Prophetic Traditions and Modem Medicine in the Middle East:Resurrection, Reinterpretation, and Reconstruction

AHMED RAGABHARVARD UNIVERSITY

INTRODUCTIONIn a 1997 edition of al-Suyûtî's ' treatise on the plague, which was composed in the fifteenthcentury, the actual treatise occupies only one-third of the volume; the rest of the volumecomprises a number of chapters written by the editor, Muhammad 'Alî al-Bâz, that func-tion as a parallel text engaging with al-Suyûtî's treatise on different levels. In his chaptersal-Bâz re-creates the history and the significance of the treatise and presents the content andcontext of the edited work in an altered manner. This edition belongs to a genre of writingsin which medieval texts originally written by important scholars of religion and addressingquestions of "Prophetic medicine" are edited (in the sense of modified), drawn into debate,and republished.

This article traces how the intellectual authority of the primary author is reformulated andhow his text is reproduced in the framework of a modern medical discourse.^ This entails aclose look at the perceived and formulated epistemic value of the primary text, which lies atthe heart of the editing process regardless of the intellectual tradition to which it belongs. Theediting process requires by definition the selection of a text to be edited and admits or arguesfor a specific value of such text, but the way this value is assigned and evaluated depends onthe paradigmatic structure within which the editing is produced.

I will argue that the secondary texts at hand represent an involvement with science andmedicine that is largely determined by the authority of modern science and not by that of the

Author's note: I would like to acknowledge Soha Bayoumi for her tremendous help and valuable comments in theearly stages of this article, which helped bring the article to life. I would also like to acknowledge Alice Gissingerand the anonymous reviewers, whose questions, comments, suggestions, and critique were extremely helpful andvaluable.

1. Jaläl al-Dîn al-Suyûtî (d. 911/1505) was one of the most acknowledged religious authorities in the fifteenthand sixteenth centuries in the Islamic world, authoring one of three canonized exegeses of the Qur'an. According toa Prophetic hadith, a remarkable scholar of religion appears every century to renew Islam {mujaddid), on both thetheological and practical levels. Al-Suyûtî was considered to be the centennial scholar for his period. '

2. In the following discussion I will refer to the medieval texts and authors as "primary" and to the modern orcontemporary texts and authors as "secondary." The Prophetic traditions or other sacred texts will be referred to as"Prophetic" or "sacred." This categorization is meant to preserve the intellectual responsibility of both medieval andmodem authors. This assigning of intellectual responsibility is important because the project of this article is not todiscuss the relation between the Prophetic saying and the medical knowledge at the time of Muhammad but ratherthe integration of this saying with a contemporaneous medical discourse by subsequent authors, whether medievalor modern.

3. All editors perform a process of selection and argue for the value of the chosen text. However, the assignedvalue as well as the manner and method of editing and the choice of where to add additional text or where to amendoriginal text—and why—reveal the paradigmatic priorities of the editor; in the case of academic editors, this isrooted in a scholarly consensus of how editions should be made and of proper historical methodology. This articlewill focus, however, on what I argue is a distinct genre intended for a distinct purpose, which dictates in turn itsediting style and priorities.

Journai ofthe American Orientai Society 132.4 (2012) 657

658 Journal of the American Oriental Society 132.4 (2012)

primary text. In other words, the secondary text aims to give a contemporary legitimacy tothe medieval text, and this process involves a heightened sense of scientific authority and apositivist and teleological view of the modem scientific paradigm, rooted in the intellectualenvironment, and not only the socio-political environment, of the secondary author. Thisallows for the re-creation of the scientific narrative in conditions different from those of itsorigin, permitting a new discourse that engulfs and amalgamates the scientific narrative withother narratives. It is also connected to the tradition of Prophetic medicine, which forms thegenealogical background of the texts at hand.

In this article I analyze how the secondary texts and the discursive genre to which theybelong negotiate the claims of authority of both the sacred and the primary texts—this iscentral to both the genre's formation and continuity and those of scientific discourse." Inthis article the analysis of the texts at hand aims to understand the authority assigned to themodern scientific narrative. This analysis is not only important to understand the relationbetween science and Islam, but is also central to studying the relation between these reli-gious discourses and different questions of modernity and modernization, which have beena subject of debate since the second half of the nineteenth century, albeit in different forms.

The problem of competing intellectual authorities is central to all texts on Prophetic medi-cine, whether medieval or contemporary, though the proposed solutions are different andremain dependent on their respective intellectual and socio-political contexts. The literatureof Prophetic medicine as it appeared throughout the medieval period in the writings of schol-ars as Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya (d. 1350), al-SuyOtï (d. 1505), and Ibn TOlOn (d. 1546),among others,^ is dated by historians of medicine to the ninth century when one of the first

4. There is a tendency also in scholarship on Islam and contemporary science and technology to view theprimary scholarship as ontologically and epistemologically separate from the scientific discourse and to posit theprimary authors as entering into a confrontation with an alien discourse, as when it focuses on how the religious lawjudges certain "controversial" aspects of scientific production or how contemporary Islamic belief systems handlescientific claims that are deemed contradictory to Islam's premise, such as evolution, abortion, cloning, etc. See, justto mention a few, Dariusch Atighetchi, Islamic Bioethics: Problems and Perspectives (The Netherlands: Springer,2007); Robert Koenig, "Creationism Takes Root Where Europe, Asia Meet," Science 292, no. 5520 (2001): 1286-87; Salman Hameed, "Science and Religion: Bracing for Islamic Creationism," Science 322 (2008), online at http://helios.hampshire.edu/~sahCS/Hameed-Science-Creationism.pdf (last accessed July 15, 2011); S. Aksoy, "MakingRegulations and Drawing up Legislation in Islamic Countries under Conditions of Uncertainty, with Special Refer-ence to Embryonic Stem Cell Research," Journal of Medical Ethics 31 (2005): 399-403. (This is not to deny thatthere is scholarship that deals with religious and scientific discourses as interconnected epistemic formations.) Iargue that this view is incomplete because it neglects the intellectual and socio-cognitive processes involved in theproduction of truth, which are also central in the production of legal opinions accepting or refusing specific scientificnotions or products.

5. On the question of modernity and modernization, see t^if Stenberg, 77ie ¡slamization of Science: Four Mus-lim Positions Developing an Islamic Modernity (Lund: Religionshistoriska Avdelningen, Lunds Universitet, 1996);Brian Silverstein, "Islam and Modernity in Turkey: Power, Tradition and Historicity in the European Provinces ofthe Muslim World," Anthropological Quarterly 76 (2003): 495-517; Stephen Sheehi, "Arabic Literary-ScientificJournals: Precedence for Globalization and the Creation of Modernity," Comparative Studies of South Asia, Africaand the Middle East 25,2 (2005): 438-49; Muhammad Khalid Masud, "Islamic Modernism," in Islam and Moder-nity: Key Issues and Debates, ed. Muhammad Khalid Masud et al. (Edinburgh; Edinburgh Univ. Press, 2009),237-60.

6. A more detailed discussion of the medieval literature on Prophetic medicine is given in Ahmed Ragab, "TheProphets of Medicine and the Medicine of the Prophet: Analytical Remarks on Prophetic Medicine" (lecture pre-sented at the Harvard Society of Arab Students, Cambridge, Mass., November 12, 2009), and Ahmed Ragab, "TheQuestion of Anatomy: Towards a New View of the Intersection of Science and Religion in the Medieval MiddleEast" (paper presented at the annual conference of the Middle East Studies Association, Boston, November 2009).

