 1. Three of them go back to Saʿīd b. Jubayrspot ((d.qubid 94/714),. a al-nab a¯ı Kufan makanahu¯ scholar). of the Qurʾān, jurisprudence and Ḥadīth, who, accordingAs to in Muslim the other biographies, Ibn Abbas¯ was versions, a student the event takes place during the Prophet’s illness, of Ibn ʿAbbās.Error! Reference source not found. but in this version, it happens even during the last moments of his life. In the last sentence, we are told that the Prophet passed away while those present are still leaving the place. The same time and the same verb (although active form qabad. a instead of the passive form qubid. a in Ibn Sa d’s tradition) was mentioned in tradition T3 of Ibn Abbas¯ version 5. The writing materials mentioned, inkpot and a piece of paper, previously appeared only in both traditions of Ibn Abbas¯ version 3 of Sulayman¯ al-A mash, one of them from the work of Ibn Sa d (tradition SA1) and in one tradition (S2) of Ibn Abbas¯ version 1, also part of Ibn Sa d’s work. Tradition S2 is the only one among the traditions of Ibn Abbas¯ version 1 that contains the combination of inkpot and a piece of paper. If we combine this departure from the other version 1 traditions with the fact that all three Ibn Abbas¯ traditions that mention inkwell and a piece of paper as writing materials are included within the same section of Ibn Sa d’s work, he seems to be the one responsible for the unity of writing materials within these three Ibn Abbas¯ traditions. Yet he also mentions two other traditions from Ibn Abbas,¯ one with different writing materials and one without writing materials. It is therefore not possible to determine with certainty to whom the deviating formulations belong.48 Religions 2021, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 16 of 33

2.1.7. Conclusion Ibn Abbas¯ Traditions The textual analysis of the traditions on the unwritten document attributed to Ibn Abbas¯ showed that there are six different versions that differ to a greater or lesser degree from each other. This conﬁrms the branches that the isnad¯ bundle shows in Figure1. Each version contains one or more motifs that only appear in that particular version. These characteristic motifs can thus be attributed to the common link of that particular version (see Table 2). In addition, however, the six versions also contain a number of common motifs that are explicitly or implicitly mentioned in the texts. The ﬁrst is the time of the event: The

Religions 2021, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW Prophet is very sick. It is unclear on which day the event3 takesof 33 place. According to the first three versions, this is on Thursday, as appears from the exclamation of Ibn Abbas.¯ Versions 4, 5 and 6 do not mention a specific day, but state that Muh. ammad is about to die, with versions 5 and 6 even indicating that he dies on the same day.51 Miskinzoda’s observation evolved and how, over time and across specific regions, other textual motifs have been that most traditions agree on Thursday and some on Monday,52 has to be adjusted. The added and omitted, creating new narratives. dating of this event on Thursday in versions 1–3 must be attributed to Sa ¯ıd b. Jubayr, the common link of versions 1–3. While Sa ¯ıd b. Jubayr’s traditions are indeed the most 2. Isnād-cum-matn Analysis Applied common in the collections and consequently, his version seems to be the most accepted, Based on the asānīd, thethis traditions should in be which counted the as motif one appears version, can as they be divided all come in fromfive the same transmitter. The groups. The first group containsimportance traditions of the ascribed difference to inthe dating famous is the Qur’ degreeān scholar of drama and in which the event is placed. Companion of the Prophet, WhenʿAbd All placedāh ibn during ʿAbbā thes (d. Prophet’s 67/686–7). illness, The majority there is stillof the hope tra- for a second opportunity for ditions (35) belong to this grouthep. Prophet The second to write group the10 document.is ascribed to However, the Companion when placed Jābir on his day of death, then b. ʿAbd Allāh (d. 78/697) andthe contains chance seven of another traditio opportunityns. The third is group, lost. The consisting internal of dating two of the event of Ibn Abbas¯ traditions, is traced back toversions the Companion 5 and 6 to and the second day of deathcaliph enhances ʿUmar b. the al-Kha dramaṭṭāb of (d. the event. 23/644). The fourth group, with fiveThe traditions, second motif is ascribed is the presence to Muḥa ofmmad’s several nephew people, and although this is not explicitly son-in-law, ʿAlī b. Abī Ṭālibstated (d. in 40/661), most versions, and the but last is indicated group with by means the second of the plurallargest form of person suffixes and number of traditions (15)11verb is traced conjugations back to (f.e. ʿĀ iʾ tuns¯ha¯ı and(d. lakum58/67).8), said to have been Muḥammad’s favourite wife andThe daughter third motif of the is first the Prophet’scaliph Abū instruction Bakr. All toof bringthe alleged writing materials so that he can first transmit-ters of these traditionswrite a document belonged forto the them circle after of which Muḥammad’s they will intima not gotes astray. and This is the only sentence the sīra mate-rial describes theirthat appearsfrequent almost interaction verbatim with in the all Prophet. traditions, except for the type of writing materials. The The ICM analysis beginsmaterials with a brief vary perbiography version of and the sometimes individuals even to withinwhom thethe traditionstra- of one version.53 Only ditions are attributed per group.version To 5 isobtain slightly an differentoverview in of that which the purpose people ofhave the handed document is to avoid disagreement. down the tradition accordingThis to the deviation asānīd and must to identify therefore common be attributed transmitters to Layth per b. group, Ab¯ı Sulaym an,¯ the common link the asānīd have been drawnof in this a figure. subgroup The ofearliest traditions. common The transmitter, last common the “motif”so-called is that none of the versions common link, is by way of refershypothesis to a written assumed document to be the as distributor the end result of the nor tradition to the content in of the document that the question. Subsequently, the mutūn of the traditions within a given group are first compared with each other and then with the groups discussed earlier.

2.1. Group 1: The Ibn Abbās Narrative The first group of the traditions is traced back to ʿAbd Allāh b. ʿAbbās. Ibn ʿAbbās was related to the Prophet through his father al-ʿAbbās, the brother of Muḥammad’s father ʿAbd Allāh, and his mother, who was the sister of the Prophet’s wife Maymūna.12 At the time when the story is set, the death of the Prophet, he was still young, between ten and fifteen years old.13 Ibn ʿAbbās is one of the most controversial Companions of Muḥammad within scholarly debates. In Muslim scholarship, he is revered as one of the greatest Qurʾān exegetes and his name appears in the asānīd of countless traditions on the Prophet Muḥammad.14 In non-Muslim scholarship, the authenticity of the ascription of the majority of these traditions is criticized. Herbert Berg and Claude Gilliot argue that Ibn ʿAbbās should be regarded as a symbolic figure to authenticate the information in the tradition.15 Figure 1 is a simplified representation of the chains showing only the earliest generations of transmitters.16 The common link according to Figure 1 would be Ibn ʿAbbās.17 In order to determine whether these traditions are indeed from Ibn ʿAbbās, the texts (mutūn) of the traditions will be compared. The textual analysis revealed six different versions of the tradition about the unwritten document, which correspond to the numbers indicated in Figure 1. Three of them go back to Saʿīd b. Jubayr (d. 94/714), a Kufan scholar of the Qurʾān, jurisprudence and Ḥadīth, who, according to Muslim biographies, was a student of Ibn ʿAbbās.Error! Reference source not found. Religions 2021, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 16 of 33

Finally, what is striking about all these traditions is that none of them places Ibn Abbas¯ explicitly in the space where the Prophet and the group of unknown persons are located. According to the asan¯ ¯ıd, he tells about this event and, according to some versions, seems emotionally affected by it, but in each version, Ibn Abbas¯ relates the story in a third person objective point of view. The contrast of the almost detached description of the main event with Ibn Abbas’¯ emotional outburst in the introduction is enhanced in some traditions of version 155 and almost all traditions of version 2 by the ﬁrst-person point of view of Sa ¯ıd b. Jubayr. The ﬁrst and second person are only used when somebody speaks. The mainly third-person point of view separates Ibn Abbas¯ from the quarelling. In the next part, we will look at the extent to which the traditions about the unwritten document ascribed to Jabir¯ b. Abd Allah¯ match the Ibn Abbas¯ versions.

2.2. Group 2: The Jabir¯ b. Abd Allah¯ Narrative The following group of traditions that reﬂect the motive of Muhammad’s request for writing materials for a document he intends to prepare for his community have been attributed to Ibn Abbas’¯ contemporary Jabir¯ b. Abd Allah.¯ Jabir,¯ like Ibn Abbas,¯ was one of the Prophet’s Companions. He died in 78/697 at the age of 94, meaning that he was older than Ibn Abbas¯ when Muh. ammad died. Jabir¯ belonged to the tribe of the Khazraj, one of the two Arab tribes who lived in Yathrib (later called Medina) before the arrival of the Prophet. Together with his father, he would have attended the second Aqaba meeting with Muh. ammad, shortly before his hijra, where Jabir¯ swore allegiance to Muh. ammad and converted to Islam together with his father. Although he was not present at the ﬁrst two famous battles of Badr and Uh. ud, he participated in numerous other battles of the Prophet. Various reports describe regular contact between Muh. ammad and Jabir’s¯ family. A critical note from Kister on Jabir’s¯ tradition material is that traditions were attributed to him that did not always adhere to the correct rules of h. ad¯ıth transmission. For example, the famous scholar al-H. asan al-Bas.r¯ı is said to have reported directly from Jabir¯ without being a student of his.56 Group 2 includes seven traditions, all of which go back to Jabir¯ b. Abd Allah¯ through the Meccan traditionist Abu¯ l-Zubayr Muh. ammad b. Muslim b. Tadrus al-Qurash¯ı (d. 128/746). While, according to the asan¯ ¯ıd, the traditions of Ibn Abbas¯ circulated mainly Religions 2021, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 16 of 33

Wāqidī included the woman motif in these two traditions. That would put the dating of FigureFigure 3. 3. TheThe isnisnādad¯ bundlebundle of of Ab Abūu¯ l-Zubayr’s l-Zubayr’sthe traditions traditionswomen frommotif from J ā Jinabirbir¯ Ibn b. b. ʿ AbdʿAbd bb āAlls All versionāh.ah.¯ 6 with al-Wāqidī’s informant, Ibrāhīm b. Ismāʿīl, who died in 165/781–2, i.e., to the same period as Hishām’s. The woman motif (either one TheThe first first thing thing that that strikes oneoneor more aboutabout women) thesethese seven se venthus traditions traditions seems to is is thathave that they beenthey are areintroduced all all short: short: the into the story of the unwritten thefocus focus is on is theon Prophet’sthe Prophet’s instruction documentinstruction to get in to writing the get second writing materials. quarter materials. Five of ofthe theFive second seven of theIslamic traditions seven century. Unlike the ʿUmar motif, traditionslook very look much very alike much and are,alike accordingthe and woman are, toaccording motif the as isan¯ not ¯ıdto, fromrestrictedthe as Qurraānīd to, from b.any Kh particular Qurraalid,¯ who b. Khregion livedālid, in (Layth and his informant Ṭāwūs 57 57 whoBasra. lived The in text Basra. of these The text traditions of theseare is:not traditions from Medina, is: but from Kufa and Janad (Yemen), respectively), but occurs only in 58 58 [...][ ... on] the on theauthority authority of Ab ofū Abtraditions l-Zubayru¯ l-Zubayr thaton the onwere theauthority not authority widespread, of Jā ofbir, Jabir,¯ he indicati said he said (/that)ng (/that)that atthey hisat were not widely accepted. death,his death, the Messenger the Messenger (/Prophet) (/Prophet)59 of 59Godof Godcalled called for fora piece a piece of ofpaper paper to towrite write on on itit a a documentdocument for for hi hiss communitycommunity (li-ummatihi(2.4.li-ummatihi Group )4:) [so The[so that] that]ʿAl theyī b. they Ab willī Ṭwillā notlib Narrativenot go astraygo astray nor benor led be astray. led astray. In the house was noise and ʿUmar b. al-Khaṭṭāb spoke, so he (the60 Prophet)60 In the house was noise and Umar b.The al-Kha traditionst.t.ab¯ spoke, of the so penultimate he (the Prophet) group arerelinquished all traced back to Muḥammad’s nephew relinquished it (the document or the piece of paper). it (the document or the piece ofʿAl paper).ī b. Abī Ṭālib (d. 40/661), the fourth caliph of the Muslim empire. The Islamic tradition The other two Abū l-Zubayr traditions, J1 and J7,6161 differ slightly from Qurra’s The other two Abu¯ l-Zubayrmaterial traditions, describes J1 a and strong J7, bonddiffer between slightly Mu fromḥammad Qurra’s and his nephew ʿAlī that began version.6262 In J1 the reference to ʿUmar is missing, i.e., “they shouted in front of him” version. In J1 the referencebefore to Umar Mu isḥammad’s missing, prophethood i.e., “they shouted and continued in front until of him” the latter’s death. ʿAlī was one of (laghaReligionsṭū ʿindahu 2021, )12 instead, x FOR PEER of REVIEW“there was noise and ʿUmar spoke” (laghaṭ wa-takallama 3 of 33 (lagha.tu¯ indahu) instead of “therethe was first noise converts and andUmar married spoke” F (ālaghaṭima,.t wa-takallama the Prophet’sUmar daughter.), When Muḥammad died, ʿUmar), but since ʿUmar’s presence is confirmed in J7, i.e., “ʿUmar b. al-Khaṭṭāb was but since Umar’s presence is confirmedʿAlī led the in preparation J7, i.e., “ Umar of his b. body al-Kha fort. t.burial.ab¯ was76 opposedBecause of to this, he did not take part in the opposed to it” (fa-khālafa ʿalayhā ʿUmar b. al-Khaṭṭāb), we can most probably attribute the it” (fa-khalafa¯ alayha¯ Umar b. al-Kha.t.tab¯ ), we can most probably attribute the omission or discussions about succession of the Prophet.63 The debates on the day the Prophet died, and omissionsuppression or suppression of Umar’s name of ʿUmar’s to Ibrevolvedah¯ ¯ımnameb. and Yaz to how, ¯ıd.Ibr63ā Thehoverīm noise b.time Yaz motifanīd.d a iscrossThe completely noisespecif icmotifmissing regions, is other textual motifs have been completelyin J7 and has missing been replacedin J7 and byhas the beenadded aforementioned repl anacedd omitted, by the phrase creatingaforementioned that newUmar narratives. phrase was opposed that ʿUmar to it. ʿ ʿ wasMus¯ opposeda¯ b. Dawud¯ to it. or MAbdūsā b. All Dah¯āwud b. Lah or¯ ı aAbd must All haveāh b. been Lahī responsiblea must have for been this. 64responsible 64 2. Isnād-cum-matn Analysis Applied for this.The common motifs in all traditions can be attributed to Abu¯ l-Zubayr (d. 128/746), the commonThe common link ofmotifs the as inan¯ all¯ıd, traditions and datedBased can to theon be the firstattributed as quarterānīd, theto of Ab traditions theū secondl-Zubayr in Islamic which (d. 128/746), century.the motif appears can be divided in five theAb commonu¯ l-Zubayr’s link narrativeof the asān isīd very, andgroups. similar dated to toThe the the first Ibn quartergroupAbbas¯ contains versions.of the second trad Theitions eventIslamic ascribed takes century. place to the famous Qur’ān scholar and Abū l-Zubayr’s narrative is very similar to the Ibn ʿAbbās versions.ʿ The event ʿtakes place towards the end of the Prophet’sCompa life. Munionh. ammad of the Prophet, orders writingAbd All materialsāh ibn Abb to writeās (d. a67/686–7). The majority of the tra- towardsdocument, the but end due of tothe noise Prophet’s aroundditions life. him, Mu he(35)ḥ abandonsammad belong ordersto it. this Moreover, grouwritingp. from The materials thesecond version to group write of Ab10 isau¯ ascribed to the Companion Jābir document,l-Zubayr we but do due not to learn noise anything aroundb. about ʿhim,Abd theAllhe ā contentabandonsh (d. 78/697) of theit. Moreover,and document contains andfrom seven only the traditio theversion purposens. of The third group, consisting of two Abisū described. l-Zubayr However,we do not there learn are anything alsotraditions, clear about differences is thetraced content back from of to the the the Ibn document CompanionAbbas¯ versions.and and only second the caliph ʿUmar b. al-Khaṭṭāb (d. Unlike the Ibn Abbas¯ versions,23/644). Abu¯ The l-Zubayr’s fourth versiongroup, with is lacking five traditions, any mention is ascribed of the to Muḥammad’s nephew and Prophet’s illness. The Prophet’s commandson-in-law, is formulated ʿAlī b. Ab differently:ī Ṭālib (d. “the 40/661), Prophet/Messenger and the last group with the second largest of God called for” (da a¯ al-nab¯ı/rasul¯number Allah¯ bi- of) instead traditions of the (15) characteristic11 is traced “bring back to me” ʿĀ ( iʾ tuns¯h¯aı (d. 58/678), said to have been bi-). Although the piece of paperM (us.ḥahammad’s. ¯ıfa) also appearsfavourite as wife a variant and daughter in some of Ibn theAbb firstas¯ caliph Abū Bakr. All of the alleged versions, for example in versionfirst 6 and transmit- some traditionsters of these of version traditions 1, in belonged the Abu¯ to l-Zubayr the circle of Muḥammad’s intimates and the sīra mate-rial describes their frequent interaction with the Prophet. The ICM analysis begins with a brief biography of the individuals to whom the traditions are attributed per group. To obtain an overview of which people have handed down the tradition according to the asānīd and to identify common transmitters per group, the asānīd have been drawn in a figure. The earliest common transmitter, the so-called common link, is by way of hypothesis assumed to be the distributor of the tradition in question. Subsequently, the mutūn of the traditions within a given group are first compared with each other and then with the groups discussed earlier.

Table 2. The unique motifs of Ibn Abbas¯ versions 1–6.

