Sepintas Lalu Tentang Ibnu Ishaq

Sepintas Lalu Tentang Ibnu Ishaq

Namanya Muhamad bin Ishaq . Hidup sezaman dengan Imam Malik dan pernah berjumpa dengan Anas bin Malik dan Said ibnu Musayyab.

Beliau tidak rasminya diangkat sebagai ‘bapa sirah’ dan cerita-cerita sirah yang bersumber dari beliau banyak bertebaran dalam kitab-kitab sirah kemudiannya . Malah dalam sukatan pelajaran Universiti Al-Azhar terdapat cerita-cerita yang bersumber dari beliau.

 

Salah seorang anak muridnya Ibnu Hisham telah mengutip secara bebas ( ataupun dengan tapisan yang ringan) cerita-cerita dari Ibnu Ishaq dan memuatkannya di dalam kitabnya yang termasyhur Sirah Ibnu Hisham, sebuah kitab rujukan sirah yang utama masakini.

Ibnu Ishaq ialah seorang penganut Syiah . Anutannya telah mempengaruhi cara beliau berfikir dan telah banyak diabadikan di dalam kitab-kitab yang beliau nukilkan atau dalam siri pengajiannya.

Banyak cerita-cerita ganjil berkenaan kehidupan dan suasana awal Islam yang bersumber hanya dari beliau seorang. Cerita-cerita ini banyak untuk menyokong fahaman syiahnya iaitu samada mengangkat Saidina Ali ra atau keluarganya, mengurangkan sumbangan atau memburuk-burukkan sahabat yang lain terutama Saidina Muawiyah serta sahabat-sahabat utama seperti Abu Bakar , Umar ra

Di antara cerita yang diriwayatkan oleh beliau yang dipertikaikan oleh Ulamak ialah:

a) Kisah Hindun ra , ibu kepada saidina Muawiyah, yang dikatakan memakan jantung Saidinia Hamzah. Cerita ini tidak pernah diceritakn oleh orang lain malah dalam Shahih Bukari , Wahsyi ra yang membunuh Saidina Hamzah tidak pernah menyebut tentang kisah ini. Motif utama ialah mencacatkan Hindun, ibu kepada Muawiyah , musuh utama golongan Syiah.

b) Kekarutan dalam cerita-cerita tentang Muawiyah ra dengan menggambarkan beliau sebagai seorang pemutar belit dan suka mengambil kesempatan. Motifnya ialah untuk mencederakan peribadi sahabat besar ini kerana dengan tercederanya beliau bermakna Quran yang ada hari ini berkemungkinan tercedera juga, kerana beliau adalah salah seorang jurutulis wahyu nabi.

c) Cerita hijrah nabi saw dari rumah beliau saw pada waktu malam dengan Saidina Ali menggantikan tempat tidur baginda saw. Pada mata kasarnya ianya menunjukkan keberanian, kepatuhan dan pengorbanan Saidina Ali. Tetapi dalam kitab hadis paling sahih, Sahih Bukhari , mengatakan nabi saw berhijrah dari rumah Saidina Abu Bakar di waktu siang hari .

Dalam Sahih Bukhari dinyatakan dengan jelas peranan keluarga Abu Bakar seperti Abd Rahman, Asma’ dan lain-dain dalam peristiwa hijrah ini. Tidak lain cerita yang dibawa oleh Ibnu Ishak ialah untuk menutup sumbangan dan pengorbanan besar Abu Bakar ra sekeluarga sesuai dengan akidah Syiah yang mengkafirkan sahabat-sahabat besar seperti Abu Bakar, Umar, Usman, Aisyah dan seterusnya.

d) Kisah Isra’ nabi dari rumah Ummu hani’ . Ummu Hani ialah kakak kepada Saidina Ali dan masa ini masih lagi belum Islam . Secara sepintas lalu dapat diperhatikan Ibnu Ishak cuba mengaitkan setiap peristiwa besar dengan Saidina Ali sekeluarga. Tetapi dalam kes ini beliau sebenarnya cuba mencederakan maruah Rasullullah saw sendiri . Kalau cerita ini benar, kita akan mengatakan bahawa nabi saw bersunyi-sunyi ( atau tidur) di rumah isteri orang tanpa kehadiran suaminya. Alangkah dahsyatnya fitnah yang ingin dilemparkan oleh Ibnu Ishaq terhadap nabi saw.