RAGAB: Prophetic Traditions and Modern Medicine in the Middle East 659

known treatises of this kind was composed. It became very popular starting from the four-teenth century, as evidenced by the sheer number of manuscripts and treatises composedduring this period.^

I have argued' that these writings on Prophetic medicine appear to be an intellectual phe-nomenon and a discourse based on the relation between a Prophetic and a medical/Galenicnarrative rather than a form or a paradigm of medical practice rooted in a relation betweenhealth and disease or a perception of normality, as is the case with other medical traditionsor practices. This discourse created a fissure within the Prophetic narratives themselves withthe inference that Muhammad's medical pronouncements have a lesser status than his reli-gious ones, which alone enjoy the timeless authority and the sanction of holiness imbued bythe character of the Prophet. The rest of the Prophetic corpus, or more accurately the partsrelated to medicine, are only additions, which are local, time-sensitive, and less credible. Inthis way traditions of Prophetic medicine are not engaged in a debate with the "truths" ofmedical theory, but are relegated to the status of relics of history and traditions of old, whichmust be revised, accepted or rejected, and arranged along the discursive rules of medicaltheory.

This place of medieval "Prophetic medicine" at the intersection of Prophetic and medicalnarratives is historically specific and is related to contemporaneous historical and socio-intellectual circumstances; it does not appear to dictate our secondary author's perception ofProphetic medicine. As will be shown below, secondary authors do not engage the epistemicdifferentiations presented in the primary text, but dismantle this medieval problematizationof Prophetic and Galenic narratives to construct a new relationship with a different medicalnarrative. The solutions presented by the secondary authors are informed by their particularsocio-intellectual context and the contemporary perception of the medical discourse.

The rise and spread of this secondary literature coincided with the waves of Islamistthought and the more religious atmosphere of the late 1970s and 80s, which was explainedby many political scientists and sociologists to be linked in many instances to the socio-economic and political shift in the Middle East during this period. '" Emblematic of thisshift included the appearance on television of religious personalities such as MuhammadMutwalî 1-Sha' râwî, who explained the meaning of the Qur'an every Friday for many yearsand appeared in print several times.

Although this socio-political shift was not the motivating factor behind this literature, itdid contribute to its spread. This literature has its ancestors in the works of Ismâ'îl Mazhar,

7. 'Abd Allah b. Bustâm al-Nîsâbûrî, Tlbb al-a'imma (Qum: Chaf, 2005). This collection, authored by Shi'ites,is presented as part of the legacy of different Imams. Although many historians of medicine consider this collectionto be the first known treatise on Prophetic medicine (see "Tibb," in Encyclopaedia of Islam, New Edition [Leiden:Brill, 1960-2004]), this view neglects the different formation and discursive strategies used in this collection whencompared to Sunni collections of Prophetic medicine. The most striking difference is that the Sunni collectionsdepend on a tradition that cannot be renewed, having ended with Muhammad's death in 632, while the heritage ofthe Imams extends well into the ninth century. This difference in timeline becomes very important in light of therapid dissemination of Galenic medicine throughout the eighth and ninth centuries, which transformed the medicaldiscourse in the Middle East. In addition to this objection, analyzing the frameworks of discursive authority andagency in Shi'ite and Sunni discourses proves to be instrumental in setting this collection apart and in delineatingthe differences between Shi'ite and Sunni traditions of "Prophetic medicine." These factors have not been addressedby those who consider Tibb al-a'imma as part of the Prophetic medicine literature.

8. Irmeli Pehro, The Prophet's Medicine: A Creation of the Muslim Traditionalist Scholars (Helsinki: Koke-maki, 1995).

9. In Ragab, "The Prophets of Medicine and the Medicine of the Prophet" (supra, n. 6).10. Hatsuki Aishima and Armando Salvatore, "Doubt, Faith and Knowledge: The Reconfiguration of the Intel-

lectual Field in Post-Nasserist Cairo," Journal of the Royal Anthropological Institute 15,1 (2009): 41-56.

660 Journal ofthe American Oriental Society 132.4 (2012)

al-Rahmän al-Kawakibï, Mustafa Sädiq al-Râfi^î, and others in the early twentieth cen-tury, which appeared in such publications as the journal of al-Azhar and aimed at reconcil-ing Islam and modem science through a scientific interpretation of the religious texts. Thisproduction coexisted with a movement for the popularization of science led by journals suchas al-Muqtataf ana Mamlakat al-nahl among others. "

Although organically connected to the same discourse, medicine represents a differentcase because it is seen as dependent on a different framework of authority and justification.Physics, astronomy, and evolutionary biology derive their legitimacy from the intellectualperception of science and its inherent value at the intellectual level, and argue for theirvalidity and socio-cognitive significance depending either on direct technological applica-tion or on a modernist discourse framed around identity politics, which led to discussions ofthe connections of these sciences to socio-political agendas hostile to certain Islamic views.Medicine, on the other hand, is presented not as an abstract scientific construction, or anepisteme, but rather as a techne. Modern medicine was constructed discursively with effi-ciency at heart and with its ability to produce observable, much needed benefits as its mainargument of legitimacy. '

Thus, medicine was not presented as a theoretical endeavor, which required abstract jus-tification or paradigmatic dialogue of modernization and identity, but as a technology, whichcan be judged only in relation to efficiency. Even as questions of appropriateness and con-formity to religious discourse were raised, such as in relation to dissection, blood transfu-sion, and organ transplantation, the argument of usefulness was key and the notion of utilitywas the decisive factor. When certain medical practices such as in-vitro fertilization, spermdonation, and stem-cell research were not sanctioned by a religious authority, this did notaffect medicine as a discourse because it was perceived as a technology, which can be takenand accepted piecemeal.'^ Owing to this view, medicine gained an outstanding legitimacyand its practitioners a significant epistemic authority on account of their training, skill, andexpertise. '"

In the following, the study of the negotiations of authority in contemporary collections ofProphetic medicine will include three main aspects: the perception of the primary text andits role in informing the identity of the secondary text (section one), the relation betweenthe secondary text and modem medical discourse (section two), and the discursive strategiesused by the secondary text in this process of negotiation (section three).

11. Marwa S. Elshakry, "Knowledge in Motion: The Cultural Polities of Modem Science Translations in Ara-bic," Isis 99 (2008): 701-30. It is important here to note that the genealogical connection of the genre at hand andthe tum-of-the-century and early-twentieth-century texts does not imply that the two share the same intellectualpremise. The diflferenee in audienee, reception, means of communication, the authors' intellectual background, andtheir education resulted in significant differences in the nature of the narrative. The present article focuses on thecontemporary and late-twentieth-century literature, which was born in the previously described political and socio-cultural project of contemporary Islamic thought.

12. Antoine Barthélémy Clot Bey, Kunûz al-sihha wa-yawaqîi al-minha (Cairo: al-Maktaba wa-!-Matba'a1-Jadïda, 1927).

13. This proposed distinction of medicine as a techne is to be seen in relation to other contemporary sciencesand is based on different perceptions of science, as a theoretical endeavor, and technology, as a practical identity-free practice.

14. Sylvia Chiffoleau, Médecines et médecins en Egypte: Construction d'une identité professionnelle et projetmédical (Paris: L'Harmattan; Lyon: Maison de l'Orient Méditerranné, 1997).