The tears wet the pebbles; different writing materials (a piece of paper, shoulder blade or document); description Version 1 Sufyan¯ b. Uyayna of the disagreement and dispute among the people; (d. 198/814) Muh. ammad’s command to leave him alone and his remark on his state; threefold command Version 2 Malik¯ b. Mighwal The comparison of the tears with pearls; two different (d. 159/776) writing materials (shoulder blade or tablet) No description of the crying; one kind of writing Version 3 Sulayman¯ al-A mash material (a piece of paper); the question to Muh. ammad (d. 148/765) whether they should bring it later; Muh. ammad’s counter question: After what? The exclamation of Ibn Abbas¯ “Thursday, what a Versions 1–3 Sa ıd¯ b. Jubayr Thursday!”; the crying of Ibn Abbas¯ (even if the three (d. 95/714) versions differ in the details); people who wonder if Muh. ammad is delirious Religions 2021, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 16 of 33

present to carry out the Prophet’s command, yet he does not appear to give them time to comply with his (the women’s question immediately follows the Prophet’s request). Muḥammad’s reprimand would then have to be directed against ʿUmar. However, it is also addressed to other people, which would only make sense if a discussion took place amongst them. This shows that Hishām’s version is a secondary version. In Hishām’s version a switch is made to a first-person perspective: ʿUmar, the alleged narrator of this tradition, relates the event from his point of view (f.e., “we were”, “between us”, “I said”). In contrast with the versions of Ibn ʿAbbās and Abū l-Zubayr, he is an active participant in the event. The noise or discord motif occurs in both Ibn ʿAbbās’ and Abū l-Zubayr’s versions, but the ʿUmar motif only in those of Hijazi origin, versions 4 and 6 of Ibn ʿAbbās and the version of Abū l-Zubayr. The Medinan origin of the two traditions of Hishām, who is from Medina himself and provides a Medinan isnād, is consistent with the regional occurrence of the ʿUmar motif. Is Hishām’s version derived from Ibn ʿAbbās’ or Abū l-Zubayr’s? So far, Hishām’s version has more similarities to that of Ibn ʿAbbās than that of Abu l-Zubayr, such as that no location is mentioned, nor that Muḥammad is about to die, and the wording of the Prophet’s command. One part has not yet been discussed: the women motif. The women motif occurs in both of Hishām b. Saʿd’s traditions from ʿUmar and can therefore be traced back to him and dated to the second quarter or the middle of the second Islamic century, since Hishām died in 160/776–7. We have already encountered the (one) woman motif in two other versions: Ibn ʿAbbās versions 5 and 6. In two of the three traditions of Ibn ʿAbbās version 5 of Layth b. Abī Sulaym, a woman rebukes the people present for shouting instead of following the command of the Prophet. Although what she says is different from Hishām’s version, it conveys the same sentiment: a rebuke Religions 2021, 12, x FOR PEERfor not REVIEW following the Prophet’s command (“Woe unto you! [It is] the command of the 3 of 33 Messenger of God!” (wayḥakum ʿahd rasūl Allāh)). The woman motif in Layth’s traditions can be dated to the second quarter of the second Islamic century, since Layth died in 138/755–6 or 143/760–1. In Ibn ʿAbbās version evolved and how, over time and across specific regions, other textual motifs have been 6, the woman is identified as Zaynab, one of the Prophet’s wives. Although her reprimand added and omitted, creating new narratives. follows a statement by ʿUmar, she addresses several people, revealing that part of the story is missing from this tradition. The woman motif in this tradition is more difficult to 2. Isnād-cum-matn Analysis Applied date, because there is only one tradition of it. It is part of Ibn Saʿd’s work in which he Religions 2021, 12, 579 collected nineBased traditions on the about asān īthed, the unwritten traditions document. in which 75the Of motif these14 appears ofnine 32 traditions, can be divided two in five contain thegroups. woman The motif, first groupfor which contains Ibn Sa tradʿd itionsboth timesascribed lists to his the teacher famous al-W Qur’āqidān ī scholaras and ʿ ʿ informant.Compa However,nion of thethese Prophet, nine, Ibn Abd Saʿ dAll tracesāh ibn four Abb traditionsās (d. 67/68 back6–7). to al-WThe āmajorityqidī, two of the tra- 10 of which ditionsdo not (35) contain belong the to woman this grou motif.p. The It secondis therefore group unlikely is ascribed that Ibnto the Sa ʿCompaniond or al- Jābir Table 2. Cont. ʿ Wāqidī includedb. Abd Alltheā hwoman (d. 78/697) motif and in containsthese two seven traditions. traditio Thatns. Thewould third put group, the dating consisting of of two traditions, is traced back to the Companion and second caliph ʿUmar b. al-Khaṭṭāb (d. the women motif in IbnIbn ʿAbb bbāas¯s version speaks of 6a with disaster; al-W noāqid writingī’s informant, materials Ibrāhīm b. Ismāʿīl, 23/644). The mentioned;fourth group,Umar’s with presence; five traditions,Umar makes is ascribed the call to not Muḥammad’s nephew and Version 4 Ibn Shihwhoab¯ died al-Zuhr in ı¯165/781–2, i.e., to the same period as Hishām’s. The woman motif (either one son-in-law, toʿAl obeyī b. the Ab Prophet’sī Ṭālib (d. wish; 40/661),Umar’s and argument the last that grou no p with the second largest (d. 124/742) or more women) thus seems to have been introduced into the story of the unwritten 11 ʿ ʾ documentnumber in the secondof traditionssecond quarter document (15) of the is is needed second traced besides Islamic back the to century. QurĀ an;¯sh Unlikea counter (d. 58 the/67 ʿ8Uma), sari dmotif, to h ave been ḥ argument; the people of/in the house (ahl al-bayt) the womanM umotifammad’s is not restrictedfavourite towife any and particular daughter region of the (Layth first caliphand his Ab informantū Bakr. All Ṭāw ofū sthe alleged ḥ are not fromfirst Medina, transmit- Shoulderbutters from of these blade Kufa astraditions and writing Janad material; belonged (Yemen), purpose to respectively), the document circle of Mubut occursammad’s only intima in tes and the sīra mate-isrial to avoid describes disagreement their frequent (between interaction two men); with noise the or Prophet. Version 5 Laythtraditions b. Abı¯ Sulaym thatan¯ were not widespread, indicating that they were not widely accepted. The ICMshouting analysis after begins the request with a of brief the Prophet; biography the correctionof the individuals to whom the tra- of those present by a woman 2.4. Groupditions 4: The ʿareAlī attributedb. Abī Ṭālib perNarrative group. To obtain an overview of which people have handed down the traditionUmar’s according rejection of to the the death asān ofīd and Muh. toammad; identify reference common transmitters per group, The traditions of the penultimate group are all traced back to Muḥammad’s nephew Version 6 al-Waqid¯ ı—¯ Ikrimathe asānīd haveto the been cities drawn of the Byzantines;in a figure. Zaynab, The earliest the Prophet’s common transmitter, the so-called ʿAlī b. Abī Ṭālib (d. 40/661), the fourth caliph of the Muslim empire. The Islamic tradition common link,wife, is correctsby way thoseof hypothesis present assumed to be the distributor of the tradition in material describes a strong bond between Muḥammad and his nephew ʿAlī that began question. Subsequently, the mutūn of the traditions within a given group are first com- before Muḥammad’s prophethood and continued until the latter’s death. ʿAlī was one of 2.3. Group 3: The Umar b.pared al-Khat with..tab¯ Narrative each other and then with the groups discussed earlier. the first converts and married Fāṭima, the Prophet’s daughter. When Muḥammad died, The Hijazi occurrence of the Umar motif is also evident in the traditions of group 3 ʿAlī led the preparation of his body for burial.76 Because of this, he did not take part in the attributed to the Companion2.1. andGroup second 1: The caliph Ibn Abb ofā thes Narrative Muslim empire Umar b. al-Khattab¯ discussions about succession of the Prophet. The debates on the day the.. Prophet died, and (d. 23/644). Umar had close tiesThe to first the group Prophet, of whichthe tradit wereions conﬁrmed is traced byback Mu toh. ammad’s ʿAbd Allāh b. ʿAbbās. Ibn ʿAbbās marriage to Umar’s daughterwas Hrelated. afs.a. Accordingto the Prop tohet Islamic through tradition, his fatherUmar al-ʿ playedAbbās, a the major brother of Muḥammad’s fa- role in the appointment ofther Abu ¯ʿAbd Bakr All asā leaderh, and of his the mother, Muslim who community was the sister after theof the death Prophet’s of wife Maymūna.12 At the Prophet Muh. ammad.the Immediately time when followingthe story is the set, death the death of the of Prophet, the Prophet, the religious he was still young, between ten community Muh. ammad hadand establishedfifteen years a decadeold.13 Ibn earlier ʿAbb startedās is toone fall of apart. the most Separately, controversial Companions of several groups of MuslimsMu inḥ Medinaammad gatheredwithin scholarly to discuss debates. their future In Muslim course. scholarship, During one he is revered as one of the of these debates, Umar b.greatest al-Kha Qurt.t.ab¯ ʾā tookn exegetes the hand and of his Ab nameu¯ Bakr appears and swore in the allegianceasānīd of countless traditions on the to him, shortly followed byProphet the other Muḥ menammad. present14 In innon-Muslim the hall. The scholarship, next day, Ab theu¯ authenticity Bakr’s of the ascription of 66 leadership was announcedthe in majority Medina. ofAb theseu¯ Bakr traditions later appointed is criticizedUmar. Herbert as his Berg successor, and Claude Gilliot argue that and Umar became caliphIbn of theʿAbb Muslimās should empire be regarded after Ab uas¯ Bakr’s a symbolic death. figure to authenticate the information in the Group 3 contains onlytradition. two traditions,15 preserved in the collections of Ibn Sa d and 67 al-T. abaran¯ ¯ı, and the commonFigure link 1 according is a simplified to the representation chains of transmission of the cha isins Hish showingam¯ only the earliest gener- b. Sa d (d. 160/776–7) fromations Medina, of transmitters. who belonged16 The common to the tribe link of according the Quraysh. to FigureH. ad¯ıth 1 would be Ibn ʿAbbās.17 In authorities such as Ibn H. anbalorder (d.to determine 241/855) and whether Yah. y a¯these b. Ma traditions¯ın (d. 158/775) are indeed labelled from him Ibn ʿAbbās, the texts (mutūn) 68 a weak transmitter (laysa bi-muof theh. kimtraditions li-l-h. ad ¯ıth/laysawill be compared. bi-dhak¯ al-qaw The¯ı/d. textuala ¯ıf ). Thisanalysis may revealed also be six different versions of the reason why few traditionsthe tradition have been about preserved the unwritten in the h. document,ad¯ıth collections. which Al-correspondT. abaran¯ ¯ı to the numbers indicated remarks that only Hisham¯ in relates Figur thesee 1. T traditionshree of th fromem g hiso b informantack to Saʿī Zayd,d b. Jubayr and only (d. M94/714),us¯ a,¯ a Kufan scholar of the who received the traditionQur fromʾān, Hishjurisprudenceam¯ according and Ḥ toad hisīth,isn who,ad¯ , from according Hisham,¯ to Muslim and that biographies, was a student the same applies to Muh. ammadof Ibn ʿAbb b. Alās.¯ıError! b. Khalaf Reference source (see not Figure found. 4). Al- T. abaran¯ ¯ı’s comment indicates that he had no variants of this tradition in his day. He was apparently unfamiliar with al-Waqid¯ ¯ı’s tradition.69 Ibn Sa d’s tradition goes back to Hisham¯ through al-Waqid¯ ¯ı, while that of al-T. abaran¯ ¯ı goes back to him through Mus¯ a¯ b. Ja far b. Ibrah¯ ¯ım b. Muh. ammad b. Al¯ı b. Abd Allah¯ 70 b. Ja far b. Ab¯ı T. alib¯ (al-Ja far¯ı) . According to both asan¯ ¯ıd, the tradition is handed down through a chain of members of the same family.71 Hisham¯ b. Sa d received the tradition from his guardian Zayd b. Aslam (d. 136/754), who got it from his father Aslam al-Qurash¯ı al- Adaw¯ı who was a client (mawla¯) from Umar b. al-Khat.t.ab.¯ All are from Medina. The text of Ibn Sa d’s tradition from Hisham¯ b. Sa d is:

[ ... ] on the authority of Umar b. al-Khat.t.ab,¯ he said: We were with the Prophet, and between us and between the women was a curtain (h. ijab¯ ). The Messenger of God said, “If you cleanse me with seven water skins and bring me a piece of paper and an inkpot then I will write for you a document after which you will never go astray.” The women said: “Bring the Messenger of God what he needs.” Umar said: I said, “Be quiet. You are his companions. When he (i.e., Muh. ammad) is sick, you squeeze your eyes and when he is healthy you take his neck!” The Messenger of God said, “They are better than you (minkum)!” Religions 2021, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 16 of 33

Religions 2021, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 3 of 33

evolved and how, over time and across specific regions, other textual motifs have been added and omitted, creating new narratives.

2. Isnād-cum-matn Analysis Applied Based on the asānīd, the traditions in which the motif appears can be divided in five groups. The first group contains traditions ascribed to the famous Qur’ān scholar and Companion of the Prophet, ʿAbd Allāh ibn ʿAbbās (d. 67/686–7). The majority of the traditions (35) belong to this group. The second group10 is ascribed to the Companion Jābir Figure 4. The isnad¯ bundle of Hisham¯ b. Sa d’s traditions from Umar b. al-Khat.t.ab.¯ b. ʿAbd Allāh (d. 78/697) and contains seven traditions. The third group, consisting of two traditions, is traced back to the CompanionThe and event second in the caliph traditions ʿUma ofr b. Hish al-Khaam¯ b.ṭṭā Sab (d.d, like the Ibn Abbas¯ versions, is linked 23/644). The fourth group, with five traditions,to the Prophet’s is ascribed illness to (explicitlyMuḥammad’s in al- nephewT. abaran¯ and¯ı’s tradition U2 and implicit in Ibn Sa d’s son-in-law, ʿAlī b. Abī Ṭālib (d. 40/661),tradition and U1). the The last Prophet’s group with command the second is formulated largest differently in the two traditions: number of traditions (15)11 is traced“bring back tome” ʿĀ ( iʾ tuns¯ha¯ı bi-(d). in58 U1/67 is8), similar said t too h theave Ibn beenAbb as¯ versions and “summon for me” Muḥammad’s favourite wife and daughter(ud u¯ lof¯ı bi- the) in first U2 resemblescaliph Ab Abū Bakr.u¯ l-Zubayr’s All of the version alleged from Jabir,¯ i.e., “the Prophet/Messenger first transmit-ters of these traditions belongedof God called to the for” circle (da ofa¯ al-nabMuḥammad’s¯ı/rasul¯ All ah¯intima bi-).tes The and writing material Muh. ammad asks for, a the sīra mate-rial describes their frequentpiece interaction of paper andwith an the inkpot Prophet. (bi-s.ah. ¯ıfa wa-dawah¯ ), and the stated purpose of the document, The ICM analysis begins with a brief“after biography which you of will the never individuals go astray”, to whom are more the liketra- the Ibn Abbas¯ versions by mentioning ditions are attributed per group. To obtainthe inkpot an overview (which is of missing which inpeople the version have handed of Abu¯ l-Zubayr) and the use of the indirect down the tradition according to the asāspeechnīd and “forto identify you” (“for common your transmittersumma” in the per version group, of Abu¯ l-Zubayr). It is even identical the asānīd have been drawn in a figure.to IbnThe Abbearliestas¯ version common 3 of transmitter, Sulayman¯ b.the al-A so-calledmash and Ibn Abbas¯ version 6 of Ibn Sa d common link, is by way of hypothesisthrough assumedIkrima. to be Thethe presencedistributor of severalof the tradition persons isin not explicitly stated, but can be derived question. Subsequently, the mutūn of fromthe traditions the plural within form ofa given person group sufﬁxes are and first verb com- conjugations, all second person plural pared with each other and then with themasculine, groups discussed i.e., the aforementioned earlier. “bring me” or “summon for me”, “for you” (lakum), “you will not go astray” (la¯ tad. illu¯), “than you” (minkum). 2.1. Group 1: The Ibn Abbās Narrative Contrary to the versions of Ibn Abbas¯ and Abu¯ l-Zubayr, there is no uproar or discord The first group of the traditions isamong traced the back persons to ʿAbd present, Allāh b. except ʿAbbā fors. Ibn the ʿ discussionAbbās between Umar and the women. was related to the Prophet through hisNeither father theal-ʿAbb locationās, the of thebrother event of nor Mu theḥammad’s content offa- the document is discussed. In fact, the ther ʿAbd Allāh, and his mother, who was the sister of the Prophet’s wife Maymūna.12 At the time when the story is set, the death of the Prophet, he was still young, between ten and fifteen years old.13 Ibn ʿAbbās is one of the most controversial Companions of Muḥammad within scholarly debates. In Muslim scholarship, he is revered as one of the greatest Qurʾān exegetes and his name appears in the asānīd of countless traditions on the Prophet Muḥammad.14 In non-Muslim scholarship, the authenticity of the ascription of the majority of these traditions is criticized. Herbert Berg and Claude Gilliot argue that Ibn ʿAbbās should be regarded as a symbolic figure to authenticate the information in the tradition.15 Figure 1 is a simplified representation of the chains showing only the earliest generations of transmitters.16 The common link according to Figure 1 would be Ibn ʿAbbās.17 In order to determine whether these traditions are indeed from Ibn ʿAbbās, the texts (mutūn) of the traditions will be compared. The textual analysis revealed six different versions of the tradition about the unwritten document, which correspond to the numbers indicated in Figure 1. Three of them go back to Saʿīd b. Jubayr (d. 94/714), a Kufan scholar of the Qurʾān, jurisprudence and Ḥadīth, who, according to Muslim biographies, was a student of Ibn ʿAbbās.Error! Reference source not found. Religions 2021, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 16 of 33

2.4. Group 4: The Al¯ı b. Ab¯ı T. alib¯ Narrative The traditions of the penultimate group are all traced back to Muh. ammad’s nephew Al¯ı b. Ab¯ı T. alib¯ (d. 40/661), the fourth caliph of the Muslim empire. The Islamic tradition material describes a strong bond between Muh. ammad and his nephew Al¯ı that began before Muh. ammad’s prophethood and continued until the latter’s death. Al¯ı was one of the ﬁrst converts and married Fa¯t.ima, the Prophet’s daughter. When Muh. ammad died, Al¯ı led the preparation of his body for burial.76 Because of this, he did not take part Religions 2021, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 16 of 33

Figure 5. The isnad¯ bundle of Umar b. al-Fadl’s traditions from Al¯ı b. Ab¯ı Talib.¯ Figure 5. The isnād bundle of ʿUmar b. al-Faḍ. l’s traditions from ʿAlī b. Abī Ṭ. ālib. Two slightly different versions of the narrative can be distinguished in the ﬁve traditions.Two The textslightly of the different ﬁrst version versions in traditions of the narrative A1 and A2 can from be Ibndistinguished Sa d and al-Bukh in thear¯ five¯ı is: traditions. The text of the first version in traditions A1 and A2 from Ibn Saʿd and al- Bukh[ā...rī is:] Al¯ı b. Ab¯ı T. alib¯ informed us that the Prophet (A1)/Messenger of God (A2) said when he became heavy [in sickness], “ Al¯ı, if you bring me a plate […] ʿAlī b. Abī Ṭālib informed us that the Prophet (A1)/Messenger of God (A2) (tabaq) then I will write on it what would prevent my community after me81 from said. when he became heavy [in sickness], “ʿAlī, if you bring me a plate (ṭabaq) going astray.” He ( Al¯ı) said: “I was afraid that his soul would depart (before I then I will write on it what would prevent my community after me81 from going return), so I said, ‘I can memorise better from my forearm than from a piece of astray.” He (ʿAlī) said: “I was afraid that his soul would depart (before I return), paper’.” He ( Al¯ı) said: “His head was between my forearm and my upper arm. so I said, ‘I can memorise better from my forearm than from a piece of paper’.” He (Muh. ammad) started to bequeath the prayer, the zakah¯ (almsgiving) and what He (ʿAlī) said: “His head was between my forearm and my upper arm. He your right hands own (=slaves).” He ( Al¯ı) said: “[Muhammad continued] thus ḥ . until(Mu hisammad) soul departed. started to Hebequeath ordered the the prayer,shahada¯ the(creed) zakāh that (almsgiving) there is no and god what but your right hands own (=slaves).” He (ʿAlī) said: “[Muḥammad continued] thus