e) Kisah mempersaudarakan Ali ra dengan nabi saw. Suatu kisah yang tidak masuk akal bila dipandang dari tujuan ‘mempersaudarakan’ itu sendiri, kerana sememangnya Ali adalah saudara kepada nabi saw dan beliau ra adalah sama-sama dari Mekah. Tidak lain ini adalah untuk menaikkan martabat Ali ra dari yang sepatutnya untuk merasionalkan hujjah bahawa beliaulah yang sepatutnya dilantik menjadi khalifah selepas wafatnya nabi saw.

Banyak lagi kisah aneh yang dikeluarkan oleh beliau seorang. Maka tidak menghairankan bila ulamak besar mengatakan :

”…..salah seorang dajjal ” , ” Kami telah menghalau Ibnu Ishaq keluar dari Madinah” – Imam Malik

“Dia meriwayatkan hadith-hadith karut dari orang-orang majhul ( orang yang tidak diketahui latarbelakangnya) ” – Ali Ibnu Al-Madini

” Muhammad bin Ishaq adalah di antara perawi-perawi yang tidak menepati syarat-syarat hadith sahih” – Imam Nawawi

“Aku bersaksi bahawa Muhammad bin Ishaq adalah pendusta besar ” – Yahya bin Said al-Qatthan

Mereka yang men’ta’dil’ kannya bersikap demikian kerana tidak mengetahui dengan jelas kedudukan sebenar beliau samada kerana tidak hidup sezaman dengannya atau tidak dapat mengesan sifat sebenar disebabkan oleh sikap “Taqiyah” yang diamalkan sesuai dengan kehendak ajaran Syiah yang dianutinya.

Catatan sejarah perlu diperbetulkan kerana ini akan menjaga keutuhan agama Islam ini sendiri. Kita tidak akan berpuashati menganut agama Islam sekiranya nabinya besekedudukan dengan isteri orang, sahabat-sahabat utama yang meneruskan syiar ini berperangai tidak senonoh malah menjadi kafir selepas peninggalan nabi saw, jurutulis wahyu di mana Quran yang kita pegang hari ini merupakan orang yang tidak boleh dipercayai dan sentiasa mencari peluang untuk habuan dunia malah beliau datang dari keluarga yang tidak bertamaddun.

Sikap yang perlu diambil ialah kita wajib menolak seorang yang bernama Muhammad bin Ishaq secara total untuk menyelamatkan Islam yang kita cintai ini secara total. Wallahua’lam

 

============

 

Ibn Ishaq

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Muslim historian
Muḥammad ibn Isḥāq ibn Yasār
Title Ibn Isḥaq
Born 85 AH /704 AD[1]
Medina
Died 150–159 AH/761–770 AD[1][2]
Baghdad
Ethnicity Arab
Era Islamic golden age
Region Medina, Alexandria, Baghdad
Main interests Prophetic biography

Muḥammad ibn Isḥāq ibn Yasār ibn Khiyār (according to some sources, ibn Khabbār, or Kūmān, or Kūtān,[3] Arabic: محمد بن إسحاق بن يسار بن خيار‎, or simply ibn Isḥaq ابن إسحاق, meaning “the son of Isaac”) (died 767, or 761[2]) was an Arab Muslim historian and hagiographer. Under the aegis of the ‘Abbasid caliph Al-Mansur, Ibn Ishaq collected oral traditions that formed the basis of the most important biography of the Islamic prophet Muhammad.