RAGAB; Prophetic Traditions and Modern Medicine in the Middle East 661

PERCEPTION OF THE PRIMARY TEXT AND ITS ROLE IN INFORMINGTHE IDENTITY OF THE SECONDARY TEXT

Throughout the 1980s and 90s, Mustafa Mahmud was a prominent speaker in variousArabic media. A physician, Mahmud claimed to have had a long journey with doubt, whichended with his recovering his faith and advocating a view of Muslim religion and Muslimreligious texts as "compatible" with modern science. ' This Mahmud mostly did on hisweekly TV show called al-'Ilm wa-1-imän (Science and Faith), which ran for 400 weeksin primetime on the first channel of the then two-channel Egyptian TV. As a complementto the show he published a number of books. In the introduction he wrote for an edition ofIbn Qayyim al-Jawziyya's al-Tibb al-nabawl, Mahmud reminds the reader of his relation tomedicine, writing, "My relationship to medicine is a close and intimate one. Medicine to meis a history, a family, a lifetime, and a study, which I have loved, indulged in, and followed[closely]."'6

Similarly, Muhammad *Ali al-Bâz, the editor of the above-mentioned edition of al-Suyûtî' streatise on the plague—as well as one on Prophetic medicine—is prominently described onthe book's cover as a physician. Al-Bâz, who did not achieve the repute of Mustafa Mahmud,developed a keen interest in al-Suyûtî's writings and wrote about twenty books addressingdifferent medical questions based on Prophetic traditions. In his introduction to the edition ofal-Suyuti's Mo rawähu l-wä'ünfi akhbär al-tä'ün, he explains that the introductory chapters,which he wrote, include accounts of the nature, causes, symptoms, and treatments of theplague according to modem medicine. '

Other physicians, though with shorter bibliographies, were also keen to detail their medi-cal credentials on the covers of their volumes on Prophetic medicine—e.g., Muhammad 'Allal-Barr in his edition of Ibn Habib al-Andalusi's treatise on Prophetic medicine, ' and "AbdAllah 'Abd al-Razzäq Massud al-Sa'îd in his self-published collection, where he relied on thework of Ibn Qayyim but did not undertake a direct edition of the volume. " Although not amedical doctor, *Abd al-Bäsit Sayyid introduced himself as a professor of biological physicsand botany on the cover and in the introduction of his work on plants and herbal treatmentsin the Prophetic traditions. "

"Modern medicine" appears on the cover page of yet another edition of Ibn Qayyim'sal-Tibb al-nabawl. Entitled S^ibib al-tibb al-nabawî fi daw' al-ma'ärif al-tibbiyya wa-l-'•ilmiyya al-hadltha (Authentic Prophetic Medicine in the Light of Modem Medical andScientific Knowledge), it is edited by Salim b. " Id al-Hilâlî, who comes from a different

15. Armando Salvatore, "Social Differentiation, Moral Authority and Public Islam in Egypt: The Path of Mus-tafa Mahmud," Anthropology Today 16,2 (2000): 12-15. In this article Salvatore argues that MahmQd constructedhis authority based largely on a personal narrative of devotedness and commitment.

16. Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya, al-Tibb al-nabawl, ed. Muhammad FathI Abu Bakr (Cairo: al-Där al-Misriyyaal-Lubnaniyya, 1989), 5. In spite of his importance and his landmark television program, which shaped much ofthe debate on science and religion in the Middle East, MahmQd has received little scholarly attention and his workhas not been fully studied or analyzed. See Aishima and Salvatore, "Doubt, Faith and Knowledge," 41-56, whichdiscusses MahmOd's work and intellectual journey in the context of the intellectual life of the 1970s and 1980s.

17. Ed. Damascus: Dar al-Qalam, 1997, 15.18. Muhammad 'All al-Barr, ed. al-Tibb al-nabawl li-'Abd al-Malik Ibn Habib al-Andalusl al-Ilblrl (Damascus:

al-Dâr al-Shâmiyya, 1993). Al-Andalusï's treatise is mentioned in other treatises but was thought to be missing. Inhis introduction al-Barr outlines his own efforts in discovering and editing this treatise.

19. 'Abd Allah 'Abd al-Razzäq Mas'Dd Sa'Id, Min al-i'jâz al-tibbifi l-ahädlth al-nabawiyya al-sharïfa (Amman:n.p., 2000).

20. 'Abd al-Bäsil: Muhammad Sayyid, al-Tadäwl bi-1-a'shäb wa-l-tibb al-nabawl (Giza: al-Sharika al-Misriyyaal-'Alamiyya li-1-Nashr, 2000).

662 Journal ofthe American Oriental Society 132.4 (2012)

background from both Mahmud and al-Bäz.^' In his short biography, published on a Salafíwebpage^^ and cited in hundreds of Salafí online forums, he is presented as a scholar ofProphetic hadith trained by the well-known traditionist Nâsir al-Dïn al-Albäni (d. 1999)^-'and an active member in many Salafi forums and groups. His writings include many bookson Prophetic traditions and several editions of medieval compilations or legal treatises. '*

The long title of al-Hilâlï's edition reflects this secondary author's inclinations, which hefurther clarifies when describing his methodology in editing the book: "I linked the [trea-tise's] chapters to modern scientific and medical knowledge."^^ In justifying his edition ofthe book, al-Hilâlï adds, "Despite Imam Ibn Qayyim al-Jawziyya's prominence [. . .], he didnot transcend the medical knowledge of his time [. . .]. Therefore, a new reading of the prin-ciples of Prophetic medicine is necessary. [This reading] depends on contemporary scientificfacts to understand the meanings [of Prophetic medicine], direct its aims, and organize itslanguage {tawjîh maqäsidihi wa-tansïq abjadiyyätihi)."^^ To achieve this goal, the editor,who is not a physician, used the help of a physician, ^Ädil al-Azharï, to clarify relevant medi-cal facts in footnotes, each of which is marked with an alif.'^'^

Al-Bäz justified his editing of al-Suyûtï's treatise on the plague in a similar manner, writ-ing "There is no doubt that our contemporary Arabic literature needs another book on theplague, to explain and investigate the different aspects of the disease and connect what wasmentioned about [it] in our rich heritage with what we know about it today after the astonish-ing scientific progress [made]."^^

Thus "medicine," "modern medicine," or "contemporary scientific facts" are presented asa legitimizing force for editing the original texts. An expert in the figure of a certified physi-

21. Al-Hilâlî, Sahih al-tibb al-nabawi... (Ajman, U.A.E.: Maktabat al-Furqan, 2003). Although this study isbased on a qualitative analysis of forty-seven difFerent sources, I will focus my analysis on the works of MahmQd,al-Baz, and al-Hilâiï due to the importance of the authors and their work and because they represent differentapproaches to the questions discussed in this article. Other volumes of Prophetic medicine will be referenced toexemplify the spread of particular approaches or discursive strategies but will not be analyzed with the same depth.

22. www.albaidha.net/vb/showthread.php?t=l 183 (accessed September 2, 2011).23. AI-Albânï was one ofthe more influential scholars of hadith in the second half of the twentieth century. For

more on his work and views, see Kamaruddin Amin, "Nasiruddin al-Albânî on Muslim's $ahïh: A Critical Study ofHis Method," Islamic Law and Society 11,2 (2004): 149-76.

24. One of al-Hilâlï's most important writings is a book on the authority of the minority opinion in Islamic law,in which he argues that this opinion becomes obligatory if it adopts a more literal understanding of the religioustext or if it relies on a more fundamentalist position in relation to these texts. Salîm b. ^d al-Hilâiï, al-Adilla wa-l-shawâhid 'ala wujûb al-akhdh bi-khabar al-wâhid fî l-ahkäm wa-l-'aqä^id (Amman, 1986). This position stemsfrom the author's training and his opinion with regard to the utmost superiority of the religious text and the neces-sity of literal interpretation. This position will be important to consider as we look at al-Hilâlî's work on Propheticmedicine.