Religions 2021, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 16 of 33

present to carry out the Prophet’s command, yet he does not appear to give them time to comply with his (the women’s question immediately follows the Prophet’s request). Muḥammad’s reprimand would then have to be directed against ʿUmar. However, it is also addressed to other people, which would only make sense if a discussion took place amongst them. This shows that Hishām’s version is a secondary version. In Hishām’s version a switch is made to a first-person perspective: ʿUmar, the alleged narrator of this tradition, relates the event from his point of view (f.e., “we were”, “between us”, “I said”). In contrast with the versions of Ibn ʿAbbās and Abū l-Zubayr, he is an active participant in the event. The noise or discord motif occurs in both Ibn ʿAbbās’ and Abū l-Zubayr’s versions, but the ʿUmar motif only in those of Hijazi origin, versions 4 and 6 of Ibn ʿAbbās and the version of Abū l-Zubayr. The Medinan origin of the two traditions of Hishām, who is from Medina himself and provides a Medinan isnād, is consistent with the regional occurrence of the ʿUmar motif. Is Hishām’s version derived from Ibn ʿAbbās’ or Abū l-Zubayr’s? So far, Hishām’s version has more similarities to that of Ibn ʿAbbās than that of Abu l-Zubayr, such as that no location is mentioned, nor that Muḥammad is about to die, and the wording of the Prophet’s command. One part has not yet been discussed: the women motif. The women motif occurs in both of Hishām b. Saʿd’s traditions from ʿUmar and can therefore be traced back to him and dated to the second quarter or the middle of the second Islamic century, since Hishām died in 160/776–7. We have already encountered the (one) woman motif in two other versions: Ibn ʿAbbās versions 5 and 6. In two of the three traditions of Ibn ʿAbbās version 5 of Layth b. Abī Sulaym, a woman rebukes the people present for shouting instead of following the command of the Prophet. Although Religions 2021, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 3 of 33 what she says is different from Hishām’s version, it conveys the same sentiment: a rebuke for not following the Prophet’s command (“Woe unto you! [It is] the command of the Messenger of God!” (wayḥakum ʿahd rasūl Allāh)). evolved and how,The over woman time anmotifd a crossin Layth’s specif ictraditions regions, canother be textual dated motifsto the secondhave been quarter of the added and omitted,second Islamic creating century, new narratives. since Layth died in 138/755–6 or 143/760–1. In Ibn ʿAbbās version 6, the woman is identified as Zaynab, one of the Prophet’s wives. Although her reprimand 2. Isnād-cum-matnfollows Ana statementalysis Applied by ʿUmar, she addresses several people, revealing that part of the Based onstory the is as missingānīd, the from traditions this tradition. in which The the woman motif appears motif in can this be tradition divided isin more five difficult to groups. Thedate, first becausegroup contains there is tradonlyitions one traditionascribed ofto it.the It famousis part ofQur’ Ibnān Sa scholarʿd’s work and in which he Companioncollected of the Prophet, nine traditions ʿAbd All āabouth ibn theʿAbb unwrittenās (d. 67/68 document.6–7). The75 majority Of these of nine the tra-traditions, two ditions (35) containbelong tothe this woman group. motif, The second for which group Ibn10 isSa ascribedʿd both timesto the listsCompanion his teacher Jābir al-W āqidī as Religions 2021, 12, 579 19 of 32 b. ʿAbd Allāinformant.h (d. 78/697) However, and contains of these seven nine, traditio Ibn Sans.ʿd The traces third four group, traditions consisting back of to two al-W āqidī, two traditions, isof traced which back do not to thecontain Companion the woman and motif.second It caliph is therefore ʿUmar unlikelyb. al-Kha thatṭṭāb Ibn(d. Saʿd or al- 23/644). TheW fourthāqidī group,included with the five woman traditions, motif inis theseascribed two to traditions. Muḥammad’s That nephewwould put and the dating of in which Muh. ammadson-in-law, dies—with theʿAl womenī b. his Ab head īmotif Ṭālib between in (d. Ibn 40/661), ʿAl bb¯ı’sās forearm version and the and6 with last upper groual-W arm—ispā qid withī’svery informant, the second Ibr largestāhīm b. Ismāʿīl, similar to the traditionnumber attributedof who traditions died to Mu in (15) 165/781–2,h. ammad’s11 is traced i.e., favorite backto the wife tosame ʿĀA¯ periodʾ isha.sha In( asd. it Hish58 she/6ā tells7m’s.8), thats Theaid womanto have motifbeen (either one the Prophet diedMu withḥammad’s his heador favouritemore between women) wife her and chestthus daughter andseems her to chin.of have the90 firstbeen caliph introduced Abū Bakr. into All the of story the alleged of the unwritten The reasonfirst for transmit- creatingdocument antersAl of¯ı these version in the traditions ofsecond this tradition quarterbelonged of may to the the have second circle to do ofIslamic withMuḥ theammad’s century. time Unlikeintimates the and ʿUma r motif, period and regionthe s inīra whichmate-therialUmar woman describes b. motif al-Fa their dis. l not grewfrequent restricted up. interaction Although to any particular wewith are the not Prophet.region sure when(Layth and his informant Ṭāwūs Umar was born andThe died, ICMare he analysis not likely from witnessed begins Medina, with the but a change brieffrom biographyKufa of power and Janad inof thethe (Yemen), Islamicindividuals empire respectively), to whom the but tra- occurs only in in the middle ofditions the second are attributedtraditions Islamic century.thatper weregroup. The not To Umayyadwidespread, obtain an dynasty, overview indicati whong of that hadwhich they ruled people were the not have widely handed accepted. empire after thedown death the of tradition caliph Al according¯ı, were overthrown to the asānīd by and the to Abbidentifyasids¯ common with the transmitters help of per group, Sh¯ı ¯ı Muslims onthe the asā promisenīd have2.4. that Groupbeen a descendant drawn4: The ʿ Alin īa b. offigure. AbAlī Ṭ¯ıā would libThe Narrative earliest be proclaimed common caliph. transmitter, Their the so-called disappointmentcommon with the link,Abb is asid-appointedThe¯by waytraditions of hypothesis of caliph the penultimate resultedassumed in to group a be hostile the are distributor attitudeall traced of backof the the to tradition Muḥammad’s in nephew 91 Sh¯ı ¯ı’s towardsquestion. the Abb asidSubsequently,¯ ʿAl caliphs.ī b. Abī Ṭ āManythelib (d.mut followers40/661),ūn of the the of traditions fourthAl¯ı could caliph within be of found thea given Muslim in the group area empire. are first The com-Islamic tradition where Umar b.pared al-Fa withd. l lived. eachmaterial Although other describes and Basra then a wi wasstrongth notthe bond completelygroups between discussed pro- MuAlid ḥearlier.ammad like Kufa and –it his nephew ʿAlī that began 92 was largely Sunn¯ı- there werebefore also Mu supportersḥammad’s of prophethoodAl¯ı. While and the continued version of untilUmar the does latter’s death. ʿAlī was one of not address the2.1. issue Group of succession 1:the The first Ibn fromAbbconvertsās the Narrative Prophet,and married it does Fā underscoreṭima, the Prophet’sAl¯ı’s closeness daughter. to When Muḥammad died, the Prophet and in thisThe sensefirstʿAl group displaysī led the of thepreparation a pro- traditAlidions tendency.of is his traced body backfor burial. to ʿAbd76 Because Allāh b. of ʿ Abbthis,ā hes. Ibndid ʿnotAbb takeās part in the Besides thesewas differencesrelated discussionsto the from Prop the hetabout previously through succession discussedhis father of the al- versionsProphet.ʿAbbās, of The the Ibn debates brotherAbbas,¯ onof Ab theMuu¯ dayḥammad’s the Prophet fa- died, and l-Zubayr and Hishther am¯ʿAbd b. All Sa ād,h, there and his is another mother, striking who was difference. the sister Thereof the isProphet’s no opposition wife Maymūna.12 At to obeying thethe Prophet’s time when instruction the story for is writing set, the material.death of Althoughthe Prophet,Al he¯ı does was notstill follow young, between ten the instructiona tond the fifteen letter (heyears memorizes old.13 Ibn them), ʿAbb heās ensuresis one of that the Mu mosth. ammad’s controversial words are Companions of preserved. TheMu mentionḥammad of withinAl¯ı’s good scholarly memory debates. assures In Muslim the reliability scholarship, of the he commands is revered as one of the and a reason isgreatest provided Qur forʾā notn exegetes obeying and the his order: nameAl appears¯ı is afraid in thatthe as Muānh.īdammad of countless will die traditions on the before his return.Prophet We will Mu alsoḥammad. encounter14 In non-Muslim this lack of oppositionscholarship, in the the authenticity discussionof of the the ascription of next narrative.the majority of these traditions is criticized. Herbert Berg and Claude Gilliot argue that Ibn ʿAbbās should be regarded as a symbolic figure to authenticate the information in the 2.5. Group 5: The A¯ isha bt. Ab¯ı Bakr Narrative tradition.15 The last groupFigure of traditions, 1 is a simplified revolving representation around the Prophet’s of the instructionchains showing to get only writing the earliest gener- materials, is ascribed to A¯ isha (d. 58/687), the favourite wife of the Prophet Muhammad ations of transmitters.16 The common link according to Figure 1 would. be Ibn ʿAbbās.17 In and the daughter of Abu¯ Bakr, the ﬁrst caliph of the Islamic empire after the death of order to determine whether these traditions are indeed from Ibn ʿAbbās, the texts (mutūn) Muhammad. According to the Islamic had¯ıth material, the Prophet married her a few years . of the traditions will be .compared. The textual analysis revealed six different versions of before the hijra after the death of his ﬁrst wife Khad¯ıja. At the time, A¯ isha was still very the tradition about the unwritten document, which correspond to the numbers indicated young. Although A¯ isha was not his only wife and their marriage to the Prophet may in Figure 1. Three of them go back to Saʿīd b. Jubayr (d. 94/714), a Kufan scholar of the also have been concluded from a political point of view to strengthen ties with Abu¯ Bakr, Qurʾān, jurisprudence and Ḥadīth, who, according to Muslim biographies, was a student she continued to hold a special position among Muhammad’s wives. Contrary to Umar b. of Ibn ʿAbbās.Error! Reference source not found. al-Fad. l’s version from Al¯ı of discussed above, the common belief is that the Prophet died in her arms, after which he was buried in her apartment.93 All the traditions in this group are attributed to the Ibn Ab¯ı Mulayka, who, like A¯ isha and Abu¯ Bakr, belonged to the Taym clan within the tribe of the Quraysh. Ibn Sa d considers Ibn Ab¯ı Mulayka a reliable (thiqa) transmitter, belonging to the second generation in Mecca, who narrated many ah. ad¯ ¯ıth (kath¯ır al-h. ad¯ıth), including traditions from A¯ isha and Ibn Abbas.¯ He died in Mecca in 117/735.94 Two slightly different versions can be distinguished within the A¯ isha traditions. The reconstruction of A¯ isha version 1 is:95 [ ... ] on the authority of A¯ isha, she said: The Messenger of God said to me during 96 his illness of which he died, “If you call (ud ¯ı/ud u¯) Abd al-Rah. man¯ b. Ab¯ı Bakr for me, then I will write a document for Abu¯ Bakr on which no one after me disagrees.” Then he said, “Leave it/him (da ¯ıhi)97. God forbid, that the believers disagree about Abu¯ Bakr.” The common link of version 2 is the Kufan scholar Abu¯ Mu awiya¯ al-D. ar¯ır (d. 194/810). His reconstructed text is:98 [ ... ] on the authority of A¯ isha, she said: When the Messenger of God became heavy in sickness, he said to Abd al-Rah. man¯ b. Ab¯ı Bakr, “Bring me a shoulder blade so that I can write a document for Abu¯ Bakr on which no one disagrees.” When Abd al-Rah. man¯ started to get up, he said, “God and the believers forbade disagreeing about Abu¯ Bakr.” The most striking differences between the two versions are the role of A¯ isha, the writing material and the wording of the last sentence. In version 1, the Prophet’s request is Religions 2021, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 16 of 33

present to carry out the Prophet’s command, yet he does not appear to give them time to comply with his (the women’s question immediately follows the Prophet’s request). Muḥammad’s reprimand would then have to be directed against ʿUmar. However, it is also addressed to other people, which would only make sense if a discussion took place amongst them. This shows that Hishām’s version is a secondary version. In Hishām’s version a switch is made to a first-person perspective: ʿUmar, the alleged narrator of this tradition, relates the event from his point of view (f.e., “we were”, “between us”, “I said”). In contrast with the versions of Ibn ʿAbbās and Abū l-Zubayr, he is an active participant in the event. The noise or discord motif occurs in both Ibn ʿAbbās’ and Abū l-Zubayr’s versions, but the ʿUmar motif only in those of Hijazi origin, versions 4 and 6 of Ibn ʿAbbās and the version of Abū l-Zubayr. The Medinan origin of the two traditions of Hishām, who is from Medina himself and provides a Medinan isnād, is consistent with the regional occurrence of the ʿUmar motif. Is Hishām’s version derived from Ibn ʿAbbās’ or Abū l-Zubayr’s? So far, Hishām’s version has more similarities to that of Ibn ʿAbbās than that of Abu l-Zubayr, such as that no location is mentioned, nor that Muḥammad is about to die, and the wording of the Prophet’s command. One part has not yet been discussed: the women motif. The women motif occurs in both of Hishām b. Saʿd’s traditions from ʿUmar and can therefore be traced back to him and dated to the second quarter or the middle of the second Islamic century, since Hishām died in 160/776–7. We have already encountered the (one) woman motif in two other versions: Ibn ʿAbbās versions 5 and 6. In two of the three traditions of Ibn ʿAbbās version 5 of Layth b. Abī Sulaym, a woman rebukes the Religions 2021, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 3 of 33 people present for shouting instead of following the command of the Prophet. Although what she says is different from Hishām’s version, it conveys the same sentiment: a rebuke for not following the Prophet’s command (“Woe unto you! [It is] the command of the evolved and how, over Messengertime and a ofcross God!” specif (wayic ḥregions,akum ʿahd other rasū textuall Allāh)). motifs have been added and omitted, creating Thenew womannarratives. motif in Layth’s traditions can be dated to the second quarter of the second Islamic century, since Layth died in 138/755–6 or 143/760–1. In Ibn ʿAbbās version 2. Isnād-cum-matn Analys6, theis Appliedwoman is identified as Zaynab, one of the Prophet’s wives. Although her reprimand Based on the asānīdfollows, the traditions a statement in which by ʿ Umar,the motif she appears addresses can severalbe divided people, in five revealing that part of the groups. The first groupstory contains is missing traditions from ascribed this tradition. to the The famous woman Qur’ motifān scholar in this traditionand is more difficult to Companion of the Prophet,date, ʿ Abdbecause Allā hthere ibn ʿisAbb onlyās (d.one 67/68 tradition6–7). Theof it. majority It is part of of the Ibn tra- Saʿd’s work in which he ditions (35) belong to thiscollected group. nineThe secondtraditions group about10 is theascribed unwritten to the document. Companion75 Of Jā birthese nine traditions, two b. ʿAbd Allāh (d. 78/697)contain and contains the woman seven traditiomotif, forns. whichThe third Ibn group, Saʿd bothconsisting times oflists two his teacher al-Wāqidī as Religions 2021, 12, 579 20 of 32 traditions, is traced backinformant. to the Companion However, andof these second nine, caliph Ibn Sa ʿUmaʿd tracesr b. foural-Kha traditionsṭṭāb (d. back to al-Wāqidī, two 23/644). The fourth group,of whichwith five do traditions,not contain is theascribed woman to Mumotif.ḥammad’s It is therefore nephew unlikely and that Ibn Saʿd or al- son-in-law, ʿAlī b. AbīW Ṭāāqidlib ī (d.included 40/661), the and woman the lastmotif grou in thesep with two the traditions. second That largest would put the dating of number of traditions (15)the11 women is tracedaddressed motif back in Ibn to to ʿ ĀʿA ¯bb ʾ ishaāssh versiona (AA2,(d. 58 6 AA4,/ 6with78), AA7)( asl-Waid āudtqido ¯ıh)ī’sa orv informant,e to b aeen group Ibr of unknownāhīm b. Ism personsāʿīl, (ud u¯)99, Muḥammad’s favourite whowife died and indaughterwho 165/781–2, must of getthe i.e., herfirst to thebrother caliph same Ab Abdperiodū Bakr. al-Ra as AllHishh. m ofan,¯ā m’s.the while alleged The in woman version motif 2 from (either Abu ¯one Mu awiya¯ al- first transmit-ters of theseor traditionsmore women)D. arbelonged¯ır, herthus brother toseems the iscircle to already have of Mu been presentḥammad’s introduced and Muintimah. ammadintotes theand directly story of instructs the unwritten him to get writing the sīra mate-rial describesdocument their frequent inmaterials. the secondinteraction In versionquarter with 1, of theA ¯the Prophet.isha second takes Islamic an active century. role and Unlike the story the isʿUma toldr from motif, a first-person The ICM analysis beginsthe woman with perspective,motifa brief is biography not restricted while of in the versionto anyindividuals particular 2 she is to (only) region whom the (Layth the source tra- and of his the informant account and Ṭāw sheūs relates the ditions are attributed perare group. not from Totradition Medina,obtain froman but overview from the third-person Kufa of andwhich Janad point people (Yemen), of view.have respectively),handed but occurs only in down the tradition accordingtraditions to the that asā nwereīInd and version not to widespread, identify 1, the Prophet’scommon indicati transmitters requestng that does they per not were group, include not widely any reference accepted. to writing material, the asānīd have been drawn in a figure.while inThe version earliest 2he common asks for transmitter, a shoulder blade. the so-called After the request, Muh. ammad tells A¯ isha common link, is by way2.4. of Grouphypothesis 4:in The version assumed ʿAlī b. 1,Ab “Leavetoī Ṭ ābelib theNarrative it/him” distributor (da ¯ıhi of)’, the which tradition is missing in in version 2. In version 2 it is question. Subsequently, the Themut ūtraditionsn saidof the that traditions of Abdthe penultimate al-Ra withinh. man¯ a givengroup stands groupare up all (dhahaba aretraced first backAbd com- al-Rato Muh. mḥammad’san¯ li-yaquma¯ nephewor qama¯ Abd al- 100 pared with each other andʿAl thenī b. Ab wiī thṬRaā thelibh. m (d.an¯groups) 40/661),and discussed thisthe fourth isagain earlier. caliph missing of the in Muslim version 1.empire. The last The sentence Islamic tradition looks similar in the material describestranslation, a strong but is bond worded between differently. Muḥ Versionammad 1and has hisma adhanephew¯ Allah¯ ʿAl anī yakhtalifathat began al-mu minuna¯ 2.1. Group 1: The Ibn Abbbeforeās Narrative Muḥ(God ammad’s forbids prophethood that the believers and continued disagree), until while the version latter’s 2death. has ab ʿa¯Al Allī wasah¯ wa-l-mu one of minuna an The first group of thethe traditfirst convertsionsyukhtalafa is traced and(God married back and to ʿF theAbdāṭima, believers All theāh b.Prophet’s forbade ʿAbbās. disagreeing). daughter.Ibn ʿAbbā Whens Muḥammad died, ¯ was related to the ProphetʿAl īthrough led the preparationhis fatherBoth Aal- ofʿishaAbb his bodyā versionss, the for brother burial. take placeof76 BecauseMu duringḥammad’s of thethis, lastfa- he did days not of take the part Prophet’s in the illness. In ther ʿAbd Allāh, and hisdiscussions mother, whoversion about was succession the 1, this sister is referredof of the the Prophet’s Prophet. to as “during The wife debates Maym the disease ūonna. the12 heAt day died the from”Prophet (f¯ı died, marad .andihi alladh ¯ı mata¯ the time when the story is set, the deathf¯ıhi) and of inthe version Prophet, 2as he “when was still he young, became between heavy in ten sickness” (lamma¯ thaqula). The former and fifteen years old.13 Ibn ʿAbbāexpressions is one of is the identical most controversial to that of Ibn CompanionsAbbas¯ version of 6 from Ibn Sa d, but it is such a Muḥammad within scholarly debates.general In Muslim wording scholarship, that it cannot he is be revered seen as as evidence one of the of interdependent transmission. The ¯ ¯ ¯ ¯ ¯ greatest Qurʾān exegetes and his namelatter appears is unique in the to as Abānuīd Muof countlessawiya al- traditionsD. arır’s version on the 2 from A isha. In both A isha versions, the Prophet addresses one person, similar to the Al¯ı narrative discussed above. Prophet Muḥammad.14 In non-Muslim scholarship, the authenticity of the ascription of ¯ 101 the majority of these traditions is criticizedMuh. ammad. Herbert wants BergAbd and al-Rah Cla. mudean,¯ Gilliot the son argue of Ab thatu¯ Bakr and a full brother of A isha , Ibn ʿAbbās should be regarded as a tosymbolic write a figure document to authenticate for Abu¯ Bakr. the information Both Abd al-Rain theh. man¯ and Abu¯ Bakr have not been tradition.15 mentioned as participants in the story about the unwritten document of the Prophet in ¯ Figure 1 is a simplified representationany of the of the discussed chains showing versions, only and the their earliest appearance gener- is therefore unique to the A isha versions. Similar to the Al¯ı version of Umar b. al-Fadl, the people present, A¯ isha or ations of transmitters.16 The common link according to Figure 1 would be Ibn ʿAbbās.17 In . Abd al-Rahman¯ b. Ab¯ı Bakr, do not dispute the Prophet’s instruction. order to determine whether these traditions are. indeed from Ibn ʿAbbās, the texts (mutūn) For the first time ever, the document is not intended for the community—mentioned of the traditions will be compared. The textual analysis revealed six different versions of explicitly in some versions, “li-ummat¯ı” (for my community), and implicit in others, “lakum” the tradition about the unwritten document, which correspond to the numbers indicated (for you)—but for one person. The purpose of the document is to avoid disagreement. in Figure 1. Three of them go back to Saʿīd b. Jubayr (d. 94/714), a Kufan scholar of the We encountered this before in Ibn Abbas¯ version 5 of the Kufan transmitter Layth b. Ab¯ı Qurʾān, jurisprudence and Ḥadīth, who, according to Muslim biographies, was a student Sulayman¯ (d. 138/755–6 or 143/760–1). Since both Layth and the common link of A¯ isha of Ibn ʿAbbās.Error! Reference source not found. version 2, Abu¯ Mu awiya¯ al-D. ar¯ır, and the possible common links of A¯ isha version 1, 102 Muh. ammad b. Aban¯ al-Ja f¯ı (d. 175/792) or Abd al- Az¯ız b. Rufay (d. 130/787–8), ( Abd Allah¯ b. Ad¯ı 1997) lived in Kufa, the disagreement motif appears to have regional origins. The disagreement, in both A¯ isha versions, concerns a dispute over Abu¯ Bakr, as shown in the last sentence, “God and the believers forbade disagreeing about Abu¯ Bakr”. Not only God, but also the “the believers” reject it, thereby implying that disagreement equals non-belief. Given the time at which this story takes place, just before the death of the Prophet, this seems to refer to the disagreement that arises over Abu¯ Bakr’s succession of Muh. ammad as leader of the Muslim community. A second similarity to Ibn Abbas¯ version 5 of Layth b. Ab¯ı Sulayman¯ is the shoulder blade mentioned in A¯ isha version 2 of Abu¯ Mu awiya¯ al-D. ar¯ır, which shows the interdependency of the traditions of Abu¯ Mu awiya¯ al-D. ar¯ır and Layth b. Ab¯ı Sulayman.¯ According to al-Mizz¯ı, Abu¯ Mu awiya¯ al-D. ar¯ır transmits from Layth, which corresponds to the findings of the isnad-cum-matn¯ analysis.103 The shoulder blade motif in Abu¯ Mu awiya¯ al-D. ar¯ır’s version from A¯ isha is therefore most likely from Layth. Something else seems to have happened with the disagreement motif. Except for Ibn Abbas¯ version 5 of Layth, we only encountered the disagreement motif with Ibn Ab¯ı Mulayka, where it is part of the basic narrative. According to al-Mizz¯ı, one of Layth’s informants is Ibn Ab¯ı Mulayka104 and therefore the latter is very likely the source of Layth’s disagreement motif. However, there is even more to the A¯ isha narrative. The similarities of both A¯ isha versions indicate that they are from the same source, Ibn Ab¯ı Mulayka (d. 117/735), according to Figure6. The common motifs of the two A¯ isha versions thus date to the Religions 2021, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 16 of 33

