Jewish myths in Muslim traditions

In answer to the video "How Islam Shaped Its Sources"

The type of hadith classified as israeliyyat are Jewish myths, used by story-tellers, who would include them in their narrations. They wanted to answer the popular sense of curiosity in trivial, spiritually inconsequential details in the lives and times of former prophets. These israeliyyat were mainly written by the early converts from the people of the book. With Islam's fast advance throughout the Judeo-Christian communities of the Middle East, it is obvious that these converts would not at once totally free their minds from their previous religious tradition. Many continued to explain the Quranic narratives using their Biblical information. Under Abubakr's caliphate for instance, Abdullah bin ‘Amr bin ‘Aas, an ex-Jew took possession of many books gathered by the Byzantine Christians following the battle of Yarmouk, and he would use the information therein to comment on certain Quran passages and disseminated many of the stories among the Muslims, which would be used by later commentators. The technical term itself was not used systematically before Ibn Kathir. Although before him, the Andalusian exegete, Abu bakr Ibn al-Arabi mentioned it. Ibn Taymiyya, the mentor of Ibn Kathir, and Ibn Taymiyya's contemporary al-Tufi discussed israeliyyat before Ibn Kathir. Keeping in mind the existence of so many published and unpublished tafsirs, it is virtually impossible to identify the commentator who was the first user of the term israeliyyat in a technical sense. These reports have been always understood as an amalgam of truth and falsehood. 

The Muslim story tellers would take for basis the Quranic text, then add the Jewish traditions from the converts where they deemed it most fit, resulting in a commentary that is neither Quranic nor Jewish. Although Muslims in their exegetical and non-exegetical works tried as much as possible to keep them out of their works on the Quran, they were not always successful in that endeavour. Muslim scholars since Tabari, ibn Atiyya, al Khazin, ibn al Jawzi etc all spoke of these traditions with various ethnic terms evoking their Judeo-Christian origins "the claims of the people of the scriptures", or "what the historians of the people of the book invent" etc. The prophet himself was alert to the potential intrusions of Jewish traditions in the minds of his followers. Umar once asked a Jew from Medina to copy for him sections of the Torah, and when it was presented to the prophet "his countenance changed then he said to Umar;

"Were Moses to appear in your midst and were you then to follow him and abandon me, you would go astray. Of all peoples, you are my lot; just as of all the prophets I am your lot"

Here it would be appropriate to discuss hadith skepticism aimed at Abu Huraira. The nature of the criticism really fundamentally stands on no grounds other than the contents of his narrations; the miracles and praises of the prophet, or Abu Huraira’s stance on various issues. Yet the same could be applied to similar ahadith unrelated to him. For example Shia polemicists will point out that he was against ahlul bayt yet no reliable traditions going back to him show him praising Banu Umayya against Ali while many reliable reports show his neutrality and actual inclination for the ahlul bayt. Modernists will point to supposedly misogynistic statements while ignoring clear reports praising mothers, encouraging taking care of wives, saying that more women are in paradise than men, giving benefit of the doubt to women suspected of adultery and promiscuity. Later, regional jurists like the kuffans questionned his authority in issuing fiqh rulings but never undermined his reliability as a transmitter. There are sahabas and tabieen even revered by shia and mutazila who hate Abu Huraira, yet are found narrating from him like Abu Ayub, Jabir, or ibn Abbas (mixed views among Shia).

Him being a former pagan does not undermine his trustworthiness either. He was a convert like all first generation Muslims, a Yemenite from the tribe of Daws, who were known for their lowly life morals. He was hated, rejected and cursed by his people before they themselves entirely entered the fold of Islam. He used to live among the ahl al suffa in Medina, the people who left all for Islam. They were put in a mosque for visibility and so were always taken care of by the community and the prophet in particular. Abu Huraira was highly dependant upon the prophet, hence his constant interaction with him and his household. His closeness to the prophet made him bold in seeking knowledge, in addition to being very attentive to details. He was very confident in what he saw and heard from the prophet in relation to other companions who were more cautious, fearing mistakes in transmission. He was even criticized for that, how readily he would transmit prophetic sayings. Umar once warned Abu Huraira from transmitting, due to the people’s reaction and self serving interpretations, not his reliability. He did the same with other transmitters like Ammar. Umar trusted Abu Huraira and placed him provincial governor. So his rise as a prolific, trustworthy transmitter didnt happen in a vaccuum. His life circumstances made him stand out as a transmitter, but he wasnt the only one of that caliber. There were other contemporaries as prolific as him, young adults like him, who lived a few decades after the prophet’s death so people went to them for knowledge. In addition he resided in Medina, the center of knowledge the last decades of his life.

When hadith scholars counted the narrations attributed to Abu Huraira, these numbers included repetitions, weak and unreliable reports. The reliable reports total around 600 in the sahihayn and around 60 outside, which is relatively close to the 6 other prolific sahabas. Statistically, 660 ahadith over the course of 3-4years of interracting with the prophet is a very little number. Also not all ahadith he narrates are directly from the prophet, some are taken from other companions, during the course of his life after the prophet had passed away. Around 20% of his ahadith are ahad, but are not alien to Islamic teachings. Nobody says the sahabas were error free, but investigations have shown some of these errors, not arbitrary ad hominem the likes of which people have used against Abu Huraira. His interraction with Kaab al ahbar is another point hadith critics like to raise. Kaab was a rabbi who converted in Umar’s caliphate. Kaab shared information not only with Abu Huraira but other sahabas and tabieen. So there are others than Abu Huraira who transmitted from Kaab. And a tiny portion of ahadith from Abu Huraira include Jewish traditions. Kaab wasnt a teacher of hadith. He learned about the prophet and islamic fiqh from companions and tabieen, including Abu Huraira, which he then transmitted. He often did it while making parallels with his own Jewish traditions. So similarities between what is found in Muslim teachings and what Kaab reports from Judaism doesnt entail borrowing or influence from Kaab, rather that Kaab saw similarities which he emphasized. The ahadith reliably attributed to Kaab are few in comparison to the forgeries. Some people did mix Kaab’s ahadith and attributed them to the prophet, but were detected.