25. AI-Hiläli, 5fl/ii/i, 13.26. Ibid., 10.27. Using the help of a physician or a specialist to write specific footnotes is seen in many other collections

of Prophetic medicine, e.g., inter alia, that of Abu *Abd Allah Shams al-Dïn a!-Dhahabï, ed. Muhammad "Abdal-Rahmän al-Mar^ashlï (Beirut: Dar al-Nafä'is li-l-Tibä'a wa-I-Nashr wa-l-Tawzï^ 2004), and that of Ibn Qayyim,ed. 'Abd al-Ghanï *Abd al-Khâliq (Cairo: Dar Ihyä' al-Kutub al-*Arabiyya, 1957). The latter used the help of 'Ädilal-Azharï also, but his edition has much less interference in the text than that of al-Hilâlï.

28. Al-Suyûtï, Mä rawâhu l-wâ'ûn, 13. The emergence of new scientific achievements necessitating newresearch in Prophetic medicine was used as justification not only of this book but also of a graduate study programin Prophetic traditions at the University of Amman by a professor in the introduction of his student's master's thesis:Bâsim Hasan Warda, al-Hady al-nabawifi l-tibb ai-waqä'i (Amman: Juhayna li-I-Nashr wa-1-Tawzï*, 2006), 9, 11.This justification was used in other collections or editions as well; see, e.g., the editions of Ibn Qayyim's treatiseby 'Abd al-MuHï Qal'ajï (Cairo: Dar al-Turâth, 1978), 16; and by Shu^ayb al-Amä'üt (Beirut: Mu'assasat al-Risâla,1980), 4.

RAGAB : Prophetic Traditions and Modern Medicine in the Middle East 663

cian is presented to give more legitimacy to the medical content of the secondary text and torewrite the primary text "in the light of modern medical and scientific facts."^'

In the examples of al-Baz and al-Hilâlî, these modern facts appear to be the raison d'êtreof the editing. The secondary author believes it is necessary to place himself in the shoesof Ibn Qayyim, who collected the traditions of Prophetic medicine and linked them to themedical facts of his time. 3° Here the primary text becomes an epistemic tool and a vehicle ofontologically independent knowledge and not a novel production of the author. Ibn Qayyimis not considered "responsible" for the primary treatise but rather is seen as a preserver ofa more enigmatic and original body of knowledge, which reveals itself in a different man-ner for each and every different author. The Prophetic traditions are not an expression of aparticular medical knowledge but of an everlasting unchangeable body of knowledge, whichcan be understood differently by different authors and in different times.

This perception of Prophetic medicine appears to be central to the editors and second-ary authors of the books under study. Al-Hilâlî dedicates a chapter to this particular ques-tion. Under the title "Madâ 1-ihtijâj bi-1-hadî 1-nabawî fí 1-shu Qn al-t;ibbiyya wa-1-ilâjiyya"(The Degree of Authority of Prophetic Guidance in Questions of Medicine and Treatment),he explains that there are two different views concerning this subject.^' The first regardsMuhammad's traditions, which address questions of medicine, science, or the intricacies ofdifferent arts and crafts, as "human" views, depending largely on Muhammad's own experi-ence and the knowledge of his contemporaries. Al-Hilâli cites Ibn Khaldün and Qâdî ^Iyâdas proponents of this view.^^

The second view, in support of which four different scholars of religion and traditionsare quoted, insists that a Prophetic tradition is an expression of revealed divine knowledgeand thus is necessarily true and cannot be doubted. Unsurprisingly, the secondary authorsubscribes to the second view. He proceeds to give six different arguments for his point ofview, five of which are derived from medieval religious authorities. Einally, he presents hisown argument: "The scientific and medical facts mentioned in the traditions include clearideas that are supported by modem science and assured by new medicine. This indicateswithout a doubt and with the utmost clarity that it was God Who revealed this [knowledge]to [His] prophet."33

Similarly, in the edition of al-Dhahabi's (d. 1348) al-Tibb al-nabawl, the editor al-Mar^ashlî admits that he was reluctant to publish a volume on Prophetic medicine because"I believe that the Prophet transmitted a divine message {risäla samäwiyya)," which is per-manent, while science changes. However, the fact that science is proving much of what theProphet transmitted convinced him to publish the book. 3'' And, in Qal^ajî's introduction toyet another edition of Ibn Qayyim's treatise on Prophetic medicine, the secondary authorrecalls Sayyid Qutb's view, which rejects using scientific theories to prove the sacred textbecause the former are ever changing. The secondary author agrees, but adds, "[However]the Qur'an still teaches us medicine. Although it is not permissible to add to the Qur'an

29. Al-HilälT, Sahlh, 10.30. As detailed in Ragab, "The Prophets of Medicine" (supra, n. 6).31. AI-HilalT, Sahlh, 21. Interestingly, the author does not engage at all with Ibn Qayyim's own perception of

Prophetic medicine as a practice specific to the people of the desert. Ibn Qayyim's statement is left in the text butwithout any comment or discussion by the secondary author.

32. Ibid., 21-22.33. Ibid., 28.34. Al-Mar'ashiï, ed., al-Tibb al-nabawl, 6.

664 Journal of the American Oriental Society 132.4 (2012)

what is not part of it, it is also not permissible to deny what it indicates (yunkaru minhu mäyaqtadï),''^^ which are the scientific and medically sound commandments.

Finally, another edition of Ibn Qayyim's al-Tibb al-nabawl by Muhammad Fathi AbuBakr addresses the same question but with less elaboration. In a chapter entitled "Ära' hawlal-tibb al-nabawï" (Opinions about Prophetic Medicine), the editor presents Ibn KhaldQn'sview on historicity and the limitations of Prophetic medicine. He then argues that "Muslimphysicians and other [non-Muslim physicians] still write about this Prophetic medicine upto today, supporting it and strengthening their opinion (mu^ayyidîn lahu muhzzin ra'yahum)with science and experiments, especially after the incredible progress in medical sciencesand technologies in this age."^^ The physician Mustafa Mahmud, who wrote a small intro-duction to Abu Bakr's edition, seems to address the same question, though indirectly:

To me, Prophetic medicine is not just a book but a science, which I have indeed practiced andwitnessed. [For instance,] I treated several cases with honey. ' I remember a case of severeeczema (ikztmä) accompanied by lacerations around the anus. None of the ointments or drugsthat we studied in medical school yielded any result. [The eczema] resisted corticosteroids andanti-fungal drugs, and any chemical would only make the inflammation flare up. I thought, let ustry what our Prophet said about honey and black seed. [. . .] So I made an ointment by mixinghoney and black seed oil with a concentration of ten percent and mixed them well. [ . . . ] ! applied[the ointment] to the inflamed skin and the pain was relieved immediately. The inflammationdecreased in intensity and it was completely cured after a few days. I mentioned this [story] toDr. al-Zawahiri, our genius and internationally acclaimed dermatologist, and he said, "This iscompletely understandable from a scientific point

Although the editions under study seem to be aware of the medieval discussion surround-ing the value of the corpus of hadith known as Prophetic medicine, as explained earlier theyappear to care little about the details of this debate and its actual history, or about the opin-ions of their own primary authors. Instead, they present a consistent view, which argues that"Prophetic medicine" was revealed by God and is "correct" in the absolute sense of the word.Thus Prophetic medicine is perceived as an ahistorical body of knowledge, which remainscorrect and valid throughout history. However, this knowledge is inherently enigmatic andsecretive; it reveals its secrets only to those who know. The secondary authors are not dealingwith Ibn Qayyim, al-Dhahabï, or al-Suyûtï's product but rather with the truth behind their"limited and deficient" views. The primary authors are stripped of their ownership of the text,which is openly rewritten to correspond to new knowledge and new medicine.

It is important to note that the alleged inadequacy of the primary authors is only cir-cumstantial, since it pertains to the circumstances surrounding the process of authorship.