present to carry out the Prophet’s command, yet he does not appear to give them time to comply with his (the women’s question immediately follows the Prophet’s request). Muḥammad’s reprimand would then have to be directed against ʿUmar. However, it is also addressed to other people, which would only make sense if a discussion took place amongst them. This shows that Hishām’s version is a secondary version. In Hishām’s version a switch is made to a first-person perspective: ʿUmar, the alleged narrator of this tradition, relates the event from his point of view (f.e., “we were”, “between us”, “I said”). In contrast with the versions of Ibn ʿAbbās and Abū l-Zubayr, he is an active participant in the event. The noise or discord motif occurs in both Ibn ʿAbbās’ and Abū l-Zubayr’s versions, but the ʿUmar motif only in those of Hijazi origin, versions 4 and 6 of Ibn ʿAbbās and the version of Abū l-Zubayr. The Medinan origin of the two traditions of Hishām, who is from Medina himself and provides a Medinan isnād, is consistent with the regional occurrence of the ʿUmar motif. Is Hishām’s version derived from Ibn ʿAbbās’ or Abū l-Zubayr’s? So far, Hishām’s version has more similarities to that of Ibn ʿAbbās than that of Abu l-Zubayr, such as that no location is mentioned, nor that Muḥammad is about to die, and the wording of the Prophet’s command. One part has not yet been discussed: the women motif. The women motif occurs in both of Hishām b. Saʿd’s traditions from ʿUmar and can therefore be traced back to him and dated to the second quarter or the middle of the second Islamic century, since Hishām died in 160/776–7. We have already encountered the (one) woman motif in two other versions: Ibn ʿAbbās versions 5 and 6. In two of the three traditions of Ibn ʿAbbās version 5 of Layth b. Abī Sulaym, a woman rebukes the Religions 2021, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 3 of 33 people present for shouting instead of following the command of the Prophet. Although what she says is different from Hishām’s version, it conveys the same sentiment: a rebuke for not following the Prophet’s command (“Woe unto you! [It is] the command of the evolved and how, over Messengertime and a ofcross God!” specif (wayic ḥregions,akum ʿahd other rasū textuall Allāh)). motifs have been added and omitted, creating Thenew womannarratives. motif in Layth’s traditions can be dated to the second quarter of the second Islamic century, since Layth died in 138/755–6 or 143/760–1. In Ibn ʿAbbās version Religions 2021, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 2. Isnād-cum-matn Analysis Applied 21 of 33 6, the woman is identified as Zaynab, one of the Prophet’s wives. Although her reprimand Based on the asānīdfollows, the traditions a statement in which by ʿ Umar,the motif she appears addresses can severalbe divided people, in five revealing that part of the groups. The first groupstory contains is missing traditions from ascribed this tradition. to the The famous woman Qur’ motifān scholar in this traditionand is more difficult to Religions 2021, 12, 579 21 of 32 However, there is even moreCompa to the nionʿĀʾisha of the narrative. Prophet,date, The ʿ Abdbecause similarities Allā hthere ibn of ʿisbothAbb only āʿĀs (d.oneʾisha 67/68 tradition 6–7). Theof it. majority It is part of of the Ibn tra- Saʿd’s work in which he versions indicate that they are fromditions the (35) same belong source, to thisIbncollected grouAbī Mulaykap. nineThe secondtraditions (d. 117/735), group about10 ac-is theascribed unwritten to the document. Companion75 Of Jā birthese nine traditions, two cording to Figure 6. The commonb. motifsʿAbd All of ātheh (d. two 78/697) ʿĀʾishacontain and versions contains the womanthus seven date traditiomotif, to the forns. end whichThe third Ibn group, Saʿd bothconsisting times oflists two his teacher al-Wāqidī as endof the of first the first or the or thebeginning beginning of ofthetraditions, the second second isIslamic Islamictraced century. century.backinformant. to Thethe The ḥCompanionh.adad However,ī¯ıthth materialmaterial andof these contains second nine, caliph Ibn Sa ʿUmaʿd tracesr b. foural-Kha traditionsṭṭāb (d. back to al-Wāqidī, two several traditions that are attributed23/644). to IbnThe AbAb fourth¯ıī MulaykaMulayka group,of andand whichwith thatthat five do taketake traditions,not placeplace contain duringduring is theascribed thethewoman to Mumotif.ḥammad’s It is therefore nephew unlikely and that Ibn Saʿd or al- Prophet’s illness. illness. From From these these traditions traditionsson-in-law, a cl aear clearʿAl pictureī picture b. Ab emergesīW emergesṬāāqidlib īin (d.included which in 40/661), which the the Prophet andthe woman Prophet the pre- lastmotif grou in thesep with two the traditions. second That largest would put the dating of prefersfers Abū Ab Bakru¯ Bakr over overothers others in different innumber different settings. of settings. traditions Various Various phrases (15)the11 women is phrasesfrom traced motifthe from backʿĀ inʾisha Ibnthe to narrativeʿ ĀʿA ¯bb ʾ ishaāssh versiona (d. 58 6/ 6with78), asl-Waid ātqido hī’sav informant,e been Ibrāhīm b. Ismāʿīl, narrativeare also present are also in present these intraditions, theseM traditions,uḥ ammad’ssuch as such “duringfavourite as “during his whowife illness hisdiedand illness indaughterof 165/781–2, which of which ofhe the i.e.,died” he first died”to the (caliphfī same Ab periodū Bakr. as AllHish ofā m’s.the alleged The woman motif (either one 105105 (maraf¯ı maraḍihid. ihialladh alladhī m¯ıā mtaata¯ fīhi f¯ıhi), ),“call “call Abfirst Abū u¯transmit-Bakr Bakr for for tersme” me” of ( (ud udtheseʿūuh¯orh l traditionsmoreī¯ı (Ab¯ıī Bakr)women)Bakr) belonged)) , , thus“God “God toseems andthe thecirclethe to have of Mu beenḥammad’s introduced intima intotes theand story of the unwritten believers forbidforbid that”that” ((yayaʾba¯ā AllAllah¯ātheh dhdh salika¯īāralika mate- wa-l-muwa-l-murial describesʾminminuna¯ūnadocument).). 106their106 IbnIbn frequent Abin ¯ıīthe MulaykaMulayka secondinteraction narratesnarratesquarter with of the the Prophet. second Islamic century. Unlike the ʿUmar motif, from IbnIbn ʿAbbAbbas¯ās107107 and thusthus appearsappearsto toThe be be theICM the one one analysis who who combined combinedbeginsthe woman with the the motifmotifa motifbriefof is biographyof thenot the unwrittenrestricted unwrit- of the to anyindividuals particular to region whom (Layth the tra- and his informant Ṭāwūs documentten document with with the the motif motif of theof theditions disagreement disagreement are attributed over over Ab Ab peru¯areū Bakr, Bakr,group. not justfrom just To as as Medina, heobtain he may may an buthave have overview from donedone Kufa of andwhich Janad people (Yemen), have respectively),handed but occurs only in with other motifs. down the tradition accordingtraditions to the that asā nwereīd and not to widespread, identify common indicati transmittersng that they per were group, not widely accepted. the asānīd have been drawn in a figure. The earliest common transmitter, the so-called common link, is by way2.4. of Grouphypothesis 4: The assumed ʿAlī b. Ab toī Ṭ ābelib theNarrative distributor of the tradition in question. Subsequently, the Themut ūtraditionsn of the traditions of the penultimate within a givengroup groupare all aretraced first back com- to Muḥammad’s nephew pared with each other andʿAl thenī b. Ab wiī thṬā thelib (d.groups 40/661), discussed the fourth earlier. caliph of the Muslim empire. The Islamic tradition material describes a strong bond between Muḥammad and his nephew ʿAlī that began 2.1. Group 1: The Ibn Abbbeforeās Narrative Muḥ ammad’s prophethood and continued until the latter’s death. ʿAlī was one of The first group of thethe traditfirst convertsions is traced and married back to ʿFAbdāṭima, All theāh b.Prophet’s ʿAbbās. daughter.Ibn ʿAbbā Whens Muḥammad died, was related to the ProphetʿAl īthrough led the preparationhis father al- ofʿAbb his bodyās, the for brother burial. of76 BecauseMuḥammad’s of this, fa- he did not take part in the ther ʿAbd Allāh, and hisdiscussions mother, who about was succession the sister of of the the Prophet’s Prophet. The wife debates Maym ūonna. the12 At day the Prophet died, and the time when the story is set, the death of the Prophet, he was still young, between ten and fifteen years old.13 Ibn ʿAbbās is one of the most controversial Companions of Muḥammad within scholarly debates. In Muslim scholarship, he is revered as one of the greatest Qurʾān exegetes and his name appears in the asānīd of countless traditions on the Prophet Muḥammad.14 In non-Muslim scholarship, the authenticity of the ascription of the majority of these traditions is criticized. Herbert Berg and Claude Gilliot argue that Ibn ʿAbbās should be regarded as a symbolic figure to authenticate the information in the tradition.15 Figure 1 is a simplified representation of the chains showing only the earliest generations of transmitters.16 The common link according to Figure 1 would be Ibn ʿAbbās.17 In order to determine whether these traditions are indeed from Ibn ʿAbbās, the texts (mutūn) of the traditions will be compared. The textual analysis revealed six different versions of the tradition about the unwritten document, which correspond to the numbers indicated in Figure 1. Three of them go back to Saʿīd b. Jubayr (d. 94/714), a Kufan scholar of the FigureFigure 6. The 6. isnTheād isnbundlead¯ bundle of Ibn of Ab Ibnī Mulayka’s Ab¯ı Mulayka’s traditions traditions from fromʿĀʾishaA¯ bt.isha Ab bt.ī Bakr. Ab¯ı Bakr. Qurʾān, jurisprudence and Ḥadīth, who, according to Muslim biographies, was a student Error! Reference source not found. 3. Conclusions of Ibn ʿAbbās. The ICM analysis of thethe unwrittenunwritten documentdocument narratives has shown that there areare roughly fivefive differentdifferent narrativesnarratives inin thethe narrativenarrative materialmaterial aboutabout thethe unwrittenunwritten documentdocument that MuhammadMuhammad intended to writewrite duringduring hishis illness.illness. ByBy attributingattributing thosethose narrativesnarratives toto companions of the Prophet, they appear to bebe separateseparate narratives,narratives, butbut thethe similaritysimilarity inin setting and in the Prophet’s request suggests that there might bebe a connection between thethe traditions. The ICM analysis helped toto entangleentangle thethe interwoveninterwoven traditiontradition complexes.complexes. ByBy comparing the chains of transmission with the texts, it was possiblepossible to datedate thethe differentdifferent narratives, identify the oldest kernel of each narrative and to determine who is resposible for certain parts parts in in the the account. account. By By separating separating the the earlierst earlierst core core and and later later motifs, motifs, it is pos- it is possiblesible to make to make much much more more precise precise statements statements about about possible possible historical historical elements elements of these s¯ıraīra stories. One of the earliest versions is ascribed to Ibn ʿAbbAbbas.¯ās. The event takes place whenwhen thethe Prophet isis veryvery sick. sick. Several Several persons persons are are present present when when he askshe asks for anfor inkpotan inkpot and somethingand some- tothing write to onwrite to prepareon to prepare a document a document for his for people his people after which after which they will they not will go not astray. go astray. What heWhat wants he wants to write to remainswrite remains unknown, unknown, because be aftercause his after request his request a commotion a commotion arises among arises those present, since they think the request was caused by his illness. At one point the Prophet orders them to leave. The earliest transmission of this basic narrative was probably oral and circulated in the first few generations mainly in Iraq and the Hijaz. A second,

Religions 2021, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 16 of 33

present to carry out the Prophet’s command, yet he does not appear to give them time to comply with his (the women’s question immediately follows the Prophet’s request). Muḥammad’s reprimand would then have to be directed against ʿUmar. However, it is also addressed to other people, which would only make sense if a discussion took place amongst them. This shows that Hishām’s version is a secondary version. In Hishām’s version a switch is made to a first-person perspective: ʿUmar, the alleged narrator of this tradition, relates the event from his point of view (f.e., “we were”, “between us”, “I said”). In contrast with the versions of Ibn ʿAbbās and Abū l-Zubayr, he is an active participant in the event. The noise or discord motif occurs in both Ibn ʿAbbās’ and Abū l-Zubayr’s versions, but the ʿUmar motif only in those of Hijazi origin, versions 4 and 6 of Ibn ʿAbbās and the version of Abū l-Zubayr. The Medinan origin of the two traditions of Hishām, who is from Medina himself and provides a Medinan isnād, is consistent with the regional occurrence of the ʿUmar motif. Is Hishām’s version derived from Ibn ʿAbbās’ or Abū l-Zubayr’s? So far, Hishām’s version has more similarities to that of Ibn ʿAbbās than that of Abu l-Zubayr, such as that no location is mentioned, nor that Muḥammad is about to die, and the wording of the Prophet’s command. One part has not yet been discussed: the women motif. The women motif occurs in both of Hishām b. Saʿd’s traditions from ʿUmar and can therefore be traced back to him and dated to the second quarter or the middle of the second Islamic century, since Hishām died in 160/776–7. We have already encountered the (one) woman motif in two other versions: Ibn ʿAbbās versions 5 and 6. In two of the three traditions of Ibn ʿAbbās version 5 of Layth b. Abī Sulaym, a woman rebukes the people present for shouting instead of following the command of the Prophet. Although what she says is different from Hishām’s version, it conveys the same sentiment: a rebuke for not following the Prophet’s command (“Woe unto you! [It is] the command of the Messenger of God!” (wayḥakum ʿahd rasūl Allāh)). The woman motif in Layth’s traditions can be dated to the second quarter of the second Islamic century, since Layth died in 138/755–6 or 143/760–1. In Ibn ʿAbbās version 6, the woman is identified as Zaynab, one of the Prophet’s wives. Although her reprimand follows a statement by ʿUmar, she addresses several people, revealing that part of the story is missing from this tradition. The woman motif in this tradition is more difficult to date, because there is only one tradition of it. It is part of Ibn Saʿd’s work in which he collected nine traditions about the unwritten document.75 Of these nine traditions, two contain the woman motif, for which Ibn Saʿd both times lists his teacher al-Wāqidī as Religions 2021, 12, 579 22 of 32 informant. However, of these nine, Ibn Saʿd traces four traditions back to al-Wāqidī, two of which do not contain the woman motif. It is therefore unlikely that Ibn Saʿd or al- Wāqidī included the woman motif in these two traditions. That would put the dating of distinctive narrative,the women attributed motif to J abir¯in Ibn b. ʿAbd bbās All versionah,¯ was 6 with circulating al-Wāqid in theī’s informant, same region. Ibrāhīm b. Ismāʿīl, The common corewho of these died two in 165/781–2, stories points i.e., toto athe sommon same period source as that Hish canām’s. be dated The woman at least motif (either one to the second halfor of more the first women) Islamic thus century—the seems to actualhave been event introduced or a well-known into the story story on of the unwritten the unwritten document.document Although in the second the attribution quarter of to the Ibn secondAbbas¯ Islamic and Jabir¯ century. b. Abd Unlike Allah¯ the ʿUmar motif, could not be confirmed,the woman the characteristic motif is not restricted features ofto bothany particular versions indicateregion (Layth that it and cannot his informant Ṭāwūs be excluded. Ibn areAbb notas¯ andfrom Jabir¯ Medina, were but Companions from Kufa of and the Janad Prophet (Yemen), and had respectively), access to him. but occurs only in Unlike later versionstraditions of that the story,were theirnot widespread, texts relate the indicati storyng itself that in they an almost were detachednot widely accepted. way (except for the emotional context in which four Ibn Abbas¯ versions are placed). Further remarkable2.4. elements Group 4: The of these ʿAlī b. earliest Abī Ṭālib versions Narrative are the opposition to the writing of the document, evenThe accusing traditions the Prophetof the penultimate of being delirious, group are the all lacktraced of clarityback to aboutMuḥammad’s nephew its content and theʿAl Prophet’sī b. Abī Ṭā abandonmentlib (d. 40/661), of the writing fourth thecaliph document. of the Muslim These empire. ambiguous The Islamic tradition elements, which canmaterial be dated describes to at least a strong half a centurybond between after the Mu deathḥammad of the and Prophet, his nephew speak ʿAlī that began for an actual eventbefore rather Mu thanḥammad’s a story. prophethood The later additions and continued revealed until by the the ICM latter’s analysis death. ʿAlī was one of fill in the gaps inthe this first narrative converts or and explain married ambiguities. Fāṭima, the For Prophet’s example, daughter. later transmitters When Muḥammad died, of the Ibn Abbas¯ narrative added their own details. Some of these can be traced back to Religions 2021, 12, x FOR PEERʿAlī REVIEWled the preparation of his body for burial.76 Because of this, he did not take part in the 3 of 33 certain narrators, such as the dating on Thursday, while others are of regional origin. An discussions about succession of the Prophet. The debates on the day the Prophet died, and example of the latter is the identification of Umar b. al-Khat.t.ab¯ as one of those present. The Umar motif is part of traditions of Hijazi origin and the earliest dateable occurrence is evolved and how, over time and across specific regions, other textual motifs have been the first quarter of the second Islamic century, based on Ibn Abbas¯ version 4 from al-Zuhr¯ı added and omitted, creating new narratives. (d. 124/742) and the Jabir¯ traditions from Abu¯ l-Zubayr (d. 128/746). Because al-Zuhr¯ı and Abu¯ l-Zubayr transmit from each other and their versions contain similarities, there seems 2. Isnād-cum-matn Analysis Applied to be interdependency in the transmission, which speaks for inclusion of the Umar motif in Hijazi traditions instead of suppressionBased on of the the asUmarānīd, the motif traditions in Iraqi traditions.in which the Another motif laterappears can be divided in five addition is the woman (orgroups. women) The motif. first It seemsgroup tocontains have been trad introduceditions ascribed into theto the story famous Qur’ān scholar and of the unwritten documentCompa in the secondnion of quarterthe Prophet, of the ʿ secondAbd All Islamicāh ibn century.ʿAbbās (d. Unlike 67/68 the6–7). The majority of the tra- Umar motif, the woman motifditions is not(35) restricted belong to to this any grou particularp. The regionsecond but group occurs10 is onlyascribed in to the Companion Jābir traditions that were not widespread,b. ʿAbd All indicatingāh (d. 78/697) that and they contains were not seven widely traditio accepted.ns. The Half third group, consisting of two a century later, in the secondtraditions, half of theis traced second back Islamic to the century, Companion the threefold and second command caliph ʿUmar b. al-Khaṭṭāb (d. motif is introduced into the23 story./644). The The introduction fourth group, of thewith motif fivealso traditions, originated is ascribed in a specific to Muḥammad’s nephew and region, in Iraq in the vicinityson-in-law, of Basra andʿAlī Kufa. b. Abī Ṭālib (d. 40/661), and the last group with the second largest The two most deviatingnumber narratives of traditions are those (15) of 11Al is¯ı b. traced Ab¯ı T. backalib¯ and to ʿĀA¯ ʾ isha.sha ( Bothd. 58/678), said to have been narratives consist of combinationsMuḥammad’s of motifs favourite from wife different and stories,daughter including of the first that caliph of the Abū Bakr. All of the alleged unwritten document. Thefirst document transmit- storyters is of used these to traditions spotlight onebelonged person, to theAl¯ı circle and Ab of u¯Muḥammad’s intimates and Bakr, respectively. Both narrativesthe sīra mate- are relatedrial describes to the their discussion frequent of interaction the succession with of the the Prophet. Prophet, which may be why bothThe narratives ICM analysis not only begins refer with to the a brief content biography of the document of the individuals to whom the tra- but also contain no oppositionditions to Mu areh. ammad’s attributed wish per to group. write it.To Although obtain an the overviewAl¯ı narrative of which people have handed does not explicitly addressdown the the issue tradition of succession according like to the asA¯ānīishad and narrative, to identify it common does transmitters per group, underscore Al¯ı’s closenessthe to theasān Prophetīd have andbeen in drawn this sense in a displays figure. The a pro- earliestAlid tendency.common transmitter, the so-called The narrative probably originatedcommon in link, a period is by and way region of hypothesis of pro- Alid assumed support. to The be theA¯ ishadistributor of the tradition in narrative emerged earlier,question. towards Subsequently, the end of the the first mut orū then ofbeginning the traditions of the within second a given group are first com- Islamic century. After thepared Ibn Abb withas¯ each narrative other and it is then the mostwith commonthe groups narrative discussed in earlier. the h. ad¯ıth collections. While the storyline of the earliest versions of the unwritten document is still visible in the Al¯ı narrative,2.1. Group in 1: the TheA ¯Ibnisha Abb narrativeās Narrative it has been snowed under by motifs from other traditions. However,The first thatgroup is anof the interwoven traditions tradition is traced complex back to thatʿAbd still Allāh b. ʿAbbās. Ibn ʿAbbās has to be untangled. was related to the Prophet through his father al-ʿAbbās, the brother of Muḥammad’s father ʿAbd Allāh, and his mother, who was the sister of the Prophet’s wife Maymūna.12 At Funding: This research received no external funding. the time when the story is set, the death of the Prophet, he was still young, between ten Data Availability Statement:aThend datafifteen referred years to inold this.13 studyIbn ʿAbb are openlyās is availableone of the in DANS most EASY controversial Companions of archive at https://doi.org/10.17026/dans-xsv-bg4xMuḥammad within scholarly (accessed ondebates. 23 July In 2021). Muslim scholarship, he is revered as one of the Conflicts of Interest: The authorgreatest declares Qur noʾā conflictn exegetes of interest. and his name appears in the asānīd of countless traditions on the Prophet Muḥammad.14 In non-Muslim scholarship, the authenticity of the ascription of the majority of these traditions is criticized. Herbert Berg and Claude Gilliot argue that Ibn ʿAbbās should be regarded as a symbolic figure to authenticate the information in the tradition.15 Figure 1 is a simplified representation of the chains showing only the earliest generations of transmitters.16 The common link according to Figure 1 would be Ibn ʿAbbās.17 In order to determine whether these traditions are indeed from Ibn ʿAbbās, the texts (mutūn) of the traditions will be compared. The textual analysis revealed six different versions of the tradition about the unwritten document, which correspond to the numbers indicated in Figure 1. Three of them go back to Saʿīd b. Jubayr (d. 94/714), a Kufan scholar of the Qurʾān, jurisprudence and Ḥadīth, who, according to Muslim biographies, was a student of Ibn ʿAbbās.Error! Reference source not found. Religions 2021, 12, 579 23 of 32 Religions 2021, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 24 of 33