Contents

Life

Born in Medina, ibn Isḥaq was the grandson of a Christian man, Yasār, who had been captured in one of Khalid ibn al-Walid‘s campaigns and taken to Medina as a slave. His grandfather became the slave of Qays ibn Makhrama ibn al-Muṭṭalib ibn ʿAbd Manāf ibn Quṣayy and, having accepted Islam, was manumitted and became his mawlā, thus acquiring the nisbat al-Muṭṭalibī. Yasār’s three sons, Mūsā, ʿAbd al-Raḥmān, and Isḥāq, were all known as transmitters of akhbār, who collected and recounted tales of the past. Isḥāq married the daughter of another mawlā and from this marriage ibn Isḥāq was born.[3]

There are no details of his early life, but in view of the family nature of early akhbār and hadith transmission, it was natural that he should follow in their footsteps. He was also influenced by the work of ibn Shihab al-Zuhri, who praised the young ibn Ishaq for his knowledge of maghāzī (literally, stories of military expeditions). Around the age of 30, ibn Isḥaq arrived in Alexandria and studied under Yazīd ibn Abī Ḥabīb. After his return to Medina, based on one account, he was ordered out of Medina for relating a false hadith from a woman he did not meet (Fāṭima bint al-Mundhir, wife of Hishām ibn ʿUrwa).[3] But those who defended him, like Sufyan ibn `Uyaynah, stated that Ibn Ishaq told them that he did meet her.[4] Leaving Medina (or forced to leave), he traveled eastwards towards what is now Iraq, stopping in Kufa, al-Jazīra, Ray, finally settling in Baghdad. There, the new Abbasid dynasty, having overthrown the Umayyad caliphs, was establishing a new capital.

Ibn Isḥaq moved to the capital and found patrons in the new regime.[5] He was commissioned by the Abbasid caliph Al-Mansur to write an all-encompassing history book starting from the creation of Adam to the present day, known as “al-Mubtadaʾ wa al-Baʿth wa al-Maghāzī” (lit. “In the Beginning, the mission [of Muhammad], and the expeditions”). It was kept in the court library of Baghdad,[6] although none of his writings are now extant. He died in Baghdad around 761–770 AD.

Biography of Muhammad

Ibn Isḥaq collected oral traditions about the life of the Islamic prophet Muhammad. These traditions, which he orally dictated to his pupils,[6] are now known collectively as Sīratu Rasūli l-Lāh (Arabic: سيرة رسول الله‎ “Life of the Messenger of God”) and survive mainly in the following sources:

  • An edited copy, or recension, of his work by his student al-Bakka’i, which was further edited by ibn Hisham. Al-Bakka’i’s work has perished and only ibn Hisham’s has survived, in copies.[7]
  • An edited copy, or recension, prepared by his student Salamah ibn Fadl al-Ansari. This also has perished, and survives only in the copious extracts to be found in al-Tabari’s voluminous History of the Prophets and Kings.[7][8]
  • Fragments of several other recensions. Guillaume lists them on p. xxx of his preface, but regards most of them as so fragmentary as to be of little worth.

According to Donner, the material in ibn Hisham and al-Tabari is “virtually the same”.[7] However, there is some material to be found in al-Tabari that was not preserved by ibn Hisham. For example, al-Tabari includes the controversial episode of the Satanic Verses, while ibn Hisham does not.[6][9]

Following the publication of previously unknown fragments of ibn Isḥaq’s traditions, recent scholarship suggests that ibn Isḥaq did not commit to writing any of the traditions now extant, but they were narrated orally to his transmitters. These new texts, found in accounts by Salama al-Ḥarranī and Yūnus ibn Bukayr, were hitherto unknown and contain versions different from those found in other works.[10]

Views about his sīra narratives

Notable scholars like the jurist Ahmad ibn Hanbal appreciated his efforts in collecting sīra narratives and accepted him on maghāzī, despite having reservations on his methods on matters of fiqh.[3] Ibn Ishaq also influenced later sīra writers like Ibn Hishām and Ibn Sayyid al-Nās. Other scholars, like Ibn Qayyim Al-Jawziyya, made use of his chronological ordering of events.[11]

