On 9 May 2004 17:32:15 -0700, (Ir. Hj. Othman bin
Hj. Ahmad) wrote:

(michael) wrote in message ...
In article , says...


"Pan" wrote in message
.. .
On Thu, 6 May 2004 21:02:40 +0800, "Ir. Hj. Othman bin Hj. Ahmad"
wrote:


...

...
So Buhari was collecting documents to compile into the
Hadith some 200 years after the death of the Prophet.

This is about right but is not relevant to the discussion. The discussion
was about the hadith. Buhari is just one of many collectors.
In Malaysia we follow the Shafie Mazab but from my first reading he died
150 years after Muhamamd and he quote many hadith as well.

Which source was the least number of years after Muhammad's death, and
about how many years?

The Gospel was written fewer years after Jesus' death, apparently, yet
many things happened in the intervening years that seem to have
colored the way in which the story is told. Muslims think the Gospels
contain inaccuracies, right? So what about the Hadiths? Logically, if
they are so far removed from Muhammad's life, and none of the
compilers knew Muhammad, we might hypothesize that they could perhaps
be more unreliable accounts of what Muhammad said than the Gospels
are, as accounts by apparent apostles of Jesus on events in Jesus'
life. Of course, all of us know that the number of intervening years
is not conclusive in such matters. Nevertheless, it could logically
give rise to some questions as to reliability.

Michael

If you would like to send a private email to me, please take out the TRASH, so to speak. Please do not email me something which you also posted.