The Historical Value of the Traditional Islamic Sources W/ Dr. Sean Anthony
Vložit
- čas přidán 23. 04. 2023
- This is a clip about the traditional Islamic sources, such as the Life of Muhammad and material found in Hadith, and its value for historical scholarship in Islamic Studies. This clip is taken from my interview with Professor Sean Anthony. If you enjoyed this video please subscribe to the channel and like the video! Please be sure to check out the full interview, here: • Sean Anthony: The Hist...
Happy Mubarak Dear Sean Anthony May Allah bless You and all Muslims all over the world
I wish we could get a list of these??? Where can I find this list?
what kadmon story is being talked about here? anybody has references?
It's called Caedmon's hymn.
If you read about the life of Caedmon, it sounds awfully similar to that of the story of Prophet Muhammad receiving the first verses of the Qur’an. But instead of being able to read, Caedmon was unable to sing until he sung somehow regardless. And was able to sing poetic lines not of his own making, but inspired.
Where is the earliest manuscript of the biography of Muhammad attributed to Ibn Hisham?
We don't have it.
It is upsetting that a big claim is made that implies accounts giving a lot of evidence of Mohammed for the pre Abassid period it's not followed through with detail from example texts and how those have been analysed. I understand the point that surviving dated text in early 8th century could support the traditional narrative, but that is not backed up. Do they exist in original form and carbon dated, and what do they say? Are there cross references from other material? Are there sources that are not vulnerable to retrospective falsification? Opportunity missed again.
Uthmanic codification is not mentioned in the Sira of Salim b. Dhakwan. Anthony got it wrong here ;)
can you expand?
Anthony spoke of various sources here.
Yeah, it might be mentioned in other sources, but it doesn’t seem to be in Salim’s sira.
5:28 A patchwork ‼️
ibn Hisham admits he has omitted from his history certain events that he found offensive/scandalous and other events that, if mentioned/written, would have made some people upset.
This is a damning admission for a historian to make. In my opinion it renders his entire biography of muhammad a best extremely biased, and at worst utterly useless.
So true .. FULLY BIASED.
Well at least he admitted it instead of hiding it
Recycled oriental view on Islam. Perhaps abit more.. revisions.
How did the kingdom of the shah survive when the Muslims conquered Persia?? in don’t get this guy.
These revisionist think they know it all, bunch of jokers.
😂But if they were talking about christian origins you’d agree with them huh