35. Qa.]^a\i, ed., al-Tibb al-nabawï, 16.36. Ibn Qayyim, al-Tibb al-nabawi, ed. Muhammad Fathï Abu Bakr, 11. Muhammad Falhî Abu Bakr is a liule-

known author, with no known writings apart from the discussed compilation. In this regard he is similar to the vastmajority of authors in the field of Prophetic medicine, who usually publish one or two editions of medieval texts.The success of this particular book is due to the fact that Mustafa Mahmud wrote its introduction and presented AbuBakr as his colleague and a promising author. Mahmud's hopes for Abu Bakr did not materialize.

37. Honey was sanctioned by Muhammad as a divinely ordained nourishment and a treatment for many condi-tions. It is therefore considered the hallmark of Prophetic medicine treatments. In one tradition, Muhammad visitedone of his Companions and found him suffering from a stomach ache. He ordered the Companion's brother to givehim honey. Muhammad asked about his Companion's condition three times after that only to find that it had notimproved. The first two times he repeated his advice to drink honey. The third time he said to the Companion'sbrother, "Your brother's stomach lied and God told the truth. Give him honey." Some accounts mention that theCompanion was eventually cured.

38. Ibn Qayyim, al-Tibb al-nabawi, ed. Muhammad Fathi Abu Bakr, 5.

RAGAB: Prophetic Traditions and Modern Medicine in the Middle East 665

As al-Hilali explained, it was impossible for Ibn Qayyim to exceed the level of knowledgeavailable during his lifetime. "It is certainly known that [Ibn Qayyim's medical] knowledgedoes not reach the infallibility or the immutability of Prophetic medicine." ^

According to the secondary texts, knowledge is perceived on two different levels. Qn onelevel, the circumstantial, ever-changing knowledge is reported by the primary authors and issubject to modification, doubt, and editing. Al-Hilâlî removed entire chapters of the primarytext that he thought were built on doubtful or fabricated Prophetic traditions. On the otherlevel, there is stable eternal knowledge, which is represented by the content of the Prophetictraditions and revealed by God. The secondary texts perceive and present the primary textsin light of this division, constantly trying to tease out these two levels and to relate to eachone of them separately.

The knowledge attributed to the primary authors is of lesser value here. It remains boundto contemporaneous achievements and limited by the deficiencies of its contextual scientificreality. However, the relation between the primary and secondary texts cannot be dismissedor even viewed as simply instrumental, as the primary text serves to facilitate the process ofcollection of relevant Prophetic traditions or lessens the effort required to achieve the sec-ondary text. In fact, the fact that both the primary and the secondary texts agree more or lesson the same position regarding the value of Prophetic medicine—as eternal, immutable, andenigmatic—demonstrates the genealogical nature of the relation Tjetween the two texts. Thesecondary text posits itself as part of the tradition charted by the primary text. It acquires itsvoice and inherits its battles from the primary text. At the same time, it is the inadequacy andincompleteness of the primary text and its undeniable datedness that weaken the primary textand raise the secondary text to be the continuation of a previous glorious, albeit historicallylimited, attempt.

The Prophetic knowledge is the core of the discursive formation, which the secondary textis dedicated to serve. However, the secondary text is not only based on this knowledge butalso positioned at the junction ofthe Prophetic tradition and modem science. Such a relationbetween the Prophetic tradition and modern medicine, and the need to clarify the former andrestmcture its arguments, are the raison d'être of these texts. These books are not intendedto collect or even verify the traditions in question, but rather to "connect [them] to modemscientific and medical knowledge."*" The position of the secondary text therefore lies at theintersection of the modem scientific paradigm and the Prophetic tradition.

RELATION BETWEEN THE SECONDARY TEXTAND MODERN MEDICAL DISCOURSE

As shown above, the secondary texts take a critical approach to the primary texts. How-ever, such a critical view is not only of the (forgivable) inadequacy and limitations of thescientific content of the time, but it also addresses the writing style and the putative trustwor-thiness of the primary authors.

Mustafa Mahmud wams readers in his short introduction to Muhammad Fathî Abu Bakr'sedition that "exaggeration, elaboration, and overstatement have become part of every [field],even of Prophetic medicine. Therefore, the reader may come across some things that herejects in this unparalleled book. Here the praiseworthy role ofthe editor [becomes clear].'""

39. Al-Hiläli, Sahlh, 10.40. Ibid., 13.41. Ibn Qayyim, al-Tibb al-nabawl, ed. Muhammad Fathî Abu Bakr, 6.

666 Journal ofthe American Oriental Society 132.4 (2012)

The primary author, Ibn Qayyim, one of Islam's most celebrated Hanbalï scholars,''^ is thusblamed for exaggerating and presenting traditions that are doubtful and that might contradictthe contemporary reader's knowledge and/or intuition. This is what has led to the second-ary text, for the editor "has devoted [much time] to revising the above-mentioned hadithaccording to the fundamentalist rules of correction and verification, and has revealed thatsome of these traditions are fabricated (mawdü^), some are weak (da^if), some are uncommon(gharîb), and some are denounced (munkar). This is the role of scientific integrity in restor-ing everything to its due course.'"^^

The existence of "weak" or unreliable Prophetic traditions in Ibn Qayyim's book is alsofound in al-Hilâlî's edition, where he writes: "Among the blameworthy {yu^khadh 'ala) issuesin al-Tibb al-nabawi is [. . .] the presence of weak and even fabricated traditions without [theauthor's] clarifying their degree [of reliability]. Thus, he [Ibn Qayyim] composed chaptersand issued [legal] opinions Callaqa bihä ahkäm) [based] on them.'"^^ This realization ledal-Hilali to remove all the unreliable and fabricated traditions, replace them when possiblewith trustworthy traditions, and even delete whole chapters.

The primary text is deficient with regard to updated medical knowledge and the age-oldrules of reporting Prophetic traditions, but the primary author is one of the most promi-nent scholars of tradition in Islamic history and is revered by these secondary authors, whodescribe him as "the divine Imam and the second sheikh of Islam'"*^ and "the great scholar.'"^^Mahmud qualifies his arguments by admitting that Ibn Qayyim's efforts are "great andextraordinary. However, they are human efforts liable to error and oblivion (yajüzu ^alayhäal-khata^ wa-l-nisyän)."^^ He then quotes a Qur'anic verse in which man is said to be forget-ful and weak in resolve.

Despite the apparent will of the secondary author to find excuses for the shortcomingsof the primary author, the former's dwelling on these shortcomings needs to be explained,especially since it jeopardizes the legitimacy of the primary text and the primary author as asource of traditions and possibly endangers the whole narrative. A closer look at a secondaryauthor's comments gives us some insight into this quandary.

In MahmDd's introduction, the shortcomings in the primary author's choice of traditionsare not mentioned in the context of an objective analysis of the primary text in question.The blame functions instead to further a particular perception of the ability and the role ofthe secondary author in editing the primary text: he is credited twice—once by name, whenMahmud mentions the effort behind the edition, and once by inference, when Mahmud out-

42. Along with Ibn Taymiyya (d. 1328), whose student he was, Ibn Qayyim insisted on the unparalleled legiti-macy of the Prophetic traditions and argued for an approach of non-interpretation following in the footsteps of IbnHanbal. Their work acquired more importance when it formed the basis ofthe work and the intellectual formationof Muhammad Ibn *Abd al-Wahhab, the founder of the strict Wahhâbï school in the early nineteenth century. Theirwork remains central in Salafï and fundamentalist writings where they are portrayed as the most distinguished schol-ars in all of Islamic history. This view of Ibn Qayyim is important to keep in mind as we see how the secondaryauthors formulate the authority of the respected primary author.