The most widely discussed criticism of his sīra was that of his contemporary Mālik ibn Anas.[3] Mālik rejected the stories of Muhammad and the Jews of Medina on the ground that they were taken solely based on accounts by sons of Jewish converts.[12] These same stories have also been denounced as “odd tales” (gharāʾib) later by ibn Hajar al-Asqalani.[12] Mālik and others also thought that ibn Isḥāq exhibited Qadari tendencies, had a preference for Ali over Uthman (Guillaume also found evidence of this, p.xxii,xxiv),[3] and relied too heavily on what were later called the Isrā’īlīyāt. Furthermore, early literary critics, like ibn Sallām al-Jumaḥī and ibn al-Nadīm, censured ibn Isḥāq for knowingly including forged poems in his biography,[3] and for attributing poems to persons not known to have written any poetry.[10] The 14th-century historian al-Dhahabī, using hadith terminology, noted that in addition to the forged (makdhūb) poetry, Ibn Isḥāq filled his sīra with many munqaṭiʿ and munkar reports.[13]

Guillaume notices that Ibn Isḥāq frequently uses a number of expressions to convey his skepticism or caution. Beside a frequent note that only God knows whether a particular statement is true or not (p. xix), Guillaume suggests that Ibn Isḥāq deliberately substitute the ordinary term “ḥaddathanī” by a word of suspicion “zaʿama” (“he alleged”) to show his skepticism about certain traditions (p. xx).

Reconstruction of the text

The original text of the Sīrat Rasūl Allāh by Ibn Ishaq (Medina 85 A.H.; Bagdad 151 ) did not survive. Yet it was one of the earliest substantial biographies of Muhammad. Fortunately, as noted above, much of the original text was copied over into a work of his own by Ibn Hisham (Basra; Fustat c. 218 A.H.).[14]

Ibn Hisham also “abbreviated, annotated, and sometimes altered” the text of Ibn Ishaq, according to Guillaume (at xvii). Interpolations made by Ibn Hisham are said to be recognizable and can be deleted, leaving as a remainder, a so-called “edited” version of Ibn Ishaq’s original text (otherwise lost). In addition, Guillaume (at xxxi) points out that Ibn Hisham’s version omits various narratives in the text which were given by al-Tabari in his History.[15][16] In these passages al-Tabari expressly cites Ibn Ishaq as a source.[17][18]

Thus can be reconstructed an ‘improved’ “edited” text, i.e., by distinguishing or removing Ibn Hisham’s additions, and by adding from al-Tabari passages attributed to Ibn Ishaq. Yet the result’s degree of approximation to Ibn Ishaq’s original text can only be conjectured. Such a reconstruction is available, e.g., in Guillaume’s translation.[19] Here, Ibn Ishaq’s introductory chapters describe pre-Islamic Arabia, before he then commences with the narratives surrounding the life of Muhammad (in Guillaume at 109-690).

Translations

In 1864 the Heidelberg professor Gustav Weil produced an annotated German translation. Several decades later the Hungarian scholar Edward Rehatsek left an English translation, but one not published until over a half-century later.

Alfred Guillaume‘s 1955 English translation of Ibn Isḥaq is currently favored by non-Arabic speakers, although some have questioned the reliability of this translation.[20][21] In it Guillaume combined ibn Hisham and those materials in al-Tabari cited as ibn Isḥaq’s whenever they differed or added to ibn Hisham, believing that in so doing he was restoring a lost work. The extracts from al-Tabari are clearly marked, although sometimes it is difficult to distinguish them from the main text (only a capital “T” is used).[22]

Other Works

Ibn Isḥaq wrote several works, none of which survive. Apart from al-Mubtadaʾ wa al-Baʿth wa al-Maghāzī, he is credited with Kitāb al-kh̲ulafāʾ, which al-Umawwī related to him (Fihrist,92; Udabāʾ, VI, 401) and a book of Sunan (Ḥād̲j̲d̲j̲ī Ḵh̲alīfa, II, 1008).[6]

Reliability of his ahadith

In hadith studies, ibn Isḥaq’s hadith is generally thought to be “good” (ḥasan) (assuming an accurate and trustworthy isnad, or chain of transmission)[23] and himself having a reputation of being “sincere” or “trustworthy” (ṣadūq). However, a general analysis of his isnads has given him the negative distinction of being a mudallis, meaning one who did not name his teacher, claiming instead to narrate directly from his teacher’s teacher.[24] Because of his tadlīs, many scholars including Muhammad al-Bukhari hardly ever used his narrations in their sahih books.[25] According to al-Khaṭīb al-Baghdādī, all scholars of ahadith except one no longer rely on any of his narrations, although truth is not foreign to him.[26] Others, like Ahmad ibn Hanbal, rejected his narrations on all matters related to fiqh.[3] Al-Dhahabī concluded that despite his good qualities any narration solely transmitted through him should probably be considered as containing munkar.[13]

