Analysing Muslim Traditions: Studies in Legal, Exegetical and Magh[a.bar]z[i.bar] Had[i.bar]th.

• Author: Brown, Jonathan
• Position: Book review

Analysing Muslim Traditions: Studies in Legal, Exegetical and Magh[a.bar]z[i.bar] Had[i.bar]th. By HARALD MOTZKI, with Nicolet Boekhoff-van der Voort and Sean W. Anthony. Islamic History and Civilization, vol. 78. Leiden: BRILL, 2010. Pp. xv + 502. $258.

In a series of articles and in his book on the origins of Islamic jurisprudence (1991; Eng. trans. 2002), Harald Motzki introduced a new and badly needed approach to our study of early Islamic intellectual history. Motzki challenged the reigning conclusions of Joseph Schacht and the late G. H. A. Juynboll by demonstrating convincingly that their study of early had[i.bar]th and law used only a small and selective body of sources, and that it was based on skeptical assumptions which, taken together, often asked the reader to believe a set of coincidences far more unlikely than the possibility that a had[i.bar]th might actually date from the genesis of the Islamic community. Motzki's work and that of those who have followed in his footsteps have contributed greatly to advancing the study of early Islamic history and law.

To describe his method of analyzing and dating had[i.bar]ths, Motzki coined the term "isn[a.bar]d-cum-matn" analysis. It is based on three main assumptions. First, the variants of a had[i.bar]th are, at least partially, the results of the process of transmission. Second, the isn[a.bar]ds of these variants of a had[i.bar]th reflect, at least partially, the actual course of their transmission. Third, if the texts (sing. matn) of these variants emanating from a supposed common source are both similar enough and seemingly independent, then that source would seem to be an "authentic moment" of transmission. Behind Motzki's method lies an even more important assumption, in my opinion, namely, that it is inaccurate to assume that intentional forgery and deception are the most likely explanation for all phenomena of had[i.bar]th transmission. Touted by earlier scholars such as Juynboll as the commonsense explanation behind the byzantine web of had[i.bar]th transmissions, Motzki sees "forgery" as less likely in many instances than a number of other mundane, realistic, and totally predictable factors.

It is also very important, however, not to read too much into Motzki's method. Many of his readers, especially those espousing a fideistic approach to the had[i.bar]th corpus, have assumed that he believes that had[i.bar]th are generally authentic. In this volume, Motzki clarifies this misunderstanding, stating clearly, "I do not believe that. I only assume that many traditions found in the extant compilations were not invented by the compilers but have a history (including forgeries) which can be retraced to a certain point in time. The main aim of my approach is dating traditions" (pp. 234-35).

This volume of articles on early Islamic history, each applying the Motzkian school of isn[a.bar]d-cum-matn analysis to a specific topic, is an extremely useful tool for understanding Motzki's school of thought as delimited on both its sanguine and skeptical borders. The first two chapters are translations into English of...