AppendixAppendix AA

Figure A1. Cont.

ReligionsReligions2021 2021, 12, 12, 579, x FOR PEER REVIEW 2524 ofof 3233

Religions 2021, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 16 of 33

2.4. Group 4: The ʿAlī b. Abī Ṭālib Narrative The traditions of the penultimate group are all traced back to Muḥammad’s nephew ʿAlī b. Abī Ṭālib (d. 40/661), the fourth caliph of the Muslim empire. The Islamic tradition material describes a strong bond between Muḥammad and his nephew ʿAlī that began before Muḥammad’s prophethood and continued until the latter’s death. ʿAlī was one of the first converts and married Fāṭima, the Prophet’s daughter. When Muḥammad died, ʿAlī led the preparation of his body for burial.76 Because of this, he did not take part in the discussions about succession of the Prophet. The debates on the day the Prophet died, and Religions 2021, 12, 579 25 of 32 Religions 2021, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 26 of 33

AppendixAppendix B B

Religions 2021, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 16 of 33

present to carry out the Prophet’s command, yet he does not appear to give them time to comply with his (the women’s question immediately follows the Prophet’s request). Muḥammad’s reprimand would then have to be directed against ʿUmar. However, it is also addressed to other people, which would only make sense if a discussion took place amongst them. This shows that Hishām’s version is a secondary version. In Hishām’s version a switch is made to a first-person perspective: ʿUmar, the alleged narrator of this tradition, relates the event from his point of view (f.e., “we were”, “between us”, “I said”). In contrast with the versions of Ibn ʿAbbās and Abū l-Zubayr, he is an active participant in the event. The noise or discord motif occurs in both Ibn ʿAbbās’ and Abū l-Zubayr’s versions, but the ʿUmar motif only in those of Hijazi origin, versions 4 and 6 of Ibn ʿAbbās and the version of Abū l-Zubayr. The Medinan origin of the two traditions of Hishām, who is from Medina himself and provides a Medinan isnād, is consistent with the regional occurrence of the ʿUmar motif. Is Hishām’s version derived from Ibn ʿAbbās’ or Abū l-Zubayr’s? So far, Hishām’s version has more similarities to that of Ibn ʿAbbās than that of Abu l-Zubayr, such as that no location is mentioned, nor that Muḥammad is about to die, and the wording of the Prophet’s command. One part has not yet been discussed: the women motif. The women motif occurs in both of Hishām b. Saʿd’s traditions from ʿUmar and can therefore be traced back to him and dated to the second quarter or the middle of the second Islamic century, since Hishām died in 160/776–7. We have already encountered the (one) woman motif in two other versions: Ibn ʿAbbās versions 5 and 6. In two of the three traditions of Ibn ʿAbbās version 5 of Layth b. Abī Sulaym, a woman rebukes the people present for shouting instead of following the command of the Prophet. Although what she says is different from Hishām’s version, it conveys the same sentiment: a rebuke for not following the Prophet’s command (“Woe unto you! [It is] the command of the Messenger of God!” (wayḥakum ʿahd rasūl Allāh)). The woman motif in Layth’s traditions can be dated to the second quarter of the second Islamic century, since Layth died in 138/755–6 or 143/760–1. In Ibn ʿAbbās version 6, the woman is identified as Zaynab, one of the Prophet’s wives. Although her reprimand follows a statement by ʿUmar, she addresses several people, revealing that part of the story is missing from this tradition. The woman motif in this tradition is more difficult to Religions 2021, 12, 579 date, because there is only one tradition of it. It26 is ofpart 32 of Ibn Saʿd’s work in which he collected nine traditions about the unwritten document.75 Of these nine traditions, two contain the woman motif, for which Ibn Saʿd both times lists his teacher al-Wāqidī as informant. However, of these nine, Ibn Saʿd traces four traditions back to al-Wāqidī, two Notes of which do not contain the woman motif. It is therefore unlikely that Ibn Saʿd or al- 1 In order to be able to date the traditions, the year is mentioned inW whichāqid theī included person died the according woman motif to the hijrin ¯theseı era (the two first traditions. year) That would put the dating of and according to the C.E. era (the second year). (Ibn Kath¯ır n.d.the), IV: women p. 451; motif (Ibn H .inajar Ibn al- ʿAsqal bbās an¯version¯ı 1960), 6 VIII: with pp. al-W 132–35āqidī’s informant, Ibrāhīm b. Ismāʿīl, no. 4431–4432 (al-h. ad¯ıth al-khamis¯ ), https://al-maktaba.org/book/1673/4372who died in (accessed 165/781–2, on 27i.e., April to the 2021).Examples same period of as internet Hishām’s. The woman motif (either one discussions in English and Arabic in forums, general websites andor YouTube,more women) are: English thus sites:seems https://islam.stackexchange. to have been introduced into the story of the unwritten com/questions/12072/what-is-the-calamity-of-thursday (accesseddocument on 27 April in the 2021); second https://www.imamreza.net/old/eng/ quarter of the second Islamic century. Unlike the ʿUmar motif, imamreza.php?id=12957 (accessed on 27 April 2021); http://www.shiapen.com/comprehensive/pen-and-paper/preface.htmlthe woman motif is not restricted to any particular region (Layth and his informant Ṭāwūs (accessed on 27 April 2021); https://allaboutshias.com/calamity-of-thursday/ (accessed on 27 April 2021); https://www. are not from Medina, but from Kufa and Janad (Yemen), respectively), but occurs only in islamicinsights.com/religion/clergy-corner/the-unwritten-will-and-the-calamity-of-thursday.html (accessed on 27 April 2021). traditions that were not widespread, indicating that they were not widely accepted. 2 Arabic site: https://salafcenter.org/2854/ (accessed on 27 April 2021); and on YouTube by searching ÒmÌ'@ ÐñK IK Yg: https:// www.youtube.com/results?search_query=%D8%AD%D8%AF%D9%8A%D8%AB+%D9%8A%D9%88%D9%85+%D8%A7%D9 2.4. Group 4: The ʿAlī b. Abī Ṭālib Narrative %84%D8%AE%D9%85%D9%8A%D8%B3 (accessed on 27 April 2021). The traditions of the penultimate group are all traced back to Muḥammad’s nephew Religions 2021, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 3 See the sources in the previous two footnotes. Furthermore,3 of 33 examples of wiki sites with Sunni and Shi i positions are: https://en.wikishia.net/view/Hadith_al-Dawat_wa_l-Qirtas (accessedʿAlī b. Ab onī 27Ṭā Aprillib (d. 2021); 40/661), https://religion.wikia.org/wiki/ the fourth caliph of the Muslim empire. The Islamic tradition Hadith_of_the_pen_and_paper (accessed on 27 April 2021). material describes a strong bond between Muḥammad and his nephew ʿAlī that began 4 To enhance the flow of this study, which would otherwise be unnecessarilybefore Mu dense,ḥammad’s I have omitted prophethood all eulogies and that continued appear in someuntil the latter’s death. ʿAlī was one of evolved and how, over time and across specific regions, other textual motifs have been texts and translations after the names of the Prophet Muh. ammadthe and first his companions, converts and and married after God. Fāṭima, the Prophet’s daughter. When Muḥammad died, added and omitted, creating new narratives. 76 5 The translation is from (Ibn Kath¯ır 2000), IV: p. 327. ʿAlī led the preparation of his body for burial. Because of this, he did not take part in the 6 discussions about succession of the Prophet. The debates on the day the Prophet died, and 2. Isnād-cum-matn Analysis Applied(Motzki 1996; Schoeler 1996). Although they were not the first to combine an analysis of the text part with an analysis of the chains, they developed the method in its current form. Since then, many publications have appeared with and about this method. Based on the asānīd, the traditions in which the motif appears can be divided in five 7 This is just an example based on the traditions from this article. The number of narrators differs per tradition and may be more groups. The first group containsor trad feweritions than ascribed the numbers to listedthe famous here. Qur’ān scholar and Companion of the Prophet,8 ʿAbdSee All (Miskinzodaāh ibn ʿAbb 2014ās (d.). 67/686–7). The majority of the tra- 10 ditions (35) belong to this grou9 p.This The is second a very basic group description is ascribed of the to ICM the analysisCompanion offered Jā forbir the purpose of brevity. The actual application is more complex b. ʿAbd Allāh (d. 78/697) and containsand takes seven into traditio accountns. all The possible third scenarios, group, consisting including variationof two in method of transmission (oral, written, oral based on notes), traditions, is traced back to the adaptationsCompanion by and the author second of thecaliph collection, ʿUma ther b. possibility al-Khaṭṭā ofb multiple(d. versions of a transmitter, etc. See, however, the limits of the 23/644). The fourth group, with ICMfive analysistraditions, in ( Görkeis ascribed 2011). to Muḥammad’s nephew and son-in-law, ʿAlī b. Abī Ṭā10lib (d.The 40/661), sequence and of the the groups last is grou basedp on with the thecontent, second as will largest become clear in the following part of the article. 11 number of traditions (15) is tracedMore traditions back to ofʿĀA¯ ʾ ishasha can (d. be 58 found/678) in, thesaidh. ad t¯ıtho hcollections,ave been but they either do not have a complete isnad¯ or come from later Muḥammad’s favourite wife andcollections daughter in of which the first the tradition caliph Ab fromū Bakr. an earlier All collectionof the alleged is quoted identically. first transmit-ters of these 12traditions(Gilliot belonged 2012), consulted to the circle online of on Mu 27ḥ Octoberammad’s 2020; intima (Ibn al-Kalbtes and¯ı 1966), I: Figures4 and6. 13 the sīra mate-rial describes their (frequentAl-Mizz¯ı 1998interaction), IV: p. 178;with (Ibn theH. Prophet.ajar al- Asqalan¯ ¯ı 2001), II: p. 365. Gilliot considers the diversity in ages an “age trick” to extend The ICM analysis begins withthe a rather brief short biography period ofof contactthe individuals with the Prophet to whom (Gilliot the 2012 tra-). 14 ditions are attributed per group.See, To for obtain example an (overviewAl-Mizz¯ı 1998 of which), IV: pp. people 176–78 have no. 3345; handed (Al-Dhahab ¯ı 2007), I: pp. 33–34 no. 18 (al-T. abaqa al-ul¯ a¯); (Ibn H. ajar down the tradition according to theal- Asqalasānīdan¯ and¯ı 2001 to), identify II: pp. 364-66. common Ibn Sa transmittersd cites many per traditions group, that praise Ibn Abbas’¯ wisdom, see (Ibn Sa d 1997), II: pp. 278–84. the asānīd have been drawn15 in aSee, figure. for example, The earliest (Berg 2004common, p. 142; transmitter, Berg 2011; Gilliot the so-called 2012; Pregill 2017, p. 104). common link, is by way of16 hypothesisThe top assumed lines indicate to be how the many distributor different of people the tradition subsequently in reported the narration of the last transmitter, according to question. Subsequently, the muttheūn asofan¯ the¯ıd. traditions within a given group are first compared with each other and 17then wiThisth seemsthe groups circular discussed because the earlier. selection criterion is traditions ascribed to Ibn Abbas.¯ However, a common link is usually not found at the level of the Companions of the Prophet Muh. ammad, but at the Successor levels or later as the other figures in this 2.1. Group 1: The Ibn Abbās Narrativearticle show. See also, for example, the various figures in the articles by Harald Motzki, Nicolet Boekhoff-van der Voort and Sean Anthony in (Motzki 2010), pp. 208, 383 or 413. See, however, Figure2 with Anas b. M alik¯ as common link, (Motzki 2010), p. 294. The first group of the traditions is traced back to ʿAbd Allāh b. ʿAbbās. Ibn ʿAbbās 18 (Motzki 2012), consulted online on 14 January 2021. The complete figure with the asan¯ ¯ıd of the Ibn Abbas¯ traditions from Sa ¯ıd b. was related to the Prophet through his father al-ʿAbbās, the brother of Muḥammad’s fa- Jubayr is included in AppendixA. ther ʿAbd Allāh, and his mother, who was the sister of the Prophet’s wife Maymūna.12 At 19 When the majority of the traditions mention a particular phrase, it is considered part of the Sufyan¯ tradition. The parts in round the time when the story is set, the death of the Prophet, he was still young, between ten brackets appear in only a few traditions, but are confirmed by various narrators from Sufyan.¯ The other traditions omit this 13 and fifteen years old. Ibn ʿAbbphrase.ās is Anone overview of the ofmost all the controversial differences between Companions these traditions of can be found at https://doi.org/10.17026/dans-xsv-bg4x Muḥammad within scholarly debates.(accessed In onMuslim 23 July scholarship, 2021). he is revered as one of the greatest Qurʾān exegetes and20 hisThere name are appears fourteen in traditionsthe asānīd of of Sufy countlessan¯ b. Uyayna, traditions but sinceon the Ibn Kath¯ır’s tradition S14 quotes al-Bukhar¯ ¯ı from Qutayba and is Prophet Muḥammad.14 In non-Muslimidentical scholarship, with tradition the S6, itauthenticity is not counted of asthe a separateascription tradition. of (Ibn Kath¯ır n.d.), IV: p. 450, and (Al-Bukhar¯ ¯ı n.d.), VI: p. 11 the majority of these traditions is(Kit criticizedab¯ al-magh. az¯Herbert¯ı—Bab¯ maraBergd. al-naband Cla¯ı wa-wafude atihi¯Gilliot) (S6). argue The otherthat traditions are from: ( Abd al-Razzaq¯ 1983), VI: p. 57 no. 9992 Ibn ʿAbbās should be regarded as(S1); a symbolic (Ibn Sa d figure1997), II: to p. authenticate 187 (S2); (Ibn theH. anbal information 1993), I: p. in 292 the no. 1940 (S3); (Al-Bukhar¯ ¯ı n.d.), IV: p. 85 (Kitab¯ al-was.aya¯ : Bab¯ hal tradition.15 tustashfa u ila¯ ahl al-dhimma wa-mu amalatihim¯ ) (S4) and pp. 120–21 (Bab¯ ikhraj¯ al-yahud¯ min jaz¯ırat al- Arab) (S5); (Muslim 2012), III: Figure 1 is a simplified representationp. 86 no. 1637-20 of the (S7); cha (Al-Nasins showinga¯ ¯ı 1991 only), III: p.the 434, earliest no. 3/5854 gener- (S8); (Al-Bayhaq¯ı 2008), VII: pp. 181–82 (S9); (Al-H. umayd¯ı 1988), I: ations of transmitters.16 The commonpp. 241–42 link according no. 526 (S10); to (FigureAl-T. abar 1¯ ıwould 2010), III: be p.Ibn 249 ʿAbb (S11,ā S12);s.17 In Ab u¯ Ya la¯ al-Maws.il¯ı 1984–1994), IV: pp. 298–99 no. 2409 (S13). In order to determine whether these traditions are indeed from Ibn ʿAbbās, the texts (mutūn) of the traditions will be compared. The textual analysis revealed six different versions of the tradition about the unwritten document, which correspond to the numbers indicated in Figure 1. Three of them go back to Saʿīd b. Jubayr (d. 94/714), a Kufan scholar of the Qurʾān, jurisprudence and Ḥadīth, who, according to Muslim biographies, was a student of Ibn ʿAbbās.Error! Reference source not found. Religions 2021, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 16 of 33