See also

References

  1. ^ a b Mustafa al-Saqqa, Ibrahim al-Ibyari and Abdu l-Hafidh Shalabi, Tahqiq Kitab Sirah an-Nabawiyyah, Dar Ihya al-Turath, p. 20
  2. ^ a b Robinson 2003, p. xv
  3. ^ a b c d e f g h Jones, J. M. B. (1968). “ibn Isḥāḳ”. Encyclopaedia of Islam. 3 (2nd ed.). Brill Academic Publishers. pp. 810–1.
  4. ^ Ibn Abī Ḥātim, Taqdima al-maʿrifa li kitāb al-jarḥ wa al-taʿdīl, at “Sufyān ibn ʿUyayna”
  5. ^ Robinson 2003, p.27
  6. ^ a b c d Raven, Wim, Sīra and the Qurʾān – Ibn Isḥāq and his editors, Encyclopaedia of the Qur’an. Ed. Jane Dammen McAuliffe. Vol. 5. Leiden, The Netherlands: Brill Academic Publishers, 2006. p29-51.
  7. ^ a b c Donner, Fred McGraw (1998). Narratives of Islamic origins: the beginnings of Islamic historical writing. Darwin Press. p. 132. ISBN 978-0-87850-127-4.
  8. ^ W. Montgomery Watt and M. V. McDonald, “Translator’s Forward” xi-xlvi, at xi-xiv, in The History of al-Tabari. Volume VI. Muhammad at Mecca (SUNY 1988). Regarding al-Tabari’s narratives of Muhammad, the translators state, “The earliest and most important of these sources was Ibn Ishaq, whose book on the Prophet is usually known as the Sirah. Discussed here are Ibn Ishaq and his Sirah, the various recensions of it, Guillaume’s translation, and Ibn Hisham.
  9. ^ Cf., Ibn Ishaq (Guillaume’s reconstruction, at 165-167) and al-Tabari (SUNY edition, at VI: 107-112).
  10. ^ a b Raven, W. (1997). “SĪRA”. Encyclopaedia of Islam. 9 (2nd ed.). Brill Academic Publishers. pp. 660–3. ISBN 90-04-10422-4.
  11. ^ Muḥammad Ibn ʻAbd al-Wahhāb, Imam (2003). Mukhtaṣar zād al-maʻād. Darussalam publishers Ltd. p. 345. ISBN 978-9960-897-18-9.
  12. ^ a b Arafat, W. N. (1976-01-01). “New Light on the Story of Banū Qurayẓa and the Jews of Medina”. Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society of Great Britain and Ireland (2): 100–107. ISSN 0035-869X. JSTOR 25203706.
  13. ^ a b Al-Dhahabī, Mīzān al-iʿtidāl fī naqd al-rijāl, at “Muhammad ibn Ishaq”
  14. ^ Dates and places, and discussions, re Ibn Ishaq and Ibn Hisham in Guillaume (xiii, xli).
  15. ^ Al-Tabari (839-923) wrote his History in Arabic: Ta’rikh al-rusul wa’l-muluk (Eng: History of Prophets and Kings). A 39-volume translation was published by State University of New York as The History of al-Tabari; volumes six to nine concern the life of Muhammad.
  16. ^ Omitted by Ibn Hisham and found in al-Tabari are, e.g., at 1192 (History of al-Tabari (SUNY 1988), VI: 107-112), and at 1341 (History of al-Tabari (SUNY 1987), at VII: 69-73).
  17. ^ E.g., al-Tabari, The History of al-Tabari, volume VI. Muhammad at Mecca (SUNY 1988) at p.56 (1134).
  18. ^ See here above: “The text and its survival”, esp. re Salamah ibn Fadl al-Ansari. Cf, Guillaume at xvii.
  19. ^ Ibn Hisham’s ‘narrative’ additions and his comments are removed from the text and isolated in a separate section (Guillaume at 3 note, 691-798), while Ibn Hisham’s philological additions are evidently omitted (cf., Guillaume at xli).
  20. ^ Humphreys, R. Stephen (1991). Islamic History: A framework for Inquiry (Revised ed.). Princeton University Press. p. 78. ISBN 0-691-00856-6.
  21. ^ Tibawi, Abdul Latif (1956). Ibn Isḥāq’s Sīra, a critique of Guillaume’s English translation: the life of Muhammad. OUP.
  22. ^ E.g., Guillaume at 11-12.
  23. ^ M. R. Ahmad (1992). Al-sīra al-nabawiyya fī dhawʾ al-maṣādir al-aṣliyya: dirāsa taḥlīlīyya (1st ed.). Riyadh: King Saud University.
  24. ^ Qaraḍāwī, Yūsuf (2007). Approaching the Sunnah: comprehension and controversy. IIIT. p. 188. ISBN 978-1-56564-418-2.
  25. ^ A Biography of the Prophet of Islam, By Mahdī Rizq Allāh Aḥmad, Syed Iqbal Zaheer, pg. 18
  26. ^ al-Khaṭīb al-Baghdādī, Tārīkh Baghdād

