them a warner from among themselves, and the unbelievers said, 'This is a sorcerer, a liar '" In Surah xliii. 29, we read: "And when the truth came to them, they said, 'This is sorcery, and verily we are unbelievers in it.' Here Al Baizawi says, 1 "Accordingly they named the Qur'an sorcery." And again, in Surah xlvi. 6, it is thus said: "And when Our signs are read aloud over them as evidences, those who disbelieved the truth when it has come to them have said, 'This is manifest sorcery.'" In this passage we find exactly the same expression as in Surah lxi. 6. Moreover, Al Baizawi 2 explains "the truth" here as the verses ".

Many Muslims urge that in the Traditions (احاديث) many strange miracles are attributed to Muhammad. Doubtless this is true, as we shall see. But the question of the reliability of the Traditions in reference to this matter must be considered, before we accept their evidence as a proof that such miracles were actually wrought. In the first place, as we have seen, the Qur'an itself not only does not mention any of Muhammad's miracles, but it even explains why God did not give him miracle-working power. To the thoughtful and learned man, whether Muslim or Christian, this evidence of the Qur'an far outweighs any number of Traditions. Moreover, while it is easy to understand why in later times traditions arose which ascribed miracles to Muhammad, on the other hand it is quite impossible to imagine that these verses of the Qur'an which show that he wrought no miracle could have been interpolated or corrupted in order to deny his miracles, if he had worked any such. Secondly, those who compiled the Traditions had no personal knowledge of the events which they recorded. They lived some hundreds of years after Muhammad's time, and therefore had to rely upon statements repeated orally and said to be traceable to trustworthy witnesses. The collectors of the

1 Vol. ii, p. 238.
2 Vol. ii, p. 254.

Traditions contained in the Sihahu's Sittah died at 1 the following dates: Bukhari, A.H. 256; Muslim, A.H. 261; Tirmidhi, A.H. 279; Abu Da'ud, A.H. 275; An Nasa'i A.H. 303; Ibn Majah, A.H. 273. Among the Shiites the chief works on the subject belong to still later dates: the Kafi of Abu Ja'far Muhammad to A.H. 329; the Man la yastahdirahu'l Faqih of Shaikh 'Ali to A.H. 381; the Tahdhib of Shaikh Abu Ja'far to A.H. 466; the Istibsar to A.H. 406; and the Nahju'l Balaghah of Sayyid Radi to A. H. 406. The fact that the Sunnis and the Shi'ites, while accepting the same Qur'an cannot agree upon the same collections of Traditions, shows how unreliable Tradition is when it contradicts the Qur'an. The Traditions given by Bukhari in his Sahih are probably the most reliable of all; next come those accepted by Muslim and Tirmidhi. But, in order to show the honoured reader of these pages what an immense number of unreliable Traditions were current even in Bukhari's time, and how very much credulous imagination or falsehood then prevailed, it will suffice if we remind him that Bukhari himself informs us that he collected 100,000 Traditions, which he thought might be correct, and 200,000 unreliable ones. Out of the whole 300,000, he finally held only 7,275 to be trustworthy; and, when he had eliminated repetitions, these were reduced to 4,000.2 Even these are not all trustworthy, for they often contradict one another, and sometimes even are contrary to the Qur'an, as in this matter of Muhammad's miracles. Abu Da'ud collected 500,000 Traditions, but accepted only 4,000 of them.3

But let us adduce some of these asserted miracles that their nature may be clearly seen.

(1) Bukhari, on what he considers good authority, tells 4 the following tale. "The Prophet sent a company

1 Kashfu'z Zunun, vol. ii, pp. 34-37.
2 See the Introduction to the Mishkat, last page: ed. of A.H. 1298, Haidari Press, by Shaikh 'Abdu'l Haqq of Delhi.
3 Kashfu'z Zunun, vol. ii, p. 34.
4 Mishkat, pp. 523, 524.