43. Ibn Qayyim, al-Tibb al-nahawi, ed. Muhammad Fathï Abu Bakr, 6.44. Al-Hilâlî, Sahih, 12. The same claim is repeated in other volumes and collections, with the secondary authors

arguing for the necessity of revising the Prophetic traditions to ensure their accuracy. See, for example, Warda, al-Hady al-nabawi {supra, n. 34); ai-Arnä'öt's edition of Ibn Qayyim's al-Tibb al-nabawî (supra, n. 34); Muhammadb. Ahmad al-Dhahabi, al-Tibb al-nabawl (Riyadh: Maktabat Nizâr Mustafa al-Baz, 1996); Muhammad b. Muflihal-Maqdisî, Khamsûn faslan ß l-tadäwi wa-l-'iläj wa-l-übb at-nabawi, ed. 'Ädil b. Muhammad AI Muhammad(Riyadh: Dar ^Älam al-Kutub, 2000).

45. Al-Umn, ?ahih, 11.46. Ibn Qayyim, al-Tibb al-nabawî, ed. Muhammad Fathï Abu Bakr, 12.47. Ibid., 6.

RAGAB: Prophetic Traditions and Modern Medicine in the Middle East 667

lines what he views as the principles and values of scientific integrity. '' Al-Hilâlî praisedhimself in a similar fashion—one of the two "blameworthy" problems in Ibn Qayyim's trea-tise, according to al-Hilâlî, was the lack of proper citations.'*' (It goes without saying thatcitations were not of significance during the first half of the fourteenth century.)

These comments by MahmOd and al-Hilâlî are intended to underscore the value of theirwork in relation to the primary text. Editing is a process of revision and rewriting of theedited text, which is needed to rectify the errors of the original author and to purify the Pro-phetic knowledge of exaggeration and misunderstanding. Although the secondary authors'comments appear to taint the authority of the primary author, Ibn Qayyim, their clear andunwavering belief in his value and authority, which is evident from their praise of him,reveals that their comments are, in fact, intended to establish their own worthiness and toenhance their own legitimacy by proving their ability to stand as tall as such an admittedlysignificant scholar.

Thus, the secondary text presents itself as part of the tradition charted by the primarytext and as an expression of the same intellectual and epistemological stance of the primaryauthor. However, the primary text was not brought to life but rather etemally put to rest. Thesecondary text does not engage the primary text in a relationship of equality and contempo-raneity, but builds its entire intellectual edifice on the ruins of the primary text and constructsits legitimacy on the deficiency of its parent text. It does not continue but replaces the pri-mary text. It is a channel through which the primary text is reintroduced in a better and morecomplete appearance. The historicity of the primary text is not ignored but is underscoredand reinforced, because it allows for the rebirth of the same text in its new and updated garb.

As the primary text metamorphoses to give birth to the secondary text, the acknowl-edged and revered primary author lends his legitimacy and authority to the secondary author.Unlike the texts of al-Fârâbî (d. 950) and al-Râzî (d. 925) against Philoponus and Galen, thenew texts by the secondary authors do not claim a comparable, although separate, authoritycompared to that of the primary text, and do not lend themselves to debating and refutingthe primary texts, but rather claim a transcendental legitimacy derived from the sacred textand from the ability of the secondary text to add to the primary and to update it. Al-Hilâlîdoes not present himself as a student or a critic of Ibn Qayyim. His work is not a study ofthe latter's work nor an effort to publish an unknown text. He presents himself as a rebirthof Ibn Qayyim. He claims ownership of the text and feels free to modify it, correct it, andomit from it. His text re-produces the treatise; it is not a critical edition but a new advent ofthe medieval text.

DISCURSIVE STRATEGIES USED BY THE SECONDARYTEXT IN THE PROCESS OF NEGOTIATION

Linking the Prophetic knowledge to the findings of modem science is behind the need toreproduce the primary text, as is clear from citations in the secondary text to modem medicalknowledge and progress in contemporary science. In fact, modem medicine occupies morespace than would be thought necessary to establish the claimed goal of the secondary author.In his edition of al-Suyûtî's treatise on the plague, Mä rawähu l-wä'ünft akhbär al-tä'ün,al-Bâz dedicates entire chapters to describing modem findings conceming plague, its modesof transmission, and its treatment. These chapters exist independently from the primary textand do not reference it or connect it in any way to modern science. The connections are

48. Ibid.49. Al-Hilâlï, Sahlh, 12.

668 Journal of the American Oriental Society 132.4 (2012)

made in the long and detailed footnotes, which swamp the original text and provide a modemmedical counterpart to its content.

The attempt by the secondary text to connect Prophetic traditions to modern scientificknowledge has as starting point the assumption that the traditions are ontologically part ofGod's one and all-encompassing knowledge. They do not contain advice from Muhammadto his Companions, but hidden messages, which cannot be perceived fully by the incompletehuman mind at any particular moment of history. This hidden knowledge reveals itself indirect proportion to the scientific knowledge that develops independently. Therefore, IbnQayyim, al-Suyütí, and other primary authors were unable to decipher all the content andmeaning of the Prophetic text during their time. As knowledge and science expand and prog-ress, our ability to understand the Prophetic traditions increases.^''

This assumption rests on a skeptical claim that humans will never at any one moment beable to fully comprehend God's knowledge as revealed in the scripture and in the traditions.More importantly, it represents a clear view of science as inevitably advancing and refiningour understanding of the religious texts. Not only do the secondary authors believe in theforward progress of science, they also derive their legitimacy from this progress, as alreadyexplained. Therefore, the legitimacy of the secondary text lies not in the religious narrativebut in the scientific one.

The position taken by the secondary text to bridge the religious and the scientific narra-tives can be identified by the strategies the secondary text uses to deal with contradictionsbetween the two narratives. These strategies can be summarized as follows: obliteration,doubt, and interpretation.

In the first strategy, the secondary text simply removes controversial or contradictorystatements from the primary text, as, e.g., al-Hilâlî removing two chapters from the primarytext claiming that the traditions on which these chapters were based are doubtful. One of thechapters is "a chapter on [Muhammad's] guidance on treating fire."^' Contrary to al-Hilâlï'ssweeping claim that the traditions of these chapters are unreliable, this chapter was actuallybased on a reliable tradition that is given in two of the six Sunni canonical books of tradi-tions. In this tradition Muhammad said that glorifying God would help put out a fire. IbnQayyim explains that as the devil is made of fire and as the glorification of God defeats thedevil, then fire, which represents the devil's essence, would be defeated (put out) by glorify-ing God. He adds, "We have tried this method and found it to be effective."^^ Al-Hilâlï'sact of removal thus appears not to be motivated by his professed methodological keennessto rid the text of unreliable traditions, but by the content of the tradition itself, which willbe objectionable to most modern readers and may render the text less authoritative. In thiscase, as in other cases of omission, the secondary author avoided the contradiction between

50. This position is also taken by Ahmad Shawqi Ibrahim in his eight-volume encyclopedia dedicated to thescientific miracle of the Prophetic traditions. In discussing embryology, for examply, Ibrahim argues that medi-eval exegetes and scholars could not understand the real meaning of the verses and traditions due to their limitedknowledge: Ahmad Shawqi Ibrahim, Mawsit^at al-i'jäz al-'ilmlft l-hadlth al-nabawl (Giza: Nahdat Misr, 2003), 2:57-58. Similarly, Hasan Ni ma argues in his encyclopedia of Prophetic medicine that many of the traditions weretransmitted in a language suitable for Muhammad's contemporaries and they should be reinterpreted to reveal theirreal meaning in view of our contemporary knowledge: Hasan Ni^ma, Mawsü'at al-tibb al-qadîm (Beirut: RashadPress, 2007), 60-61.