Bibliography

Primary Sources

  • Alfred Guillaume, The Life of Muhammad. A translation of Isḥaq’s “Sirat Rasul Allah”, with introduction [xiii-xliii] and notes (Oxford University 1955), xlvii + 815 pages. The Arabic text used by Guillaume was the Cairo edition of 1355/1937 by Mustafa al-Saqqa, Ibrahim al-Abyari and Abdul-Hafiz Shalabi, as well as another, that of F. Wustenfeld (Göttingen 1858–1860). Ibn Hasham’s “Notes” are given at pages 691–798.
  • Gustav Weil, Das Leben Mohammeds nach Mohammed ibn Ishak, bearbeitet von Abd Malik ibn Hischam (Stuttgart: J. B. Metzler’schen Buchh. 1864), 2 volumes. The Sirah Rasul Allah translated into German with annotations. Volume 1
  • Ibn Isḥaq, The Life of Muhammad. Apostle of Allah (London: The Folio Society 1964), 177 pages. From a translation by Edward Rehatsek (Hungary 1819 – Mumbai [Bombay] 1891), abridged and introduced [at 5–13] by Michael Edwards. Rehatsek completed his translation; in 1898 it was given to the Royal Asiatic Society of London by F.F.Arbuthnot.
  • Ibn Isḥaq (2004). Al-Mazīdī, Aḥmad Farīd. ed (in Arabic). Al-Sīrah al-Nabawiyah li-ibn Isḥāq (السيرة النبوية لابن إسحاق). Bayrūt: Dār al-kutub al-ʻilmiyah. ISBN 2-7451-3982-7.
  • Ibn Isḥaq (1976). Hamidullah, Muhammad. ed (in Arabic). Sīrat ibn Isḥāq al-musammāh bi-kitāb al-Mubtadaʼ wa-al-Mabʻath wa-al-maghāzī (سيرة ابن اسحاق، المسماة ب‍كتاب المبتدأ والمبعث والمغازي ). Al-Rabāṭ al-Maghrib: Maʻhad al-Dirāsāt wa-al-Abḥāth lil-Taʻrīb.

Traditional Biographies

Secondary Sources

  • Donner, Fred McGraw (1998). Narratives of Islamic origins: the beginnings of Islamic historical writing. Darwin Press. ISBN 978-0-87850-127-4.
  • Robinson, Chase, Islamic Historiography, Cambridge University Press, 2003, ISBN 0-521-58813-8
  • Wansbrough, John, Quranic Studies, 1977, as reprinted in 2004, ISBN 0-19-713588-9
  • Wansbrough, John, The Sectarian Milieu, 1978, as reprinted in 2005. ISBN 0-19-713596-X.
  • ‘Arafat, W. (1958-01-01). “Early Critics of the Authenticity of the Poetry of the “Sīra””. Bulletin of the School of Oriental and African Studies, University of London 21 (1/3): 453–463. ISSN 0041-977X. JSTOR 610611.