present to carry out the Prophet’s command, yet he does not appear to give them time to comply with his (the women’s question immediately follows the Prophet’s request). Muḥammad’s reprimand would then have to be directed against ʿUmar. However, it is also addressed to other people, which would only make sense if a discussion took place amongst them. This shows that Hishām’s version is a secondary version. In Hishām’s version a switch is made to a first-person perspective: ʿUmar, the alleged narrator of this tradition, relates the event from his point of view (f.e., “we were”, “between us”, “I said”). In contrast with the versions of Ibn ʿAbbās and Abū l-Zubayr, he is an active participant in the event. The noise or discord motif occurs in both Ibn ʿAbbās’ and Abū l-Zubayr’s versions, but the ʿUmar motif only in those of Hijazi origin, versions 4 and 6 of Ibn ʿAbbās and the version of Abū l-Zubayr. The Medinan origin of the two traditions of Hishām, who is from Medina himself and provides a Medinan isnād, is consistent with the regional occurrence of the ʿUmar motif. Is Hishām’s version derived from Ibn ʿAbbās’ or Abū l-Zubayr’s? So far, Hishām’s version has more similarities to that of Ibn ʿAbbās than that of Abu l-Zubayr, such as that no location is mentioned, nor that Muḥammad is about to die, and the wording of the Prophet’s command. One part has not yet been discussed: the women motif. The women motif occurs in both of Hishām b. Saʿd’s traditions from ʿUmar and can therefore be traced back to him and dated to the second quarter or the middle of the second Islamic century, since Hishām died in 160/776–7. We have already encountered the (one) woman motif in two other versions: Ibn ʿAbbās versions 5 and 6. In two of the three traditions of Ibn ʿAbbās version 5 of Layth b. Abī Sulaym, a woman rebukes the people present for shouting instead of following the command of the Prophet. Although what she says is different from Hishām’s version, it conveys the same sentiment: a rebuke for not following the Prophet’s command (“Woe unto you! [It is] the command of the Messenger of God!” (wayḥakum ʿahd rasūl Allāh)). Religions 2021, 12, 579 27 of 32 The woman motif in Layth’s traditions can be dated to the second quarter of the second Islamic century, since Layth died in 138/755–6 or 143/760–1. In Ibn ʿAbbās version Religions 2021, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 6, the woman is identified as Zaynab, 3one of 33of the Prophet’s wives. Although her reprimand this article, the numbering of the traditions and the order of thefollows sources are a statement based on the by overlap ʿUmar, in thesheas addressesan¯ ¯ıd and the several similarities people, revealing that part of the in the mutun¯ . story is missing from this tradition. The woman motif in this tradition is more difficult to 21 The following text is adapted from the translation of Ismail K. Poonawala in (Al-Tabar¯ı 1990), pp. 174–75. evolved and how, over time and across specifdate,ic regions, because other there. textual is only motifs one traditionhave been of it. It is part of Ibn Saʿd’s work in which he 22 This sentenceadded is part an ofd traditionsomitted, S1,creating S3, S4, new S5 and narratives. S7. collected nine traditions about the unwritten document.75 Of these nine traditions, two 23 In inkpot, piece of paper (dawah¯ wa-s.ah. ¯ıfa), a shoulder blade (katifcontain) and the a document woman (kitmotif,ab¯ ) are for mentioned which Ibn as differentSaʿd both writing times lists his teacher al-Wāqidī as material in2. some Isn traditions,ād-cum-matn while An othersalys dois Applied not mention writinginformant. material at However, all. of these nine, Ibn Saʿd traces four traditions back to al-Wāqidī, two 24 The sentence appears in traditions S2, S3, S6, S8, S10 and S11. of which do not contain the woman motif. It is therefore unlikely that Ibn Saʿd or al- Based on the asānīd, the traditions in which the motif appears can be divided in five 25 Wāqidī included the woman motif in these two traditions. That would put the dating of A suffix is addedgroups. in traditionsThe first S5,group S6, S7, contains S8, S10 and trad S13.itions ascribed to the famous Qur’ān scholar and 26 The transmitter of tradition S15 of al-Tabaran¯ ¯ı is, according to thetheisn womenad¯ , not from motif Sufy inan ¯Ibn b. ʿUyayna bbās version but from 6 Shiblwith b.al-WAbbāqidad,¯ ī a’s informant, Ibrāhīm b. Ismāʿīl, Companion of the Prophet,. ʿAbd Allāh ibn ʿAbbās (d. 67/686–7). The majority of the tra- fellow townsman of Sufyan’s¯ informant Sulayman¯ b. Ab¯ı Muslim.who This died tradition in 165/781–2, is shortened i.e., byto al-theT abarsamean¯ ¯ıperiod and consists as Hish of oneām’s. The woman motif (either one ditions (35) belong to this group. The second group10 is ascribed to the Companion. Jābir sentence only. The first part is identical to the other Sufyan¯ textsor from more Sulaym women)an,¯ but thus the secondseems partto have is slightly been different: introducedyawm into the story of the unwritten b. ʿAbd Allāh (d. 78/697) and contains seven traditions. The third group, consisting of two ishtadda f¯ıhi waj al-nab¯ı instead of (yawm) ishtadda bi-rasul¯ Allah¯ wajdocumentuhu. The in use the of asecond different quarter preposition of the and second the word Islamic prophet century. Unlike the ʿUmar motif, traditions, is traced back to the Companion and second caliph ʿUmar b. al-Khaṭṭāb (d. indicates that this tradition may not be from Sufyan,¯ but this cannotthe woman be established motif with is not certainty restricted as it to is aany tradition particular of which region only (Layth and his informant Ṭāwūs the first sentence23/644). is mentioned. The fourth (Al-T group,. abar an¯with¯ı n.d. five), XII: traditions, p. 50 no. 12507.is ascribed to Muḥammad’s nephew and 27 are not from Medina, but from Kufa and Janad (Yemen), respectively), but occurs only in The followingson-in-law, text is a translation ʿAlī b. Ab ofī theṬā reconstructedlib (d. 40/661), text and of W aki the¯ b. last Jarr groua¯h. fromp with Malik¯ the b. secondMighwal largest based on four nearly 11 traditions that were not widespread, indicating that they were not widely accepted. identical traditionsnumber from of traditions the works of (15) Ibn H. isanbal, traced Muslim, back al-Nas to ʿĀa ¯ ʾ ¯ıs andha al-(dT.. abar58/6¯ı.7 See8), (sIbnaidH . tanbalo ha v1993e b),een I: p. 461 no. 3335 (ST2); (MuslimMu 2012ḥammad’s), III: p. 86favourite no. 21-(000) wife (ST3); and (daughterAl-Nasa¯ ¯ı of1991 the), III:first p. 435caliph no. Ab 1/5857ū Bakr. (ST4); All (Al- ofT. abarthe ¯ıalleged 2010), III: p. 249 (ST5). 28 2.4. Group 4: The ʿAlī b. Abī Ṭālib Narrative This is the onlyfirst phrase transmit- whereters all of four these traditions traditions deviate belonged from each to other, the circlebi-l-law ofh. wa-l-dawMuḥammad’sah¯ aw al-katif intima(ST2),tes andbi-l-katif wa-l-dawah¯ ḥ (aw al-lawh. thewa-l-daw sīra mate-ah¯ ) (ST3),rial bi-l-lawdescribesh. wa-l-daw their frequentah¯ wa-l-katif interaction wa-l-dawTheah¯ with(ST4) traditions the and Prophet.bi-l-law of theh. wa-l-daw penultimateah¯ – aw group bi-l-katif are wa-l-daw all tracedah¯ back to Mu ammad’s nephew (ST5). The ICM analysis begins with a brief biographyʿAlī b. Ab of īthe Ṭā libindividuals (d. 40/661), to thewhom fourth the caliph tra- of the Muslim empire. The Islamic tradition 29 Tradition ST1ditions from Ibnare Sa attributedd is slightly per different group. from To theobtain other an traditions.material overview describes The of main which differencesa strong people bond from have Wakbetween handed¯ı ’s text Mu areḥwa-kaammadann and¯ı his nephew ʿAlī that began anz. uru ila¯ insteaddown ofthethumma tradition naz. artuaccording ila¯, khaddihi to theinstead asānīd of andkhaddayhi tobefore identify, andMu it ḥcommonammad’s does not transmitters contain prophethood the uncertainty per and group, continued about the until writing the latter’s death. ʿAlī was one of material andthe only asā statesnīd havebi-l-katif been wa-l-daw drawnah¯ .in See a (figure.Ibn Sa d The 1997 earliestthe), II: first p. 187. commonconverts transmitter,and married the Fā ṭso-calledima, the Prophet’s daughter. When Muḥammad died, 30 76 (Ibn Sa d 1997common), II: p. 187link, (SA1). is by way of hypothesis assumedʿAl īto led be the the preparation distributor ofof his the body tradition for burial. in Because of this, he did not take part in the 31 Miskinzodaquestion. points to theSubsequently, problematic nature the mut of theūn mentionedof the traditions writingdiscussionsmaterials within about a and given succession the typegroup ofmaterial ofare the first Prophet. referred com- toThe as s.debatesah. ¯ıfa. See, on the day the Prophet died, and (Miskinzodapared 2014), with p. 236 each footnote other 16. and then with the groups discussed earlier. 32 (Al-T. abaran¯ ¯ı n.d.), XI: p. 308 no. 12261 (SA2). In the isnad¯ is mentioned Abd Allah¯ b. Ubayd Allah,¯ but that is a mistake. He is Abd Allah¯ 2.1. b. Abd Group All 1:ah¯ The al-R Ibnaz¯ ¯ı, Abb whichās Narrative is confirmed by the similarities between the two traditions SA1 and SA2. 33 It is likely that the discrepancies between the two traditions are due to an oral transmission or to transmission based on notes. The first group of the traditions is traced back to ʿAbd Allāh b. ʿAbbās. Ibn ʿAbbās 34 ( Abd al-Razzwasaq¯ related1983), V: to pp. the 438–39 Prop no.het 9757 through (Z1); (hisAl-Bayhaq father ¯ıal- 2008ʿAbb), VII:ās, pp.the 183–84 brother (Z1a); of Mu (IbnḥHammad’s. anbal 1993 fa-), I: pp. 436–37 no. 3110 (Z2); (Al-Bukhar¯ ¯ı n.d.), VI: pp. 11–12 (Kitab¯ al-Maghaz¯ ¯ı – Bab¯ marad al-nab¯ı wa-wafatihi¯ [ ... ]) (Z3); (Ibn Kath¯ır n.d.), IV: p. 451; ther ʿAbd Allāh, and his mother, who was the sister. of the Prophet’s wife Maymūna.12 At (Muslim 2012), III, pp. 86–87 no. 22-(000) (Z4); (Al-Nasa¯ ¯ı 1991), III: p. 433 no. 1/5852 (Z5); (Ibn Hibban¯ 1997), XIV: pp. 562–63 the time when the story is set, the death of the Prophet, he was still young, between. ten no. 6597 (Z6); (Ibn Ab¯ı l-H. ad¯ıd 1987), VI: p. 54 (Z7). and fifteen years old.13 Ibn ʿAbbās is one of the most controversial Companions of 35 The words in round brackets are additions to some of the traditions, while others do not mention them. A “/” indicates that in some traditionsMuḥ theammad preceding within word scholarly is replaced debates. by the wordIn Muslim between scholarship, round brackets. he is It revered is possible as that one both of the options come from Abd al-Razzgreatestaq.¯ The Qur fullʾ listān ofexegetes variations and among his name al-Zuhr appears¯ı’s traditions in the is as availableānīd of countless at https://doi.org/10.17026/dans-xsv-bg4x traditions on the 14 (accessed onProphet 23 July 2021).Muḥammad. This also shows In non-Muslim that tradition scholarship, Z7 of Ibn Ab¯ı the al-H. authenticityad¯ıd is very different of the fromascription the other of Abd al-Razzaq¯ traditions andthe thereforemajority appearsof these to traditions have been is adjusted criticized by. oneHerbert of the Berg transmitters and Claude above GilliotAbd argue al-Razz thataq¯ in the isnad¯ (see AppendixBIbn). The ʿAbb wordās shouldabadan is be present regarded in traditions as a symbolic Z1a, Z2, figure Z3a, Z5 to and authenticate Z6. the information in the 36 The words rastradition.ul¯ Allah¯ 15appear in traditions Z1, Z1a and Z4. 37 Laghat. is used insteadFigure of 1laghw is a insimplified traditions representation Z5 and Z6. Z7 from of the Ibn cha Ab¯insı l-H .showingad¯ıd combines only both:the earliestal-laghat gener-. wa-l-laghw. 38 Z1 and Z1aations both mention of transmitters.Abd Allah¯16 The instead common of Ubayd link All accordingah.¯ to Figure 1 would be Ibn ʿAbbās.17 In 39 ʿ See (Al-Bukhorderar¯ ¯ı n.d. to ),determine IX: p. 137 whether (Kitab¯ al-i thesetis.am¯ traditions bi-l-kitab¯ wa-l-sunna—B are indeed ab¯from karahiyat ¯Ibn Abb al-khilās,af¯ the) (Z8). texts Al-Bukh (mutūar¯n)¯ı quotes another tradition withof the a double traditionsisnad¯ Hish willam—Ma¯ be compared.mar and TheAbd textual al-Razz analysisaq—Ma¯ revealedmar, (Al-Bukh six differentar¯ ¯ı n.d.), VII: versions pp. 155–56 of (Kitab¯ al-.tibb— Bab¯ qawl al-marthe ¯ıtraditiond. qum¯ u¯ ann about¯ı). The thematn unwrittenis very similar document, to the which above textcorrespond from Abd to al-Razz the numbersaq.¯ I therefore indicated mainly focus on the tradition Z8.in Figure 1. Three of them go back to Saʿīd b. Jubayr (d. 94/714), a Kufan scholar of the 40 Unique elementsQurʾā are,n, jurisprudence for example, h. a d.andarat al-wafḤadīth,ah¯ instead who, according of h. ad. ara, q umto¯ uMuslim¯ ann¯ı (similar biographies, to the text was of Hisha studentam¯ in tradition Z8 and in contrast toof theIbn (reconstructed) ʿAbbās.Error! Reference text of sourceAbd not al-Razz found. aq),¯ or ghalabahu al-waj (similar to the text of Abd al-Razzaq¯ and in contrast to the text of Hisham).¯ The complete list of differences is available on https://doi.org/10.17026/dans-xsv-bg4x (accessed on 23 July 2021). 41 In al-Bukhar¯ ¯ı’s tradition Z3 from Al¯ı b. Abd Allah¯ from Abd al-Razzaq¯ all references to Umar’s part in this story are omitted. Since other traditions of Abd al-Razzaq¯ and al-Bukhar¯ ¯ı do mention Umar, Al¯ı b. Abd Allah¯ alone can be responsible for this omission. Al¯ı b. Abd Allah¯ is Al¯ı b. al-Mad¯ın¯ı, a very well-known scholar of defects in traditions and asan¯ ¯ıd. See (Al-Mizz¯ı 1998), V: p. 270 no. 4685. 42 Miskinzoda refers in a footnote to the discussion about the status of prophetic ah. ad¯ ¯ıth in relation to the Qur an,¯ within which similar statements about the Qur an¯ as present in al-Zuhri’s tradition are common (Miskinzoda 2014), p. 238 footnote 25. Religions 2021, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 16 of 33