51. Al-Hiläli, 5û/ii/i, 12.52. Ibn Qayyim, al-Tibb al-nabawî, 205-6.

RAGAB: Prophetic Traditions and Modern Medicine in the Middle East 669

the Prophetic tradition and contemporary scientific views by obliterating the possibility ofcontroversy entirely and avoiding its mention. ^

The second strategy—doubt—is less radical than obliteration. However, it ultimatelyarrives at the same result: rendering a particular tradition irrelevant. When the secondaryauthors inform their readers that a particular tradition is doubtful, this statement invalidatesthe tradition within the body of Prophetic traditions, thus effectively resolving any contradic-tion between the Prophetic and the scientific narratives.

According to the rules of hadith science, Muhammad's sayings are verified by a chain oftransmission (isnäd), which should be composed of trustworthy, pious men and women whotransmitted the report one to the other in person and directly all the way from Muhammadhimself. The strength of this chain, which is gauged by its continuity and by the trustworthi-ness of its components, determines the hadith's reliability. The definitive status of a narra-tor's trustworthiness lies in the hands of the narrator's contemporaries, who carefully reviewhis or her life and social and political relationships—it cannot be judged ahistorically. Thus,the proof of a narrator's trustworthiness is that contemporaries identified him or her as pious,honest, intelligent, etc.; a hadith scholar cannot issue a judgement on a narrator's trustworthi-ness except through the eyes and testimonies of his or her contemporaries.

Qur secondary authors appear to approach the question of trustworthiness differently.Al-Bâz, for example, has come across a famous tradition in which Muhammad says thatplague is caused by the infidel jinn. "* Al-Bâz determines that the tradition is unreliabledespite the isnäd having been judged to be reliable according to Ibn Hanbal, al-Tabarânî,al-Suyûtî, Ibn Hajar, among others.^^

Mahmud Nasîmî, a medical doctor who wrote a book entitled al-Tibb al-nabawi wa-l-Hlmal-hadith before al-Bâz, also considered the jinn tradition unreliable, explaining his view-point as follows:

It has been scientifically proven that plague is caused by a kind of bacillus [. . .] transmitted byrodent fleas. It is impossible that the Prophet of God says something that contradicts reality. Iremind [the reader], on this occasion, that if a tradition contradicts reality in both its literal andmetaphorical meanings, this constitutes a clear argument against the validity of attributing thistradition to the infallible Prophet even if the isnäd is correct. ^

Since Prophetic traditions are a part of God's knowledge, it is impossible for these tra-ditions to contradict "scientific facts." The contradiction renders the report untrustworthy,providing enough reason for the secondary author to reject the tradition. A new standardof trustworthiness is thus created based on a teleological and positivist perception of thetruth rather than on a circumstantial and socially constructed process of trust. "Truth," aspresented by science, becomes the judge of the authenticity of the religious text and its tradi-tions, regardless of the chains of transmission and the rules of the science of hadith.

The third strategy relies on interpreting the religious tradition to remove the contradic-tion and to allow for the conciliation of the religious and scientific narratives. Al-Bâz'sdiscussion of the jinn tradition is exemplary in this regard. Although he first questions the

53. Similarly, Ni'ma admitted to having removed all the traditions and anecdotes that "are attributed to theProphet but are not compatible with scientific thinking." Ni'ma, Mawsü'at al-tibb al-qadlm, viii.

54. Jinn are invisible creatures whose essence is fire. They are endowed with the faculty of choice and are,therefore, either believers or unbelievers. Believer tribes of jinn are usually supportive of, or at least harmless to,humans, while infidel tribes can inflict harm on some occasions.

55. Al-Suyuti, Mä rawähu al-wä'Un, 42-43.56. Mahmud Nâzim Nasîmî, al-Tibb al-nabawl wa-l-'ilm al-hadlth, 3 vols. (Damascus: al-Sharika al-Muttahida,

1984), 2; 390.

670 Journal ofthe American Oriental Society 132.4 (2012)

tradition's authenticity, he also resorts to a second line of defense in case the first strategyis not accepted by all his readers: he presents an interpretation of both the Prophetic tradi-tion and the scientific finding. In regard to the former he argues that Muhammad's use of"jinn" probably meant the fleas or the bacteria causing plague, quoting a number of Arabicdictionaries to explain that the root j-n-n means "to hide" or "to be invisible" and thus "thesefieas that cause plague are not noticed by man [as they] hide among clothes so that they arehardly noticeable. [. . .] Therefore, we can call them jinn because the jinn is all that is hid-den." He reveals his reasoning behind this interpretation: "Otherwise, modem science wouldcontradict this hadith that the cause of plague is creatures made of fire called jinn." "Since itwas impossible for the Prophet to tell [his Companions] about microbes and bacteria, as theywere not discovered until the end of the nineteenth century [. . .], it was necessary to refer to[the microbes] in a way that Arabic could handle {bimä tahtamiluhu l-lugha l-^arabiyya) andtheir [the Companions'] minds Cuqüluhum) as well."^''

It is not clear whether al-Baz believes that Muhammad actually knew about microbes anddecided not to relay this information, or that he did not know and transmitted a divine hiddenmessage without understanding its true meaning. In this way Muhammad is perceived as achannel of God's knowledge, which encompasses everything. As his knowledge merges intoGod's knowledge, it becomes hard to differentiate the two.

Al-Baz resorts to rereading science, too, to cover up any remaining holes in his concilia-tory narrative. Interestingly he falls back on Ibn Qayyim, who was faced with a similar prob-lem when he wrote his book: the general medical authorities of the time did not believe thatthese metaphysical creatures had any role to play in causing plague. Ibn Qayyim, followedby al-Baz who quotes him verbatim, invoked paradigmatic boundaries to resolve the contra-diction: As the jinn fall outside the realm of knowledge of medicine, it is possible that thesecreatures play a certain role in plague etiology, which does not contradict scientific findings.Thus, the causes claimed by Muhammad and those claimed by medicine, both medieval andmodern, are not mutually exclusive. ^

Al-Hilâlï adopts a more conservative position in relation to the interpretation of religioustexts and rejects al-Baz's and Nasîmï's^^ attempts to reinterpret the jinn hadith. Instead, heproposes a reinterpretation of science, arguing that its inability to prpve something does notnecessarily preclude its existence.^'' He addresses Nasïmï's quote directly:

[Nasîmï's] claim that it is impossible that what the Prophet says contradicts reality is true. How-ever, it is not permissible to force the texts to meet reality (i^näq al-nusüs li-tuwäßq al-wäqi').Instead, we should allow [time] for reality to interpret them. [That is] because many issues thatthe Prophet mentioned were not known in his context (wäqi^) and his era but [then] sciencecame to prove some of them. A day will come when all of their [the texts'] truths are revealed. '

Al-Hilâlï follows this very strategy when he discusses the "fiy" hadith, in whichMuhammad says that if a fly with one wing falls in one's food or drink, it should be sub-merged completely because it carries a poison under one wing and the antidote under theother. First, al-HiialT rejects the claim that the hadith is doubtful. He assures the reader that.

57. Al-Suyuti, Mä rawähu l-wä'un, 48, 49, 46.58. Ibid., 45-46.59. See Nasîmï, al-fibb al-nabawi, 2: 389-91.60. AI-Hiläli, §ahih, 77. This same position is advanced by other secondary authors, who argue that we should

not reject traditions if they contradict science, but we should wait for science to progress to a stage where it canprove them; see, for example, al-Mar^ashlï, ed., al-T'bb al-nahawl, 6.