present to carry out the Prophet’s command, yet he does not appear to give them time to comply with his (the women’s question immediately follows the Prophet’s request). Muḥammad’s reprimand would then have to be directed against ʿUmar. However, it is also addressed to other people, which would only make sense if a discussion took place amongst them. This shows that Hishām’s version is a secondary version. In Hishām’s version a switch is made to a first-person perspective: ʿUmar, the alleged narrator of this tradition, relates the event from his point of view (f.e., “we were”, “between us”, “I said”). In contrast with the versions of Ibn ʿAbbās and Abū l-Zubayr, he is an active participant in the event. The noise or discord motif occurs in both Ibn ʿAbbās’ and Abū l-Zubayr’s versions, but the ʿUmar motif only in those of Hijazi origin, versions 4 and 6 of Ibn ʿAbbās and the version of Abū l-Zubayr. The Medinan origin of the two traditions of Hishām, who is from Medina himself and provides a Medinan isnād, is consistent with the regional occurrence of the ʿUmar motif. Is Hishām’s version derived from Ibn ʿAbbās’ or Abū l-Zubayr’s? So far, Hishām’s version has more similarities to that of Ibn ʿAbbās than that of Abu l-Zubayr, such as that no location is mentioned, nor that Muḥammad is about to die, and the wording of the Prophet’s command. One part has not yet been discussed: the women motif. The women motif occurs in both of Hishām b. Saʿd’s traditions from ʿUmar and can therefore be traced back to him and dated to the second quarter or the middle of the second Islamic century, since Hishām died in 160/776–7. We have already encountered the (one) woman motif in two other versions: Ibn ʿAbbās versions 5 and 6. In two of the three traditions of Ibn ʿAbbās version 5 of Layth b. Abī Sulaym, a woman rebukes the people present for shouting instead of following the command of the Prophet. Although what she says is different from Hishām’s version, it conveys the same sentiment: a rebuke for not following the Prophet’s command (“Woe unto you! [It is] the command of the Messenger of God!” (wayḥakum ʿahd rasūl Allāh)). The woman motif in Layth’s traditions can be dated to the second quarter of the second Islamic century, since Layth died in 138/755–6 or 143/760–1. In Ibn ʿAbbās version 6, the woman is identified as Zaynab, one of the Prophet’s wives. Although her reprimand follows a statementReligions 2021by ʿ,Umar,12, 579 she addresses several people, revealing that part of the 28 of 32 story is missing from this tradition. The woman motif in this tradition is more difficult to date, because there is only one tradition of it. It is part of Ibn Saʿd’s work in which he collected nine traditions about the unwritten document.75 Of these nine traditions, two 43 contain the woman(Ibn motif, H. anbal for 1993 which), I: p.Ibn 383 Sa no.ʿd 2680. both times lists his teacher al-Wāqidī as 44 informant. However,(Al-T of. abar thesean¯ ¯ı nine,n.d.), Ibn XI: p. Sa 27ʿd no. traces 10961. four traditions back to al-Wāqidī, two 45 of which do not contain(Al-T. abar thean¯ ¯ıwoman n.d.), XI: motif. p. 27 no. It 10962.is therefore unlikely that Ibn Saʿd or al- Wāqidī included46 theT3 evenwoman describes motif atin the these end two that thetraditions. Prophet died.That would put the dating of the women motif47 in(Ibn Ibn Sa ʿd bb 1997ās ),version II: pp. 188–89.6 with al-Wāqidī’s informant, Ibrāhīm b. Ismāʿīl, who died in 165/781–2,48 Of the i.e., nine to reported the same traditions period inas theHish paragraph,ām’s. The five woman go back motif to Ibn (eitherAbbas.¯ one The writing materials mentioned in these traditions or more women) thusare successively: seems to have inkpot been and aintroduced piece of paper into (version the story 3); inkpot of the and unwritten a piece of paper (deviating version 1); shoulder blade and document in the secondinkpot (versionquarter 2);of nonethe second (version Islamic 4); inkpot century. and a piece Unlike of paper the ʿ (versionUmar motif, 6). See (Ibn Sa d 1997), II: pp. 187–89. the woman motif49 isSee, not for restricted example, to (Egger any particular 2018), p. 38. region (Layth and his informant Ṭāwūs are not from 50Medina,See, but for example,from Kufa (Ibn and Hish Janadam¯ 1998 (Yemen),), IV: p. respectively), 270. The tradition but from occurs al-Zuhr only¯ı—Sa in ¯ıd b. al-Musayyab—Abu¯ Hurayra relates how traditions that wereUmar not widespread, does not want indicati to acceptng Mu thath. ammad’s they were death not and widely says that accepted. like Moses he will return after forty days. A translation of the tradition is available in (Guillaume 1978), p. 682. See also, ( Abd al-Razzaq¯ 1983), V: p. 434, in which the comparison with Moses 2.4. Group 4: The ʿAlisī alsob. Ab presentī Ṭālib asNarrative well as Umar’s exclamation that he hopes the Prophet lives until the hands of all hypocrites are been cut off. Miskinzoda makes the connection with a statement made during a council of war as described by Uri Rubin. However, given the The traditions of the penultimate group are all traced back to Muḥammad’s nephew similarity in terms, I think it comes from other traditions about the death of the Prophet. See (Miskinzoda 2014), pp. 240–41. ʿAlī b. Abī Ṭālib (d. 40/661), the fourth caliph of the Muslim empire. The Islamic tradition 51 Although the Prophet died on Monday according to Islamic tradition, none of the traditions Ibn Abbas¯ versions 5 and 6 place ḥ ʿ material describes thea strong event explicitlybond between on that day.Mu Moreover,ammad and none his of thenephew other versionsAlī that yet began to be discussed mention Monday as the day the event before Muḥammad’soccurred. prophethood In my article and continued I will therefore until not the equate latter’s the death. day of deathʿAlī was with one Monday. of Of course, it is possible that the day was so the first converts andwidely married known F thatāṭima, further the specificationProphet’s daughter. was not required.The When MuKitḥammaab¯ Sulaymd died, b. Qays contains a tradition attributed to Ibn Abbas¯ ʿAlī led the preparationthat explicitly of his body describes for burial. Monday76 Because as the day of this, of death he did and not the take day part of the in event the with the document. This narration, however, discussions about successiondiffers significantly of the Prophet. in content The from debates the other on the Ibn dayAbb theas¯ Prophet traditions. died, Although and it contains certain phrases from various Ibn Abbas¯ versions, they are placed in a new context, and other Ibn Abbas¯ characteristics are missing. According to the isnad¯ at the beginning, Aban¯ b. Ab¯ı Ayyash¯ (d. 138/755 or later) narrates the story of Sulaym who relates a conversation in the house of Ibn Abbas¯ about the death day of the Prophet. Ibn Abbas¯ starts to cry (fa-baka¯ Ibn Abbas¯ = versions 1 and 2) and tells that the Prophet had died on Monday (yawm al-ithnayn wa-huwa l-yawm alladh¯ı qubid. a f¯ıhi). In addition to his immediate family, thirty other companions were present. The Prophet says: If you bring me a shoulder blade (=version 2, ≈version 5, and ≈1 tradition of version 1), then I will write on it for you a document [so that] after me you will not go astray nor disagree (≈version 5). Somebody (far un¯ ) argues that the Prophet is talking deliriously (= version 2). The Prophet becomes angry and rebukes them for disagreeing with him when he is alive. He wonders what happens when he dies. He then abandons writing the document. The Religions 2021, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 3 of 33 dating of the event to Monday deviates from all other Ibn Abbas¯ traditions, as well as the details on the people present and the formulation of the Prophet’s rebuke. The similarities with Ibn Abbas¯ versions 1, 2 and 5 seem to indicate that the author of this traditions knew those versions. Since there is no other variant of this tradition, dating it is not possible. The tentative conclusions that can be drawn from theevolved matn analysis and how, is that over the author time seemsand across to be familiar specific with regions, the version(s) other textual of Sa ¯ıd motifs b. Jubayr, have been in particular the versions from Malik¯ a b.dded Mighwal and omitted, and Layth creating b. Ab¯ı Sulaym, new narratives. and that the similarities are to be found in those traditions which were passed down in Kufa in the earliest generations (versions 2 and 5). See (Sulaym b. Qays n.d.), p. 324 no. 27 (accessed on 27 June 2021). 2. Isnād-cum-matn Analysis Applied 52 (Miskinzoda 2014), p. 233. Based on the asānīd, the traditions in which the motif appears can be divided in five 53 See, for example version 1. groups. The first group contains traditions ascribed to the famous Qur’ān scholar and 54 In this regard, versions 1–3 count as one version since they are all transmitted by Sa ¯ıd b. Jubayr. Consequently, two versions Companion of the Prophet, ʿAbd Allāh ibn ʿAbbās (d. 67/686–7). The majority of the tra- mention Umar (versions 4 and 6) and two do not (versions 1–3 and 5). The Sulaym tradition mentioned in footnote 52 actually ditions (35) belong to this group. The second group10 is ascribed to the Companion Jābir supports the suppression of the name of Umar in the Kufan versions if my speculation of a Iraqi origin of the Sulaym tradition is correct. After the story of the documentb. ʿAbd event, Allāh Sulaym (d. 78/697) and Ibn andAbb containsas¯ talk seven about traditio the personns. whoThe third opposes group, the Prophet’s consisting of two command. At the insistence of an attendant,traditions, Ibn isAbb tracedas¯ confessess back to the that Companion this person is andUmar. second He askscaliph those ʿUma presentr b. notal-Kha to ṭṭāb (d. mention Umar’s name, because Umar23/644). is loved The in thefourth community group, (ummawith ).five traditions, is ascribed to Muḥammad’s nephew and 55 Ibn Abbas¯ version 1 from Sufyan¯ b. son-in-law,Uyayna: S1 (qʿala¯Alī l ¯ı b.Ibn AbAbbī as,¯Ṭā fa-qultulib (d. y 40/661),a¯ Ibn Abb andas¯ ), S3 the (quln lasta¯ y a¯ grou Ibn pAbb withas¯ ), S5 the (qultu second ya¯ largest 11 Aba¯ Abbas¯ ), S7 (fa-qultu ya¯ Ibn Abbas¯ ).number Ibn Abb asof¯ version traditions 2 from (15) Malik¯ is b. traced Mighwal: back ST1 to (wa-ka ʿĀ ʾ annsh¯ıa an(zd. uru. 58), ST2+ST5/678), sa (ithummad to have been naz. artu), ST3 (h. atta¯ ra aytu). Muḥammad’s favourite wife and daughter of the first caliph Abū Bakr. All of the alleged 56 The biographical information is fromfirst (Kister transmit- n.d.), XIIters p. 230, of these consulted traditions online onbelonged 22 February to the 2021. circle of Muḥammad’s intimates and 57 The text is a reconstruction of Qurra’sthe text s basedīra mate- on therial following describes traditions: their frequent (Ibn Sa interactiond 1997), II: p. with 187 (J2);the (Prophet.Al-Nasa¯ ¯ı 1991), III: p. 435 no. 1/5856 (J3); (Ibn H. ibban¯ 1973–1983The), VII:ICM p. analysis 342 (J4); Ab beginsu¯ Ya l a¯with al-Maw a briefs.il¯ı 1984–1994 biography), III: of pp. the 393-95 individuals no. 1871 to (J5) whom and the tra- no. 1869 (J6). ditions are attributed per group. To obtain an overview of which people have handed 58 Anna is used instead of qala¯ in traditionsdown J3, J4the and tradition J5. according to the asānīd and to identify common transmitters per group, 59 Al-nab¯ı appears instead of rasul¯ Allah¯ inthe traditions asānīd have J4 and been J6. drawn in a figure. The earliest common transmitter, the so-called 60 J2 and J5 include al-nab¯ı and J5 rasul¯ common Allah¯ . Since link, the is latter by way is present of hypothesis in only one assumed tradition, to it be is not the mentioned distributor in of the the recon- tradition in structed text. question. Subsequently, the mutūn of the traditions within a given group are first com- 61 (Ibn Sa d 1997), II: p. 188 (J1); (Ibn H. anbalpared 1993 with), III: each p. 424 other no. and 14738 then (J7). with the groups discussed earlier.

present to carry out the Prophet’s command, yet he does not appear to give them time to comply with his (the women’s question immediately follows the Prophet’s request). Muḥammad’s reprimand would then have to be directed against ʿUmar. However, it is also addressed to other people, which would only make sense if a discussion took place amongst them. This shows that Hishām’s version is a secondary version. In Hishām’s version a switch is made to a first-person perspective: ʿUmar, the alleged narrator of this tradition, relates the event from his point of view (f.e., “we were”, “between us”, “I said”). In contrast with the versions of Ibn ʿAbbās and Abū l-Zubayr, he is an active participant in the event. The noise or discord motif occurs in both Ibn ʿAbbās’ and Abū l-Zubayr’s versions, but the ʿUmar motif only in those of Hijazi origin, versions 4 and 6 of Ibn ʿAbbās and the version of Abū l-Zubayr. The Medinan origin of the two traditions of Hishām, who is from Medina himself and provides a Medinan isnād, is consistent with the regional occurrence of the ʿUmar motif. Is Hishām’s version derived from Ibn ʿAbbās’ or Abū l-Zubayr’s? So far, Hishām’s version has more similarities to that of Ibn ʿAbbās than that of Abu l-Zubayr, such as that no location is mentioned, nor that Muḥammad is about to die, and the wording of the Prophet’s command. One part has not yet been discussed: the women motif. The women motif occurs in both of Hishām b. Saʿd’s traditions from ʿUmar and can therefore be traced back to him and dated to the second quarter or the middle of the second Islamic century, since Hishām died in 160/776–7. We have already encountered the (one) woman motif in two other versions: Ibn ʿAbbās versions 5 and 6. In two of the three traditions of Ibn ʿAbbās version 5 of Layth b. Abī Sulaym, a woman rebukes the people present for shouting instead of following the command of the Prophet. Although what she says is different from Hishām’s version, it conveys the same sentiment: a rebuke for not following the Prophet’s command (“Woe unto you! [It is] the command of the Messenger of God!” (wayḥakum ʿahd rasūl Allāh)). The woman motif in Layth’s traditions can be dated to the second quarter of the second Islamic century, since Layth died in 138/755–6 or 143/760–1. In Ibn ʿAbbās version 6, the woman is identified as Zaynab, one of the Prophet’s wives. Although her reprimand follows a statement by ʿUmar, she addresses several people, revealing that part of the story is missing from this tradition. The woman motif in this tradition is more difficult to date, because there is only one tradition of it. It is part of Ibn Saʿd’s work in which he collected nine traditions about the unwritten document.75 Of these nine traditions, two contain the woman motif, for which Ibn Saʿd both times lists his teacher al-Wāqidī as Religions 2021, 12, 579 30 of 32 Religions 2021, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW informant. However, of these nine, Ibn Saʿd traces four3 of traditions33 back to al-Wāqidī, two of which do not contain the woman motif. It is therefore unlikely that Ibn Saʿd or al- Wāqidī included the woman motif in these two traditions. That would put the dating of 94 evolved and(Al-Mizz how, over¯ı 1998 t),ime IV: pp.anthed 199–200 awomencross no.sp motifecif 3392;ic in (regions,Ibn Ibn Sa ʿd bb 1997otherās ),version VI:textual p. 24 6 motifs no.with 1547. a l-Whaveāqid beenī’s informant, Ibrāhīm b. Ismāʿīl, 95 added and omitted,The translation creating is based newwho onnarratives. died the texts in 165/781–2, of the following i.e., to traditions: the same ( Abperiodu¯ Daw¯ asud¯ Hish al-T.āaym’s.alis¯ ¯ıThe 1904 woman), p. 210 no.motif 1508 (either (AA1); one (Ibn Ab¯ı A¯ s.im 1980), II: p. 555or no. more 1163, women) https://al-maktaba.org/book/5930/1161 thus seems to have been introduced (accessed into on 20the April story 2021) of (AA2);the unwritten (Abu¯ Nu aym 2. Isnād-cum-matnal-As.bah anAn¯ ¯ı alys1997),is p.Applieddocument 142 no. 171, in https://al-maktaba.org/book/8237/294#p1 the second quarter of the second Islamic (AA3) century. (accessed Unlike on 20 the April ʿUma 2021);r (motif,Ibn As akir¯ 1995–2000), XXX: pp.the 267-68 woman no. 6433 motif (AA4) is not and restricted p. 268 no. to 6434 any (AA5); particular (Ibn Sa regiond 1997 (Layth), III: p. and 134 his (AA6). informant Ṭāwūs Based on the asānīd, the traditions in which the motif appears can be divided in five 96 “Ud ¯ı” is present in traditionsare not from AA2, Medina, AA4 and AA7,but from while Kufa “ud u¯and” is mentionedJanad (Yemen), in AA1, respectively), AA3, AA5 and but AA6. occurs only in groups. The first group contains traditions ascribed to the famous Qur’ān scholar and 97 The suffix –hu can refertraditions to the document that were (kit abnot¯ ) as widespread, well as to Abd indicati al-Rahngm an¯that b. they Ab¯ı Bakr. were not widely accepted. Companion of the Prophet, ʿAbd Allāh ibn ʿAbbās (d. 67/686–7). The majority. of the tra- 98 The translation is based on the texts of the following traditions: (Ibn Sa d 1997), III: p. 134 (AA9); (Ibn Hanbal 1993), VI: p. 53 no. ditions (35) belong to this group. The second group10 is ascribed to the Companion Jābir . 24254 (AA10); (Ibn As2.4.akir¯ Group 1995–2000 4: The), ʿ XXX:Alī b. p. Ab 268ī Ṭ no.ālib 6435Narrative (AA11); (Ibn Kath¯ır n.d.), IV, p. 452 (AA12); (Al-H. asan b. Arafa b. ʿAbd Allāh (d. 78/697) and contains seven traditions. The third group, consisting of two al-Baghdad¯ ¯ı 1985), p. 42 no.The 3, traditions https://al-maktaba.org/book/9313/3#p1 of the penultimate group are all(AA13) traced (accessed back to on Mu 20ḥammad’s April 2021); nephew (Ibn As akir¯ traditions, isn.d. traced), pp. 82–83,back tohttps://al-maktaba.org/book/5713/71#p4 the Companion and second caliph ʿ Uma(AA14)r b. (accessed al-Khaṭṭ onāb 13 (d. April 2021); (Ibn Asakir¯ 1995–2000), XXX: ʿAlī b. Abī Ṭālib (d. 40/661), the fourth caliph of the Muslim empire. The Islamic tradition 23/644). Thepp. fourth 268–69 group, no. 6436 with (AA15). five traditions, is ascribed to Muḥammad’s nephew and material describes a strong bond between Muḥammad and his nephew ʿAlī that began son-in-law,99 TheʿAl verbī b. is Ab inī theṬālib imperative (d. 40/661), masculine and plural, the last which grou meansp with that the at least second a group largest with a number of men was addressed, but before Muḥammad’s prophethood and continued until the latter’s death. ʿAlī was one of number of that traditions may have (15) included11 is traced (grammatically) back to ʿĀA¯ ʾ ishasha as(d well.. 58 The/678 last), s sentenceaid to h inav almoste been all traditions begins with an imperative ṭ ḥ Muḥammad’sfeminine favourite singular wife (da andthe¯ıhi ), daughterfirst making convertsA ¯ofisha the and thefirst married one caliph to be AbF spokenā ūima, Bakr. to. the All Prophet’s of the alleged daughter. When Mu ammad died, 76 100 ʿAlī led the preparation of his body for burial. Because of this, he did not take part in the first transmit-Theters sentence of these “dhahaba traditionsAbd al-Rahbelonged. man¯ li-yaq to theuma¯ circle” is present of Mu inḥammad’s traditions intima AA10-12tes and and “q ama¯ Abd al-Rah. man¯ ” in AA13-16. 101 discussions about succession of the Prophet. The debates on the day the Prophet died, and the sīra mate-Seerial (Al-Mizz describes¯ı 1998 their), IV: frequent p. 377 no. interaction 3757, who remarks with the that Prophet.Abd al-Rah. man¯ is the full brother (shaq¯ıq) of A¯ isha. The102 ICMIt is analysis difficult tobegins determine with who a brief the commonbiography link of of theA¯ inishadividuals version 1to is. whom Traditions the AA1-AA5tra- are from the same transmitter, Abu¯ ditions are Dattributedawud¯ al-T. ayperalis¯ group.¯ı and should To obtain therefore an beoverview regarded of as onewhich account. people AA6 have is a combinedhanded tradition of Abu¯ Dawud¯ al-T. ayalis¯ ¯ı and down the traditionAffan¯ b. according Muslim with to differentthe asānī formulations.d and to identify AA7 appearscommon to transmitters be a combination per ofgroup, the A¯ isha narrative with other traditions, a.o. the asānīd havefrom thebeen Ibn drawnAbbas¯ in narrative. a figure. AA8 The is moreearliest like common AA1-AA5 andtransmitter, could possibly the so-called come from Abd al- Az¯ız b. Rufay . It is especially common link,important is by way that allof threehypothesis lived in Kufa.assumed ( Abd to All beah¯ the b. Addistributor¯ı 1997), VII: of p. the 297, tradition https://al-maktaba.org/book/12579/3507#p9 in (AA7) question. Subsequently,(accessed on 13 the April mut 2021);ūn of (Ibn theAs traditionsakir¯ 1995–2000 within), XXX: a given p. 267 group no. 6432 are (AA8). first com- 103 pared with (eachAl-Mizz other¯ı 1998 and), VI:then p. 291with no. the 5762. groups discussed earlier. 104 (Al-Mizz¯ı 1998), IV: p. 200 no. 3392. 2.1. Group105 1:In The some Ibn versions Abbās Narrative the Prophets calls for Abu¯ Bakr and in others Abu¯ Bakr and his son. The106 firstSee, group for example, of the (traditIbn Saionsd 1997 is ),traced II: p. 173; back (Ibn to Kath ʿAbd¯ır n.d.All),āh IV: b. p. ʿAbb 452.ā Theres. Ibn are ʿAbb alsoā others traditions ascribed to A¯ isha which, was relatedaccording to the Prop to thehet as throughan¯ ¯ıd, do his not comefather from al-ʿAbb Ibn Abās,¯ı Mulaykathe brother and of which Muḥ containammad’s similar fa- phrases. Another ICM analysis must be performed to unravel the interdepence of these traditions. See, for example, (Ibn Sa d 1997), III: pp. 133–34. ther ʿAbd Allāh, and his mother, who was the sister of the Prophet’s wife Maymūna.12 At 107 the time when(Al-Mizz the story¯ı 1998 ),is IV:set, p. the 200 death no. 3392. of the Prophet, he was still young, between ten and fifteen years old.13 Ibn ʿAbbās is one of the most controversial Companions of References Muḥammad within scholarly debates. In Muslim scholarship, he is revered as one of the ¯ greatestAbd Qur Allʾānah¯ exegetes b. Ad¯ı. and 1997. hisAl-K nameamil¯ appears f¯ı D. u afa¯ inal-Rij the al¯as,ā 1stnīd ed. of countless Edited by traditionsAdil Ah. mad on theAbd al-Mawjud.¯ 9 vols. Beirut: Al-Kutub al- Ilmiyya, Available online: https://al-maktaba.org/book/12579 (accessed on 13 April 2021). Prophet Muḥammad.14 In non-Muslim scholarship, the authenticity of the ascription of Abd al-Razzaq.¯ 1983. Al-Musannaf, 2nd ed. Edited by Hab¯ıb al-Rahman¯ al-A zam¯ı. 11 vols. Beirut: Al-Majlis al- Ilm¯ı. the majority of these traditions is. criticized. Herbert Berg. and Cla.ude Gilliot. argue that Abu¯ Daw¯ ud¯ al-T. ayalis¯ ¯ı. 1904. Musnad Ab¯ı Daw¯ ud¯ al-T. ayalis¯ ¯ı, 1st ed. 1 vol. Haydarabad: Majlis Da¯ irat al-Ma arif.¯ Ibn ʿAbbās should be regarded as a symbolic figure to authenticate the information in the Abu¯ Nu aym al-As.bahan¯ ¯ı. 1997. Fad. a¯ il al-Khulafa¯ al-Rashid¯ ¯ına li-Ab¯ı Nu aym al-As.bahan¯ ¯ı. Edited by S. ali¯ h. b. Muh. ammad al- Aq¯ıl. 1 vol. 15 tradition. Medina: Dar¯ al-Bukhar¯ ¯ı li-l-Nashr wa-l-Tawz¯ı , Available online: https://al-maktaba.org/book/8237 (accessed on 20 April 2021). FigureAbu¯ Ya 1 isla¯ a al-Maw simplifieds.il¯ı. 1984–1994.representationMusnad of the Ab¯ı cha Ya linsa¯ al-Maw showings.il¯ı, 1stonly ed. the Edited earliest by Hgener-. usayn Sal¯ım Asad. 16 vols. Damascus: Dar¯ ations of transmitters.al-Ma mun¯ 16 li-l-Tur The commonath.¯ link according to Figure 1 would be Ibn ʿAbbās.17 In order toAfsaruddin, determine Asma. whether 2011. theseA¯ isha traditions bt. Ab¯ı Bakr. are indeed In Encyclopaedia from Ibn of ʿ Islam,Abbā THREEs, the texts. Edited (mut byū Katen) Fleet, Gudrun Krämer, Denis Matringe, of the traditionsJohn Nawaswill be and compared. Everett Rowson. The textual Leiden: analysis Brill. [CrossRef revealed] six different versions of the traditionAl-Bayhaq about¯ı. 2008. the Dalunwrittena¯ ’il al-Nubuwwa document, wa-Ma whichrifat correspond Ah. wal¯ S. a¯h. ib al-Sharto the¯ı numbersa, 3rd ed. Editedindicated by ‘Abd al-Mu t¯ı Qal aj¯ı. 7 vols. Beirut: Dar¯ in Figure 1.al-Kutub Three o al-f thIlmiyya.em go back to Saʿīd b. Jubayr (d. 94/714), a Kufan scholar of the Al-Bukhar¯ ¯ı. 1986. Al-Adab al-Mufrad, 2nd ed. Edited by Muhammad Fu ad¯ Abd al-Baq¯ ¯ı. 1 vol. Beirut: Mu assasat al-Kutub Qurʾān, jurisprudence and Ḥadīth, who, according to Muslim biographies,. was a student al-Thaqafiyya.¯ of Ibn ʿAbbās.Error! Reference source not found. Al-Bukhar¯ ¯ı. n.d. S. ah. ¯ıh. al-Bukhar¯ ¯ı. Edited by Ah. mad Muh. ammad Shakir.¯ 9 vols. Egypt: Dar¯ Ih. ya¯ al-Turath¯ al- Arab¯ı. Al-Dhahab¯ı. 2007. Kitab¯ Tadhkirat al-H. uffaz¯. , 2nd ed. Edited by Zakariya¯ Umayrat.¯ 5 vols. Beirut: Dar¯ al-Kutub al- Ilmiyya. Al-H. asan b. Arafa al-Baghdad¯ ¯ı. 1985. Kitab¯ Juz Ibn Arafa. Edited by Abd al-Rah. man¯ b. Abd al-Jabbar¯ al-Far¯ıwa¯ ¯ı. 1 vol. Kuwait: Dar¯ al-Aqs.a¯ , Available online: https://al-maktaba.org/book/9313/ (accessed on 20 April 2021). Al-Haytham¯ı. 1988. Mu jam al-Zawa¯ id wa-Manba al-Fawa¯ id. 10 vols. Beirut: Dar¯ al-Kutub al- Ilmiyya. Al-H. umayd¯ı. 1988. Al-Musnad, 1st ed. Edited by H. ab¯ıb al-Rah. man¯ al-A z.am¯ı. 2 vols. Beirut: Dar¯ al-Kutub al- Ilmiyya. Al-Mizz¯ı. 1998. Tahdh¯ıb al-Kamal¯ f¯ı Asma¯ al-Rijal¯ , 1st ed. Edited by Bashshar¯ Awwad¯ Ma ruf.¯ 8 vols. Beirut: Mu assasat al-Risala.¯ Al-Nasa¯ ¯ı. 1991. Kitab¯ al-Sunan al-Kubra¯, 1st ed. Edited by Abd al-Ghaffar¯ Sulayman¯ al-Bindar¯ ¯ı and Kasraw¯ı H. asan. 6 vols. Beirut: Dar¯ al-Kutub al- Ilmiyya. Religions 2021, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 16 of 33

present to carry out the Prophet’s command, yet he does not appear to give them time to comply with his (the women’s question immediately follows the Prophet’s request). Muḥammad’s reprimand would then have to be directed against ʿUmar. However, it is also addressed to other people, which would only make sense if a discussion took place amongst them. This shows that Hishām’s version is a secondary version. In Hishām’s version a switch is made to a first-person perspective: ʿUmar, the alleged narrator of this tradition, relates the event from his point of view (f.e., “we were”, “between us”, “I said”). In contrast with the versions of Ibn ʿAbbās and Abū l-Zubayr, he is an active participant in the event. The noise or discord motif occurs in both Ibn ʿAbbās’ and Abū l-Zubayr’s versions, but the ʿUmar motif only in those of Hijazi origin, versions 4 and 6 of Ibn ʿAbbās and the version of Abū l-Zubayr. The Medinan origin of the two traditions of Hishām, who is from Medina himself and provides a Medinan isnād, is consistent with the regional occurrence of the ʿUmar motif. Is Hishām’s version derived from Ibn ʿAbbās’ or Abū l-Zubayr’s? So far, Hishām’s version has more similarities to that of Ibn ʿAbbās than that of Abu l-Zubayr, such as that no location is mentioned, nor that Muḥammad is about to die, and the wording of the Prophet’s command. One part has not yet been discussed: the women motif. The women motif occurs in both of Hishām b. Saʿd’s traditions from ʿUmar and can therefore be traced back to him and dated to the second quarter or the middle of the second Islamic century, since Hishām died in 160/776–7. We have already encountered the (one) woman motif in two other versions: Ibn ʿAbbās versions 5 and 6. In two of the three traditions of Ibn ʿAbbās version 5 of Layth b. Abī Sulaym, a woman rebukes the people present for shouting instead of following the command of the Prophet. Although what she says is different from Hishām’s version, it conveys the same sentiment: a rebuke for not following the Prophet’sReligions command 2021, 12 , (“Woex FOR PEER unto REVIEW you! [It is] the command of the 3 of 33 Messenger of God!” (wayḥakum ʿahd rasūl Allāh)). The woman motif in Layth’s traditions can be dated to the second quarter of the second Islamic century, since Layth died in 138/755–6 or 143/760–1. In Ibn ʿAbbās version evolved and how, over time and across specific regions, other textual motifs have been 6, the woman is identified as Zaynab, one of the Prophet’s wives. Although her reprimand added and omitted, creating new narratives. follows a statement by ʿUmar, she addresses several people, revealing that part of the story is missing from this tradition. The woman motif in this tradition is more difficult to 2. Isnād-cum-matn Analysis Applied date, because there is only one tradition of it. It is part of Ibn Saʿd’s work in which he collected nine traditions about the unwritten document.75 Of theseBased nine on thetraditions, asānīd, thetwo traditions in which the motif appears can be divided in five contain the woman motif, for which Ibn Saʿd both times groups.lists his Theteacher first al-W groupāqid containsī as traditions ascribed to the famous Qur’ān scholar and Religions 2021, 12, 579 31 of 32 informant. However, of these nine, Ibn Saʿd traces four traditionsCompa backnion toof al-Wthe Prophet,āqidī, two ʿAbd Allāh ibn ʿAbbās (d. 67/686–7). The majority of the tra- 10 of which do not contain the woman motif. It is thereforeditions unlikely (35) that belong Ibn Satoʿ dthis or grou al- p. The second group is ascribed to the Companion Jābir Wāqidī included the woman motif in these two traditions. b.That ʿAbd would Allāh put (d. the78/697) dating and of contains seven traditions. The third group, consisting of two traditions, is traced back to the Companion and second caliph ʿUmar b. al-Khaṭṭāb (d. theAl- womenT. abaran¯ ¯ı.motif 1995. inAl-Mu Ibn ʿjam bbā al-Awsas version.t. Edited 6 with by aT.l-Wariq¯ ā b.qidAwī’s dinformant,. Allah¯ b. Mu Ibrh. ammadāhīm b. and IsmAbdāʿīl, al-Muh. sin b. Ibrah¯ ¯ım al-H. usayn¯ı. 23/644). The fourth group, with five traditions, is ascribed to Muḥammad’s nephew and who died10 vols. in 165/781–2, Cairo: Dar¯ i.e., al-H .toaramayn the same li-l- periodT. iba¯ a wa-l-Tawzas Hishām’s.¯ı , Available The woman online: motif https://al-maktaba.org/book/28171 (either one (accessed on or more13 Aprilwomen) 2021). thus seems to have been introduced intoson-in-law, the story ʿofAl īthe b. unwritten Abī Ṭālib (d. 40/661), and the last group with the second largest 11 documentAl-T. abaran¯ in¯ı. n.d.the Al-Musecondjam quarter al-Kab ¯ırof, 1st the ed. second Edited Islamic by H. amd century.¯ı Abdnumber al-Maj Unlike of¯ıd al-Salaf traditionsthe ʿUma¯ı. 25 vols.r (15) motif, in is 11 tracedvols. Beirut: back D toar¯ Iʿh.Āya ¯ ʾ al-Tursha (ath¯d. 58/678), said to have been the womanal- Arab motif¯ı. is not restricted to any particular region (LaythMuḥ ammad’sand his informant favourite Ṭ wifeāwū sand daughter of the first caliph Abū Bakr. All of the alleged Al-Tabar¯ı. 1990. The History of al-Tabar¯ı: Volume IX: The Last Years of the Prophet. Translated and annotated by Ismail K. Poonawala. are not. from Medina, but from Kufa. and Janad (Yemen), respectively),first transmit- butters occurs of these only traditions in belonged to the circle of Muḥammad’s intimates and Albany: The State University of New York Press. traditions that were not widespread, indicating that they werethe snotīra widelymate-rial accepted. describes their frequent interaction with the Prophet. Al-T. abar¯ı. 2010. Tar¯ ¯ıkh al-T. abar¯ı wa-Huwa Tar¯ ¯ıkh al-Rusul wa-l-Muluk¯ wa-ManThe ICM Kana¯ analysis f¯ı Zaman Kullbegins Minhum with, 1sta brief ed. Edited biography by S. udq of¯ı the Jam ¯ılindividuals to whom the tra- al- Attar.¯ 12 vols. Beirut: Dar¯ al-Fikr. .. ditions are attributed per group. To obtain an overview of which people have handed 2.4.Berg, Group Herbert. 4: The 2004. ʿAlī Ibn b. AbAbbī Ṭas¯ālib in NarrativeAbbasid-Era Tafs¯ır. In 0Abbasid Studies: Occasional Papers of the School of 0Abbasid Studies, Cambridge, down the tradition according to the asānīd and to identify common transmitters per group, The6–10 traditions July 2002 .of Edited the penultimate by James E. Montgomery. group are all Leuven: traced Peetersback to Publishers, Muḥammad’s pp. 129–46. nephew the asānīd have been drawn in a figure. The earliest common transmitter, the so-called ʿAlBerg,ī b. Herbert.Abī Ṭālib 2011. (d. 40/661), The Isnad¯ theand fourth the Production caliph of of the Cultural Muslim Memory: empire. Ibn TheAbb Islamicas¯ as a Casetradition Study. Numen 58: 259–83. [CrossRef] common link, is by way of hypothesis assumed to be the distributor of the tradition in materialEgger, Vernon describes O. 2018. a strongA History bond of thebetween Muslim WorldMuḥammad to 1750: Theand Making his nephew of a Civilization ʿAlī that, 2nd began ed. New York and London: Routledge. Gilliot, Claude. 2012. Abdallah¯ b. Abbas.¯ In Encyclopaedia of Islamquestion., 3rd ed. Subsequently, Edited by Kate the Fleet, mut Gudrunūn of the Krämer, traditions Denis Matringe,within a given group are first com- before Muḥammad’s prophethood and continued until the latter’s death. ʿAlī was one of John Nawas and Everett Rowson. Leiden: Brill. [CrossRef] pared with each other and then with the groups discussed earlier. the first converts and married Fāṭima, the Prophet’s daughter. When Muḥammad died, Gleave, Robert M. 2008. Al¯ı b. Ab¯ı T. alib.¯ In Encyclopaedia of Islam, 3rd ed. Edited by Kate Fleet, Gudrun Krämer, Denis Matringe, John ʿAlī led the preparation of his body for burial.76 Because of this, he did not take part in the Nawas and Everett Rowson. Leiden: Brill. [CrossRef] 2.1. Group 1: The Ibn Abbās Narrative discussionsGörke, Andreas. about 2011. succession Prospects of and the LimitsProphet. in the The Study debates of the on Historical the day Mutheh Prophetammad. Indied,The and Transmission and Dynamics of the Textual The first. group of the traditions is traced back to ʿAbd Allāh b. ʿAbbās. Ibn ʿAbbās Sources of Islam. Edited by Nicolet Boekhoff-van der Voort, Kees Versteegh and Joas Wagemakers. Leiden and Boston: Brill, pp. 137–51. was related to the Prophet through his father al-ʿAbbās, the brother of Muḥammad’s fa- Guillaume, Alfred. 1978. The Life of Muhammad—A Translation of Ibnther Ishaq’s ʿAbd Sirat Allā Rasulh, and Allah his, 5thmother, ed. Karachi: who was Oxford the Universitysister of the Press. Prophet’s wife Maymūna.12 At Ibn Ab¯ı A¯ s.im. 1980. Al-Sunna li-Ibn Ab¯ı A¯ s.im, 1st ed. Editedthe by Mutimeh. ammad when Nthea¯s. irstory al-D ¯ınis set, al-Alb thean¯ death¯ı. 2 vols. of the Beirut: Prophet, Al-Maktab he was still young, between ten al-Islam¯ ¯ı , Available online: https://al-maktaba.org/book/5930and fifteen(accessed years on 20 old April.13 2021).Ibn ʿAbbās is one of the most controversial Companions of Ibn Ab¯ı l-H. ad¯ıd. 1987. Sharh. Nahj al-Balagha¯ , 1st ed. Edited by MuhMu. ammadḥammad Ab u¯within Fad. l Ibr scholarlyah¯ ¯ım. 20 vols.debates. Beirut: In DMuslimar¯ al-J¯ıl. scholarship, he is revered as one of the Ibn al-Kalb¯ı. 1966. Jamharat al-Nasab: Das genealogische Werk desgreatest Hisham¯ Qur ibn Muʾānh. ammadexegetes al-Kalb and¯ı .his Edited name by appears Werner in Caskel. the as 2ān vols.īd of countless traditions on the Leiden: Brill. Prophet Muḥammad.14 In non-Muslim scholarship, the authenticity of the ascription of Ibn Asakir.¯ 1995–2000. Ta r¯ıkh Mad¯ınat Dimashq: Wa-Dhikr Fadliha¯ wa-Tasmiyat Man Hallaha¯ min al-Amathil¯ aw Ijtaz¯ bi-Nawa¯h¯ıha¯ min . the majority of these. traditions is criticized. Herbert Berg. and Claude Gilliot argue that Warid¯ ¯ıha¯ wa-Ahliha¯. Edited by Muhibb al-D¯ın Abu¯ Sa ¯ıd Umar b. Gharama¯ al- Amraw¯ı. 70 vols. Beirut: Dar¯ al-Fikr. . ʿ ā Ibn Asakir.¯ n.d. Kitab¯ al-Arba ¯ına al-Buldaniyya¯ . Edited by MuIbnstaf aAbb¯ Ash¯ sur. ¯should Cairo: be Maktabat regarded al-Qur as a symbolican,¯ Available figure online: to authenticate https: the information in the .. 15 //al-maktaba.org/book/5713 (accessed on 13 April 2021). tradition. Ibn H. ajar al- Asqalan¯ ¯ı. 1960. Fath. al-Bar¯ ¯ı Sharh. S. ah. ¯ıh. al-Bukhar¯ ¯ı. EditedFigure by Mu1 ish. ammada simplified Fu ad¯ representationAbd al-Baq¯ ¯ı. 13of vols.the cha Beirut:ins showing Dar¯ only the earliest general-Ma rifa, Available online: https://al-maktaba.org/book/1673ations (accessed of transmitters. on 27 April16 The 2021). common link according to Figure 1 would be Ibn ʿAbbās.17 In Ibn H. ajar al- Asqalan¯ ¯ı. 1971. Lisan¯ al-M¯ızan¯ , 2nd ed. 7 vols. Beirut:order Mu toassasat determine al-A lam whether¯ı li-l-Mat these.bu¯ at.¯ traditions are indeed from Ibn ʿAbbās, the texts (mutūn) Ibn H. ajar al- Asqalan¯ ¯ı. 2001. Tahdh¯ıb al-Tahdh¯ıb, 1st ed. Edited byof Ibr theah¯ ¯ımtra al-Zaybaqditions will and beAdik ¯compared. Murshid. The 4 vols. textual Beirut: analysis Mu assasat revealed six different versions of al-Risala.¯ the tradition about the unwritten document, which correspond to the numbers indicated Ibn H. anbal. 1993. Musnad al-Imam¯ Ah. mad ibn H. anbal, 1st ed. Editedin F byigu Mure h.1ammad. Three Abdof th al-Salem gam¯o bAbdack t al-Sho Saafʿ¯īd¯ı. 6b. vols. Jubayr Beirut: (d. D94/714),ar¯ a Kufan scholar of the al-Kutub al- Ilmiyya. Qurʾān, jurisprudence and Ḥadīth, who, according to Muslim biographies, was a student Ibn H. ibban.¯ 1973–1983. Kitab¯ al-Thiqat¯ . Edited by M. Abd al-Mu ¯ıd Khan¯ e.a. 9 vols. Haydarabad: Da¯ irat al-Ma arif¯ al- Uthmaniyya.¯ of Ibn ʿAbbās.Error! Reference source not found. Ibn H. ibban.¯ 1997. S. ah. ¯ıh. Ibn H. ibban¯ bi-Tart¯ıb Ibn Balban¯ , 3rd ed. Edited by Shu ayb al-Arna ut¯ .. 18 vols. Beirut: Mu assassat al-Risala.¯ Ibn Hisham.¯ 1998. Al-S¯ıra al-Nabawiyya li-Ab¯ı Muh. ammad Abd al-Malik b. Hisham¯ al-Ma aﬁr¯ ¯ı: Al-Ma rufa¯ bi-S¯ırat Ibn Hisham¯ . Edited by Muh. ammad Al¯ı al-Qut.b and Muh. ammad al-Dal¯ ¯ı Balt.ah. 4 vols. Beirut: Al-Maktaba al- As.riyya. Ibn Kath¯ır. 2000. The Life of the Prophet Muh. ammad. Translated by Trevor Le Gassick. 4 vols. Reading: Garnet Publishing. Ibn Kath¯ır. n.d. Al-S¯ıra al-Nabawiyya. 4 vols. Edited by Mus.t.afa¯ Abd al-Wah¯ . id. Beirut: Dar¯ Ih. ya¯ al-Turath¯ al- Arab¯ı. Ibn Sa d. 1997. Al-T. abaqat¯ al-Kubra¯, 1st ed. Edited by Muh. ammad Abd al-Qadir¯ At.a.¯ 8 vols. Beirut: Dar¯ al-Kutub al- Ilmiyya. Juynboll, Gautier H. A. 2007. Encyclopedia of Canonical H. ad¯ıth. Leiden: Brill. Kister, M. J. n.d. Djabir¯ b. Abd Allah.¯ In Encyclopaedia of Islam, 2nd ed. Edited by P. Bearman, T. Bianquis, C. E. Bosworth, E. van ¯ Donzel and W.¯ P. Heinrichs. Leiden: Brill, pp. 230–33. [CrossRef] Lane, Edward William. 1984. An Arabic-English Lexicon, 1st revised ed. 2 vols. Cambridge: Islamic Society Trust. Miskinzoda, Gurdofarid. 2014. The Story of ‘Pen and Paper’ and its Interpretation in Muslim Literary and Historical Tradition. In The Study of Shi i Islam: History, Theology and Law. Edited by Farhad Daftary and Gurdofarid Miskinzoda. London and New York: I.B. Taurus, pp. 231–49. Motzki, Harald. 1996. Quo vadis Had¯ıth-Forschung? Eine kritische Untersuchung von G.H.A. Juynboll: ‘Naﬁ¯ the mawla¯ of Ibn Umar, and his position in Muslim Had¯ıth Literature’. Der Islam 73: 40–80, 193–231. Motzki, Harald. 2010. Analysing Muslim Traditions: Studies in Legal, Exegetical and Maghaz¯ ¯ı H. ad¯ıth, with Nicolet Boekhoff-van der Voort and Sean W. Anthony. Leiden and Boston: Brill. Motzki, Harald. 2012. Sa ¯ıd b. Djubayr. In Encyclopaedia of Islam, 2nd ed. Edited by P. Bearman, T. Bianquis, C. E. Bosworth, E. van ¯ Donzel and W. P. Heinrichs.¯ Leiden: Brill. [CrossRef] Muslim. 2012. S. ah. ¯ıh. Muslim. Edited by Ah. mad Shams al-D¯ın. 5 vols. Beirut: Dar¯ al-Kutub al- Ilmiyya. Religions 2021, 12, x FOR PEER REVIEW 16 of 33