61. Al-Hi!alï, ía/ií/i, 79.

RAGAB: Prophetic Traditions and Modern Medicine in the Middle East 671

"as believers, we do not much care whether the hadith was proven by medicine because a[Prophetic] hadith is self-evident {burhän qä'im fi nafsihi) and does not require externalproof {da'm khärijl). However, one's faith increases when one finds that a reliable traditionis proven by correct science {al-Hlm al-sahîh)."^'^ He then quotes a lecture that he attendedby an unnamed physician in which the lecturer claimed that nies have natural antibacterialenzymes in their stomachs and that these antibacterial enzymes are the best cure for thebacteria and microbes that the flies may carry. Al-Hilali adds the testimonies of a number ofother physicians who argued the same point. Obviously, al-Hilâlî "interprets" the hadith sothat the wing mentioned there could refer to any part of the fly "close to the wing."^^

In these examples the secondary text situates itself between the scientific and the religiousnarratives. In this construct, as an expression of scientific reality the scientific narrative pro-vides for a better understanding of the religious text, thus legitimating the reproduction andthe rewriting of the primary text.

This view of science and of knowledge reveals a perception of science as a continuousforward-directed endeavor toward more knowledge, which, the secondary authors claim, hasalways been contained within the confines of the religious text, awaiting discovery, but with-out the aid of science there is no way to know the hidden details of the divine knowledge.

However, this position at the "intersection" of the religious and scientific narratives leadsto the secondary text being faced with the inevitable contradictions between the two nar-ratives. Secondary authors use a variety of intellectual and epistemic strategies aiming atconciliating the two narratives without attempting to invalidate either of them. The strate-gies included obliterating particular traditions and removing them from the studied corpusaltogether, doubting and questioning the legitimacy of traditions, or interpreting the religiousnarrative to correspond to the scientific "fact" or the scientific narrative.

CONCLUSIONIn rewriting a medieval text, the secondary text undertakes a process of "translation" in

its larger sense. This process does not involve the replacement of words and idioms fromone language to another (in this case from the medieval to the contemporary linguistic con-structs), but involves identifying the position of the secondary text in relation to the primarytext and to the socio-cognitive and intellectual networks attached to each of them. ^

In our case, the secondary text regards the primary as being formed of two distinct parts,with different authors, diffei-ent qualities, and different epistemologies. The first part is writ-ten by the primary medieval author and enjoys a particular degree of respect and authority,even though its epistemic formation is largely perceived as limited to its context and hardlysignificant in its content. The second part is divine and is represented by the Prophetic tradi-tions included in the primary narrative. This component is seen as infallible and relies ondivine knowledge providing an all-encompassing epistemic unity. However, this knowledge

62. Ibid., 171.63. The "fly" hadith represents one of the more persistent dilemmas for many secondary authors, some of whom

dedicate special chapters to discussing it. In the vast majority of cases, they offer an explanation similar to that ofal-Hilâlî, as, for instance, does Ahmad Shawql Ibrahim, though he claims that the microbes/toxins and the anti-microbial agents are actually present on the wings. He also argues that the hadith was reported by only one personand that this makes it doubtful and allows a Muslim to reject it without risking infidelity. Finally, he argues thatMuhammad could have made his comment to make poor people accept their unclean food and thus avert the risk offamine: Ibrahim, Mawsü'at al-i'jäz al-'llml, 6: 70-74.

64. See Elshakry, "Knowledge in Motion" (supra, n. II); Scott Montgomery, Science in Translation: Move-ments of Knowledge through Cultures and Time (Chicago: Univ. of Chicago Press, 2000).

672 Journal ofthe American Oriental Society 132.4 (2012)

is enigmatic in nature and reveals itself slowly and in proportion to the knowledge of thereader.

The secondary text establishes a genealogical relation with the first part of the primary text,claiming to belong to the same tradition and to represent the same point of view. However,the inadequacy and dated nature of the primary text's epistemology lead to its suppressionand, ultimately, to its insignificance. This fate of the primary text provides an opportunityfor the nascence ofthe secondary text, recreating and, effectively, replacing the primary text.

The Prophetic traditions of the primary text lie at the heart of the secondary text and thesecondary text bases its legitimacy on its ability to provide a better understanding of themthrough the lens of contemporary medical knowledge. The modern scientific narrative is,thus, the purpose for the secondary text and the real basis for its legitimacy. Inevitably,contradictions arise between the Prophetic traditions and the scientific narrative, which isarticulated by "physicians," "modem science," "modern progress," etc. The secondary textresorts to a number of strategies to negotiate these contradictions. These strategies benefitfrom the enigmatic nature of the religious text, which lends itself to various interpretations,and from the obscurity ofthe scientific narrative to an average reader.

However, the enigmatic nature of the religious text is not infinite or open-ended. Thesocio-cognitive setting to which the secondary' authors belong requires a stable and quasi-permanent religious discourse that is capable of rewarding unquestionable epistemic author-ity. An open-ended space of interpretation could compromise the discourse on which thesecondary text rests. Therefore, the strategy of interpretation always appears to be limitedand can only solve minor contradictions.

The obscurity of the scientific narrative to the average reader allows the secondary textto reconstruct science. This process entails the instrumentalization of the statements madeby particular agents presented as representatives of science and endowed with institutionalepistemic authority in order to create a "science" that allows for the formal conciliation ofthescientific and the Prophetic narratives. Thus, this construction plays the role of the sciencethat is necessary to legitimize the secondary text.

At the level of the religious narrative, secondary authors are able to develop unique meth-ods to interpret and to censor the Prophetic tradition in a manner that renders it compatiblewith modem science. These methods are not based on the discursive rules of the scienceof hadith but rather on the compatibility with the scientific narrative as perceived by theseauthors. Although this discursive effort appears to be successful in reforming the view of therelation between scientific and Prophetic narratives, it remains vulnerable to competing per-ceptions of either narrative because it bases its identity on particular paradigmatic definitionsand perceptions of these narratives. In other words, if the scientific narrative as a discursiveepisteme was reintroduced to and became popular with the readership of this literature, itwould necessarily limit the secondary authors' capacity to themselves interpret the scien-tific discourse and it would complicate the discursive problems of this literature. Similarly,reintroducing the temporality of the religious text will present a competing resolution to thediscursive confiict and will undermine the paradigmatic foundations of this literature.

In a recent study Dariusch Atighetchi traced the development of a discourse of "concord-ism" between modern science and Islam from the early-twentieth-century ^Abd al-Rahmänal-Kawäkibi, among others, to contemporary opinions by religious scholars and scientists. ^The notion, which Atighetchi explains was borrowed from the Christian context, acquireddifferent forms depending on the background of the respective scholars. However, the nar-

65. Atighetchi, Islamic Bioethics (supra, n. 4).

RAGAB: Prophetic Traditions and Modern Medicine in the Middle East 673

rative borrowing of the concept reveals many limitations when discussed at the discursiveand conceptual levels. In the Christian context, strategies of concordism depended largelyon interpretation of the religious text to allow for its agreement with scientific thought. Inthe context studied in this article, the inaccessibility of the scientific discourse to the reader-ship of the examined literature makes way for a process of interpretation and representationof the scientific discourse to become more compatible with the religious text, which under-goes a process of interpretation as well. This process allows for the appearance of differentdiscursive strategies and distinct intellectual discussions that are dissimilar to those in theChristian context.

Although the notion of "concordism" can be useful to describe the entire set of processesaiming to reformulate the relation between science and religion, it ofl ers little with regard tothe strategies involved, as employed by our secondary authors. These strategies are central tounderstanding the debates of intellectual authority and of modernization in the context of theliterature studied here, and to deconstructing the relation(s) between scientific and religiousdiscourses at the discursive level, along with the negotiation of authority between medievaland modern narratives within the discursive formation at hand.

Copyright of Journal of the American Oriental Society is the property of American Oriental Society and itscontent may not be copied or emailed to multiple sites or posted to a listserv without the copyright holder'sexpress written permission. However, users may print, download, or email articles for individual use.